Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 4773975" data-attributes="member: 66434">Not at all. A roleplaying game is about portraying a fictional character within a given game world. Simulation/realism is a separate issue from this and isn't connected. If you are participating in a roleplaying game, then you are deciding how your character will respond to events in the game as opposed to actively telling a story during such participation. After the action takes place, a story may be made out the events.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Well I do loves me some cake.<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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Too many powers is a minor issue. The bigger problem is the lack of definition between the magical and mundane. The blending of it all together into &quot;superpowers&quot; is an unwanted genre shift to me. If I want to play a supers game I will, there is no need to morph a fantasy game into one. This has nothing to do with the scale of the abilities. D&amp;D has always featured a steadily rising power curve. The only &quot;realism&quot; that has ever been important (to me) has been the relative consistent reality of the game world, which includes magic that is identifiable as such.I have never seen a game in which humans fighting huge dragons ever approached what I would call realistic.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;[bolded part] I do want to tell you, because its a fact.&nbsp;IMHO 4E is too much about about combat. The rules presentation supports the grid first/ world second approach to the game.I also have stated on more than one occasion that 4E does not inhibit roleplaying and I stand by that. Unless the mad-cow has advanced in my brain, I do not recall complaining about a lack of storytelling.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Yes. I never claimed that D&amp;D at its core was an implied low magic game. Please enlighten me about these contadictions. 4E has adjusted the scale of things to remove the &quot; zero to hero&quot; aspect of power gain that had been there before. Fledgling adventurers are virtual X-men at 1st level in 4E which is a dramatic change from prior editions.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Why tone down fantastic elements? Its a fantasy world and I think it should have them. Heroes are powerful beings and get to operate outside the regular laws of the world, and thats called magic or supernatural power. If there is no underlying mundane world how do the heroes stand out from everyone else? Old D&amp;D took a semi-medieval world and overlayed a layer of the fantastic. This made the fantasy elements really stand out. If the whole world is over the top fantastical then everything seems kind of the same.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I see 4E as world where fireballs aren't blazing. Can you really kill anything but a constructed pinata monster with that thing?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ExploderWizard, post: 4773975, member: 66434"] Not at all. A roleplaying game is about portraying a fictional character within a given game world. Simulation/realism is a separate issue from this and isn't connected. If you are participating in a roleplaying game, then you are deciding how your character will respond to events in the game as opposed to actively telling a story during such participation. After the action takes place, a story may be made out the events. Well I do loves me some cake.:) Too many powers is a minor issue. The bigger problem is the lack of definition between the magical and mundane. The blending of it all together into "superpowers" is an unwanted genre shift to me. If I want to play a supers game I will, there is no need to morph a fantasy game into one. This has nothing to do with the scale of the abilities. D&D has always featured a steadily rising power curve. The only "realism" that has ever been important (to me) has been the relative consistent reality of the game world, which includes magic that is identifiable as such.I have never seen a game in which humans fighting huge dragons ever approached what I would call realistic. [bolded part] I do want to tell you, because its a fact. IMHO 4E is too much about about combat. The rules presentation supports the grid first/ world second approach to the game.I also have stated on more than one occasion that 4E does not inhibit roleplaying and I stand by that. Unless the mad-cow has advanced in my brain, I do not recall complaining about a lack of storytelling. Yes. I never claimed that D&D at its core was an implied low magic game. Please enlighten me about these contadictions. 4E has adjusted the scale of things to remove the " zero to hero" aspect of power gain that had been there before. Fledgling adventurers are virtual X-men at 1st level in 4E which is a dramatic change from prior editions. Why tone down fantastic elements? Its a fantasy world and I think it should have them. Heroes are powerful beings and get to operate outside the regular laws of the world, and thats called magic or supernatural power. If there is no underlying mundane world how do the heroes stand out from everyone else? Old D&D took a semi-medieval world and overlayed a layer of the fantastic. This made the fantasy elements really stand out. If the whole world is over the top fantastical then everything seems kind of the same. I see 4E as world where fireballs aren't blazing. Can you really kill anything but a constructed pinata monster with that thing? [/QUOTE]

Verification