Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The Best Thing from 4E
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Aenghus" data-source="post: 6564789" data-attributes="member: 2656"><p>There's more than one sort of transparency. Giving lots of step-by step instructions is one sort of transparency, but that's not the sort of transparency 4e uses outside of combat. </p><p></p><p>The primary transparency in 4e is powers working as listed with very little qualification or special cases. The more reliable powers are the more they can be used to solve problems without worrying about the referee using fiat to prevent it. (obviously the DM can use fiat that way, it just will be obvious and likely a violation of the typical 4e social contract)</p><p></p><p>I wouldn't use the term "ill-defined" in relation to 4e non-combat rules. All too often in previous editions extra detail ended up roadblocking the party, obscuring how to address the task. Players could waste huge amounts of time with recalcitrant DMs, asking twenty questions, or a hundred questions, until they stumbled on the one that allowed the task to be started. The transparency in 4e in relation to non-combat play is precisely in leaving out picky, messy details that slow play up and just generate lots of skill checks and extra chances for failure. The skill challenge mechanic tries to give a system so players can rely on resolving tasks, succeed or fail, within a few skill rolls. Attempts by the referee to sabotage the skill challenge, consciously or unconsciously, will be more visible due to the system transparency than in previous editions.</p><p></p><p>4e outside combat is zoomed out, unfocused, generalised, abstracted, I think by design, as different groups don't agree on the weightings to attach to various factors. To those tired of the "thousand steps to failure" that often happened in previous editions (check after check after check until a single failure ended the attempt) this is a great boon. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Detail isn't always an ally of the player, sometimes it's used as a weapon by the DM to obscure valid paths in a maze of red herrings, throw up roadblocks of arbitrarily long skill check chains etc. This can happen by accident when the DM is very invested in certain game directions that may not be obvious or attractive to his players.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Aenghus, post: 6564789, member: 2656"] There's more than one sort of transparency. Giving lots of step-by step instructions is one sort of transparency, but that's not the sort of transparency 4e uses outside of combat. The primary transparency in 4e is powers working as listed with very little qualification or special cases. The more reliable powers are the more they can be used to solve problems without worrying about the referee using fiat to prevent it. (obviously the DM can use fiat that way, it just will be obvious and likely a violation of the typical 4e social contract) I wouldn't use the term "ill-defined" in relation to 4e non-combat rules. All too often in previous editions extra detail ended up roadblocking the party, obscuring how to address the task. Players could waste huge amounts of time with recalcitrant DMs, asking twenty questions, or a hundred questions, until they stumbled on the one that allowed the task to be started. The transparency in 4e in relation to non-combat play is precisely in leaving out picky, messy details that slow play up and just generate lots of skill checks and extra chances for failure. The skill challenge mechanic tries to give a system so players can rely on resolving tasks, succeed or fail, within a few skill rolls. Attempts by the referee to sabotage the skill challenge, consciously or unconsciously, will be more visible due to the system transparency than in previous editions. 4e outside combat is zoomed out, unfocused, generalised, abstracted, I think by design, as different groups don't agree on the weightings to attach to various factors. To those tired of the "thousand steps to failure" that often happened in previous editions (check after check after check until a single failure ended the attempt) this is a great boon. Detail isn't always an ally of the player, sometimes it's used as a weapon by the DM to obscure valid paths in a maze of red herrings, throw up roadblocks of arbitrarily long skill check chains etc. This can happen by accident when the DM is very invested in certain game directions that may not be obvious or attractive to his players. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
The Best Thing from 4E
Top