The Tragedy of Flat Math

[pemerton]

My thinking is that the role of fiction is tied closely to the reward system - the fiction that plays a role in character growth is what tends to be focused on.

But this analysis doesn't quite work for a vanilla approach, I don't think - because it is of the essence of a vanilla approach that the relevant reward is not mechanically mediated.

Analysing vanilla narrativism is particularly interesting for me because I run a vanilla narrativist 4e game!

 

[pemerton]

Go on, because this sounds quite cool.

AD&D DMG pp 80-81:

Someone once sharply criticised the concept of the saving throw as ridiculous. . . A character under magical attack is in a stress situation, and his or her own will force reacts instinctively to protect the character by slightly altering the effects of the magical assault. . . Magic-user understand spells, even on an unconscious level, and are able to slightly tamper with one so as to render it ineffective. Fighters withstand them through sheer defiance, while clerics create a small island of faith. Thieves find they are able to avoid a spell's full effects by quickness . . .​

This is very different from 3E F/R/W treatment of saving throws.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I wonder if this is related to associated mechanics: any fiction that is not specifically connected to the mechanics is deemed unimportant, because if it were important there'd be a rule for it.

Only if you're obsessed with mechanics The significance of the thing is in the fiction itself, and the way the fiction feeds the fiction. If my wizard can bash wooden doors because he employs some mechanically trivial magic but he's operating in a world where magic is forbidden, well he could be in big trouble real fast... I mean weren't you the guy that coined "fiction first"?

 

[FireLance]

The Tragedy of Fat Math: Rolling 1d20 + 37 against AC 48 sucks.

The Other Tragedy of Flat Math: ... but not nearly as much as rolling 1d20+7 vs. AC 18 at 20th level.

Disclaimer: IMO, of course. I certainly would not be so crass as to declare some other playstyle to be badwrongfun.

 

[Cybit]

The game has pretty flat math from what they said. Magic weapons basically increase the chance you have to hit relative to monsters PERMANENTLY, IE, a +1 magic weapon gives you a higher chance to hit monsters of all levels, and is not expected to be had in the core system.

There are very small bonuses (+1 every 4/5 levels?), but that's so that folks feel some sort of progression beyond damage / HP increases. The vast majority of power increases will be in options, damage, and HP.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I wonder if this is related to associated mechanics: any fiction that is not specifically connected to the mechanics is deemed unimportant, because if it were important there'd be a rule for it.

Could be. But your statement makes me wonder in turn if that effect comes from a change in the fantasy fiction the typical fans are consuming? I don't read widely enough in the latest stuff to say, since I don't care for about 80% of it. What I have read, sampling, is enough to convince me there is some connection. For example, I'll bet there is a small but significant correlation between 4E fans and fans of Steven Brust, compared to say a similar correlation between 3E fans and fans of Robin Hobbs. (It will be a weak correlation because a lot of Brust fans will find 4E insufficiently like AD&D, and a lot of Hobbs fans will find 3E insufficiently like Vampire, for example.)

There's an awful lot of people posting that profess no interest in the bulk of Appendix N. I wonder if there is much written in the last 20 years that is very comparable to those earlier stories?