Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5986647" data-attributes="member: 42582">But this I don't follow. I've watched Jacky Chan movies where he is too tired to kick but has the arm strength to slash.Is the thought that this sort of thing can't happen ever? Because the FitM narration doesn't require that it happen continously. Just once.To put it in perspective: a 4e PC will gain, at most, 29 levels. In that time, s/he will have, on average, 5 fights a level. (The other XP come from quests, skill challenges, freeform RP, etc.) That's around 150 fights overall.Now the suite of encounter powers changes every tier, so that's around 50 fights with a given suite of encounter powers. Furthermore, several of those encounter powers will overlap, more-or-less, with at-will powers, or one another (either in structure, or in actual effect in play - while there is a mechanical difference between attack 1 target and attack 2 targets, in the fiction there is no difference between an at will that hits one target and a two-target encounter power that hits only one target), or will be immediate actions that don't reflect a "special move" but simply introduce more fluidity into the abstraction that is the turn-by-turn sequence.So we're probably talking 50 or fewer occasions, over 29 levels of play, where the issue arises in the fiction of "it only being doable once". Is it really implausible to suppose that from time to time the opening isn't there, or the PC is too tired or distracted or just having a bad day?Is this a claim based on actual play experience? Or is it conjecture? FitM-heavy games devote a fair bit of energy to setting out techniques to deal with this - genre-fidelity being the main one. The 4e rulebooks have only a very modest discussion of the genre constraints (eg in the discussion of the conceits of the D&D world, and the meaning of the three tiers) but the very many detailed story elements set out as part of the rules (which contrasts with a more abstract and "toolkit" system like HeroQuest revised), plus the art, plus (for many of us) long familiarity with fantasy RPGing make the genre pretty clear.I haven't had any issues with this. And were they to come up, they would create about the same level of problem as debates, in sim/immersive play, about how much time really passed in searching the room or travelling from A to B, as an element in the resolution of spell durations.What I am interested in is what is being rejected. I don't care how any one else plays their RPGs. That's their prerogative.What irritates me a bit is when some posters reject the viability of playing an RPG in a non sim/immersive style. As if it can't be done! When in fact, all over the land, people are dong it!But who is saying that D&Dnext should not be able to support sim/immersive play?</blockquote>

Verification