Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 5970452" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I think this is key here and is the primary issue.&nbsp; There are game dogma and table feel implications to this mode of mechanical resolution.Decoupling the next &quot;frame&quot; from its immediate antecedent has very specific (and for some, dire) consequences (which is why I alluded to the tutorial/granular education requirements to illuminate the issues in my post).&nbsp; As an rpg tenant, the pursuit of interesting, dynamic, heroic fiction as ultimate end goal rather than precise, process simulation of causal-induced outcomes within a fantasy setting (and if interesting, dynamic, heroic fiction emerges out of it...hey, good on us) is heresy to a large section of the player bases' formal training/experience with DnD and cuts against the grain of their corresponding expectations of &quot;what DnD is&quot;.&nbsp; Cutting out the middle man of direct simulation and appealing directly to the paradigm of &quot;what is a compelling, genre-relevant outcome to this check which forwards the fiction toward a tension-inducing decision-point/reaction&quot; is utterly alien to many (eg - you fail a ride check and a river valley that you cannot leap manifests around the corner...or your horse takes a misstep and is slowed/injured).&nbsp; They need to get to know the moving parts, the moving parts' motives, and the potential impacts on the fiction and how they may interact with the disparate interests at the table.This &quot;Fiction-First&quot; approach is avant garde in the DnD spectrum and, as such, those that wish to successfully use it must formally train and practice (if they even care to).&nbsp; The better the education, the more coherent the tools, the more likely the outcome will be universally (not quite) satisfying and move this construct from heretical to, at least, acceptance within the larger DnD culture.&nbsp; Unfortunately, the education and coherency were quite lacking in the introductory 4e skill challenge ruleset.&nbsp; Its like attempting to proselytize an ardent follower of a competing religion toward your own with a roughly scrawled pamphlet.&nbsp; The door is already open due to the brand but you have an obscenely narrow window of opportunity when selling a new product to a prospective buyer...especially when you're the one soliciting the product and they're ambivalent, at best.&nbsp; If you want a buy-in, you better be committed to more than just a roughly scrawled pamphlet.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 5970452, member: 6696971"] I think this is key here and is the primary issue. There are game dogma and table feel implications to this mode of mechanical resolution. Decoupling the next "frame" from its immediate antecedent has very specific (and for some, dire) consequences (which is why I alluded to the tutorial/granular education requirements to illuminate the issues in my post). As an rpg tenant, the pursuit of interesting, dynamic, heroic fiction as ultimate end goal rather than precise, process simulation of causal-induced outcomes within a fantasy setting (and if interesting, dynamic, heroic fiction emerges out of it...hey, good on us) is heresy to a large section of the player bases' formal training/experience with DnD and cuts against the grain of their corresponding expectations of "what DnD is". Cutting out the middle man of direct simulation and appealing directly to the paradigm of "what is a compelling, genre-relevant outcome to this check which forwards the fiction toward a tension-inducing decision-point/reaction" is utterly alien to many (eg - you fail a ride check and a river valley that you cannot leap manifests around the corner...or your horse takes a misstep and is slowed/injured). They need to get to know the moving parts, the moving parts' motives, and the potential impacts on the fiction and how they may interact with the disparate interests at the table. This "Fiction-First" approach is avant garde in the DnD spectrum and, as such, those that wish to successfully use it must formally train and practice (if they even care to). The better the education, the more coherent the tools, the more likely the outcome will be universally (not quite) satisfying and move this construct from heretical to, at least, acceptance within the larger DnD culture. Unfortunately, the education and coherency were quite lacking in the introductory 4e skill challenge ruleset. Its like attempting to proselytize an ardent follower of a competing religion toward your own with a roughly scrawled pamphlet. The door is already open due to the brand but you have an obscenely narrow window of opportunity when selling a new product to a prospective buyer...especially when you're the one soliciting the product and they're ambivalent, at best. If you want a buy-in, you better be committed to more than just a roughly scrawled pamphlet. [/QUOTE]

Verification