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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5501466" data-attributes="member: 42582">The two alleged contradictions, I think, were in relation to the "minionising" Arcana check, and in relation to the Athletics rules.I pointed out that 4e has two modes of action resolution - with distinct headings calling them out both in the PHB and the DMG - namely, skill challenges and tactical/combat encounters (there's also a third mode, namely, exploration, but that doesn't seem to have been in issue in this thread). The tactical rules under Athletics are clearly only for the tactical/combat encounters.Is this claim controversial? Does 3E also have mutliple modes of action resolution, and hence multiple modes of skill use, that I missed in my PHB?I won't repeat my discussion of "minionising" and page 42, and its close resemblance to a published example of using social skills to do damage. But how is using page 42 ignoring the rules? And does 3E have some equivalent to page 42, and/or metagame minion mechanics, and/or using social skills to inflict hit point loss, that I'm not familiar with?Is the claim, then, that 4e doesn't suit simulationist gaming one about what some people find better, based upon their style? Or an objective claim? What about the claim that 3E supports serious RPGing better than 4e?I also don't actually agree that no one would be arguing with me if I confined my claims in the fashion you suggest. At least some posters here are telling me that 3E does everything worthwhile that 4e does, only better, and hence strongly implying (in fact sometimes actually asserting) that I'm confused about both systems, what their capabilities are, and what sort of game that they support.As I've said - apparently everyone agrees that 4e is different from 3E, except nearly  everyone who doesn't like 4e also agrees that 4e does nothing that 3E can't do better. So that, apparently, 4e is different from 3E only in having fewer and weaker capabilities as an RPG. From which it apparently follows that anyone who prefers 4e to 3E is confused about what each system can do, and/or doesn't know the rules, and/or doesn't follow the rules, and/or has never had the good fortune to play in a decent 3E game, and/or is a railroading GM, and/or . . .  well, maybe that's about it, although I'm sure there're a few other imputed failings that I've forgotten to list.EDIT: RC, that looks like a rant against you and in fact it's not - I'm sure your suggestion is well intentioned, but for the reasons I've given I don't believe that it would actually make any significant difference to the tone or content of this thread.What I would like to see, instead of being told that I'm wrong about what 4e does and can do, are some acutal examples of how 3E has been used by posters here to play in a narrativist (in the Forge sense) fashion.</blockquote>

Verification