Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
www.play-board-games.com blogs about How DnD 4th Edition is like a board game
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 5238937" data-attributes="member: 386"><p>That's the way I first looked at the game - the fictional content <em>does</em> trump everything else, because there are simple and quick rules for the DM to adjudicate any sort of action the PCs want to try. I looked at the action economy and figured that, if you can reduce an opponent's resources (HP) with a Standard Action, <em>how</em> you decide to do that should depend on the fiction; you shouldn't have to use an attack power. The Standard Action was the important thing, not the modifier being used.</p><p></p><p>Thus Intimidate checks to deal HP damage.</p><p></p><p>Playing the game, though, even with this mindset, the people I played with fell too often into the trap of only looking at their powers as their only options. "Power fixation." I have come to believe that this is because the powers don't require you to stop and think about the fictional situation beyond the grid/conditions/HP level.</p><p></p><p>The simplest way would be to have the DM say "No" to powers based on the fictional situation, but that's not the general tone of DM advice for 4E.</p><p></p><p>Does the game foster "incoherent" play, in the Forge sense? Possibly. The DM advice suggests that the PCs are heroes, the rules reduce some consequences, but the game is hard-edged and can make player skill the sole factor in victory. What's more, Quests and the loose way that colour ties to the mechanics can enable a heavily Premise-based game.</p><p></p><p>The advice leans towards a "Right to Dream" experience, I think (scaling everything to PC level without enough emphasis on "problematic features of human existence"), but those playing through the WotC modules will likely see that quashed when they come face-to-axe with Irontooth.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't think so either. My question is, because the rules say it can't, does that mean the DM should rule that it can't, or should the DM rule on some other principle? I'm not sure which way the advice leans. Personally I don't think there needs to be a rule or power that says that oozes can slip under doors (gelatinous cubes excepted); the DM can make a judgement call. I think the "rule for everything" approach takes away from that human element.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that's a great way to handle the game. The monster creation/alteration rules make it easy to tell the kind of story you want. </p><p></p><p>I should say that I'm not talking about a pre-plotted story; just that the DM can provide an appropriate level of adversity that's independent of colour, which means that the DM can pick and choose the appropriate colour for the theme of the story. This does have other effects, like making long-term strategic planning more difficult for players. That's the kind of thing I mean when different 4E techniques can be used to address different metagame goals.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>"Annakin, you're breaking my heart!"</p><p></p><p>That quote jumps to mind - it's as though Annakin failed in an Intimidate check and therefore dealt psychic HP damage to Amidala.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure the game is balanced for this kind of play - you might need to apply some modifiers to defences - but I don't think it would be hard to achieve. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep. I think there's a lot of space for discussion on how different techniques can enhance or subtract from specific metagame goals. (My problems with narrative control/authorial "power points" being one of them.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LostSoul, post: 5238937, member: 386"] That's the way I first looked at the game - the fictional content [i]does[/i] trump everything else, because there are simple and quick rules for the DM to adjudicate any sort of action the PCs want to try. I looked at the action economy and figured that, if you can reduce an opponent's resources (HP) with a Standard Action, [i]how[/i] you decide to do that should depend on the fiction; you shouldn't have to use an attack power. The Standard Action was the important thing, not the modifier being used. Thus Intimidate checks to deal HP damage. Playing the game, though, even with this mindset, the people I played with fell too often into the trap of only looking at their powers as their only options. "Power fixation." I have come to believe that this is because the powers don't require you to stop and think about the fictional situation beyond the grid/conditions/HP level. The simplest way would be to have the DM say "No" to powers based on the fictional situation, but that's not the general tone of DM advice for 4E. Does the game foster "incoherent" play, in the Forge sense? Possibly. The DM advice suggests that the PCs are heroes, the rules reduce some consequences, but the game is hard-edged and can make player skill the sole factor in victory. What's more, Quests and the loose way that colour ties to the mechanics can enable a heavily Premise-based game. The advice leans towards a "Right to Dream" experience, I think (scaling everything to PC level without enough emphasis on "problematic features of human existence"), but those playing through the WotC modules will likely see that quashed when they come face-to-axe with Irontooth. I don't think so either. My question is, because the rules say it can't, does that mean the DM should rule that it can't, or should the DM rule on some other principle? I'm not sure which way the advice leans. Personally I don't think there needs to be a rule or power that says that oozes can slip under doors (gelatinous cubes excepted); the DM can make a judgement call. I think the "rule for everything" approach takes away from that human element. I think that's a great way to handle the game. The monster creation/alteration rules make it easy to tell the kind of story you want. I should say that I'm not talking about a pre-plotted story; just that the DM can provide an appropriate level of adversity that's independent of colour, which means that the DM can pick and choose the appropriate colour for the theme of the story. This does have other effects, like making long-term strategic planning more difficult for players. That's the kind of thing I mean when different 4E techniques can be used to address different metagame goals. "Annakin, you're breaking my heart!" That quote jumps to mind - it's as though Annakin failed in an Intimidate check and therefore dealt psychic HP damage to Amidala. I'm not sure the game is balanced for this kind of play - you might need to apply some modifiers to defences - but I don't think it would be hard to achieve. Yep. I think there's a lot of space for discussion on how different techniques can enhance or subtract from specific metagame goals. (My problems with narrative control/authorial "power points" being one of them.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
www.play-board-games.com blogs about How DnD 4th Edition is like a board game
Top