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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5168260" data-attributes="member: 4937">I reject your contrast as a post-modernist construction which suggests that anything good for us, must somehow be bad.  I reject the notion that profitable work is suffering.  I reject the notion that study and scholarship are suffering.  I reject the notion that exercise and training are suffering.  Certainly, these things don't offer the same experience of gratification that the work leads up to, and certainly they all bear with them a certain measure of challenge and difficulty, but I present that they are gratifying, satisfying and even pleasurable things in and of themselves.  And therefore, I insist that they are perfectly comparable with what I've been talking about.  I refuse to accept the notion that anything hard must perforce be suffering, which is the assumption of your claim and the heart and soul of the whole matter.I haven't responded to your points about the obvious influence of indie design on 4e, because I believe that there is no obvious influence of indie design on 4e and indeed I think it is pretty clear that 4e is wildly different in assumptions, goals, mechanics and techniques from an archetypal 'indie' game like 'Dogs in the Vineyard'.  The whole notion that 4e is some sort of 'indie' game is laughable on the face of it and I don't understand why you keep trying to push such a tenuous connection.Salient features of 'Indie' games and the larger ilk of narrativist/story centered games include things like:1) Combat occupies no special or exalted place in the rules either as a means of resolving challenges or a elevated and special skill.  In fact, physical combat may not be supported directly by the rules at all.2) Very broad and unconstrained character creation.  Players have wide latitude to define the attributes of their character and the meaning of those attributes will have in the game.  3) Fortune in the End4) 'Alternative' fortune mechanics (other than traditional polyhedrals)5) Either no defined setting at all beyond the nature of the characters created, or very titlely focused settings, especially wierd, provocative, or humorous settings (again defined by the sort of characters created).6) Collaborative narration, often with concrete resources distributed to players and gamemasters alike that allow for direct narrative control, or rotating GMs.7) Mechanical definitions and support of relationships between the character and other characters.  Heavy support for resolving social drama, often to the point of having more support for resolving social combat than they have for resolving combat (or resolving them with essentially identical mechanics, see #1) By contrast, 4e is a traditional squad based tactical fantasy RPG with heavy support for combat, tightly controlled and relatively inflexible character creation, a completely traditional GM, and otherwise completely traditional mechanics.  In some ways, 4e D&D is the most 'D&Dish' version of the game ever.  Moreover, if you start looking at Indie games you'll see lots and lots of support for the sterotypical 'roleplayer' who thinks that its more mature to play characters with lots of flaws and internal conflicts and who wants to roleplay out buying a basket of apples or chatting with the neighbor as they wash their clothes in the appartment buildings basement and other low drama story centered things.  What you won't find is the traditional ego fulfillment paraphenalia - loot, experience points, repetitive tactical combat, etc.  By contrast, 4e is the game that has so defined down what it means to have flaws, that races no longer carry penalties to attributes and you are allowed to effectively substitute intelligence for dexterity to allow for combat optimization.  I mean seriously, you think 4e has heavy Indie game influence?  To complete the sterotype, you think 4e is the game that edgy, artsy, FORGE reading, flower children flocked to after the virtual demise of the WoD LARP scene?  (I should note that while sterotyping here, I'm not denigrating either style of gaming as inferior nor am I suggesting my sterotype is inclusive of everyone that enjoys 'Indie' games.)  Look, I know that before 4e came out, alot of people believed it would look like Donjon (especially when they heard about 'skill challenges') but I just don't see the resemblence.  I don't think you could have made a less 'indie' game if you tried.As for Ron Edwards essay, I don't want to comment on it, because my criticisms of it would probably unfortunately echo what alot of people have been saying about me.  I don't see how you can quote that tripe with a straight face while simultaneously blasting me for being derogatory.  I mean seriously, what's with that guy and who took a leak in his cheerios?</blockquote>

Verification