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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6039205" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Absolutely on this.  In my view, the largest group of impediments to a functional "fiction/genre/thematic interest first" game are:1 - De-incentivizing PC behavior on fiction/genre/thematic grounds (reactively in tactical play and pro-actively in strategic play and in roleplay).  There is an intrinsic PC unwillingness to take risks embedded in standard D&D play as failure in task resolution means "you're a buffoon" or "non-proficient (specifically when you're trying to express an archetype that is proficient, well practiced, or masterful) and failure in combat means you're dead.  A system whereby the cost (risk of TPK/narrative ending) benefit (narrative enrichment on thematic, genre-relevant grounds) analysis is overwhelmed by the punitive nature of the cost end of the spectrum narrows choices to a singularity; what yields success.  Accordingly, like sub-optimal strategic, tactical, and roleplay choices (on thematic/genre-relevant grounds), sub-optimal PC build choices yielding buffoonery or "dead status" renders thematic choices utterly subordinate to the aforementioned buffoonery avoidance/mere survival choices.2 - Lack of mechanical incentive/impetus to behave (reactively and proactively) and to build PCs on fiction/genre/thematic grounds.3 - Lack of thematic build choices to flesh out archetype.Again, 4th edition (unlike all other D&D editions) proves its mettle here:- Tight encounter budgeting allowing DMs absolute control over what challenges he puts before the PCs (thereby there being virtually no risk of a TPK-level challenge manifesting by accident or fuzzy math).  As such, the "cost" (in this case, the potential for TPK lurking around every "encounter corner"...sometimes by way of DM miscalculation) is bounded considerably yielding the opportunity for the "benefit" (thematic, genre-relevant choices) to be brought to bear much more consistently (especially with p42).  This is the inhibition of the de-incentive of 1.  Beyond that, from the DM side of the screen, it allows me to trust the budget will map the encounter to my anticipated output, thus allowing me to focus on enriching it tactically, strategically and thematically.- Richly thematic power choices and Class constructs allowing for strong archetype creation both tactically and as expressed in the fiction.  P42, Themes and Backgrounds further advance this considerably.  This is the inverse of 3 - across the board for all classes.  - Minor Quest Rewards for completion of theme/background relevant to the chosen archetype.  This is even better supported if cooperatively meta-gamed together with the player (or mined during discussions...sort of like investigating for potential Christmas present prospects <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />) before the game or as the game progresses.  This is the incentive of 2.- Milestones/APs rewarded for properly rendered thematic play or the willingness to take risks/lose (sometimes intentionally lose) for the sake of thematic play or dynamic, genre-relevant narrative.  This is the incentive of 2.- Fail Forward Conflict Resolution of Skill Challenges.  A singular failed Skill Check need not lead to buffoonery and an ultimate failure of the Skill Challenge leads to a new challenge, new adversity...not a dead end (literally or figuratively).  This manifests as the inhibition of the de-incentive of 1.  It can also be the incentive of 2 (Awarding APs for extraordinarily thematic risk-taking in Skill Challenges or a Failure leading to a bonus or an opportunity for 2 successes out of 1 roll)</blockquote>

Verification