NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5472629" data-attributes="member: 22779">NowayJose - my response to all that, and I largely agree, is that the end result is largely indistinguishable.  In both cases, you wind up with some sort of ability that shoots lightning and has specific in-game results that are largely dictated by the mechanics.While the route might be different, what you end up with is generally pretty close.  Yes, a square fireball is wonky - but, in play it's largely indistinguishable from a round (or pixelated) fireball since it's extremely rare that round or square will actually matter one whit.  You cast fireball, you blow up a group of baddies - and it will be a very blue moon event that being round or square actually matters.Granted it mattered a lot more when you had blowback on fireballs.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I would largely agree with that.  The question I would ask though, is that if an event does not require any mechanics to resolve, (unless you're outright free forming), then the outcome of that event is predetermined.  Trying to bluff the guard in 1e was an exercise in free-form gaming, fair enough.  But, we've already struck that off the table though.  I've been told that free form isn't the goal.  BryonD clearly stated that he likes mechanics, but, he wants the mechanics to be informed by the narrative.My point is that its circular.  When you invoke mechanics to resolve an event, that event cannot be narrated without the mechanics, thus the narrative is largely shaped by the mechanics.  Which comes first?  IMO, who cares.  The end result is largely the same - do you move slower in plate mail than in chain mail because it makes narrative sense to do so, or because there should be a mechanical trade off for having a higher AC?  IMO, the question is largely irrelavent - the point is that you arrive at the same end destination.Getting away from hypotheticals for a second.  Here's a situation from the session we played today.  Now, I was a player, not the DM.  In the scenario, we were defending a ruined keep from a large invading force.  The large force had a bullette ridden by a hobgoblin that battered down the gate.  Ok, no problem so far.Once they entered the gate, we, the PC's, smoked the hobgoblin rider quite quickly.  My eladrin warlord's turn came up.  Now, my character is narrated as being a knightly sort, horse, lance, the whole bit.  So, I fey step from the back of my horse to the back of the now riderless bullette in an attempt to take control of it.Short conversation with the DM later and we decide that Athletics is the applicable skill (although Nature certainly was a contender here).  I make my roll and the DM tells me that I can control where the bullette goes, but, that's about it.  I can't order it to attack my enemies nor not attack my allies.Now, here's my question to all of you.  How would this be resolved in an earlier edition and what are the differences in how that would be resolved?  After all, it's been repeatedly stated that 4e is completely different from any other edition, so, it stands to reason that this sequence should be resolved in completely different ways from what came before.  So, how would taking control of the bullette be resolved in pre-4e D&D?</blockquote>

Verification