Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5610204" data-attributes="member: 957">I think you are missing the point.&nbsp; And it is because of highly significant differences in what constitutes a quality narrative.&nbsp; The &quot;face value&quot; of you point presumes very different things than the &quot;face value&quot; of others.&nbsp; It seems to be an unending problem with people assuming that an rpg is an rpg and therefore everything can be compared apples to apples.&nbsp; It is vastly more complex than that.You complain about pre-4e.&nbsp; Fine.&nbsp; I don't care if you like pre-4e any more than I care if you like baseball.&nbsp; You like 4E and that is great.&nbsp; But you are discussing the merits of 3E narrative as apples to apples with 4E, and you may as well talk about which baseball team has the best goalie.&nbsp; On the list of reasons I don't play 4E is that this very topic makes the potential for the best possible narrative dead on arrival.&nbsp; (Yes, I could work around it if I wanted to, but why bother when such overwhelmingly better options are available?) You can not beat a threat you never face.&nbsp; There are things that in order to get the narrative &quot;right&quot; they must be resolved by save or die.&nbsp; If you fall into lava, you die.&nbsp; No save.&nbsp;&nbsp; However, if you have one chance to catch a rope, or avoid falling in then that save is automatically save or die.&nbsp; And there are vast other threats that either automatically kill you.&nbsp; And if they don't in your game, then as far as I personally am concerned they are &quot;wrong&quot; in your game.&nbsp; They may be great for you and I offer no argument there.&nbsp; But my baseball team is doing just fine without your goalie.When you equate save or die to coin toss challenges then you demonstrate to me that you don't conceive of the game experience that I routinely take part in.&nbsp; You may be 100% dead on for your game, but when describing mine, you are just wrong.&nbsp; Accept that or not, it makes no difference to me.There are games out there with a &quot;death trap dungeon&quot; style.&nbsp; And that CAN absolutely be a blast.&nbsp; But it need not be that way unless you want it to be.&nbsp; But you can have &quot;things that kill you&quot;.&nbsp; And the narrative that I demand requires (among many other things) that those elements must be present.&nbsp; The game as described by you prohibits those elements and therefore is never going to be &quot;good enough&quot; for my tastes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5610204, member: 957"] I think you are missing the point. And it is because of highly significant differences in what constitutes a quality narrative. The "face value" of you point presumes very different things than the "face value" of others. It seems to be an unending problem with people assuming that an rpg is an rpg and therefore everything can be compared apples to apples. It is vastly more complex than that. You complain about pre-4e. Fine. I don't care if you like pre-4e any more than I care if you like baseball. You like 4E and that is great. But you are discussing the merits of 3E narrative as apples to apples with 4E, and you may as well talk about which baseball team has the best goalie. On the list of reasons I don't play 4E is that this very topic makes the potential for the best possible narrative dead on arrival. (Yes, I could work around it if I wanted to, but why bother when such overwhelmingly better options are available?) You can not beat a threat you never face. There are things that in order to get the narrative "right" they must be resolved by save or die. If you fall into lava, you die. No save. However, if you have one chance to catch a rope, or avoid falling in then that save is automatically save or die. And there are vast other threats that either automatically kill you. And if they don't in your game, then as far as I personally am concerned they are "wrong" in your game. They may be great for you and I offer no argument there. But my baseball team is doing just fine without your goalie. When you equate save or die to coin toss challenges then you demonstrate to me that you don't conceive of the game experience that I routinely take part in. You may be 100% dead on for your game, but when describing mine, you are just wrong. Accept that or not, it makes no difference to me. There are games out there with a "death trap dungeon" style. And that CAN absolutely be a blast. But it need not be that way unless you want it to be. But you can have "things that kill you". And the narrative that I demand requires (among many other things) that those elements must be present. The game as described by you prohibits those elements and therefore is never going to be "good enough" for my tastes. [/QUOTE]

Verification