Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost" data-source="post: 4784793" data-attributes="member: 4720">That's one (slightly cynical but very valid) way of looking at it.&nbsp; It's certainly part of the reason for a company to build rules this way: expandability.&nbsp; But I think it also has some positives.&nbsp; Learning a new set of mechanics when you play a new class is good for your brain (scientifically proven fact!) and adds to replayability (my opinion, YMMV).&nbsp;That's exactly what I was saying.&nbsp; That's part of the distinction between the player and the DM.&nbsp; The players should ideally just see the coliseum.&nbsp; The DM is the one who is constantly aware that the walls are press board and lions are CGI.Maybe this is because I came from videogames first and then picked up D&amp;D, but I think the 4e rules are fine this way.&nbsp; I do just about the same suspending of disbelief in 4e that I did in 3e.&nbsp; Maybe that's because I've played it even less.&nbsp; Maybe I haven't seen the seams yet.&nbsp; I'll acknowledge the possibility.Nonsense.&nbsp; I spent years as a main tank and raid leader in WoW.&nbsp; Only just recently took a break (hence finding myself gravitating back here again)&nbsp; I was constantly up to my elbows in a level of math far beyond anything I've ever done in D&amp;D in order to optimize a character, since my moment-to-moment performance had a huge impact on the play experience of 10, 25, or 40 other people.Oh, god, no.&nbsp; I don't really think about the game in those terms at all.&nbsp; It's much more of a movie or a Wizard of OZ (man behind the curtain) metaphor for me.&nbsp; The players should see the pyrotechnic show and hear the roaring voice, not have access to the control panel.True.&nbsp; But my point was that the precise structure of the rules design and things like fudging die rolls should be over on the DM's side of the screen, because they are not a value add for the player.&nbsp; For the player, being immersed in that can have a very corrosive effect on their ability to believe the illusion of the game world, regardless of system.Are my &quot;storyteller&quot; genes showing up a bit strongly?Maybe I should be playing Paranoia.&nbsp;Not sure why I'm on the receiving end of that particular snark.&nbsp; I can disagree quite comfortably with almost everyone who has posted so far, so don't assume I'm all over the narrativist idea.&nbsp; If there is a unifying principle in 4e, I'm of the opinion that it is a gamist one.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jeremy Ackerman-Yost, post: 4784793, member: 4720"] That's one (slightly cynical but very valid) way of looking at it. It's certainly part of the reason for a company to build rules this way: expandability. But I think it also has some positives. Learning a new set of mechanics when you play a new class is good for your brain (scientifically proven fact!) and adds to replayability (my opinion, YMMV). That's exactly what I was saying. That's part of the distinction between the player and the DM. The players should ideally just see the coliseum. The DM is the one who is constantly aware that the walls are press board and lions are CGI. Maybe this is because I came from videogames first and then picked up D&D, but I think the 4e rules are fine this way. I do just about the same suspending of disbelief in 4e that I did in 3e. Maybe that's because I've played it even less. Maybe I haven't seen the seams yet. I'll acknowledge the possibility. Nonsense. I spent years as a main tank and raid leader in WoW. Only just recently took a break (hence finding myself gravitating back here again) I was constantly up to my elbows in a level of math far beyond anything I've ever done in D&D in order to optimize a character, since my moment-to-moment performance had a huge impact on the play experience of 10, 25, or 40 other people. Oh, god, no. I don't really think about the game in those terms at all. It's much more of a movie or a Wizard of OZ (man behind the curtain) metaphor for me. The players should see the pyrotechnic show and hear the roaring voice, not have access to the control panel. True. But my point was that the precise structure of the rules design and things like fudging die rolls should be over on the DM's side of the screen, because they are not a value add for the player. For the player, being immersed in that can have a very corrosive effect on their ability to believe the illusion of the game world, regardless of system. Are my "storyteller" genes showing up a bit strongly? Maybe I should be playing Paranoia. Not sure why I'm on the receiving end of that particular snark. I can disagree quite comfortably with almost everyone who has posted so far, so don't assume I'm all over the narrativist idea. If there [B]is[/B] a unifying principle in 4e, I'm of the opinion that it is a gamist one. [/QUOTE]

Verification