Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5496373" data-attributes="member: 42582">This has been covered pretty thoroughly upthread - roughly, a power which doesn't merely express or correspond to some action taken by the PC in the gameworld, but that also gives the player of that PC some sort of control over the narration of the fictional situation. Come and Get It is the main example being discussed here - it gives the player of the fighter some control over the movement and behaviour of NPCs/monsters which doesn't necessarily correspond to movement caused by actions of the figher PC.There are two reasons for making it a group activity. First, to use some Forge terminology, the fiction in an RPG is a shared imaginary space. Everyone at the table has an interest in what is going on in the fiction, so it makes sense to get everyone to sign off in the event of any conflicts/doubts. Second, it's fun.Well, one conception of what makes an RPG different from a board game or a skirmish game is precisely that it is a game where the creation and adjudication of a shared fiction is at the heart of the game - with the mechanics being a means to that end. On this conception, what you are saying here boils down to "players who are weaker roleplayers will have a harder time playing an RPG as opposed to a skirmish game" - which is true, but not necessarily a bad thing.The same response applies here - on the above conception of RPGing, it makes sense that imaginative players should be able to get more out of the game than other players. That's part of the point.But this also goes back to the idea of sharing narrative responsiblity. If the game is cooperative rather than competitive - which my 4e game mostly is, for example - then the more imaginative players will often help out the others, just as the more tactical players will help out the others with the tactical aspects of the game.If you make swinging on a chandelier to attack count as nearly two rounds worth of actions and require 3 skill checks it will probably never happen in your game.I think that page 42 is a central part of the game, and that the whole point of page 42 - which itself includes a "swing on chandelier" example, and strongly implies that it will not take two rounds worth of actions - is to allow PCs to do stuff that breaks the normal rules. This would include using swinging on a chandelier to get a square or two of extra movement. (Compare the use of a successful Acrobatics check to slide down a muddy embankment as a free action - this fairly standard terrain feature establishes, if there was any doubt, that one function of Acrobatics is to permit extra movement if the right terrain is present, just as Athletics permits movement across otherwise impassable terrain like walls and water.)In general, two things balance page 42 stunts against other options and powers (including skill powers): (i) the need for a skill roll, which in combination with a to-hit roll (in combat stunts) has a big impact on the likelihood of success; (ii) the possibility of adverse consequences for failure, such as falling prone in the chandelier example, or taking damage, which is my default consequence for failure.</blockquote>

Verification