Community

Mar 17, 2012 -- 11:54PM, Samrin wrote:

That pretty much goes for any spell when you just use the mechanics from it. I mean, look at save or dies from previous editions. Roll a will save, if you fail, you die. Not very high fantasy. The fantasy is in the flavor.

Well, that depends.

I mean, I'd certainly confuse some of the death spells like Circle of Death and Wail of the Banshee, but I'd never confuse Flesh to Stone or Disintigrate with anything else. One turns you into a statue that can be changed back and the other one reduced you to dust so that you can't be raised without very powerful magic.

Those effects can't be reflavored because the mechanics so accurately reflect the spells' flavor text.

Mar 18, 2012 -- 12:12AM, TheMormegil wrote:

Mar 17, 2012 -- 11:30PM, K.530 wrote:

I'd argue that there really isn't much fantasy when you look at the actual effects.

Much of the flavor text for 4e powers was a lot more interesting and fantastic to me than the actual effects. "Horrifying illusions" sounded great until I read the actual mechanics and found out it's the same combo of "damage and maybe one of the canned status conditions."

If fantastic flavor text is the metric for high or low fantasy, then a modular system works great. You can file off the serial numbers for illusions and reskin then "horrifying phantasmal forces" in high fantasy and make them "magic stun attack" in low fantasy.

I'd argue that fantastic effects are far more important that flavor text.

That being said, "fully bypass the fire resistance of fire creatures" is a good example of a mechanic that doesn't interest me. I'm not even sure if I'd want to even try to tell a story about that regardkess of how you flavor it.

Flavor counts. Flavor has a game effect. Flavor is the game. Mechanics are just helping you determinate the results of conflicts, and that means that they need to be well balanced to maintain the fun. When you use a 4E power, you describe it, and its effect in the reality of the game is that which you describe. The resolution is what's handled by rules.

I would actually say the flavour is not the game; the flavour is the story.  Then there are the resolution mechanics behind the story making the story have a specific effect and resolution.  They work in tandem to create the game.  Half the game is the story, which takes place in the foreground, but without the mechanics in the background, there's no game.

Mar 18, 2012 -- 1:43AM, TheMormegil wrote:

Mar 18, 2012 -- 12:22AM, Kalnaur wrote:

Mar 18, 2012 -- 12:12AM, TheMormegil wrote:

Mar 17, 2012 -- 11:30PM, K.530 wrote:

I'd argue that there really isn't much fantasy when you look at the actual effects.

Much of the flavor text for 4e powers was a lot more interesting and fantastic to me than the actual effects. "Horrifying illusions" sounded great until I read the actual mechanics and found out it's the same combo of "damage and maybe one of the canned status conditions."

If fantastic flavor text is the metric for high or low fantasy, then a modular system works great. You can file off the serial numbers for illusions and reskin then "horrifying phantasmal forces" in high fantasy and make them "magic stun attack" in low fantasy.

I'd argue that fantastic effects are far more important that flavor text.

That being said, "fully bypass the fire resistance of fire creatures" is a good example of a mechanic that doesn't interest me. I'm not even sure if I'd want to even try to tell a story about that regardkess of how you flavor it.

Flavor counts. Flavor has a game effect. Flavor is the game. Mechanics are just helping you determinate the results of conflicts, and that means that they need to be well balanced to maintain the fun. When you use a 4E power, you describe it, and its effect in the reality of the game is that which you describe. The resolution is what's handled by rules.

I would actually say the flavour is not the game; the flavour is the story.  Then there are the resolution mechanics behind the story making the story have a specific effect and resolution.  They work in tandem to create the game.  Half the game is the story, which takes place in the foreground, but without the mechanics in the background, there's no game.

It depends on your definition of game. For me, the game is the story. If you refer to the game as the mechanical parts underlying the story, than flavor has no effect on the game. But I think the point is this:

If you are playing a Paladin reflavored to be an Eldritch Knight, an arcane knight hunteing witches, and you go through a room that has a trap which trigger is sensing arcane magic, does the trap trigger? You are a paladin in your char sheet, your powers have the divine keyword. But, you reflavored it as an eldritch knight, so you should be casting arcane spells.

To me, this is a no-brainer: the trap hits you, end of the story. Flavor has a "game" effect because it influences the game (my definition of game). Of course, flavor also has no "game" effect because it doesn't change a single mechanic (your definition of game). I have seen people argue otherwise on this problem though, even going as far as to say that the trap doesn't trigger since you are a paladin.

I would indeed argue with that, as Arcane or Divine are Keywords, and thus mechanical.  So unless the player had gotten DM approval, the Paladin's powers would not be arcane, even if the reskin was claimed to be.  Thus, to truly turn the Paladin into an arcanist, all their powers would need to be arcane instead of divine, meaning they would also have the ability to take arcane feats, etc.  So yes indeed, your definition and mine are different.

Also, I consider the game what happens when story and mechanics meet.  And they should always be meeting, but if there's a disconnect, for me mechanics trump the flavour skinning them.  Flavour has no mechanical effect in the game unless it is attached to mechanics, and the mechanics take precedence.

So, reflavouring works for powers.  But if you play an orc as a human, with only flavour altered, that does not mean you dodge effects that only effect orcs because mechanically, you are still an orc.  If you want to ask the DM to change the orc to be a human, mechanically, then they have the right to do that if they want, but at that point you are house-ruling the mechanics to fit the desired flavour.  Not a problem, per se.  But all people have to be on board and honest with what is happening.  And in my opinion, you can't have your cake and eat it to.  If you play a Halfling as a gnome, you either become a gnome and be fey with all the bonuses and drawbacks that entails, or you are playing a reskinned halfling, and suffer the effects that a halfling might.

Short answer, the trap wouldn't trigger in my game, unless I as DM had houseruled that your Paladin was an arcane Eldritch Knight.

Mar 18, 2012 -- 2:17AM, Kalnaur wrote:

Short answer, the trap wouldn't trigger in my game, unless I as DM had houseruled that your Paladin was an arcane Eldritch Knight.

I see. I can't really understand that reasoning: if you reflavored the paladin to arcane then it is arcane, end of the question. The fact that you are able to reflavor to arcane without mechanical issues is one of the best features of 4E along with balance. Because really, there's virtually no change in mechanics by changing divine to arcane.

In my games the trap triggers. If a player describes a fireball as opening a small portal to the Elemental Plane of Fire and wants to use that power to jump to the Elemental Plane of Fire later in the game, cool, I plan an adventure on the Elemental Plane of Fire. If someone reflavors his shapeshift ability to turning into a small dragon, then he gets to breathe fire on a table and see it burn even if he has no fire power on his sheet. What he doesn't get to do is use his dragon breath as a weapon in battle except as part of a description. If he really wants to use it because he needs to, page 42; otherwise, he uses another power and can describe his fire breath along with it. Flavor has an impact on the game; what it does not have an impact on are the mechanics that allow me to decide whether or not an action or a whole combat is successful or not.