Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DonTadow" data-source="post: 4048637" data-attributes="member: 22622">But the whole &quot;real weapon thing&quot; doesn't work as an anology because when a DM hands you a sheet of paper with a crytogram on it, you are not really interacting with the huge stone blocks that are the cryptogram in the room.&nbsp; You have a simulation which is a puzzle on a piece of paper, similiar to your charachters weapon on the Piece of paper. Now, if the DM throws a big ole chunk of stone on the table with the crytogram on it, then we could use analogies about bringing swords and shields to the game.&nbsp; Rolling to solve a puzzle is as extreme as rolling to solve a combat.&nbsp; Having a realistic puzzle room setting is as realistic as real swords.&nbsp; Going through the motions of combat and the puzzle are in the middle. Ironically enough all are game styles that are very viable. People pay 40 bucks a piece to solve real in game puzzles and have swords at gencon with true dungeons.&nbsp; ON the other end there are a ton of boardgame/rpgs that are fun that wrap up combats with a single die roll. There are puzzles in every game of d and d, we just call them encounters and combats. Who's going to take out this character, what spell works best in this situation, how do we fight this guy without waking this one.&nbsp; How's this for a puzzle, an evil warlord traps the party in a collisium where they must fight to the death, there are 4 monsters and 6 pcs.&nbsp; Each pc can fight once. the puzzle is that the monsters are deadly, the parties equivalent cr,.&nbsp; The PCs have to pick who fights who to maximize their strengths.&nbsp; Everyone who says &quot;i hate puzzles&quot; must really love the trap system, which did away with the trap (which used to be puzzles).&nbsp; That's what I hope 4e gets back too. The puzzle trap.&nbsp; One where your skills and logic help solve the trap (as opposed to a single die roll).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DonTadow, post: 4048637, member: 22622"] But the whole "real weapon thing" doesn't work as an anology because when a DM hands you a sheet of paper with a crytogram on it, you are not really interacting with the huge stone blocks that are the cryptogram in the room. You have a simulation which is a puzzle on a piece of paper, similiar to your charachters weapon on the Piece of paper. Now, if the DM throws a big ole chunk of stone on the table with the crytogram on it, then we could use analogies about bringing swords and shields to the game. Rolling to solve a puzzle is as extreme as rolling to solve a combat. Having a realistic puzzle room setting is as realistic as real swords. Going through the motions of combat and the puzzle are in the middle. Ironically enough all are game styles that are very viable. People pay 40 bucks a piece to solve real in game puzzles and have swords at gencon with true dungeons. ON the other end there are a ton of boardgame/rpgs that are fun that wrap up combats with a single die roll. There are puzzles in every game of d and d, we just call them encounters and combats. Who's going to take out this character, what spell works best in this situation, how do we fight this guy without waking this one. How's this for a puzzle, an evil warlord traps the party in a collisium where they must fight to the death, there are 4 monsters and 6 pcs. Each pc can fight once. the puzzle is that the monsters are deadly, the parties equivalent cr,. The PCs have to pick who fights who to maximize their strengths. Everyone who says "i hate puzzles" must really love the trap system, which did away with the trap (which used to be puzzles). That's what I hope 4e gets back too. The puzzle trap. One where your skills and logic help solve the trap (as opposed to a single die roll). [/QUOTE]

Verification