Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bodhiwolff" data-source="post: 4775193" data-attributes="member: 71196">A lot of people have made some very good points, so I'll try not to repeat them. 3E is a very detail-oriented, somewhat simulation-oriented game.  There are tons of detailed options with specific rules and rulings for how to handle a wide variety of non-combat situations.  There are detailed procedures for coordinating with NPCs, using specific skills in specific ways to reach specific ends, and so forth.  The entire group of people at the table, players and DM alike, can tap into this detailed set of rulings to create their play experience.  Occasionally, this can be frustrating for the DM, as the players will often have written rules to back up their plan, or their objections to the DM's rulings, and the DM should usually acquiesce to the rules-as-written in order to maintain continuity.  Thus, there is a certain amount of power and sway in the hands of the players, if you look at it from this perspective. 4E is detail-oriented in combat, but not in other situations.  It is very "old-school" in that respect, in that it goes all the way back to the original AD&D mentality where the roleplaying aspects of the game are the result of a social contract between the DM and the players, with minimal mechanical influence.  The rules for adjudicating these non-combat roleplaying situations are *extremely* minmal, and it is assumed that all of these situations will be handled by a non-rules, non-mechanics mentality.  Occasionally this can be frustrating for players, as the DM has ultimate say as to what works and what doesn't in various situations, according to his needs, and there are no "rules" or "mechanics" to make reference to in order to persuade the DM away from his position. (in theory, the DM is always right, but in 3E this mentality doesn't necessarily mesh well when the mechanics don't mesh with the DM's needs).   Thus, there is a certain amount of power and sway in the hands of the DM, if you look at it from this perspective. I, personally, don't feel that roleplaying, story, plot, or character is assisted overly-much by a detailed set of rules and rulings.  I want a *lot* of such things in my games, but I don't want them hampered by structure.  Indeed, I prefer a more fluid setup, being an old fart who played AD&D originally where there *were* no rules for those situations (and yet we made do just fine).  Thus, I often found a complex system of mechanics to be more of a hindrance than a help, even for the players, since it tends to make one think "inside the box" instead of outside.  Thus, 4E for me fits *very* much in my playstyle.  Lots of detail in the combat, but the DM has absolute liberty to spin the greatest adventure yarns ever, free from outside hampering of mechanics. I can understand completely, however, if new players and new DM's feel less compelled by this lack of structure.  Indeed, in a situation where the DM has gone off the wire, and the players are uncomfortable with the way things are going, a more structured system would be the perfect way to bring back a feeling of comfort and control to the players. But if you have a DM who is even the least bit creative, and if you and your players are comfortable that you're all playing the game together (and don't have an adversarial relationship) then I believe that 4E is the best possible option for new players, and new DMs.</blockquote>

Verification