Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="smathis" data-source="post: 4114249" data-attributes="member: 56465">I don't really understand the example. I think I've been straightforward about what 4e gives us that makes it a far better vehicle for our Inner Narrativists than 3.x.And basing whether or not a game supports a Narrativist playstyle based on the reactions of other players isn't valid. Even if you're playing HeroQuest, there's bound to be someone at the table who wonders why you didn't use your "Friend of the Duck Clan 15w" to augment your roll. Simply put, different players make different choices and there will almost always be someone who feels that said choice was sub-optimal in some fashion.I don't think this says anything about how well a game supports Narrativist play.As far as XP...The reward system in 4e is much improved. Not only is XP awarded for non-combat in 4e but characters filling in their backgrounds is no longer penalized in 4e. You can be the son of a Blacksmith now, defining whatever that means outside of combat, without hampering your capabilities within combat (by taking away skill points you could have used in Search or Move Silently).I think my first post pretty clearly defined the three improvements in 4e that make it vastly superior to any other edition of D&D for Narr play.Again, does that raise D&D up to the level of Sorcerer?No.But it's D&D. And you'll now note that Warlocks in 4e are a lot closer to Ron's concept of them than any other caster in D&D history.See, I don't mind the G during combat/social challenges. I don't like G in character creation. I feel that hampers Narr play because it puts too much emphasis on optimal and sub-optimal builds. This is D&D. So having 15 ranks in Profession (Dirt Farmer) is vastly different than having those same ranks in Bluff or Acrobatics.I don't think there's anyway around that.As far as the choices of adventures...It's no more difficult now to use something like the Oracles in Vincent's "In a Wicked Age" than it has been in any other version of D&D. If I were running a campaign, in fact, I'd use "In a Wicked Age" to build out the adventures and -- possibly -- alternate DM duties. I love the Owe List and the Oracles as means to empower players and define the story.But it was unrealistic to expect anything of that sort in D&D.That's like being disappointed because Dennis Kucinich wasn't elected president. I mean, he wasn't the last three times he's run. So isn't it a little foolish to think he'd win this time?Same things go for choices of challenges, although the Non-Combat Encounter rules look very promising for just this sort of thing. Sure, players can't choose what monsters or traps they'll face. But where's the fun in that?But they can initiate a Non-Combat Encounter, negotiate the stakes, pick any skill to roll against and then frame the contest.How is that not a hyperjump forward for the game who's only in-game currencies in the last edition were first conceived in the mid 1970s?From where you're sitting, you may be underwhelmed. And that's okay. But from where I'm sitting, it's like D&D stopped being this scrawny, annoying, pimply-faced Pollyanna and came back from summer vacation, like, FREAKIN' HOT!I can accept that you don't see things this way. But I, for one, am going to ask 4e out on a date!</blockquote>

Verification