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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 6334470" data-attributes="member: 177">I know I already responded to the post here, but I wanted to go back and address this bit.Frankly, I don't see the complaint.  We speak of "rules engines" for a reason.  Like any engine, it is tuned to operate on a given energy source, and to perform within some fairly specific parameters.  It goes from zero to some effective maximum speed, it has a specific range in which it is most efficient, provides only a certain amount of power for any setting of the transmission, and so on.  No engine is infinitely malleable - what is under the hood of my Saturn is not ever going to run a Mack truck.  Thus, the second sentence above is rather like saying, "I can pretend that I'm on a race track all I want, but really, I'm still only driving a Smart Car."  Well, geeze, why did you expect that the engine would perform as other than what it is?  Is it not a *feature* that the thing performs (and does so pretty well) within its designed parameters, but doesn't step out of them?  Like you'd expect your hedge trimmer to suddenly be able to drive your motorcycle?It seems to me that the same is true for any rule system - define what narrative you imagine, but, if you use the rules, the table resolution will be the same as with the game's standard narrative.  The only way you get the table resolution to be different is by injecting GM intervention in resolution.  4e is no different form every other game, before or since, in that regard.Now, you may argue that 4e is rather resistant to that GM intervention, and probably have a fair point - just like on modern cars with computer-controlled engines, they are not forgiving of tinkering by weekend-duffers.  But, "The thing only does what it is designed to do!" isn't exactly a knock against the design of anything - be it a chair, a car, or a game system.</blockquote>

Verification