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: 5496818" data-attributes="member: 42582">Simulationism vs other approaches to playThis presupposes that levels and character attack/defence/damage stats play a simulationist/modelling role - that by looking at a game elements stats, you know something about its power within the gameworld.I don't think 4e as written takes this approach, and for me at least that is a strength.A human guardsman has whatever stats the GM gives him. The constraints on the GM here are ones of genre and verisimilitude - eg if I have a PC who is a Knight Commander or a Demigod then it will seem strange if the average human guardsman is much of a bother to that PC in combat - but I don't need mechanics to help me make those sorts of decisions. Rather, having made those sorts of decisions, I can place my monsters, stat them up and label them accordingly.I agree level is a game mechanism. In my view, though, in 4e it's not just for the gamist purpose you give. It's also to lead the players through "the story of D&D" - assuming that the GM mostly used published monsters, and doesn't vary them more than +/- 4 levels as the DMG suggests, then (roughly) the PCs start out fighting kobolds and end up fighting Orcus.It is against the backdrop of this story that the actual campaign then unfolds. Personally I like this, although I don't know what effect it has on replay value (I'm still in my first 4e campaign).But this can be done without having to worry about stats or levels. Is this session's adventure about getting info out of Sigil's networks of information brokers? Then tell the player to "think Sam Spade". Is it about helping Bane's armies kill Gruumsh? Then tell the player to "think Atlas".This also goes to the simulationism/anti-simulationism point. In 4e, at least, 1 doesn't mean "I missed". It means "I didn't wear away the target's ability to fight" (ie no hp were inflicted - and sometimes even that's not true, such as for Reaping Strike or Hammer Rhythm). Maybe the character missed. Maybe s/he hit but didn't pierce the armour. Maybe s/he was on target, but a freak gust of wind blew the arrow out of the way (if the target is an air elemental, the gust of wind probably wasn't a freak one!).This is part of the difference between 4e's auto-miss rule, and fumble rules in games like RQ or RM - those latter rules really do mean that the character fumbled the shot.As for a master archer in (for example) an archery competition, a 1 would mean something like a failure to split in half the arrow already lodged in the bullseye.I agree with Balesir here. I used to play Rolemaster - D&D had no interest for me, especially 3E, which has struck me as sort-of wanting to be HERO or RM (grapple rules, skill points) but not quite (hit points, too gonzo). 4e, on the other hand, was attractive precisely because it offered a reasonably coherent vision of a mainstream fantasy RPG that was very different from RM-esque simulationism.Agreed on the issues with 2nd ed AD&D - a game I have zero interest in playing again!The only gloss I'd add on your description of 4e is that it works pretty smoothly as narrativist first, gamist second (mostly when the battlemap comes out!). I say this from experience. I don't have to tweak anything - just follow the advice on player-initiated quests, wishlists etc and use skill challenges and even combat encounters as the basis for scene framing that is (by D&D standards) fairly hard (though still pretty soft by Forge standards, I think).</blockquote>

Verification