Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The_Gneech" data-source="post: 4519513" data-attributes="member: 6779">I certainly didn't intend it as a crank, just calling it as I see it. As with all subjective things, the presence or absence of such an attitude is going to be a matter of opinion.Well, one of the annoying things about bias is that by its nature it's almost impossible to tell if you've got it or not. It may be definition of terms -- one of the truisms of gaming is that &quot;you can roleplay in 'Monopoly' if you really want to,&quot; but what does that mean? Pretending you're a little boot going around a track? Pretending you're a 1920s mogul buying and selling property? Haggling with other 1920s moguls &quot;in character?&quot;But why not do both? For me, the mechanics and the roleplay are inseparable. I mean, if you roleplay a flighty elf archer, but the character sheet is a dwarf berserker, isn't there some fundamental disconnect there? That was one of the reasons I used to hate 2E so much. I was constantly coming up with what I thought were neat ideas, but which mechanically just couldn't fly. (And granted, some of them still didn't fly in 3E -- I never did get a &quot;warrior mage&quot; to work the way I wanted. But at least the system was trying, so to speak.)If the chapter devoted to &quot;finding your character&quot; was then followed up by mechanics that supported that character, I would be a lot more 4E-friendly. Instead, what I see is &quot;find your character -- and then shove him into one of six pre-made slots from which there is little derivation.&quot;A lot of this is the &quot;you are your role in combat&quot; thing coming up again. For me there should be just as much &quot;roleplaying&quot; in combat as out of it. So when I wanted to create a fighter who kicked down the door, ran across the room, and lopped the head off the enemy boss, and was told &quot;your job is to defend your teammates while the ranger or the wizard do damage,&quot; it really stuck in my craw. To me, a &quot;fighter&quot; is &quot;someone who fights.&quot; It's not &quot;someone who is and always shall be the meatshield.&quot;-The Gneech <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool&nbsp; &nbsp; :cool:"&nbsp; data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="The_Gneech, post: 4519513, member: 6779"] I certainly didn't intend it as a crank, just calling it as I see it. As with all subjective things, the presence or absence of such an attitude is going to be a matter of opinion. Well, one of the annoying things about bias is that by its nature it's almost impossible to tell if you've got it or not. It may be definition of terms -- one of the truisms of gaming is that "you can roleplay in 'Monopoly' if you really want to," but what does that mean? Pretending you're a little boot going around a track? Pretending you're a 1920s mogul buying and selling property? Haggling with other 1920s moguls "in character?" But why not do both? For me, the mechanics and the roleplay are inseparable. I mean, if you roleplay a flighty elf archer, but the character sheet is a dwarf berserker, isn't there some fundamental disconnect there? That was one of the reasons I used to hate 2E so much. I was constantly coming up with what I thought were neat ideas, but which mechanically just couldn't fly. (And granted, some of them still didn't fly in 3E -- I never did get a "warrior mage" to work the way I wanted. But at least the system was trying, so to speak.) If the chapter devoted to "finding your character" was then followed up by mechanics that [i]supported[/i] that character, I would be a lot more 4E-friendly. Instead, what I see is "find your character -- and then shove him into one of six pre-made slots from which there is little derivation." A lot of this is the "you are your role in combat" thing coming up again. For me there should be just as much "roleplaying" in combat as out of it. So when I wanted to create a fighter who kicked down the door, ran across the room, and lopped the head off the enemy boss, and was told "your job is to defend your teammates while the ranger or the wizard do damage," it really stuck in my craw. To me, a "fighter" is "someone who fights." It's not "someone who is and always shall be the meatshield." -The Gneech :cool: [/QUOTE]

Verification