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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Set" data-source="post: 4318377" data-attributes="member: 41584">The only times I see rules as having anything to do with role-playing are the following cases;Alignments.  If they were tendencies, that's no big deal, many of us have tendencies to be nice or nasty or law-abiding or freewheeling.  But they aren't, they are very specific and have mechanical effects depending on what spells, weapon properties, class restrictions, etc. are built into the game.  4e seems to be stepping further away from that, which, IMO, makes it *better* in that sense, RP-wise.  Ideally, my DM will not be telling me what my Paladin can and cannot do, nor will powers be fluctuating or spells be unavailable or classes forbidden based on such nonsense.Sanity rules.  Not a common issue in AD&D, but they take control of the character away from the player.  GURPS had the Fright Checks, which could grant permanant mental disabilities, Heroes of Horror has Corruption/Taint that can work similarly, Aberrant had mental aberrations, some shooter game had rules for whether or not a character would 'freeze up' during a firefight, etc.  *If* such punitive mechanics are called for in the setting, the player should be allowed to look at the list of appropriate levels of effect for whatever has happened and pick one that they are willing to role-play, and not just be randomly told that their fighter now has a fascination with necrophilia after the GM rolled some dice.Rotschroek/Frenzy systems.  From Vampire, systems where the character flips out in the presence of fire or sunlight or even another vampire!  (In VtR, *every single time* two vampires meet, the players are supposed to roll dice or the vampires *flip out and attack each other.*  When it was pointed out on the WW forums that this was insane, and that no coterie of vampires would survive their initial meeting, let alone be able to interact with other elder vampires, *or create new vampires,* the 'official' reply was not to use that rule the way it was written...  Great.  Why was it even there?)  Even sensibly implemented fear / frenzy rules still take away from the players ability to RP by removing control of his character from him, and, IMO, should be used sparingly, particularly in a game where the characters are assumed to have survived fifty or more years pre-game without flipping out and getting themselves killed every time someone lit a lighter in their view or said something 'disrespectful' on a message board.In the absence of RP-restrictive systems like the ones I've mentioned above, role-playing is almost entirely in the hands of the player.I've role-played in Star Fleet Battles, just about the least RP-friendly game I can think of.  If 4E has not a single mention of RP, that's fine, 'cause *rules* are the last thing RP needs.  Rules just get in the way and limit RP possibilities.</blockquote>

Verification