Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Former 4E doubter , I have high hopes now
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4017225" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>This is already changing the rules (there will be no rules for XP-docking in the DMG, I'm pretty sure). I was really talking about the RAW (as I am predicting them to be, based on information available so far).</p><p></p><p>Of course, if you really forbid metagaming then you will also have to drop APs from the game, at least, and also other aspects as well (like the default assumption that PCs are safe in a PoL if their players have not chosen to seek adversity).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, I see you are also intending to abandon that default assumption. </p><p></p><p></p><p>In many RPGs the players also get to establish context, events and situations, and determine what counts as a successful resolution of them.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, the RAW describe a cosmology for the game. Of course any given group might choose to play with a different cosmology.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The history of moral philosophy is really OT, but I would note that the greatest moral subjectivist in European philosophy are Thrasymchus (a protagonist in the Republic) and Hume (an eightenth century Scottish philosopher) - neither is a postmodernist.</p><p></p><p>On the substantive point, I don't see what the relationship is between the GM controlling the moral universe of the game, and avoiding ambiguity or subjectivism. To me, all this would seem to guarantee is that the players are hostage to the GM's subjective (and potentially ambiguous) moral sensibility.</p><p></p><p>Btw, part of the logic of mechanics like those for social challenge resolution is that the GM does not have sole control of NPC reactions in the game world.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. </p><p></p><p></p><p>This is not really consistent with the PoL design philosophy.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You seem to have misunderstood my post. I have never met you, as far as I know. I have no idea how you GM, nor what your players make of it. Indeed, with respect, I have little interest in these things.</p><p></p><p>I am doing my best to desribe the design logic, and implications for play, of 4e. Part of that is the support, by the game, of mastery of system excellence (this contrasts with the notion of "excellent play" that Gygax elaborates in the 1st ed AD&D rulebooks, which is linked no to system mastery but rather skill in operational play). </p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure what you think complex character build and action resolution rules (of the sort that 3E introduced into D&D) bring to the game. But rules mastery, and play based on that rules mastery (or system excellence, as I put it in my earlier post) is one natural such thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p>OK. This is not what W&M (sidebar, p 20) indicates to be the norm for PoL in 4e.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Subject to the above, this will mostly be under the GM's control in 4e, although there are complications (eg the players, by choosing to engage a situation in a certain way, may be able to transform it from mere background or backdrop into an encounter).</p><p></p><p></p><p>In 4e, as in 3E, there will be detailed rules for XP per challenge, and XP required per level.</p><p></p><p></p><p>In 4e, as in 3E, there will be detailed action-resolution rules. Btw, how do you use "role-playing", as opposed to dice, to resolve combat in 3E?</p><p></p><p></p><p>What do you regard as the ultimate rule?</p><p></p><p>And I'd note that not every gaming group allows the GM sole prerogative to determine what ruleset will be used to RPG.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, I've indicated all the features of the game I'm inferring from. These have all been stated publicly, either in W&M or in the various blogs and so on cited on the ENworld newspage.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 4017225, member: 42582"] This is already changing the rules (there will be no rules for XP-docking in the DMG, I'm pretty sure). I was really talking about the RAW (as I am predicting them to be, based on information available so far). Of course, if you really forbid metagaming then you will also have to drop APs from the game, at least, and also other aspects as well (like the default assumption that PCs are safe in a PoL if their players have not chosen to seek adversity). Ah, I see you are also intending to abandon that default assumption. In many RPGs the players also get to establish context, events and situations, and determine what counts as a successful resolution of them. Well, the RAW describe a cosmology for the game. Of course any given group might choose to play with a different cosmology. The history of moral philosophy is really OT, but I would note that the greatest moral subjectivist in European philosophy are Thrasymchus (a protagonist in the Republic) and Hume (an eightenth century Scottish philosopher) - neither is a postmodernist. On the substantive point, I don't see what the relationship is between the GM controlling the moral universe of the game, and avoiding ambiguity or subjectivism. To me, all this would seem to guarantee is that the players are hostage to the GM's subjective (and potentially ambiguous) moral sensibility. Btw, part of the logic of mechanics like those for social challenge resolution is that the GM does not have sole control of NPC reactions in the game world. Yes. This is not really consistent with the PoL design philosophy. You seem to have misunderstood my post. I have never met you, as far as I know. I have no idea how you GM, nor what your players make of it. Indeed, with respect, I have little interest in these things. I am doing my best to desribe the design logic, and implications for play, of 4e. Part of that is the support, by the game, of mastery of system excellence (this contrasts with the notion of "excellent play" that Gygax elaborates in the 1st ed AD&D rulebooks, which is linked no to system mastery but rather skill in operational play). I'm not sure what you think complex character build and action resolution rules (of the sort that 3E introduced into D&D) bring to the game. But rules mastery, and play based on that rules mastery (or system excellence, as I put it in my earlier post) is one natural such thing. OK. This is not what W&M (sidebar, p 20) indicates to be the norm for PoL in 4e. Subject to the above, this will mostly be under the GM's control in 4e, although there are complications (eg the players, by choosing to engage a situation in a certain way, may be able to transform it from mere background or backdrop into an encounter). In 4e, as in 3E, there will be detailed rules for XP per challenge, and XP required per level. In 4e, as in 3E, there will be detailed action-resolution rules. Btw, how do you use "role-playing", as opposed to dice, to resolve combat in 3E? What do you regard as the ultimate rule? And I'd note that not every gaming group allows the GM sole prerogative to determine what ruleset will be used to RPG. Well, I've indicated all the features of the game I'm inferring from. These have all been stated publicly, either in W&M or in the various blogs and so on cited on the ENworld newspage. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
Former 4E doubter , I have high hopes now
Top