Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="radferth" data-source="post: 4783030" data-attributes="member: 5791">I'm sure I've said this before, but for some reason this thread has inspired me to repeat myself.&nbsp; IMHO, 3e (and the vast majority of other RPGs) have a combat system designed to simulate combat in whatever world the game takes place.&nbsp; It is rarely close to realistic, and is often simulating something very odd. (At least I found 3e combats with too-many options on and/or unclosed loopholes to be so.)&nbsp; But it is clearly designed to simulate combat.&nbsp; With 4e, combat is some sort of cinematic miniatures skirmish game.&nbsp; I don't know that the end result is less realistic (whatever that means is this context), but it clearly was designed as a game, rather than a combat simulator.&nbsp; Although skeptical at first, I have actually found it quite a bit of fun to play.&nbsp; It does, however, have the disadvantage of putting an additional layer of abstraction between a player and his/her character.&nbsp; In 3e I can imagine my character evaluating his options is combat much as I was at the gaming table.&nbsp; In 4th, I have only a vague idea of how my character sees things.&nbsp; It's not a bad trade-off, but it is a trade off, and in the long run I see myself mostly playing systems that give me more immersion that 4e.On a side note, I find it somewhat ironic that, despite their differences, 3e and 4e run on basically the same combat engine.&nbsp; I mean, you could have 3e and 4e characters fight each other if you wanted.&nbsp; The numbers would line up oddly, and it would make no sense, but it would work as an exercise.&nbsp; The sad thing for me is that I really like this underlying combat system, but don't particularly care for how 3e or 4e does characters.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="radferth, post: 4783030, member: 5791"] I'm sure I've said this before, but for some reason this thread has inspired me to repeat myself. IMHO, 3e (and the vast majority of other RPGs) have a combat system designed to simulate combat in whatever world the game takes place. It is rarely close to realistic, and is often simulating something very odd. (At least I found 3e combats with too-many options on and/or unclosed loopholes to be so.) But it is clearly designed to simulate combat. With 4e, combat is some sort of cinematic miniatures skirmish game. I don't know that the end result is less realistic (whatever that means is this context), but it clearly was designed as a game, rather than a combat simulator. Although skeptical at first, I have actually found it quite a bit of fun to play. It does, however, have the disadvantage of putting an additional layer of abstraction between a player and his/her character. In 3e I can imagine my character evaluating his options is combat much as I was at the gaming table. In 4th, I have only a vague idea of how my character sees things. It's not a bad trade-off, but it is a trade off, and in the long run I see myself mostly playing systems that give me more immersion that 4e. On a side note, I find it somewhat ironic that, despite their differences, 3e and 4e run on basically the same combat engine. I mean, you could have 3e and 4e characters fight each other if you wanted. The numbers would line up oddly, and it would make no sense, but it would work as an exercise. The sad thing for me is that I really like this underlying combat system, but don't particularly care for how 3e or 4e does characters. [/QUOTE]

Verification