Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5976872" data-attributes="member: 42582">The first paragraph rings true to me. I don't know much about MMO design, but I don't see how a skill challenge could be run in an MMO - it depends very heavily upon narrative logic for adjudication. And even 4e's combat rules have many non-algorithmic aspects, from the use of forced movement (especially sliding) to the interaction between keywords and fiction (freezing things with [cold] damage, setting fire to things with [fire] damage, shattering glass wtih [thunder] damage, etc).How suitable 4e might be for a digital tabletop I don't know either - having never used one - but that seems a pretty different question from running it as an MMO.I don't agree with the last sentence - it implies that "flavour or fluff" is not relevant to action resolution in 4e, and that's not true either in or out of combat (I've given counterexamples above).The rest of what you say seems highly plausible, though, but doesn't seem to have anything to do with 4e as an MMO. It seems to be about the use of digital tools to support the mathematical and condition-tracking aspects of action resolution. And frankly 4e is not the only RPG I've played that could benefit from that - Rolemaster, played with sophisticated players and a large suite of options, can easily soak up a page of scratch paper per player per combat!After my 4e campaign finishes I'm keen to GM Burning Wheel if my group will go along with it, but that also looks like a game that will be scratch paper heavy (scripting, tracking checks and artha expenditure etc), and could benefit from electronic tools support. Heck, even classic RQ requires keeping track of ticks next to skills for advancement purposes, which an electronic PC management tool would help with.I see a bigger influence from indie games than you - in skill challenges, in the attempt to tightly integrate mechanics and fiction/story elements, and even in the way that different PC story elements (race, class, paragon path, epic destiny) are so squarely aimed at locating the PC within a thematically rich fiction.But I also agree with you and Campbell that M:TG is a clear influence on power design - clear templating, at least the attempt at crisp wording and keywording, etc (even if it sometimes falls short). In many cases - especially in the first PHB - WotC didn't go far enough with the power template. Many Epic Destinies and Paragon Paths have abilities that clearly should be formatted as powers, but haven't been so formatted because the are classified as "features" rather than "powers". This is true even of some class abilities (eg Fighters' combat challenge, which would be clearer to run if formatted as powers, like Wardens in PHB 2; and Warlock pact boons, which are formatted as powers in Essentials but not in the PHB or FRPG).This is very interesting. I can't really comment on 3E because I haven't played or GMed very much of it. But for the reasons I stated above, I don't see how 4e is meant to be run without a GM. How can skill challenges be adjudicated? How can combat be run (it's nothing like the Castle Ravenloft-style boardgames, for example, which have algorithms to run monsters and in which I assume you can't use Thunderwave to shatter the windows)?I agree that the mechanical parameters for adjudication are more defined than (for example) B/X or AD&D: not only is there the power formatting that you've noted and I agree with, but there are DCs-by-level, the various damage spread, skill challenge complexities, etc. But these don't make a GM unnecessary. HeroQuest revised similarly has very tight mechanical parameters of this sort as part of its pass/fail cycle, but that doesn't mean you could run HQ without a GM - that would be ridiculous!I think this is very tricky. The "D&D experience" runs together story elements, themes and tropes, techniques of play (including but going far beyond particular mechanical approaches), etc.I've never used grid based combat before 4e (when I GM classic D&D or Rolemaster it's "theatre of the mind", with drawings on paper when its necessary to make things clearer). So for me, the use of grids is a distinctive technique for 4e, but it doesn't spoil my "D&D experience". Nor does the fact that, as a general rule, powers can be resolved by reading a short, crisp M:TG-style text rather than a prose-style AD&D description.For me, the "D&D experience" is much more about the tropes, themes and story elements than the particular techniques. Maybe that's because I've GMed non-D&D as well as D&D systems while still running thematically very similar heroic fanasy RPGs. Or maybe it's because I enjoy mechanics, and experience them as tools for play and "immersion" rather than obstacles to those things.</blockquote>

Verification