Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5639916" data-attributes="member: 42582">I think you're right that this is the point of disagreement.I think that Gygax's AD&amp;D was about producing something that could be evaluated in (something like) aesthetic terms - namely, &quot;skillful play&quot;.2nd ed AD&amp;D seems to have envisaged that the GM would impose his/her aesthetic vision on the players by suspending the action resolution rules (sorry, &quot;fudging in the intersests of the story&quot;) at key moment. I'm hesitant to express as to what 3E was for.I play 4e to produce something that can be evaluated in aesthetic terms - thematically compelling play. (In Forge-ist terms, this is narrativism.) Whether or not this is what the designers intended me to do with 4e, it is (in my view) something that the game supports right out of the box. (There's a marked contrast here with AD&amp;D and 3E.)That's why I voted No. It's also why I get irritated by the characterisation of 4e as a tactical skirmish game (see the ongoing &quot;theory of dissociated mechanics&quot; thread).So like I said, you need more narrativist D&amp;D! (And, more seriously, I remember on another recent thread - Elf Witch's one, I think - you said that you wouldn't try and use D&amp;D for a thematically driven game. Which I think reinforces your point that this is how our experiences of, and therefore characterisation of, D&amp;D differ.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5639916, member: 42582"] I think you're right that this is the point of disagreement. I think that Gygax's AD&D [I]was[/I] about producing something that could be evaluated in (something like) aesthetic terms - namely, "skillful play". 2nd ed AD&D seems to have envisaged that the GM would impose his/her aesthetic vision on the players by suspending the action resolution rules (sorry, "fudging in the intersests of the story") at key moment. I'm hesitant to express as to what 3E was for. I play 4e to produce something that can be evaluated in aesthetic terms - thematically compelling play. (In Forge-ist terms, this is narrativism.) Whether or not this is what the designers [I]intended[/I] me to do with 4e, it is (in my view) something that the game supports right out of the box. (There's a marked contrast here with AD&D and 3E.) That's why I voted No. It's also why I get irritated by the characterisation of 4e as a tactical skirmish game (see the ongoing "theory of dissociated mechanics" thread). So like I said, you need more narrativist D&D! (And, more seriously, I remember on another recent thread - Elf Witch's one, I think - you said that you wouldn't try and use D&D for a thematically driven game. Which I think reinforces your point that this is how our experiences of, and therefore characterisation of, D&D differ.) [/QUOTE]

Verification