Flavour First vs Game First - a comparison

[pemerton]

But what about if there's a zone of silence? If can't hear the word, does he still get healed

For me, this doesn't raise the retcon issue, but what I've been calling the gonzo issue. The narration for this one is easy - "As you speak the word into his ear, he feels your breath despite the silence and his eyes flicker open" - but some might find it a bit much for their taste.

"Ah, so he twisted in the air from the blow that sent him back, and landed in a way we could not notice any blood pooling beneath him. Hey, DM, that's the third time this happened today, 12th time in this adventure, can we start training to fall in ways so our friends can see our wounds? Why can't we ever see how serious a wound is anyway? I mean, we never see any blood until we fail the save, else it wasn't bleeding at all..."

Of course, players who don't like to distinguish too much between game and metagame, who feel that if they don't know the state then the gameworld doesn't know the state, probably don't want to play with HeroWars-style fortune-in-the-middle.

This is not a problem of stupid narration, however. No one's table is actually producing the stupid narration. No one actually regards the stupid narration as tolerable in the game. The problem is a problem of some mechanics not suiting some playstyle preferences.

Why shouldn't we instead use a system that suits our playstyle, so we do not have to jump through all those hoops just to avoid trouble we currently do not have at all?

No objection. I'm not saying anything else. But I don't think the problem is stupid narration, or retconning, or even Schrodinger's wounds. I think it's that the narration to avoid those issues is experienced by some as too gonzo.

 

[pemerton]

What about a bit more "Ok, I see why you are happier with another edition" posts? It cannot be so hard to understand that 4E is not perfect for everyone.

Not at all hard to understand. I mostly play Rolemaster (and have mostly played Rolemaster for the past 18 years) and many, perhaps most, RPGers regard that as an intolerable system.

What's making me buck up a bit is the suggestion that 4e play delivers (i) retconning, (ii) Schrodinger's wounds, and (iii) stupid narration, when in fact it doesn't. The reason this claim makes me buck up a bit is because it generates an implication that players of 4e are indifferent to (i) retconning, (ii) Schrodinger's wounds, and (iii) stupid narration, when in fact (to the best of my knowledge) many, perhaps most, are not.

Undoubtedly, 4e is not grim and gritty. Some might find the narration that makes sense of it a bit gonzo. Fair enough, though for the reasons I've given in posts upthread (again drawing on Lost Soul) I don't think this has to be the case.

But this is no basis for saying that fans of 4e are happy with silly things like retconning, Schrodinger's wounds or stupid narration.

 

[pemerton]

Schrödinger wounds.

It occurs to me that one basic thing may not be clear here: "Schroedinger's wounds" implies that the GM fudges, or is vague or ambiguous, in narration, keeping information away from the players (this is the general tenor of Fenes's imagined conversations between players and GMs, for example).

But in HeroWars, and presumably if this technique is applied to 4e, it is taken for granted that it is the player who - understanding the mechanical parameters of the game - is taking a fair bit of responsibility for the narration. So the "indeterminacy" is not the GM keeping the player in the dark, but the player exercising her narrative freedom.

Non-vanilla narrativist play depends upon players who are active rather than passive in this particular fashion (for excellent examples of actual narrativist play using 4e, look at Lost Soul's "Emergent features" thread).

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

There is also option 3: Use another mechanic that offers you a fun, action-packed, exciting play experience without causing troubles for you.

Sure, if you have such a system...

But for all I know, it's not like you're really interested in the "action-packed" part anyway, considering the low frequency of combat you described.
Of course 4E is not a good fit for you then.

 

[Hypersmurf]

What about a bit more "Ok, I see why you are happier with another edition" posts?

I just did that! You said "Why shouldn't I use a system that suits my play style?" and I said "I agree entirely"!

-Hyp.

 

[Fenes]

Sure, if you have such a system...

But for all I know, it's not like you're really interested in the "action-packed" part anyway, considering the low frequency of combat you described.
Of course 4E is not a good fit for you then.

Exactly because I have few fights I want the fights to be as action-packed as they can be. If not, why bother playing them out?

3E with Bo9S delivers the action I want - flashy combat with high-damage, spectacular moves and spells, all PCs going nova. No battlemap, no chess moves, no Tank/Healer/DPS mechanics. Conan meeting Wuxia, with everyone laying into the enemies.

 

[Fenes]

I just did that! You said "Why shouldn't I use a system that suits my play style?" and I said "I agree entirely"!

-Hyp.

Then put "option 3: Use another system" in your post.

 

[Fifth Element]

Like the entire 4E system is not for everyone. I just wish people would accept that just as my playstyle - few combats, lots of social scenes, sandbox style, no exp points, no exact wealth - is not for everyone, 4E is not for everyone.

It's great that you know 4E is not a system for you. But why are you spending the time complaining about the system, when you know it's not one you enjoy?

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Because, after 10 years, I have some notion of how my players react, and I know how I react. I can already hear the dialogue:

DM: You're a warlord, you could heal him.
Player: He's unconscious, he can't hear my encouraging words, and if such words would be enough to raise him he'll be fine anyway.
DM: He might die without treatment!
Player: I am no cleric, I don't do healing magic.
DM: Yes, you do!
Player: No, I am a warlord, not a cleric!
DM: The effect is the same!

It seems to me that this is a problem with communication between a player and a DM, rather than a rules problem. The DM is making it perfectly clear that under the mechanics of the game, the player could heal his comrade, and the player is creating a fluff-reason not to do so.

If I was playing the character lying on the ground, I'd be pretty annoyed at this attitude, frankly.

As far as the discusssion on the overnight rest, I can fully appreciate why it's a problem for some people. It does seem odd that you can narrate a slashing blow to the head, drop a character to less negative hp and yet without any form of divine healing (just an Inspiring Word and some rest) that character is up and running around the next day at full hp. I can see that trying to narrate that sequence of events can be awkward if you want to sustain a feel of gritty realism.

At my table, I simply say that the character is a hero - a legend in the making, and that's how it works. Grim'n'gritty is not for me - I like tales of amazing feats that no ordinary pereson could manage.

Your Milage May, of course, Vary.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

There is also option 3: Use another mechanic that offers you a fun, action-packed, exciting play experience without causing troubles for you.

Like the entire 4E system is not for everyone. I just wish people would accept that just as my playstyle - few combats, lots of social scenes, sandbox style, no exp points, no exact wealth - is not for everyone, 4E is not for everyone.

It really gets tiring to read the umpteenth "but if you do this, this, and stop doing this, and don't ask those questions, then 4E is perfect for you!" posts.

What about a bit more "Ok, I see why you are happier with another edition" posts? It cannot be so hard to understand that 4E is not perfect for everyone.

OK - I can entirely see why you're not happy with a particular 4e mechanic, as it's not working for you (and others in this thread).

I hope that you can, in turn, see why "if you stop worrying about it, it's not a worry" is a perfectly good answer for those of us that do like the system and are happy with it.