Quote from: Seanchai;402058Is the problem, in regard to becoming a storygame, with the division of Powers in 4e that they seem narrativistic to you? If so, how do you respond to D&D always having had abilities which characters could use in various increments of time?

It's just an example in the context of the conversation. We could just as well discuss about the on/off switch nature of certain feats in 3rd ed/Pathfinder, or the notion of Challenge Ratings and Encounter Levels, Level-appropriate everything, which point out to a game that is geared towards an "appropriate", tailored on a metagame level, challenge for player characters rather than a fully open world, etc. I mean, there are tons of examples of these things we could talk about besides Powers or 4E.

As for other abilities that in previous iterations of D&D wouldn't have made any sense other than on a purely metagame or narrative point of view, there's none that come to mind right now. We've gone through Vancian casting, which to me makes perfect sense in its own way, and the Monk's Chi abilities, which also make sense to me in the game world. To give a purely martial example in a d20 game I really love too, the token pools in Iron Heroes. These make complete sense to me: you gather specific tokens by performing specific actions in the game, which you then can spend of specific abilities. This makes sense in the game world to me.

Now, what examples of abilities would you like to talk about? Maybe they'll make sense to me, and then, maybe not, and I didn't think about them until now?

Quote from: J Arcane;402066Why would my personal interpretation of a mechanic be any more meaningful than yours?

Because it would help me understand how you work out these mechanics yourself in the game world, and thus maybe inspire me with explanations of my own?

Please. If you've got some possibilities in mind, let's share them.

Quote from: J Arcane;402066Why would my personal interpretation of a mechanic be any more meaningful than yours?

It is exactly that pointless subjectivity masquerading as an intelligent point that I'm attacking here.

J, because we are open to other interpretations.  Intellectual discourse is the only way any of us really reach deeper levels of understanding.  Nothing in this thread has been 'pointlessly subjective', so why would Iwe assume that you interpretation would not contain some validity, or at least a better understanding of your position.

Quote from: Benoist;402052I didn't know anybody did something like this with 4E. It's a neat idea.

Maybe this would require implementing a Mana pool and a Divine Favor pool in the game for Arcana and Divine power sources respectively to keep things equal between classes?

You could, but you could just as well balance by other means--make the fighter & rogue pay for their flexibility by having their "action pool" work out to fewer actions than the relatively inflexible magic system. Or even have (some) magic users go all the way back to classic Vancianism (with number of memorized spells adjusted). Arguably more flavorful that way.

Quote from: Benoist;401488By storygame I mean a game that actually is collaborative story telling, with a narrative, protagonists, players affecting the way the narrative unfolds, as opposed to an actual role playing game, which, to me, is not about creating a "story", but living the "actuality" of the game world. See this thread for my take on the notion of "story" and narratives in RPGs.[/QU

I'm not into D&D but my friend joe is and he thinks it's becoming too much like a tabletop version of WoW and MTG.

Quote from: Cylonophile;402071I'm not into D&D but my friend joe is and he thinks it's becoming too much like a tabletop version of WoW and MTG.

Well, WoW is popular for a reason. I mean obviously, that's a kind of Fantasy that has found a huge audience, so it comes as no wonder that WotC would like to emulate that feel. Which may be a mistake, because the more you make D&D look like WoW, the more you're forcing the comparison in prospective players' minds, with the obvious answer for most brain-dead iPod-loving near-illiterate XBOX live zombies being "WTF? WoW is so much better."

As for MtG well, it's WotC's baby as well, and it's best selling property last I heard. How could a WotC executive *not* want D&D to replicate MtG's design and marketing?

But these things aren't new to 4E really. 4E is just the latest attempt to reinvent D&D for a new generation of gamers in this regard.

Quote from: Benoist;402068Because it would help me understand how you work out these mechanics yourself in the game world, and thus maybe inspire me with explanations of my own?

Please. If you've got some possibilities in mind, let's share them.

I just enjoy the fucking game.  Because I'm not interested in being "That guy" at the table, the one whining about how "unrealistic" the hit point system is, and how it "makes no sense" that I can't sling around Power X all day long.

My conception of the game world is not so pathetically fragile that it needs to fit up with my own personal prejudices to be enjoyable.  

Remember that whole thing I posted some time back about the death of "Suspension of disbelief"?

It's like that.

Quote from: J Arcane;402075I just enjoy the fucking game.  Because I'm not interested in being "That guy" at the table, the one whining about how "unrealistic" the hit point system is, and how it "makes no sense" that I can't sling around Power X all day long.

So basically you're just bitching because you're just comfortable playing with those game mechanics, which is fine, but does not help me at all. And really, "pathetic"? Coming from the guy who just keeps on bitching because the words have too many syllables or are just too complicated for him to understand, boo-hoo-hoo? Fuck you, man. Go buy yourself a fucking dictionary, or an education, or even better, some empathy. Asshole.

Quote from: Benoist;402077So basically you're just bitching because you're just comfortable playing with those game mechanics, which is fine, but does not help me at all. And really, "pathetic"? Coming from the guy who just keeps on bitching because the words have too many syllables or are just too complicated for him to understand, boo-hoo-hoo? Fuck you, man. Go buy yourself a fucking dictionary, or an education, or even better, some empathy. Asshole.

I just expect better from you people.  There's nothing you and your buddies have written in this thread that's any better than the bullshit on the Forge.  A lot of pseudointellectual posturing and subjective judgement passing as legitimate criticism.

This thread is so full of bullshit it makes me nauseous.

We get it, you don't like 4e.  Neither do I.  But you've been railing against it so long you've lost the plot, and now you're walking into real danger of becoming a gaggle of Mirror-Rons yourselves.

Quote from: J Arcane;402078I just expect better from you people.

Well then, we're too, because I fully expected MUCH better from you, but no. Your intent visibly is just to keep on whining about how people don't speak fucking English, how I'm just that guy that breaks your fun at the game table, that I'm pathetically fragile, blablabla.

Come on. Like that couldn't be expected the way you keep attacking me. So now I'm speaking your language: the thread doesn't suit your particular liking, and uses big words you don't like? Nobody's forcing you to read it. The same way, I'm not forced to just take your aggressive bullshit, bend over and say "amen". I won't. Fuck off.

Quote from: Benoist;402062Well it isn't, since the thread is about whether D&D is becoming a storygame, and included examples from both 4E and Pathfinder.

Which didn't include dailies. Now, suddenly, it's the presence of dailies that are supposedly making 4e into storygame and we're back on the "dissociative" track.

Quote from: Benoist;402062If you understand this as an anti-4E troll...

As I said, I thought the thread might be an anti-4e troll. You have a history of such things. For example, your recent thread about Encounters. Is it actually a troll? Shrug. Hard to say.

Quote from: Benoist;402067As for other abilities that in previous iterations of D&D wouldn't have made any sense other than on a purely metagame or narrative point of view, there's none that come to mind right now.

I listed some. Monk's once per X abilities to heal and use quivering palm were examples. You mentioned chi, but that doesn't appear in the rules. Instead, we have "Monks are monastic aesthetics who practice rigorous mental and physical training and disciple in order to become superior" (pg 30). That's where they get their powers - training.

It's no different from fighters training to become good at combat or weapons. Neither monks or fighters have some supernatural agency granting them once per X powers, yet both have them. They're intrinsic. In one case you're claiming that's "dissociative" and narrative and in the other you're hand waving them away because you've come up with some non-canon explanation for them...

Seanchai

Quote from: J Arcane;402078We get it, you don't like 4e.

There are some aspects of 4E I like. Defenses, the basic concept of powers, even the tactical aspect of combat. There are lots of things different from other iterations of the game I could do with it, and I hope Essentials makes it easier for me to enjoy.

For FUCK SAKE. This is NOT an ANTI-4E TROLL, BITCHES.

Quote from: J arcaneI just expect better from you people. There's nothing you and your buddies have written in this thread that's any better than the bullshit on the Forge. A lot of pseudointellectual posturing and subjective judgement passing as legitimate criticism.

You know, this thread was more of an analysis and an invitation for opinion than anything else.  You made your opinion, backed with a dozen posts of nothing more than whining about the language, very clear.  
You also made it clear that your only real argument is that, " You just enjoy the fucking game."  As if that helps anything, explains anything, or gives you the right to pass judgement.  This thread is part of analysis, not the 'anti 4e plot'.  You just can't see anything other than in the light you wish it to be, no matter what the reality. Go back to your own games and 'unfragile' game view, assured that no matter how intelligent or useful the critique, you are immune, inviolate in your unnaccepting rigidity.

Quote from: SeanchaiI listed some. Monk's once per X abilities to heal and use quivering palm were examples. You mentioned chi, but that doesn't appear in the rules. Instead, we have "Monks are monastic aesthetics who practice rigorous mental and physical training and disciple in order to become superior" (pg 30). That's where they get their powers - training.

It's no different from fighters training to become good at combat or weapons. Neither monks or fighters have some supernatural agency granting them once per X powers, yet both have them. They're intrinsic. In one case you're claiming that's "dissociative" and narrative and in the other you're hand waving them away because you've come up with some non-canon explanation for them...

Actually, I mentioned that.

And my comments on chi are based on Oriental adventures.  You are absolutely correct that the original PHB was somewhat dissociated, especially in regards to the healing part.  I think the chi explanation makes some sense, for some settings, but the PHB did not make that argument.  So you are correct.