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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 5498952" data-attributes="member: 48965">This touches on one of the reasons I don't think 4e is any better at narrative pacing and thematic play than PF (which was the original point), and may be even worse due to what I consider... rigid design in the SC's basic structure. For those who enjoy it's particualr artificial pacing it's great... but one size doesn't fit all... and that's where I feel alot of it's pacing falls flat for many. As an example this is probably why some people feel 4e's combat drags and is full of fidly record keeping that's worse than 3.x/PF... while others feel it's just the right length and easier to manage than 3.x/PF. That drag and fidliness is about pacing (amongst other things) and 4e's particular structure concerning it. However I've yet to see anything in the actual mechanics that make it objectively better than 3.x/PF for narrative and thematic play.  What I see are some who find it's gamist mechanics suited to their particular desires as far as pacing goes... the thematic thing I just don't see period, it seems to be based in fluff and since fluff is in every edition I don't buy 4e does that objectively better either.  As another example, I could just as easily do the 5-10 min thing in 3.X if I wanted too by simply describing the scene and using a simple skill check by each player at each stage (which would roughly give you the same length of time as SC's in 4e)... However I would rather let the particular table choose the length and level of detail they want in a particular scene, and thus set the pacing that best fits their group.</blockquote>

Verification