Speculation about "the feelz" of D&D 4th Edition

[MwaO]

But has XP turned off.

Thanks!

Hmm? Scrivener gave me XP for something just today. I've noticed I can't give XP to some people - maybe there's some sort of bug going through the system?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Thanks!

As I was reading, I was like "OMG, that's me & '3rd level is the new 1st...' Damn!"

Hmm? Scrivener gave me XP for something just today. I've noticed I can't give XP to some people - maybe there's some sort of bug going through the system?

Could be...

...it's back... here'goes...

 

[Parmandur]

Yes. Not a phenomenon you can count on around a buncha nerds (I brought up 'well you'd have to calculate the chord of the circle to be sure, once, and an engineer at the table did just that), but it often helps to have intimidating math as an alternative to your DM's judgement.

Yeah, my little theory doesn't help, there. If they were uncomfortable with 4e mechanics, it should have made it /easier/ to jump to DM rulings. That's the whole Wolfie "bad rules make good games" theorem*, except with replace 'bad' with 'despised.' ;P










* and if I'd realized I was painting myself into that particular logical corner, I'd've stopped posting a couple pages back....

Don't get me wrong, we did AoO and all that: the rules were observed. Just...in natural language/common sense terms, with no visual aids.

Thinking about it, I posit the difference for 3.x vs. 4E on this from may be a difference of degree, rather than kind: the balance of the scales just went a mite too far, with too many things happening: much easier with bag of HP rocket tag.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[Tony Vargas]

Don't get me wrong, we did AoO and all that: the rules were observed. Just...in natural language/common sense terms, with no visual aids.

Thinking about it, I posit the difference for 3.x vs. 4E on this from may be a difference of degree, rather than kind: the balance of the scales just went a mite too far, with too many things happening: much easier with bag of HP rocket tag.

I think you may be onto something there, which I alluded to above. There's a threshold where you drop the system (or rather sub-system), in play, because it becomes too complicated/frustrating/impractical to deal with for the benefit of using it, right then. In 3.5, you had more & more detailed/complex combat options, actions, conditions, etc, but, beyond a certain point, you could ignore them. You just stood there and traded damage because, of all the complex medley of options, it was the the most effective. Or just rolled initiative and made with the SoD, because if you won, it was over, and all that other stuff could be ignored. In 5e, (somewhat) similarly, where the system doesn't cover something, the DM just steps in and handles it, there's this expectation created of frequent rulings, so when you ditch the system details to rule arbitrarily, say 'common sense,' to facilitate ToTM, it's a lot less likely to be questioned or challenged or even experienced as dissonant, because it happens all the time anyway.

 

[pemerton]

I posit the difference for 3.x vs. 4E on this from may be a difference of degree, rather than kind: the balance of the scales just went a mite too far, with too many things happening: much easier with bag of HP rocket tag.

4e includes elaborate rules for reactions/interrupts, very specific bonuses and penalties which rely on exact positioning, etc. Some of these exist in 5e, to a degree, but they ARE less prevalent. 5e does NOT actively support TotM, but it does reduce the tactical nature of combat greatly and insure that in a large number of cases position won't really matter too much.

This makes more sense than the difference between feet and squares.

 

[Parmandur]

I think you may be onto something there, which I alluded to above. There's a threshold where you drop the system (or rather sub-system), in play, because it becomes too complicated/frustrating/impractical to deal with for the benefit of using it, right then. In 3.5, you had more & more detailed/complex combat options, actions, conditions, etc, but, beyond a certain point, you could ignore them. You just stood there and traded damage because, of all the complex medley of options, it was the the most effective. Or just rolled initiative and made with the SoD, because if you won, it was over, and all that other stuff could be ignored. In 5e, (somewhat) similarly, where the system doesn't cover something, the DM just steps in and handles it, there's this expectation created of frequent rulings, so when you ditch the system details to rule arbitrarily, say 'common sense,' to facilitate ToTM, it's a lot less likely to be questioned or challenged or even experienced as dissonant, because it happens all the time anyway.

To be honest, I think we dismissed the suggestion of miniatures as a corporate money grab, because we didn't need them? Even now, actually using some miniatures for reference, doesn't seem much different, except slowing things down occasionally.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[Parmandur]

This makes more sense than the difference between feet and squares.

Well, it's not like feet versus squares are an essential difference: but they have a major part to play with the feelz.

And based on my own experience, naturally lining stuff out by feet and such is all the support needed for TotM to be fruitful: don't need artificial game constructs when real world constructs will do the trick.

Sent from my BLU LIFE XL using EN World mobile app

 

[MwaO]

As I was reading, I was like "OMG, that's me & '3rd level is the new 1st...' Damn!"

Lol. In your defense, I think that was a very, very coordinated part of the marketing campaign for 5e. And I have awareness of someone trying to play me like that given my background in graphic design, which is a whole 'nother level of hurt for 5e.

 

[Campbell]

I think once you start asking yourself questions like if you need a visual representation of positioning, you really should at least ask yourself the following questions:

• What benefit am I getting from other abstractions like hit points and AC?
• Do I even need an action economy?
• Do I need a specific combat subsystem?
• Do I need exact definitions of spell effects?
• Do I need stats for the opposition? Could this be handled through fictional positioning?

If I'm interested in a character focused game where violent confrontation is a secondary concern I'm likely to treat it like a secondary concern and play something like Dungeon World, Burning Wheel (only using Bloody Versus) or Blades in the Dark where fictional positioning is king and I don't have to deal with abstractions like highly specific movement rates and ranges, Attacks of Opportunity, action economies, and hit points. If I'm in the mood for tactical combat, but can't be arsed for exact positioning I'm likely to play something that uses range bands - Edge of the Empire, Exalted 3e, etc. Of course I don't really have a mind for concrete distances. I tend to present distances in more abstract terms unless I'm playing something highly tactical - just over the horizon, in your face, at arms' reach. down the alley, pretty far, you could totally reach him but you'll have to run pretty fast, etc. When I get fed descriptions with exact geometric distances my eyes tend to glaze over, but if I see a visual representation or get abstract distances I can totally get into the fiction.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well, it's not like feet versus squares are an essential difference

It is about the only mechanical difference you came up with for "TotM Support" the rest comes down to incentives to deprecate the system and rule arbitrarily. Which....

I think once you start asking yourself questions like if you need a visual representation of positioning, you really should at least ask yourself the following questions:

• What benefit am I getting from other abstractions like hit points and AC?
• Do I even need an action economy?
• Do I need a specific combat subsystem?
• Do I need exact definitions of spell effects?
• Do I need stats for the opposition? Could this be handled through fictional positioning?

Yep, at that point, Freestyle RP starts to look like the way to go.

I remember, back on UseNet in the Roll v Role debate, there were people who bought deeply into the Wolfie philosophy, that bad rules made good games, and I always had to wonder if they'd just never heard of the concept of Freestyle.

: but they have a major part to play with the feelz.

It is funny how trivial a thing can affect feel in a big way for some people. One game has squares that convert to 5', another has feet in multiples of 5 that convert to squares. The difference is meaningless on a rational level, non-existent on a mathematical level, but on a subjective personal level, could be meaningful.

naturally lining stuff out by feet and such is all the support needed for TotM to be fruitful

It's still /no support at all/. So, sure, if that's all you need, you have it, in every edition of D&D - since they all used feet, one way or another.

Lol. In your defense, I think that was a very, very coordinated part of the marketing campaign for 5e. And I have awareness of someone trying to play me like that given my background in graphic design, which is a whole 'nother level of hurt for 5e.

Smacks of conspiracy theory - it's hard to credit WotC with a coordinated anything, let alone one rating a coupla 'very's. ;P

But, it does also ring of the "Illusory Truth Effect." Repeat something often enough, and even if still obviously false, it becomes more familiar and less implausible.

Plus, if it's not some fiendish plot, you have to give them credit for trying.