Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bert1000" data-source="post: 6658025" data-attributes="member: 29013">Thanks for the well thought out response.&nbsp;&nbsp; I get the distinction a bit better now, but not sure I get how it applies to 4e.The Doom Pool is MHRP seems like a good case of DCs changing on the fly in the service of narrative/pacing.&nbsp;&nbsp; I imagine when to use Fate points in Fate would also be this.&nbsp;&nbsp; So details of the fiction are fluid and influenced by the narrative decision to use meta currency in service of pacing/drama.&nbsp; So I do see that as “subjective” DCs.4e doesn’t really have this kind of meta currency though.&nbsp;&nbsp; The 4e suggestion that “at level encounters will produce good drama” is in service of narrative/pacing, but I fail to see how it’s different than an older D&amp;D game (or 5e) where higher level PCs are going to be given rumors and hooks for higher level dungeons.&nbsp;&nbsp; Or as they level, they will attract the attention of higher level threats.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; 4e just gives you more tools to calibrate the threats.Could you say more about “setting a high DC and justifying it by reference to fate or luck, or a spontaneous &quot;wild magic zone&quot;”?&nbsp;&nbsp; How would this work in 4e?&nbsp;&nbsp; Not that it couldn’t handle this, but not sure I see this as a normal way to link the fiction and DCs in 4e (at least, I’ve never seen it in play).I could see the desire to have challenges of “level” in 4e perhaps leading to some creation of more fantastical and crazy fiction as the DM is trying to ‘up’ the fictional landscape to match the assumed power level of the PCs.&nbsp;&nbsp; And I could see more of the “I need X DC, what would that look like?” type of planning. But again, I fail to see how this is “subjective”.&nbsp; The DCs are always linked to the fiction, and once the DCs are defined in play they don’t change.I’m only familiar with the 4e examples, but isn’t this just the case of resetting the DCs to a new ‘reality’.&nbsp; So it’s certainly ‘subjective’ to the reality you are playing in but once you decide on the reality it basically reverts back to ‘objective’ (within that reality).&nbsp;&nbsp; Again I don’t see the distinction between 4e and 5e here.&nbsp;&nbsp; In 5e, if I was going to run a game in a traditional D&amp;D world, dwarven locks would probably be a high DC, say DC25.&nbsp;&nbsp; If I was going to run a world where dwarves are mostly peaceful shepherds with no connection to crafting, then dwarven locks would be an easy DC, say DC10.&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks for the thoughts.&nbsp; Once you take off the table the whole &quot;everything automatically scales to your level, regardless of the fiction&quot; stance, I'm really struggling to see the difference between 4e and 5e/3e, other than 4e lays bare the math.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bert1000, post: 6658025, member: 29013"] Thanks for the well thought out response. I get the distinction a bit better now, but not sure I get how it applies to 4e. The Doom Pool is MHRP seems like a good case of DCs changing on the fly in the service of narrative/pacing. I imagine when to use Fate points in Fate would also be this. So details of the fiction are fluid and influenced by the narrative decision to use meta currency in service of pacing/drama. So I do see that as “subjective” DCs. 4e doesn’t really have this kind of meta currency though. The 4e suggestion that “at level encounters will produce good drama” is in service of narrative/pacing, but I fail to see how it’s different than an older D&D game (or 5e) where higher level PCs are going to be given rumors and hooks for higher level dungeons. Or as they level, they will attract the attention of higher level threats. 4e just gives you more tools to calibrate the threats. Could you say more about “setting a high DC and justifying it by reference to fate or luck, or a spontaneous "wild magic zone"”? How would this work in 4e? Not that it couldn’t handle this, but not sure I see this as a normal way to link the fiction and DCs in 4e (at least, I’ve never seen it in play). I could see the desire to have challenges of “level” in 4e perhaps leading to some creation of more fantastical and crazy fiction as the DM is trying to ‘up’ the fictional landscape to match the assumed power level of the PCs. And I could see more of the “I need X DC, what would that look like?” type of planning. But again, I fail to see how this is “subjective”. The DCs are always linked to the fiction, and once the DCs are defined in play they don’t change. I’m only familiar with the 4e examples, but isn’t this just the case of resetting the DCs to a new ‘reality’. So it’s certainly ‘subjective’ to the reality you are playing in but once you decide on the reality it basically reverts back to ‘objective’ (within that reality). Again I don’t see the distinction between 4e and 5e here. In 5e, if I was going to run a game in a traditional D&D world, dwarven locks would probably be a high DC, say DC25. If I was going to run a world where dwarves are mostly peaceful shepherds with no connection to crafting, then dwarven locks would be an easy DC, say DC10. Thanks for the thoughts. Once you take off the table the whole "everything automatically scales to your level, regardless of the fiction" stance, I'm really struggling to see the difference between 4e and 5e/3e, other than 4e lays bare the math. [/QUOTE]

Verification