|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 6:03AM
#1471
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2007
|
Awww you are making me reminisce of when D&D was D&D...
If only we could modernize it we would have 5e !
The point was that edition of D&D is a two thirds failure. as not even one third of the spels dont fail as you put them because they reference mechanics.
 Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 6:13AM
#1472
|
|
|
Max I'd like a quote please to shows that a martial push is a physical push. Where does it say that a martial push is a push in the strictest sense of the word.
Push, pull and slide are forced movement and I cant find any kind of quote that a fighter that pushes is physically pushing a creature and not forceing it to move through manuvers or attacks that might cause it to back off or any other kind of thing that you keep disreguarding.
Shield Slam Fighter 3
You follow up a successful attack by slamming your shield into the enemy, knocking him aside.
Hit: You push the target 1 square and knock it prone.
To say that now all powers are really abstract and the fighter is not actually doing the actions seems a cop out. I think it would be simpler to say there is a size limit to things you can push.
Or we can accept that there are ways to move larger creatures than yourself. And realize that the mechanics don't always have to follow what the fluff says.
Thank you for a good response. And I get and respect your opinion Doctor.
But that is precisely my issue with 'mechanics'.
And I think you have helped crystallize one point of how 4e has lost the feel of D&D.
Its an overused word in the forums because in 4e the spells, and martial powers are all about the mechanics - not about the fluff.
But in 2e it was not called fluff, the wording of what exactly occured actually mattered, the actions occuring, how it occurred mattered, the context mattered.
Now with all the powers nothing matters except the mechnanics.
The fluff is an italicised description that does not matter.
All that matters is that you inflicted x damage, created y condition and moved the opponent z squares.
I repeat.
All that matters is that you inflicted x damage, created y condition and moved the opponent z squares.
What you are doing is inconsequential, the name of the spell/power is forgettable, the description is ignored.
It was never that way.
It became that way because, well the game became a tactical tabletop miniature movement game instead of a RPG.
Sure thats not the whole story, but its one aspect that has lost the feel of D&D.
Now is there anything wrong with a tactical, strategic combat game - nothing - I like that type of game too, just as I like chess. Adding on dice roll resolution over roleplay in the form of 'skill challenges' has obviously attracted a lot of kids but its not in the spirit of the original D&D.
And unless 5e can recapture the feel I suspect that Pathfinder will continue to grow with RPG players.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 6:18AM
#1473
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2008
|
Awww you are making me reminisce of when D&D was D&D...
If only we could modernize it we would have 5e !
The point was that edition of D&D is a two thirds failure. as not even one third of the spels dont fail as you put them because they reference mechanics.
Probably more, once you factor in suppliments.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 6:35AM
#1474
|
|
|
Awww you are making me reminisce of when D&D was D&D...
If only we could modernize it we would have 5e !
The point was that edition of D&D is a two thirds failure. as not even one third of the spels dont fail as you put them because they reference mechanics.
per my other post above, having mechanics is not the problem, its when you have a small number of mechanics - x damage, y condition, move z squares and make those mechanics the only thing that matters, makes for a dull game.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 6:44AM
#1475
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2008
|
Its an overused word in the forums because in 4e the spells, and martial powers are all about the mechanics - not about the fluff.
because fluff is and should be mutable.
But in 2e it was not called fluff, the wording of what exactly occured actually mattered, the actions occuring, how it occurred mattered, the context mattered.
noit as much as you would think. plenty of people would focus on the mechanics of the spells. the color of gthe fireball did not matter only who was effected and to what extent.
Now with all the powers nothing matters except the mechnanics.
No the fluff still matters
The fluff is an italicised description that does not matter.
the italics is sample fluff, which lessens its value but does not remove it, the fluff is whatever the group wants it to be.
All that matters is that you inflicted x damage, created y condition and moved the opponent z squares.
Not to the story.
The mechanics are important for the game state which is required by it being a game with rules,
the fluff it required for the story, now if your group cares nothing for the story, the fluff does not matter, but if like 95+% of the time the the description can be summed up in 2 lines (as all you need is enough for the player to get a mental picture), then a paragraph of description is just wasted space and stuff that the majority of players just gloss over.
I repeat.
All that matters is that you inflicted x damage, created y condition and moved the opponent z squares.
repeting a falsehood does not make it true
What you are doing is inconsequential, the name of the spell/power is forgettable, the description is ignored.
in a bad group maybe, but allot of powers stand out. anyone who has every played a group with a PHB1 ranger knows what Twin Strike is.
Same for anyone who has ever gotten into their powers.
It was never that way.
actually non casters it was that way, an for casters there were always spells that blended together.
It became that way because, well the game became a tactical tabletop miniature movement game instead of a RPG.
It is still a farking RPG, if anything the separation of fluff and mechanics INCREASES the role playing potential, as it gives the group more freedom. Unless you need the training wheels to role play.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 7:00AM
#1476
|
Date Joined:
May 13, 2009
|
By being the first edition that says "here are your abilities, now what do they look like?", 4th Edition has actually seperated the people who like the game to roleplay for them from the people who like to actually roleplay.
If you think that "it's all about the mechanics", then that means you never took the time to actually generate a character. You just wrote down some mechanics, realised "omg the game does not roleplay my character for me" and then chalked it up as a problem with the game.
That's an interesting conclusion. I can understand wanting to go back to the time where the game held your hand throughout and explained exactly how you should roleplay effects, rather then this modern game which just says "this is what's going to happen, now how does your character accomplish it?".
Some people like hand holding. Others prefer actual roleplay.
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.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 7:01AM
#1477
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Cassan,
It seems that you dislike the fact that 4E can be played as a tactical boardgame, but you are making the argument that it is always played as a tactical boardgame. It makes me think that your issue isn't so much with the system as with your group.
I can say with all honesty that the fluff is much more important to my group than the mechanics. No one uses the actual name of the power beyond the first use (so that everyone at the table knows that is really happening) and everyone comes up with their own very flavorful fluff to describe what they are doing.
Perhaps you don't like the idea of mutable fluff, but for my group it is great. It allows them to be creative and as a result they get a lot more enjoyment out of combat.
So, rather than continue to try to convince us of something that we know is false (that 4E powers are just about the numbers), why don't you try to convince your group of the opposite (that 4E powers can involve just as much fluff and flavor as spells from 2E, but the creativity is now up to you, the Player).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 7:05AM
#1478
|
Date Joined:
Apr 18, 2004
|
Does anyone remember what the description of a fireball was, outside of the fact that it dealt damage(the mechanical descriptor). Maybe things caught fire(another mechanical descriptor)?
Cassan - are you arguing that 3.5 is also "not D&D", because the condition list was entirely mechanical? Spells could - daze, nauseate, sicken, frighten, panic, etc. There was a whole list of conditions in the DMG(I think around page 300) that took a description from a spell or feat and gave you the mechanic for that description. How is pushed any different from frightened?
This is getting to be like that old argument that, back in the day, people had more imagination, because they didn't have TV, and they had to think. Rubbish.
In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and small D&D was real D&D.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 7:32AM
#1479
|
|
|
Cassan,
It seems that you dislike the fact that 4E can be played as a tactical boardgame, but you are making the argument that it is always played as a tactical boardgame. It makes me think that your issue isn't so much with the system as with your group.
I can say with all honesty that the fluff is much more important to my group than the mechanics. No one uses the actual name of the power beyond the first use (so that everyone at the table knows that is really happening) and everyone comes up with their own very flavorful fluff to describe what they are doing.
Perhaps you don't like the idea of mutable fluff, but for my group it is great. It allows them to be creative and as a result they get a lot more enjoyment out of combat.
So, rather than continue to try to convince us of something that we know is false (that 4E powers are just about the numbers), why don't you try to convince your group of the opposite (that 4E powers can involve just as much fluff and flavor as spells from 2E, but the creativity is now up to you, the Player).
I agree 4e can be all that.
Experience roleplayers can make decent roleplay out of any edition, probably any game.
But especially for the new generation 4e has thrust us into a different direction from the original and its a common thing for people to think that it plays like a board game versus a RPG.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Dec 11, 2011 - 7:39AM
#1480
|
|
|
Once again PUSH is a mechanical term. It is used to describe MECHANICAL game effects. It does not precisely define the flavor or fluff of what is happening. The flavor of the example power you found does not say push.
Looks like you found a bad example.
And by the way nice dodge.
Whenever you have to describe things in D&D as a mechanical game effect - its fail.
So, it was so much better in previous editions where there was no standard term for it but "moving a creature away from you" was still something that came up a slew of times in different effects. Except of course in each case the DM had to read through a big long description of how it worked for THAT spell or feat. WOW that was good game design!!!! (or maybe it was stinky FAIL).
There's nothing "fail" about having standard game elements. What is "fail" are the people who are too pathetically unimaginative to even describe how a dragon could be moved back by a fighter.
Beyond that not only is 'push' an abstraction in the sense that it is just a term used to describe a form of movement on the grid (already a somewhat abstract construct), but you've failed to grasp that powers are narrative plot coupons used by the players to construct a combat narrative. Max for instance objects that "well, how does the fighter control which way the dragon stumbles", but he's UTTERLY MISSED THE POINT OF POWERS when he says that. The CHARACTER isn't, necessarily, controlling anything. The player OTOH most certainly is, and the rules say the player gets to use his plot coupon to move the dragon away from his character! lol.
That is not dead which may eternal lie
|
|
|
