Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8367959" data-attributes="member: 42582">Whatever the GM wants it to be! Within the constraints established by the DC-by-level chart. Until we've set a level for this challenge, we can't say; and there's no point talking about setting a challenge until we've concretely identified some PCs for whom this is intended to be a challenge.(It's probably clear that in all my posts I'm assuming that the GM is the one who frames situations in 4e. I think that's consistent with the game text - of course players are expected to establish quests, but it's still the GM who is meant to be framing those scene. If someone departs from this textual approach, and eg runs &quot;sandbox&quot; 4e, then levels will have to be given a different function. [USER=386]@LostSoul[/USER] did this - each setting element was labelled with a level that was PC-independent, and established its DCs. This sort of approach will affect the pacing that I see as fundamental to the maths of 4e's design and play.)What I would add to this is that all &quot;keeping up&quot; means is is acceptable to, hopefully fun for, everyone at the table.We can see this by comparing default 4e - where epic tier challenges are (in fictional terms) the Abyss and divine domains and rogue stars (see MM3) and the like - with Dark Sun - where epic tier challenges are Sorcerer-Kings and hangers on who (in default 4e) would suit the fiction of upper paragon, not epic.I think that 4e is fiction first, but by this I mean the PbtA sense of &quot;beginning and ending with the fiction&quot; - ie framing is first and foremost fiction, and resolution (skill challenge or combat - my claim re the latter is controversial, especially with some who dislike 4e, but I'm happy to explain it if asked) begins by engaging the fiction, and the consequences of resolution are changes to the fiction.But while PbtA &quot;begins and ends with the fiction&quot; that doesn't mean that fiction determines DCs. In AW and DW, there are no DCs. 4e does use DCs, but they're not read off the fiction. They're read off the rules for setting level-appropriate DCs and damage. Which is why I call the &quot;non-objective&quot; ie &quot;subjective&quot;. (The terminology is not fundamental; I'm just trying to explicate my usage.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8367959, member: 42582"] Whatever the GM wants it to be! Within the constraints established by the DC-by-level chart. Until we've set a level for this challenge, we can't say; and there's no point talking about setting a challenge until we've concretely identified some PCs for whom this is intended to be a challenge. (It's probably clear that in all my posts I'm assuming that the GM is the one who frames situations in 4e. I think that's consistent with the game text - of course players are expected to establish quests, but it's still the GM who is meant to be framing those scene. If someone departs from this textual approach, and eg runs "sandbox" 4e, then levels will have to be given a different function. [USER=386]@LostSoul[/USER] did this - each setting element was labelled with a level that was PC-independent, and established its DCs. This sort of approach will affect the pacing that I see as fundamental to the maths of 4e's design and play.) What I would add to this is that all "keeping up" means is [I]is acceptable to, hopefully fun for, everyone at the table[/I]. We can see this by comparing default 4e - where epic tier challenges are (in fictional terms) the Abyss and divine domains and rogue stars (see MM3) and the like - with Dark Sun - where epic tier challenges are Sorcerer-Kings and hangers on who (in default 4e) would suit the fiction of upper paragon, not epic. I think that 4e is fiction first, but by this I mean the PbtA sense of "beginning and ending with the fiction" - ie framing is first and foremost fiction, and resolution (skill challenge or combat - my claim re the latter is controversial, especially with some who dislike 4e, but I'm happy to explain it if asked) begins by engaging the fiction, and the consequences of resolution are changes to the fiction. But while PbtA "begins and ends with the fiction" that doesn't mean that fiction determines DCs. In AW and DW, there [I]are[/I] no DCs. 4e does use DCs, but they're not read off the fiction. They're read off the rules for setting level-appropriate DCs and damage. Which is why I call the "non-objective" ie "subjective". (The terminology is not fundamental; I'm just trying to explicate my usage.) [/QUOTE]

Verification