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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5745101" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't want to take a quote out of context, or to put too much wait on a throw away line - but if engaging the fiction in an RPG doesn't lead to drama, than it seems to me either (i) the fiction is not very good, or (ii) the mechanics that mediate engagement with it are not very good.I had the same thought.I don't understand your contrast between story and combat. I also don't understand your contrast between combat and simulation.And I'm sure that Pathfinder players like drama in their game. It's pretty inherent to RPGing. But they like other stuff too, I think - a healthy dose of "winning"-focused gamism, and more purist-for-system simulationist mechanics, woudl be at least two other things I would nominate.I have two reasons for thinking that 4e has mechanical features that make the sort of difference that I (and Balesir, I think) are pointing two.One is that the relevant mechanical features - skill challenges, healing surges, the death and dying rules, powers for all classes, the encounter as the focus of play, etc - are the frequent and repated objects of criticsm by those who don't like the game.The other is that I don't see very many players of modern games explaining how 3E/PF produces the same sort of play experience, whereas it is fairly common to see players of modern games compare 4e in various respects to the gameplay of those games.When someone starts posting actual play examples of narrativist or Balesir-style gamist 3E/PF, of course I'll pay them attention.</blockquote>

Verification