Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rhenny" data-source="post: 5902354" data-attributes="member: 18333">I agree with you.&nbsp;&nbsp; I think what you've posted really touches on a number of issues.&nbsp; First, in line with many of the threads that speak about language use/roleplaying, using a term like &quot;Marked&quot; is a meta-game short-hand that represents a mechanic...kind of like a &quot;macro&quot; in a computer game.&nbsp; The very way that all of the powers are named also function like a &quot;macro&quot;.&nbsp; They make it easy for players to just use one or two words instead of actually narrating what they really want to do.&nbsp; I think this is what made many people say that 4e played more like a video game.&nbsp; Yes, I know there is flavor text for each power, but after reading it once, most people forget about it, and if used more than once, it becomes repetitive.&nbsp;&nbsp; I also realize that some groups (super players and DMs) work hard to narrate rather than rely on the shorthand, but I believe that is rare mostly because combat takes so much time, I believe many groups try whatever possible to speed it up.Second, when each action is conflated into a &quot;macro&quot; and players use the shorthand to say, &quot;I'll attack with Tide of Iron,&quot; or &quot;I mark my foe,&quot; or &quot;I use Sly Flourish,&quot; combats become mechanical, often repetitive and less interesting.Third, although the attack mechanic from 4e eliminated the need for a saving throw by having the attack target a specific defense (Reflex, Fortitude, Will) and this was a brilliant idea to streamline the attack, I believe that many players (especially the ones used to earlier editions) felt that the extra conditions stacked upon the initial attack felt unfair.When the designers tinker with the issues you've mentioned, these are also some of the problems they need to address.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rhenny, post: 5902354, member: 18333"] I agree with you. I think what you've posted really touches on a number of issues. First, in line with many of the threads that speak about language use/roleplaying, using a term like "Marked" is a meta-game short-hand that represents a mechanic...kind of like a "macro" in a computer game. The very way that all of the powers are named also function like a "macro". They make it easy for players to just use one or two words instead of actually narrating what they really want to do. I think this is what made many people say that 4e played more like a video game. Yes, I know there is flavor text for each power, but after reading it once, most people forget about it, and if used more than once, it becomes repetitive. I also realize that some groups (super players and DMs) work hard to narrate rather than rely on the shorthand, but I believe that is rare mostly because combat takes so much time, I believe many groups try whatever possible to speed it up. Second, when each action is conflated into a "macro" and players use the shorthand to say, "I'll attack with Tide of Iron," or "I mark my foe," or "I use Sly Flourish," combats become mechanical, often repetitive and less interesting. Third, although the attack mechanic from 4e eliminated the need for a saving throw by having the attack target a specific defense (Reflex, Fortitude, Will) and this was a brilliant idea to streamline the attack, I believe that many players (especially the ones used to earlier editions) felt that the extra conditions stacked upon the initial attack felt unfair. When the designers tinker with the issues you've mentioned, these are also some of the problems they need to address. [/QUOTE]

Verification