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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5167583" data-attributes="member: 42582">Starfox, I agree with you that method (i) of doing skill challenges is better than (ii) - I don't think WoTC has got either the mechanics or the presentation of skill challenges fully under control, especially when compared to the sorts of action resolution systems they are being inspired by (eg HeroQuest).But even method (i) is still engaging the mechanics - having described your stunt, you have to roll for it in the fashion that the mechanics dictate. In this way 4e is more like Burning Wheel or HeroQuest and less like AD&D. And of course a good player will describe stunts keeping in mind how they will be mechanically resolved, and how this will fit with their PC's abilities.I don't think it's a flaw, in the sense of an objective failing (whereas I think the poor presentation and development of skill challenges is a flaw, in that it is an objective failing in the rulebooks and modules). But I readily agree that it is not something that all players, especially those who prefer a traditional approach to fantasy RPGs (eg AD&D, RQ, hardcore RM) would enjoy.But I don't see any reason for distinguishing these different preferences in playstyle in terms of "ego"  vs "delayed gratificaiton" (which is highly suggestive of infantile vs mature). I've tended to use "traditional" and ""modern" - if that's objectionable (and no one who prefers traditional to modern has yet indicated that it is) I'm very happy to look for another way of capturing what I think everyone agrees is a pretty significant difference in game design and game play.</blockquote>

Verification