Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6242755" data-attributes="member: 48965">I've put forth this same theory before on these boards... especially since 4e design is often lauded as very focused, and I don't really believe it is. I agree with what you've said above, that basically instead of being very focused, 4e is (IMO) a pretty incoherent game which seems to shine when people bring experience/advice/etc. from other games to supplement and drift it towards their favored style (though I do believe some styles are harder to drift it towards then others).  I mean look at [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] 's example, who that hasn't read DitV would even know what he's going on about or draw those types of conclusions?  How about we analyze what is actually in the book without referring to DitV, HQ, BW or other games... IMO if you need to reference other games (or future supplements beyond the first 3 books) to "get" 4e... then it failed somewhere in it's design and/or presentation. I feel there is definitely incoherence in the rules... some DC's are static and aren't tied to level but instead to actual "things"in the game world (Yay!! process-sim) but wait there's a whole slew of them that are based purely on character level (Huh, what?).  We got tactical combat, quests and skill challenges for the gamist player (where the book tells us that XP and treasure are to be assigned and given out for success!!) but then posters like [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] make the claim that XP/treasure/etc. aren't actual rewards... they're devices to continue the "D&D narrative"... huh??  I've watched encounter play, the WotC officially sanctioned play to introduce beginners to 4e, and it bears no resemblance to the type of play I have seen described by [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] and a few others... am I saying they aren't playing the way they claim?  No not at all.  Do I think that's the default style of play for 4e or even that common a play style among players of 4e... No, not at all.  The most common style I've seen 4e played in is a strongly gamist style, almost exactly as you describe above where the point is to earn experience for defeating encounters loosely tied together by a thin narrative... and it's not just encounters, this is also the formula for most of the official 4e adventures.  I don't see thematic relevance, I don't see much to any notice of the keywords and fictional positioning, what I see is players creating maximized "builds" (jhust like in 3.x) by using the handbooks on the WotC site and in play spending most of their time looking for the best power or highest rated skill they can use to help contribute to defeating a DM balanced encounter, almost always theme and fiction are secondary.</blockquote>

Verification