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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4156943" data-attributes="member: 710">Maybe we should create a club of "Anonymous 4E dislikers/bad-experience-havers"? "Hello, I am Toryx, and I have really tried to like the game.""Hello Toryx!"<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Just because we 4E-fanbois are vicious in our quest to prove everyone that 4E is the best thing since sliced bread doesn't mean you should feel intimidated. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Most 4E games I have heard so far concentrated on the crunchy bits. Apparently, some still managed to roleplay a lot, others have their problems. I am not sure if it has anything to do with the rules, or with the way people approach testing game rules. From what I understand, 3E skill systems works on the base of "roll and fail" (roll Diplomacy against DC 30 to convince the King to lend you his troops for the assault on the Orc Hordes"), while 4E skill encounter have a little more interaction. "I try to point out the last succesful results when the kings army attacked the Orcs." *Wizard player rolls History*. "The kings advisor reminds the king of situations where the kings army failed or had to retreat" *DM rolls advisors History check."Remember what we were also able to stop the bandit raids at the kingdom southern borders. If anyone is qualified to lead such a task, we are!" *Paladin player rolls Diplomacy*. "There are also several indications that your archnemisis, the King of Düsterburg, might be behind the attack. We might find hard evidence on this in the orc camp!" *Rogue rolls bluff check*"I explain that Bahamut would support such an assault to defend the order of the kingdom" *Cleric player rolls Religion* "May I remeind your Lord of the incredible cost for launching such an assault. We might need to increase taxes, and this usually causes an uprising among the people!" *DM rolls Intimidate for Advisor*"Off course, if it seemed to the kingdoms neighbors that the current king of Gutreich is weak and unable to fight off simple orcs, they might see this as an opportunity and make their own move!" *fighter rolls intimidate*(absent of actual game rules, this is more or less a "guesstimation" of how the system might work. I am not sure how much "counter-rolling" is allowed for NPCs in social encounters, for example.)Off course, it's not always easy to come up with such encounters, depending on how much you have fleshed out, or how good you are in making such stuff up on the fly.But what is the point of it? (This is rhetorical. I think I knew the point, I just happen to despise this kind of argumentation. But for the sake of it<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> "What, D&D is like that computer game that everyone keeps playing! It must be really good, because that's one of the must succesful games these days.""Oh noes! I don't want to play a mainstream game! D&D is serious business, it shouldn't be fun. If I wanted to have fun, I'd play WoW already!"Let's hope getting the books won't be for naught and you'll like it in the end.</blockquote>

Verification