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: 6152920" data-attributes="member: 42582">That's what the thread is about - options to give players of non-spellcasters greater narrative space options. It's pretty obvious that those are going to have to inlcude metagame mechanics, given that narrative space options (i) involve changing the narrative space in ways that extend beyond ingame causal capacities triggered by in-character RP with linear time sequences, and (ii) non-spellcasters are, within the fiction, limited to their in-character causal capacities.This is equally true for the spellcaster. The cleric can negotiate with his/her god, for example (played by the GM). The wizard can free-form spellcasting.But for various reasons, some mere tradition but I think not only that, players of spellcasters get some determinate abilities that don't depend upon persuading the GM via roleplay. Narrative options for players of non-spellcasters are about giving those other players the same sort of capabilities.There are two dimensions in play here.One is whether resolution should be via "fortune" (successful die roll) or "karma (fiatable ability, though perhaps from a rationed supply). Burning Wheel opts for fortune every time; D&D traditionally opts for karma when it comes to spells, and 4e extends that approach to non-casters - so (pre-errata) CaGI doesn't depend upon a die roll, just like Transmute Mud to Rock doesn't depend upon a die roll. Which is preferable depends in part on taste, in part on the sort of feel you're trying to create - D&D is definitely more heroic in tone than BW, though BW also has a complicated Fate Point economy to try to mitigate the vagaries of fortune at certain key moments in play.The second dimension is whether these abilities - be they fortune or karma - have metagame dimensions or not. In BW they do - with a successful skill roll the player can stipulate new backstory. In 4e the metagame element is less obivous - eg most uses of Come and Get It, and most uses of marking, lend themselves to a perfectly feasible ingame interpretation without any need to assume director's stance. The biggest metagame aspect to CaGI is actually it's rationing rules (it's an encounter power) rather than its deployment in action resolution. (Some cases of CaGI against oozes would be the notorious exceptions, but I don't think many people play campaigns that are that heavily ooze-laden that this would be the primary experience of CaGI.)A bit tangential, but did you try 4e and not like it, or not try it? The player of a 4e fighter definitely has the resources on his/her PC sheet to do the sort of thing you are talking about here.</blockquote>

Verification