|
2 years ago ::
Nov 09, 2011 - 11:54PM
#71
|
Date Joined:
Oct 31, 2007
|
The missing feeling of 4e D&D, in my opinion, stems from the lack of differentiation and concomitant opaqueness of the illusion hiding the system from the player. In this I mean to say that the hyper egalitarianism of 4e makes it difficult not to see the system working and thus breaks any form of immersion. Further that egalitarianism intrinsic to the system math makes the game extremely predicatable and erodes the ability to roleplay. While finely tuned balance is the feature that most here find beneficial to the gameplay, I personally find it constricting and detrimental to the roleplaying aspect of an RPG.
What a very elegant and well-thought-out way of saying "I hate 4e because it makes it more difficult to ruin the game experience for everyone else."
Nothing about game balance is constricting or detrimental to roleplaying. It's constrictive and detrimental to powergaming and system-mastery-based elitism. In fact, quite the opposite is true, a balanced game allows more meaningful, viable choices that can differentiate characters without them overshadowing eachother - which enables roleplay. Imbalanced systems cater to the worst sorts of powergaming, and draw players into system-mastery competitions, narrowing their choices until they're each playing one of a handful of 'optimal' builds to which they've sacrificed any pretense of character concept or roleplaying.
While I find your response revealing much of your psychology, it really says nothing at all about my post. Perhaps you could try again with a reasoned argument? Or perhaps not? To further illuminate my point though, and again I say this only based on my subjective experience and opinion, consider the range of defenses fought against at any given level- each falls within a mathmatically designed zone that varies little. This creates a situation in which I as a player find myself drawn away from roleplay and become aware of the system beneath thus breaking immersion. This does not necessarily happen to you and i expect that it does not, however it does for me. This is just one example of many that draws my atttention away from the roleplay aspect of the game. That said if you wish to cast further aspersions my way feel free to do so.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 1:44AM
#72
|
|
|
At a convention last month, I played a session of 2E where we were playing lv0 villagers without high stats or any abilities. Since mechanically there was nothing we did well, we had to improvise. In 4E the things your character can do through powers, skills and feats are very interesting, enough that you can enjoy playing solely using them. I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just different. In 2E you improvised because you had to, in 4E your character is powerful and interesting enough that you don't.
I have noticed this, and have been encouraging improvised results by having my monsters use it first (to newer players) to influence them from the very beginning of their 4e 'careers' and its been having pretty decent results. Having a goblin not use his rusty shortsword attack to deal X damage and instead he cuts the rope holding the platform of crates suspended over the players' heads, has really inspired similar creativity in players.
To the point of the post, however, I guess I walk the fence. Being an absolute math-crazed lunatic, being aware of the system doesn't break my immersion, it furthers it because I feel a 'safety net' for my character to not need to minmax to compete? That's the best way I can explain it perhaps. Nonetheless, I -absolutely- understand this may be an issue to many players. But then again, in my group we never play an 'edition' -as is-. We always add pieces of whatever edition we want or are familiar with, all within the boundaries of 'balance.' I'd suggest trying similar methods and just remembering whether or not the rule is 'printed' the 0th rule always applies. Its your game; make it that way.
As far as 4e not having the same feel to me, in many ways it doesn't; I've never felt that sense of 'awe and mystery' and system balance at the same time before; with the right DM, you never need rule books, but I can understand it may be degrading the ability to create 'awe and mystery' in future generations by a lack of exposure to it. Could be mistaken there, too, however. Just a thought. The bottom line is, I will forever keep parts of ADnD/2e,3.5, and 4e in whatever game the future brings my group to playing; passive defenses and powers being two huge ones. Beyond all that is my absolute fondness for skills being able to be used against defenses (within reason) for creative environmental play. Acrobatics vs. Reflex to tumble between someone's legs and gain combat advantage behind them, in example. Fun stuff, and I think it only adds to the feel.
*takes the .98 cents change"
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 2:26AM
#73
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
I feel a 'safety net' for my character to not need to minmax to compete?
I get the impression that is part of the feel you have in 4e that was lacking in the previous edition
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 7:26AM
#74
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2010
|
I had a very interesting situation happen in my game the other day and I think speaks to this very topic.
At one point in the session the players became trapped in a story book. Within, they encountered a massive dragon that was sleeping on a vast treasure horde (the size of a small village). I told them that any treasure or magical item they could think of was found in the dragon's horde (i.e. any magical item in 4e). Near the horde was a magical story book that floated in the air and recorded everything that happened in detail.
The encounter with the dragon was impossible since the dragon was level 30 and the pcs weren't anywhere near epic levels. In this situation the players had to do more than simply fight their way out, which was the entire point of the encounter.
In the original module the players had the option of fighting the dragon with some of the magical items in the horde and/or writing a heroic ending in the book. Either would be enough to defeat the dragon and end the story..
When the players went to search for magical items in their 4e books that might help they found nothing that worked. All of the 4e magical items were completely useless. The problem was that even if they picked up level 30 items they couldn't hit the creature or do enough damage to defeat it. Sadly even a 4e Sphere of Annihilation was useless. At that point I realized that the fighting aspect of the encounter was essentially broken in 4e and I had to tell the players that any magical item from any edition of D&D existed in the treasure horde. Once I did that the players picked up rings of wishes and everything from that point forward worked out very well. We had a great time once we freed ourselves from constraints of the 4e rules.
After this situation I realized that I should have I spent a few hours converting the encounter to 4e. I'm just not sure how I could have done that without changing it too much. Regardless, it was work as a DM that I just didn't want to do. With 4e, DM's are now forced to workout interesting encounters well ahead of time and plan for just about every contingency. For me this is more work as a DM that I don't want to do and that's one of the reasons the game just isn't the same. I'm always having to change my ideas so that they work with the system.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 7:31AM
#75
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2009
|
I'm just not sure how I could have done that without changing it too much.
You should've done an awesome skill challenge. There's no mechanical way to battle something so powerful when you're so weak.
Epic Dungeon Master Want to give your players a kingdom of their own? I made a 4e rule system to make it happen! Your Kingdom awaits!Update 5th Sep 2011: Added a sample kingdom, as well as sample of play.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 7:44AM
#76
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
I should have I spent a few hours converting the encounter to 4e.
Why would that have taken hours? This should have been a skill challenge or a puzzle, not a combat. You purpoely gave them a foe they couldn't defeat on their own. Do declare it undefeatable.
Instead, let the party make improvised skill checks using the flavor of any item in 4e. Each successful skill check is a success towards the skill challenge. And writing in the book would also constitute a success, but places the playe rin the center of the room, completely exposed to attack (grants combat advantage). On the dragon's turn, have it make a variety of attacks, including deisintegrating an item from the hoard, swatting a player away from the storybook, or simply breathing a godawful amount of fire.
The problem is not that 4e couldn't handle what you wanted. It's that you're stuck in a pre-4e mindset where the fluff has to be represented in mechanics that resemble physical laws, rather than mechanics designed to tell a story. (Which is really ironic since the encounter in question was in a friggin' storybook!)
This took me three minutes to devise. off the top of my head, here's some great items the players could improvise using...
A lodestone to prevent the dragon from flying.
Magic weapons with which to attack the dragon
A carpet of flying to reach the storybook
A ring of dragons to summon an illusory dragon to distract the real one
Hedge wizard's gloves to write in the bookwithout exposing onself to attack
Staff of Time to send the dragon forward in time, giving the heroes plenty of time to find other stuff or write in the book.
Not to mention the orbs of dragonkind!
This was a storybook adventure, but you were running it like it was a math problem. Run it like a storybook adventure!
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 7:45AM
#77
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2010
|
I'm just not sure how I could have done that without changing it too much.
You should've done an awesome skill challenge. There's no mechanical way to battle something so powerful when you're so weak.
Well I did run part of it like a skill challenge, but having the players pick from any D&D magical item and use it was part of the fun that I didn't want them to miss out on. We had a great time far more then any skill challenge could have offered.
But yes even with the most powerful 4e magical items (short of DM created artifacts) you can't kill much outside your level range.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 7:50AM
#78
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
But yes even with the most powerful 4e magical items (short of DM created artifacts) you can't kill much outside your level range.
Because there is nothing outside your level range!! Level isn't a "thing". It's an abstraction. That's why you aren't supposed to encounter creatures more than four levels away from the party level. the mechanics aren't designed for that.
Which is why the dragon shouldn't have been given the stats of a creature. It's a plot device, pure and simple. So you make it the skill challenge. Instead of defenses and hit points, it has successes and DCs. The players can aid one another, or, if they find a magic item in the hoard, make a Skill Check that contributes to the ultimate success of the encounter.
Sheesh. Why is it so dificult for people to understand what a rules abstraction is?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 8:00AM
#79
|
XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek
Date Joined:
May 31, 2003
|
I think Stix Remix indeed has a good point which I've observed before a lot; DMs are brought down to being an equal player in the game rather then the "big guy".
I don't know where you get this from. According to the DMG the DM still has the final say so on the matter. There is no DM = Player ratio going on. The DMG suggests that the DM work with the player's more but you seem to take suggestions as set in stone rules that make the two equal.
The two cannot remain equal because endless arguing would begin. That would be like having a soccer match where both teams are in charge of the rules. They would be calling fouls on each other left and right so one can gain the upper hand. This is why in D&D the DM is still the one who decides what is what at the end of the day.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Nov 10, 2011 - 8:14AM
#80
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2010
|
I should have I spent a few hours converting the encounter to 4e.
Why would that have taken hours? This should have been a skill challenge or a puzzle, not a combat. You purpoely gave them a foe they couldn't defeat on their own. Do declare it undefeatable.
Instead, let the party make improvised skill checks using the flavor of any item in 4e. Each successful skill check is a success towards the skill challenge. And writing in the book would also constitute a success, but places the playe rin the center of the room, completely exposed to attack (grants combat advantage). On the dragon's turn, have it make a variety of attacks, including deisintegrating an item from the hoard, swatting a player away from the storybook, or simply breathing a godawful amount of fire.
The problem is not that 4e couldn't handle what you wanted. It's that you're stuck in a pre-4e mindset where the fluff has to be represented in mechanics that resemble physical laws, rather than mechanics designed to tell a story. (Which is really ironic since the encounter in question was in a friggin' storybook!)
This took me three minutes to devise. off the top of my head, here's some great items the players could improvise using...
A lodestone to prevent the dragon from flying.
Magic weapons with which to attack the dragon
A carpet of flying to reach the storybook
A ring of dragons to summon an illusory dragon to distract the real one
Hedge wizard's gloves to write in the bookwithout exposing onself to attack
Staff of Time to send the dragon forward in time, giving the heroes plenty of time to find other stuff or write in the book.
Not to mention the orbs of dragonkind!
This was a storybook adventure, but you were running it like it was a math problem. Run it like a storybook adventure!
I strongly considered doing what you suggested, but I realized that it would much easier to simply go with the way it was originally written. In the end we had far more fun. Everyone had a blast 'wishing' for things. In the end, that was much better than rolling a bunch of dull skill checks. lol
You see, what you're asking me to do is abandon the combat rules in favour of a pre-defined skill challenge. Your list of options is just one solution that the players most likely won't ever consider. You can't expect them to follow it. Now, I'm sure you can post a very nice skill challenge that details all the possible actions (you think) the PC's could take. In the end, it would have to be play tested and that's too much work. I also can't possibly imagine it being very fun. Players would be expecting combat to work one particular way and if you change that they might get all confused.
I think that having the flavour attached to the items made life easier for everyone. For that reason, previous editions lent themselves well to this kind of situation without much effort on the part of the DM.
|
|
|
