Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 5805616" data-attributes="member: 58416">Keeping the two separated doesn't always help to encourage more playstyles though.  Sometimes a set of mechanics can simply just be a poor fit for trying to support fluff because they were made without any thought toward each other.  This is one of the areas where I have somewhat of a gripe toward 4th Edition.  I don't feel that 4E's mechanics support the 'Points of Light' idea or the image that 'Points of Light' as a term paints in my head very well.  Likewise, I feel that there are inconsistencies created in 4E's fiction because there isn't a coherent relationship between fluff and crunch.  This too is something I've said elsewhere, but an extreme example is easy to illustrate by looking at the three core books in their original form.  A lot of the powerful monsters, demon lords, and etc are said (in the fluff) to be scourges of the land; a terror to behold; etc; etc.  In actual play, they are completely stomped by the PCs.  However, that's only the tip of the issue.  Do a comparison of the numbers which monsters are capable of generating compared to the 'physics engine' (for a lack of better words) of the game world; then do the same using PC numbers versus the world.  There are cases in which high powered monsters struggle to break through basic structures; meanwhile, the PCs can blow throw the gates of hell using at-will powers and a few seconds of their time.  The latter is something I played through as a player during my first campaign from 1-30. It is my opinion that there would be less of a disconnect between what the rules say is going on and what the fluff says the story is if the two aspects of the game had a relationship which did a better job of complimenting each other.  I think the mechanical structure of the current game seems to support a set of playstyles which are sometimes at odds with some of the stories that the fluff tells.  I see merit in allowing many playstyles.  I am not familiar with HERO, but I do play GURPS, so I totally understanding the idea of allowing groups to use mechanics in a variety of ways without hardwired fluff getting in the way.  However, I also like there to be a coherent relationship between the two aspects (fluff and crunch) of the game I'm playing.  In the case of the CoDzilla issue, I believe that a more coherent relationship could potentially hold the solution as well -simply by making the rules support the idea that magic is difficult to master and control.</blockquote>

Verification