Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5808461" data-attributes="member: 58197">Having experienced this myself, I can say that I enjoy the game overall, but every time this happens (powers being used without even naming the power, let alone describing the intended action), it diminishes my enjoyment. I have much more fun as a DM when I can narrate the flow of combat without having to stop players and say, &quot;What did you just do?&quot; Sometimes I just give up and stop even trying to narrate until combat is over.From the player side of the table, I try not to do the &quot;announce damage and conditions without bothering to name the power that caused them&quot; thing, but with all the fiddly effects flying around in 4E, it can be hard to remember. Sometimes I'm so focused on calculating damage totals and gaming out tactics that I forget to say where these numbers are coming from. And this is despite the fact that I make a point of designing characters to minimize number-crunching at the table (for instance, I'll go to some lengths to ensure that all of my attack powers have the same attack bonus).Essentials has helped some with all this, but not enough for my taste. The issue is that my desire as a player to contribute to defeating the enemy (by using the best tactics and dealing the most damage) conflicts with my desire to be immersed in the game world. This is always going to be the case to some extent, but I'd prefer that the tradeoff be less frequent and less severe. Having the &quot;fluff&quot; and &quot;crunch*&quot; be integrated would help with that, by reminding me what my character is doing each time I look at the power text.Can't speak for Hanez, but that's my take.[size=-2]*And I still maintain that in an RPG, concepts of &quot;fluff&quot; and &quot;crunch&quot; are bogus. There are only rules of varying precision and rigidity. If you &quot;re-fluff&quot; fireball into a spell that causes creatures to burn up from the inside, you have changed the spell in more than cosmetic ways. For example, it can now be used without giving away your position, but it cannot be used to signal allies from a distance. There's nothing wrong with making such a change, but there's nothing wrong with tweaking the area and damage values either--and the DM should sign off on the change in both cases.[/size]Well, since I like role-playing games better than abstract board games, I'd get to spend more time playing an RPG and less playing an abstract board game. It's not that I don't enjoy the board game, but I like D&amp;D more.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5808461, member: 58197"] Having experienced this myself, I can say that I enjoy the game overall, but every time this happens (powers being used without even naming the power, let alone describing the intended action), it diminishes my enjoyment. I have much more fun as a DM when I can narrate the flow of combat without having to stop players and say, "What did you just do?" Sometimes I just give up and stop even trying to narrate until combat is over. From the player side of the table, I try not to do the "announce damage and conditions without bothering to name the power that caused them" thing, but with all the fiddly effects flying around in 4E, it can be hard to remember. Sometimes I'm so focused on calculating damage totals and gaming out tactics that I forget to say where these numbers are coming from. And this is despite the fact that I make a point of designing characters to minimize number-crunching at the table (for instance, I'll go to some lengths to ensure that all of my attack powers have the same attack bonus). Essentials has helped some with all this, but not enough for my taste. The issue is that my desire as a player to contribute to defeating the enemy (by using the best tactics and dealing the most damage) conflicts with my desire to be immersed in the game world. This is always going to be the case to some extent, but I'd prefer that the tradeoff be less frequent and less severe. Having the "fluff" and "crunch*" be integrated would help with that, by reminding me what my character is doing each time I look at the power text. Can't speak for Hanez, but that's my take. [size=-2]*And I still maintain that in an RPG, concepts of "fluff" and "crunch" are bogus. There are only rules of varying precision and rigidity. If you "re-fluff" [i]fireball[/i] into a spell that causes creatures to burn up from the inside, you have changed the spell in more than cosmetic ways. For example, it can now be used without giving away your position, but it cannot be used to signal allies from a distance. There's nothing wrong with making such a change, but there's nothing wrong with tweaking the area and damage values either--and the DM should sign off on the change in both cases.[/size] Well, since I like role-playing games better than abstract board games, I'd get to spend more time playing an RPG and less playing an abstract board game. It's not that I don't enjoy the board game, but I like D&D more. [/QUOTE]

Verification