Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zakael19" data-source="post: 9890167" data-attributes="member: 7044099">What 4e did and many of its “indie” successor games followed was build a really distinct and clear-mechanical language challenge mode, with a distinct break from the exploration/interaction mode. What it further did was add scaffolding for bridging those modes together & giving players a way to provide their own direction on play. The DMG2 gave concrete guidance and techniques to do narrative forward play in this system that never really made it into the WOTC products apart from the excellent Neverwinter Campaign Setting which remains a master- class of PC centric campaign design. Everything that many later games brought in (ranging from Dungeon World’s techniques up to Daggerheart’s GM guidance and collaborative worldbuilding framework) shows up in 4e first.We see this sort of thing echoed in Lancer’s eventual narrative mode; ICON’s first drafts with the FITD and tactical rulesets existing uneasily; Trespasser’s OSR spin; and Draw Steel’s loose skill system and narrative abilities contrasted to its highly defined combat.I still think 4e’s Skill Challenge and Quest framework is the most flexible way to have the table develop goal-forward and non-GM fiat play I’ve seen out of the category.</blockquote>