Let's talk about "plot", "story", and "play to find out."

[Scott Christian]

I had a lot of fun with 4e. For most of it I played a fighter with Come and Get It, which I thought was a fantastic power both thematically and in actual play. Whenever I used it, I came up with an in-character rationale for why the enemies were briefly drawn to me. I remember once CAGI'ing some dark elves because I had struck their priest, CAGI'ing some monsters I can't remember by playing possum, CAGI'ing some dire wolves by using my primal barbarian (multiclass) instincts to howl a challenge, and CAGI'ing some sword wraiths by unveiling my sword that hates undead and does extra damage to them.

There were also a couple of times where I couldn't think of a fun explanation, so I didn't use the power. But most of the time it was a creative challenge to come up with a satisfying (not forced) explanation and I was able to do it.

As I say, this is often a PICNIC issue (problem in chair not in computer)

I agree with this and with @hawkeyefan.

Ugh having to imagine all those things sounds positively exhausting!!!!

These two can co-exist. I had a lot of fun with 4e. Since I skipped 3.5, and this is what brought me back, it was so much fun. I liked the mechanics, and enjoyed DMing in that system. But there are certain things, as a I look back on, that were not that good. It's the nature of any system.
But what was hinted at earlier, about game's filling niches, and rulesets catering those niches, I find absolutely true. I find it especially true that rulesets are better made when they lean towards that niche. Of course, the largest and biggest RPG is an example of this not being true. But honestly, I think that is what makes it special.

 

[Fenris-77]

Debatable, sure. But I think how far a leap it is depends somewhat on how much the result lines up with your personal preferences.

The only person here who's concerned with personal preferences is you.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The only person here who's concerned with personal preferences is you.

Why are you so insistent on trying to tell me what people other than you think and feel? Can't you just say you aren't concerned with personal preference without having to assume others agree with you?

 

[Scott Christian]

Debatable, sure. But I think how far a leap it is depends somewhat on how much the result lines up with your personal preferences.

I agree.

 

[Fenris-77]

Why are you so insistent on trying to tell me what people other than you think and feel? Can't you just say you aren't concerned with personal preference without having to assume others agree with you?

Because you are only interested in what you think, and that's not interesting or informative. Step outside of that narrow little place and I've got your back.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because you are only interested in what you think, and that's not interesting or informative. Step outside of that narrow little place and I've got your back.

I'm interested in what other people think, but I want to hear from them, not from other people who have decided to speak on their behalf for some reason.