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: 5501580" data-attributes="member: 42582">Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean here by "the problem".Just as some things about 4e design have been obvious to you from day 1, so some things about it have been obvious to me from that day also, or not too much after it. There was <a href="http://critical-hits.com/2008/03/05/dd-xp-interview-sara-girard-rob-heinsoo/" target="_blank">this comment from Heinsoo</a>, for example, about the reemblance to indie RPGs in the design (which was discussed at some length upthread, around the 450s). And there were posts on these boards from Chris Sims about the rationale and use of healing surges (can't link, sorry). Having read these various desinger comments, and having read the rulebooks in light of them, and then having played the game, my principal claim was, has always been, and continues to be, that 4e supports narrativist play better than 3E. A related claim has always been that 4e does not support exploration-oriented (ie simulationist) play as well as does 3E.A number of contributions on this thread - particularly from Imaro and Beginning of the End - have denied the first of these claims. If you're now telling me that they've been using "narrativist" in some other sense - despite the fact that <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/5496468-post491.html" target="_blank">I made my use of Forge terminology clear pretty much from the get-go</a> - that's interesting, but also a bit confusing. What claim of mine did all those posts think they were trying to rebut?</blockquote>

Verification