Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6246250" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Have very little time so let so this is going to be a meandering, shallow breakdown.&nbsp; First, let me say that I was using &quot;toys et al&quot; to take a vague stab at framing potential definitional uses of folks who use the term as a pejorative.&nbsp; (a) I don't use it but (b) if forced to, I would frame it as &quot;default campaign legitimacy as protagonists&quot;.&nbsp; I think this is key and there are a few facets to making this key.Consider the term &quot;Monty Haul&quot;.&nbsp; This term hasn't found its way into 4e play.&nbsp; Why?&nbsp; Its because magic items (or alternate advancement bonuses) specifically, and other &quot;extra-class&quot; resources generally, are effectively PC-build side resources that are assumed in order to keep the encounter challenge math (especially the noncombat challenge math with skill bonuses vs scaling DCs) functional.&nbsp; GMs aren't going to throw out &quot;math perturbing&quot; (in prior editions this might be termed as &quot;campaign disruptive&quot;) items/parcels that unbound the challenge math (which is meant to be predictable GM-side...so you can make a TPK challenge if you want and you know it will be in TPK territory...rather than by accident).4e assumes the PCs have campaign legitimacy.&nbsp; They assume that the gameplay situations/challenges/backdrop that the GM composes frames them as protagonists in an Epic Fantasy/Big Damn Hero story.&nbsp; That fictional positioning is default.&nbsp; You can certainly perturb it backwards and make them meager adventurers or &quot;murderhobos&quot; trying to scratch and claw out a living while not getting ganked.&nbsp; But the game certainly does default to/presuppose that.&nbsp; More to the point, children want toys because...well...&quot;I WANT TOYS&quot; or because &quot;HE/SHE HAS TOYS I WANT THEM TO&quot;.&nbsp; The mere existence of the toys or the fact that someone else has them &quot;entitles&quot; them to having toys.&nbsp; My friends and I make a joke a lot about contemporary American behavior that really bothers me and I've developed a quip when I see it in action &quot;I'M AMERICAN AND IN AMERICA WE GET WHAT WE WE WANT AND WE WANT IT NOW, OK.&quot;&nbsp; It is a very childlike response/aspiration with a dearth of awareness as to potential insidiuos 2nd and 3rd order consequences (on their own lives and on cultural trajectory) to such a paradigm.&nbsp; I want it.&nbsp; I don't care about anything else.&nbsp; Give it to me.&nbsp; And now.&nbsp; They are ends sought unto themselves.This isn't the case in 4e.&nbsp; The awareness and consideration for 2nd and 3rd order implication is central.&nbsp; In fact, it is the point.&nbsp; These things become means as physical constructs meant to legitimize PC role in the world (fictional positioning as big damn hero and protagonists that should be shaping campaign trajectory), while simultaneously (and this is key) being metaphyiscal constructs as acute considerations for equilibrating challenge math.&nbsp; There is no &quot;earning&quot; Big Damn Hero status as this is the default thematics baked into the system (it is the premise) in the same way that there is no &quot;earning&quot; spellcasting as a Wizard (and all the fictional positioning that goes with it) or being a Dog (an gun-toting avenger/paladin that deals with demonic influence in the towns...punishing, enforcing, bringing to justice et al) in Dogs in the Vineyard.&nbsp; Folks who play Wizards aren't entitled (as spellcasters) and Dogs aren't entitled (as gun-toting religious avengers/paladins) because they chose to play the game.&nbsp; It doesn't make life easier for you.&nbsp; You don't get it just because you want it and you want it NOW.&nbsp; When you say &quot;yeah, I'll play&quot;, you've done all the &quot;earning&quot; required.&nbsp; Now it is time to test your mettle as a big damn hero and see where your story goes (if it goes at all).&nbsp; You may die just as before but everyone will be Big Damn Heroes and everyone will have (roughly) equal footing in establishing those roots in the campaign while the GM will challenge that premise with predictable challenge math.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 6246250, member: 6696971"] Have very little time so let so this is going to be a meandering, shallow breakdown. First, let me say that I was using "toys et al" to take a vague stab at framing potential definitional uses of folks who use the term as a pejorative. (a) I don't use it but (b) if forced to, I would frame it as "default campaign legitimacy as protagonists". I think this is key and there are a few facets to making this key. Consider the term "Monty Haul". This term hasn't found its way into 4e play. Why? Its because magic items (or alternate advancement bonuses) specifically, and other "extra-class" resources generally, are effectively PC-build side resources that are assumed in order to keep the encounter challenge math (especially the noncombat challenge math with skill bonuses vs scaling DCs) functional. GMs aren't going to throw out "math perturbing" (in prior editions this might be termed as "campaign disruptive") items/parcels that unbound the challenge math (which is meant to be predictable GM-side...so you can make a TPK challenge if you want and you know it will be in TPK territory...rather than by accident). 4e assumes the PCs have campaign legitimacy. They assume that the gameplay situations/challenges/backdrop that the GM composes frames them as protagonists in an Epic Fantasy/Big Damn Hero story. That fictional positioning is default. You can certainly perturb it backwards and make them meager adventurers or "murderhobos" trying to scratch and claw out a living while not getting ganked. But the game certainly does default to/presuppose that. More to the point, children want toys because...well..."I WANT TOYS" or because "HE/SHE HAS TOYS I WANT THEM TO". The mere existence of the toys or the fact that someone else has them "entitles" them to having toys. My friends and I make a joke a lot about contemporary American behavior that really bothers me and I've developed a quip when I see it in action "I'M AMERICAN AND IN AMERICA WE GET WHAT WE WE WANT AND WE WANT IT NOW, OK." It is a very childlike response/aspiration with a dearth of awareness as to potential insidiuos 2nd and 3rd order consequences (on their own lives and on cultural trajectory) to such a paradigm. I want it. I don't care about anything else. Give it to me. And now. They are ends sought unto themselves. This isn't the case in 4e. The awareness and consideration for 2nd and 3rd order implication is central. In fact, it is the point. These things become means as physical constructs meant to legitimize PC role in the world (fictional positioning as big damn hero and protagonists that should be shaping campaign trajectory), while simultaneously (and this is key) being metaphyiscal constructs as acute considerations for equilibrating challenge math. There is no "earning" Big Damn Hero status as this is the default thematics baked into the system (it is the premise) in the same way that there is no "earning" spellcasting as a Wizard (and all the fictional positioning that goes with it) or being a Dog (an gun-toting avenger/paladin that deals with demonic influence in the towns...punishing, enforcing, bringing to justice et al) in Dogs in the Vineyard. Folks who play Wizards aren't entitled (as spellcasters) and Dogs aren't entitled (as gun-toting religious avengers/paladins) because they chose to play the game. It doesn't make life easier for you. You don't get it just because you want it and you want it NOW. When you say "yeah, I'll play", you've done all the "earning" required. Now it is time to test your mettle as a big damn hero and see where your story goes (if it goes at all). You may die just as before but everyone will be Big Damn Heroes and everyone will have (roughly) equal footing in establishing those roots in the campaign while the GM will challenge that premise with predictable challenge math. [/QUOTE]

Verification