Legends and Lore - Nod To Realism

[Nemesis Destiny]

What color and style the clothes have or if they fit together doesn't matter (Mockery? Lazer from instrument? Any other flavor?)

It matters if you decide it does. If you decide that it's important, you change the style or whatever so it doesn't clash, fits better, etc.

 

[Derren]

It matters if you decide it does. If you decide that it's important, you change the style or whatever so it doesn't clash, fits better, etc.

Which is a house rule as the 4E rules specifically say that its not important.

 

[Balesir]

There is a difference between players finding loopholes and the designers not even caring.

There is, but what relevance has this to anything? Do you have some priviledged information on what the designers do and don't care about?

And the instant you say "Just change the flavor to make the rules work for you", and that is the gist of what you argue here, you place less value on flavor than on rules.

This is a non-sequitur. For the avoidance of doubt, that means it does not follow, logically.

It follows that allowing freedom to reflavour means placing less value on one, specific, prescribed bit of flavour. But it does not follow that allowing such freedom means placing less value on flavour in general. In fact, it indicates the opposite. If I give you freedom and desist from dictating to you how something should be done, it generally means I attach far more value to that something rather than less. It's not universally true, but it's a fair generalisation. If I say to someone "just do X", it's generally because we just want to get it done - it's not that important. If it is important, I want them to think about it for themselves.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Bad for the player who followed your advice and ignored flavor text because its mallable.

Where is this even coming from?

If a player tosses a fireball and the DM says, "ok, now you damaged the creatures, and also lit everything in the room on fire." That DM is doing exactly what they're supposed to do, AND following the rules.

The player may object and say, "but it says 'Creatures' not 'Objects'!!! How can the room be on fire?" but that is just a player being whiney.

I have referenced the section of Rules Compendium on page 107 TWICE in this thread now, and clearly you haven't read it, because it explicitly spells out that in such cases the DM is to make a judgment call on what happens.

The player used a Fireball, a power with the Fire keyword in a room full of flammable objects, catching anything that happened to be in his burst 3. That's how it goes. Just like every edition before it.

 

[Balesir]

Sure, but as far as 4E is concerned it only matters that you wear shoes, trousers and a shirt (Ranged 10, single target, CHA v WILL; on a hit, 1d6 + CHA mod -2 to hit rolls).
What color and style the clothes have or if they fit together doesn't matter (Mockery? Lazer from instrument? Any other flavor?)

Now you're just being obtuse.

You have it the wrong way around; 4E says if you have some skill with creating a good impression with how you dress, you will be able to do it moderately well (if you make the roll - i.e. if you successfully navigate the unknown factors) and this will have a broadly predictable result. The precise clothes you wear will be down to your judgement and taste at the time; we assume that these are good, because you have the skill "create a good impression through how you dress".

 

[Derren]

The player used a Fireball, a power with the Fire keyword in a room full of flammable objects, catching anything that happened to be in his burst 3. That's how it goes. Just like every edition before it.

So? And the bard mocked a skeletton.
You have argued, together with others, that the name "Mockery" does not necessarily mean that mocks are involved.

The same way the player can argue that just because the spell is called fireball it is not a ball of fire and that according to the rules (the important things which stay fixed and can't be changed on a whim) only creatures are affected.

You seem to think that the creativity in 4E comes from the player now trying to find a spell description which lets him deal fire damage to the enemies but not ignite the room they are in. But for me this is on the same levels as players trying to find "Bag of Rats" loopholes (It is a form of creativity, but nothing I want to encourage).

For me, and likely for many people who think 4E lacks realism and left because of it, creativity means that the player now has to think of a way to attack the enemies without damaging the room they are in with the tools he has, and not to simply reshape the tools to do what he wants.

Also, by using "flavor is mallable" players can never be sure what their characters can do and what not because they only have the rules part of their powers and the constant danger of DM fiat.
Sure, you can be a "good DM" (as defined by 4E) and say yes to everything, but for me (as player) this is boring as it removes the need to be really creative as I can simply change the flavor to whatever I need and yet also frustrating because in the cases it doesn't work (DM says no) the only reason for it is DM fiat and not because I was not skilled/clever enough.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Which is a house rule as the 4E rules specifically say that its not important.

Again, wrong. This is not a houserule. The rules explicitly tell you to alter flavour text to suit.
Q.E.D.:

Players are free to invent their own descriptions of powers, sprinkling them with detail specific to the adventures or campaign setting.

and

You can alter this description as you like, to fit your own idea of what the power looks like.

 

[Derren]

Again, wrong. This is not a houserule. The rules explicitly tell you to alter flavour text to suit.
Q.E.D.:
and

Again, if you can change something at will it is not important.
If the player can decide once what the power looks like and never change it, then it is important again, but you can still run in the skeletton issue here in the case that the player decided the power works how implied by the default flavor text.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

So? And the bard mocked a skeletton.
You have argued, together with others, that the name "Mockery" does not necessarily mean that mocks are involved.

The same way the player can argue that just because the spell is called fireball it is not a ball of fire and that according to the rules (the important things which stay fixed and can't be changed on a whim) only creatures are affected.

Except it is still a ball of fire, regardless of what a player decides it looks like, and as I pointed out, the player can argue that it affects creatures only all day long, but that's not a player decision to make - it's the DMs. Just like it always has been.

You seem to think that the creativity in 4E now comes from the player now trying to find a spell description which lets him deal fire damage to the enemies but not ignite the room they are in. But for me this is on the same levels as players trying to find "Bag of Rats" loopholes (It is a form of creativity, but nothing I want to encourage).

Except it's nothing like a bag of rats. A player can try to describe things any way they like, but the effect is still a burst 3 Arcane Fire attack, so if the DM wants to rule it catches things on fire, they can. If the social contract at that particular table is such that a description of the effect can change how the DM parses the effect in game, fine, but that is veering into houserule territory.

The reason the flavour text is malleable is to reinforce the fiction, not try to destroy it. If you're determined to make it sound silly, then the same can be done of any of our games of choice. We sit around pretending to be elves and wizards.

For me, and likely for many people who think 4E lacks realism and left because of it, creativity means that the player now has to think of a way to attack the enemies without damaging the room they are in with the tools he has, and not to simply reshape the tools to do what he wants.

Except that it doesn't work this way at all. You toss a fireball, you have to deal with the consequences. Nothing has changed.

Also, by using "flavor is mallable" players can never be sure what their characters can do and what not because they only have the rules part of their powers and the constant danger of DM fiat.
Sure, you can be a "good DM" (as defined by 4E) and say yes to everything, but for me (as player) this is boring as it removes the need to be really creative as I can simply change the flavor to whatever I need..

So, players at the mercy of the DM - juuuuuust like every other edition of the game.

And 'say yes' doesn't guarantee that things will work in a player's favour. This has also been discussed to death.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Again, if you can change something at will it is not important.

Your opinion. Not one universally held, and certainly not a hard fact of any kind.

If the player can decide once what the power looks like and never change it, then it is important again, but you can still run in the skeletton issue here in the case that the player decided the power works how implied by the default flavor text.

Again, this is your opinion. You are welcome to it, but it's clearly not shared by everyone.

Clearly there is some disagreement here. You aren't getting anywhere with your arguments, so what is it you're looking for, besides a pointless argument?