Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Justifying high level 'guards', 'pirates', 'soldiers', 'assassins', etc.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4942464" data-attributes="member: 18280"><p>Let's imagine that Celebrim didn't understand you. Then, all that would determine if something was "cinematic" is relation of threat to PC level. Indeed, any threat, so long as it held the proper relationship to PC level, would be equally cinematic.</p><p></p><p>Only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play."</p><p></p><p>Now, as you say, perhaps English isn't your primary language, but if this is what you mean to say, it becomes strange that E6 would somehow be less cinematic than any other game. Surely, if only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play," E6 is as capable of delivering cinematic play as any other edition.</p><p></p><p>Hence Celebrim's comment that he doesn't seem to be the one confused. Either only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play", and E6 is as conducive to cinematic play as any other game, or there is something else involved. Your statements, as given in previous posts ("4e models cinematic play better than any edition to date. E6 does it extremely poorly."), are mutually contradictory. That indicates confusion.</p><p></p><p>An examination of your statements leads one to believe that it isn't merely the relation of threat to PC level that you view as conducive to fun play. You clearly are looking as specific types of threats as acceptable, and others as not acceptable. Perhaps you meant to clearly demark this part of your statements from those related to "cinematic" play, but it is (I think) understandable if there is some confusion here.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The above seems to strongly suggest some relationship between these opinions. It is no disparagement on anyone's language ability to be able to see that suggestion. In specific, it suggests that the more "realistic" something is, the less "cinematic" it is, and vice versa.</p><p></p><p></p><p>RC</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4942464, member: 18280"] Let's imagine that Celebrim didn't understand you. Then, all that would determine if something was "cinematic" is relation of threat to PC level. Indeed, any threat, so long as it held the proper relationship to PC level, would be equally cinematic. Only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play." Now, as you say, perhaps English isn't your primary language, but if this is what you mean to say, it becomes strange that E6 would somehow be less cinematic than any other game. Surely, if only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play," E6 is as capable of delivering cinematic play as any other edition. Hence Celebrim's comment that he doesn't seem to be the one confused. Either only "encounters that are too easy for the PCs, as well as encounters that are too difficult for them, make for other-than-cinematic play", and E6 is as conducive to cinematic play as any other game, or there is something else involved. Your statements, as given in previous posts ("4e models cinematic play better than any edition to date. E6 does it extremely poorly."), are mutually contradictory. That indicates confusion. An examination of your statements leads one to believe that it isn't merely the relation of threat to PC level that you view as conducive to fun play. You clearly are looking as specific types of threats as acceptable, and others as not acceptable. Perhaps you meant to clearly demark this part of your statements from those related to "cinematic" play, but it is (I think) understandable if there is some confusion here. The above seems to strongly suggest some relationship between these opinions. It is no disparagement on anyone's language ability to be able to see that suggestion. In specific, it suggests that the more "realistic" something is, the less "cinematic" it is, and vice versa. RC [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Justifying high level 'guards', 'pirates', 'soldiers', 'assassins', etc.
Top