Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 6264087" data-attributes="member: 58416">The three goals you listed are things which I feel are suited to my tastes.I guess maybe my problem is that I cannot gauge whether #1 is happening or not.  That is for a lot of different reasons.  My exposure to Forgotten Realms has been minimal.  I know the general highlights (famous characters, general background of the setting, etc,) but I couldn't say what makes sense in the context of the world.  I have no idea what is even supposed to make sense in the context of the world; what kind of fantasy is Forgotten Realms supposed to capture?  I think I have some idea from the tiny little bit of FRs I have played between 3rd, 4th, and now 5th, but all three of those editions also appear to have different styles and different visions, so that's not exactly helpful.  All I can say is that it felt somehow almost too defined in 3rd; I am in the minority of people who felt that the story behind the changes (but not necessarily the mechanics) in 4th were cool; 5th doesn't yet have any particular flavor for me at all beyond just being a fantasy game.  Another reason behind why I cannot tell if something makes sense in the context of the world is because I'm not sure what style of game the designers want it to be.  Something that makes sense in the context of a high fantasy world doesn't necessarily make sense in a gritty pulp sword & sorcery story.  Without having a better idea of what parts of the math are more or less normal, I have little idea about what the intent is.  ...though, ironically, I also simultaneously feel like I do have a sense of the game's direction from some of the design choices and polls and discussions, but there are times when I'm not sure that what is being said and the game I have in front of me match up, so then I'm not sure.  I'm not sure what the intended direction is, and I'm also not sure if there are two different directions, and I'll end up feeling like I did during early 4E when I felt as though the fluff of the game and the crunch of the game were trying to tell me two different stories.  I cannot comment on the Pathfinder playtest or what it was like.  I did not participate in it.  I do not expect WoTC to give the game away for free, so I understand the playtest packets not being the finished game.  That being said, one of the complaints I have about the playtest is that I'm often coming away from the sessions without much in the way of an impression of the game.  What am I supposed to feel about the game?  What is the intent behind why I have access to the material I do?  Am I supposed to feel as though the game has a particular style?  Is it within the design parameters of the playtest that I often come away with a general sense of nothingness... apathy isn't quite the right word, but it's the closest I can come up with right off the top of my head.  I certainly do have likes and dislikes, but, overall, it's just kind of a blank experience for me a lot of the time.  I can say that I highly enjoyed the adventure which I just finished up last week...  I can't recall the name, but it's the one with the Yeti fight at the beginning.  I had fun, but I can't say that it's because of the game itself that I had fun.  The adventure was good; very good, but I feel as though I would have been just as happy to play the same adventure with a different mechanical framework.  I'm not saying that with intent to say something negative; as said, I have a very good opinion of the adventure itself.  I'm just wondering what impression is supposed to stick with me after I play a session of 5th Edition.  If the intent was to get a feel for the game, I'm not sure that I'm getting it.  Maybe I am, but I don't recognize it because it's not clear to me what feel I'm supposed to be looking for...?</blockquote>

Verification