Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4402476" data-attributes="member: 42582">You unfairly run together a number of features of playstyles that are actually quite distinct.To begin: You appear to equate a particular mechanical preference - for metagame-heavy plot-protection mechanics rather than simulationist/immersion mechanics - with a particular flavour preference - for combat-heavy rather than exploration-heavy play.But I can't see any necessary connection between the two categories of preference. I'll give examples to explain why.Some people who like a combat-heavy game also like immersion-encouraging, metagame-free mechanics. You'll find a number of them posting on the RM forum on the ICE boards.Some people who like a combat-light exploration-heavy game also like metagame-heavy mechanics, in which the mechanics allow the player to choose the stakes for his/her PC. I imagine some of these people play The Dying Earth (light-hearted exploration) or HeroQuest (ultra-serious exploration).Furthermore, even looking only at those who like combat-heavy play with meta-game heavy mechanics, it's a little rude to imply (as you do) that their play is shallow. The Riddle of Steel fits this description (combat-heavy flavour and meta-game heavy mechanics), and it's self-evidently not a shallow game. There's no reason 4e need by shallow either (though it has more potential for it then TRoS, I imagine, having no obvious analogue to Spiritual Attributes).And some meta-game free exploration-heavy play can probably be pretty shallow - I've certainly seen some 2nd ed AD&D modules that seem to fit this description.</blockquote>

Verification