Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5425412" data-attributes="member: 957">This is the part where I play my broken record....Players bring role play to the table.  When comparing systems, things that the players bring to the table are not relevant.  Only things that the system brings to the table are relevant.Not all systems provide the same level of interaction between roleplaying and mechanics.  For me personally, and apparently for a large number of other people who like a good level of "simulation" in their games, there are systems that do a vastly better job of creating that feedback between the mechanics and the roleplay.  That doesn't mean you don't LOVE 4E and roleplay your hearts out on top of the system.  It just means that there are perfectly valid reasons for people with other preferences to find 4E well down the list of games of preference.Long before 4E existed I was using encounters that would be recognized as very skill-challenge-like.  But, they also varied from event to event pretty substantially.  IMO skill challenges put the mechanics to much in front of the roleplaying.  The mechanics are set in and it is up to the players to describe how their characters meet the requirements.  It is very similar to the use of powers in combat.  I've seen many 4E fans praise the GREAT roleplaying perk of needing to come up with an on-the-fly explanation of WHY their power worked under the circumstances at hand.  I can see how someone could enjoy that.  But, for my preference, I want the mechanics to be as invisible as possible.  I want the players to just roleplay their part and have mechanics that respond to that, not have the roleplay react to the mechanical expectations.I don't want wizards to get better at climbing for no other reason than they gained levels.  If the wizard is imagined as someone who can climb, then cool, but let the player make that call.  In 4E the mechanics demand that the character have that aspect.I want the AC of a pirate and a knight to be defined purely by the fact that they are a pirate and a knight, not primarily by the challenge level they are supposed to fit.Over and over 4E is about mechanics first and then roleplaying to fit the allowances of the mechanics.  I want my game to be about roleplay first and the mechanics do their best to keep up.It isn't that you CAN'T roleplay 4E.  Obviously you can.  But the expectation is that the mechanics lead.  And please, don't tell me you can ignore that any time you want.  I agree 100% that you can, you can go off script and make the mechanics try to keep up.  But you are now just doing a workaround that is counter to the system presumptions.  The fact that you can go against the grain of the system is not a selling point for the system.</blockquote>

Verification