Hmm, ok... though I think the DM "dictating" a game is a playstyle choice as opposed to something forced by the rules of 4e or any previous edition of D&D... while designing a character seems to have just as prevalent a culture around it in 4e as it did in previous editions... whether one chooses to partake in said culture or not, is again a playstyle choice.
On the "DM dictating" thing I didn't particularly mean that as an "attribute" of any particular edition; I think you attribute far more "advocacy" to me post than was actually intended. I write to explain why I like what I like, not to demand that you like the same things. What I was listing was a selection of things that, from time to time, have been said to be "where it's at". Among these have been "the DM's story", "the DM's description of the world", "the character build" and "the elegant rules". I think that none of these is as appropriate a focus as what the players (including the GM) do, minute to minute, at the gaming table.
I'm still slightly confused by your argument. Since at the end you readily admit these things still take place in 4e...
Sure, they take place, but they are not the focus of admiration. I'm not claiming this is universal - just relating my experience. I do think that 4E supports this focus particularly well; not as well as it ideally could, but better than any other game system I have tried. I'll say a bit about why, below.
That's an interesting assumption, though I disagree it's something inherent to 4e and not also a part of other editions. Again, I believe this has much more to do with playstyle and culture at the table than it does with anything inherent in the rules of 4e.
Right; the "inherent to 4E" thing. First a statement I'm not going to try to "prove" - I hope it's fairly self-evident to an experienced RPer, but if not we'll just have to agree to disagree:
Rules cannot control play style or table culture. They just can't. What they can do, however, is support particular playstyles by not "getting in their way". You can normally tell when a system is not supporting the preferred play style at a table, because you will see house rules - possibly in profusion.
So, no, this style of play - these observations - are not "inherent" to 4E. But I do find that 4E is exceptionally good at
supporting them. That is to say, when we play with the agenda for fun/kudos/admiration that I describe, I find I hardly need to houserule the system at all.
The culture around optimization of builds on WotC's site is still as large and thriving as it's ever been.
Yep; 4E also seems to support this agenda fairly well. Some actually prefer it to 3.X because whareas, with 3.X, facility with character design can get you a character grossly more powerful than the "run of the mill", in 4E getting major (real) advantage is more of a challenge.
That doesn't mean it doesn't also support the agenda I'm talking about, too.
Just like with most of pemerton's arguments I find it hard to understand what it is that you're saying is intrinsic to 4e and what that quality produces that other editions do not.
OK, I'll try to give a taster. It applies mainly to combat; that is where in 4E it's most notable. Non-combat is an area where I think 4E could use a great deal of improvement - but I would really like to see it along the lines of supporting what I'm talking about here, and the current crop of designers seem to be drifting away from that, alas.
4E combat has powers and abilities that are particularly well adjusted to pulling off "cool moves" mainly due to two things:
1) they create situations by (forced) moving enemy, but applying conditions to opponents and by creating zones and areas of specific effects.
2) they create specific, defined effects that translate directly to the game world. What I mean by this is they are not subject to adjudication, interpretation or negotiation. Charm or Domination powers, for example, make an enemy move or perhaps attack another - they do not make an enemy "do whatever the DM thinks won't trigger a self-preservation instinct" or other effects that are subject to negotiation. They do not create "illusions that make the monsters think there is someone down the corridor".
This last, in particular, helps with unequivocally "neat" tactics. If the success of a move results from me winning a social status-game with the GM, I don't feel the same sense of "victory" as I do after a really cool move in 4E or in a board game. All I have done is best a friend of mine in a social manipulation or facedown; what I wanted to do was show off to them a cool, clever idea that they did not then have to rended a judgement over.
Here are a couple of "buffing" consumables off the top of my head...
The Elixir of Invisibility in AV lasts for 5 mins or until the end of the encounter... whichever comes first... most encounters don't last 5 mins.
Or when you attack. It's a set up for starting a conflict - once you are engaged (i.e. you attack someone) it ceases.
The Whetstone of Venom in AV affects the next creature you successfully attack, irregardless of the amount of time.
Again - it lasts until the first hit.
Potion of Vigor in AV, gain 15 temporary hit points... they don't expire or have a set time limit.
Potion of Heroism, gives you 20 temp hit points with no expiration.
THPs last until they are used or you take a (short or extended) rest. Like the previous two, they set up an initial "jump", but go as the conflict is engaged in.
Alchemical Silver & Ghoststrike Oil can be used to pre-buff before combat.
As can Magic Items, levelling up and taking new powers...
Now I will readily admit that many or even majority of consumables have time limits revolving around the encounter
And this, I think, was
pemerton's point.
but I think this has much more to do with 4e's obsession with balance than in trying to create drama and tension.
I'm not really interested in speculating what the rules designers' intentions or motives were - maybe you're right >shrug<
As to rituals I was more talking about scrying and teleportation which there are rituals for in 4e. Finally I think you're mistaken about many of the utility powers as far as them empowering characters to scout and prepare for encounters.
I would distinguish between "preparing for an encounter" - setting up a surprise, recconnoitering the opposition, getting into position and so forth - and applying buffs that will last all day, or through several encounters, from temporary/renewable character resources.
