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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost" data-source="post: 5006909" data-attributes="member: 4720">I guess since we're talking about Power Cards and such in this thread, I figured we were talking about combat.  Besides, I'm one of those people who doesn't really care about most of the non-combat rules.  Combat is where I need a random element to adjudicate how things throw down.  Skill challenges and such for chases or to provide a framework for doing social things seem fun, but I've always been just as happy with talking that stuff out, letting the DM throw a skill or ability check our way when we try something.  I feel like we're more or less on the same page here.Combat I think has room for more rules, but I'm a bit of a tactical sort.  Once initiative is rolled, I find that I really like a variety of cinematic and tactical things to do with varying combat effects right in front of me.  Not only does it feel tactically deeper, but it also inspires me to generate further effects and feel like I have a rules justification right in front of me.  i.e. "Well, if I can do X damage by smacking this guy with my shield, and it has a good chance to knock him down, I ought to be able to use that bench on a couple guys simultaneously the same way." (DM applying some penalties to such a maneuver assumed)  or  "If I can do Y fire damage in an area, that should be more than sufficient to set off a sizable explosion (read: knockback) in that silo, what with all the mousemen kicking up starch."  (Yes, my wizards tend to be scientists.  It's the only way I know how to roleplay 18+ intellect).In short, for my brain, presenting lots of options.... tends to generate yet more options, not less.  Clearly, mileage varies on this one, but I don't think that's a system problem.  Leastways, it's not one that's insurmountable.  Shake some trees, write up some new power cards that say "What would YOU like to do?" and so on.On the immersion issue... have you ever had a brand new player bring some serious roleplay right out of the gate?  I haven't seen it.  Usually, they are are spending most of their cognitive resources on playing the game.  Some sessions in, they start to ratchet it up..... often to the detriment of their gameplay, at first, until actual system mastery sets in later. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/angel.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":angel:" title="Angel    :angel:" data-shortname=":angel:" />When you hand a new rules set to people, the learning is going to drastically increase the cognitive load on them for several game sessions, thereby reducing their capacity to either roleplay or think outside the box.Unfortunately, I have to bring this back to an edition comparison because I'm not sure how else to make this point.  Granted, I've played very little 4e, sadly, but it seems from my brief experience that everyone but the druids and wizards have a more interesting space inside their rules box than they used to.  It's going to take some time to learn what goes on just in there before you can start cutting holes in the walls, rearranging the Skinnerian widgets and so on.  But I think ultimately, many people will end up just as creative, though perhaps they will shoot their ideas through the prism of existing powers, rather than making them up whole cloth.  I'm not sure that's a bad thing, since it probably makes it easier for the DM to decide if the rules exception the player wants to make is within a reasonable boundary of the existing rules exceptions.  Make sense?</blockquote>

Verification