Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5522559" data-attributes="member: 51942">I agree with most of your previous points, but this one I'm not so convinced of.  There are degrees of consistency, and 4e is definitely noticeably less concerning with any kind of in-game reality than 3e ever was.  And while RP may be system-independent, 4e's black-box ability style discourages thinking out of that box.  There's no help in adjudicating odd interactions, no mental model of how something's supposed to work.  E.g. spells in 3e were often useful out of combat not merely because that was their intent, but also because their supposed functioning in-game was clear, and thus even if there wasn't an exact match with the normal scenarios (e.g. no enemy), you could reasonable rule on the effects.  In 4e, that's harder - not impossible, but harder.  If the fluff makes sense, you can actually use that fluff creatively.In any case, I agree that plot balance is a laudable goal, I just don't think we should look at this as a zero-sum game: 4e's (plot) balance doesn't necessarily imply black-box powers without reasonable fluff nor symmetric class design - yet 4e does suffer from those flaws.And then there are lots of little design decisions that hurt believability without gaining simplicity or plot balance in return.  E.g. the wishlist-based item distribution.  The monster design that's dissociated from fluff.  Excessive numbers of virtually identical items whose effects are mostly clearly balanced in a meta-game fashion.  Effect durations heavily interacting with initiative order.  Saves vs. forced movement - but only if into a pit.  Lots of interrupting powers - but you can't use em on your turn.  You can shift when you stand up, but only if a creature is standing on you.  Solos with fundamentally meta-game bonuses.  Disregarding size differences.These facts don't make a game bad, but they do influence what kind of game it is.  And 4e tends slightly more towards a game like magic the gathering, or say dominion (my current infatuation <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />) - a great, fun pastime, but you play it tactically, with cool combos and neat tricks.  You don't use powers when their fluff is thematically appropriate, you use em when they're tactically sensible - usually, anyhow.  And because the focus is on the mechanics of powers, the player mindset is less likely to result in creative in-game applications of the PC abilities, and more likely to result in creative tactical applications of the game-mechanical effects.</blockquote>

Verification