mousey's page

I would hope in the above case, that the DM had a) created this particular effect with the skills of the characters in mind, perused the skills chapter and thought of results for use of Insight, Perception, Arcana etc etc

A Skill Challenge would fit the bill nicely. Dis-spelling the illusion - that's less roleplaying and more mechanics.

How about protection from evil? Detect undead? Speak with undead? (the living will not be able to answer) stinking cloud?

How many abilities or powers in 4th ed allows such option?

Dispelling isn't any less rp too if its done with the story in mind (Raistlin used featherfall to float down the inn's back...the whole encounter was rp-ed)

mousey wrote:

I'll still play it as new challenges are my cup of tea. However, its too different from any other rpgs. D&D in itself is somewhat less rp intensive as compared to some other gaming systems and 4th ed just pushed it further into the abyssal pits of rp.

The problem with this assertion is that it's entirely subjective. Two weeks ago my 4e game had a session where not a single dice was rolled. Compare that with a MLWM or Heroquest or any other narratavist game. In other words, your games of D&D might have less roleplaying, but D&D in and of itself does not prevent roleplaying any more than any other game.

However, its merely a statement how supportive a game system is of it. Hack & Slash can be rp-ed. Troll and Tunnel can be rp-ed. Even minaiture wargaming systems like warhammer can be rp-ed (go! go! my minions of darkness! Destroy those manlings of the empire! I seek redress for the death of my katrina!!) but how much of the gamerules supports rp?

An analogy: A fork can scoop just like a spoon but how well geared is it and how much can you scoop it? And how much work you need to put in to scoop? And it also depends on what you want to scoop (ice-cream works with fork too but to a lesser degree)

Ask these questions: How much of the 4th ed game system u used when no dice was rolled? No combat was done? How much? So how much of the abilities/feats was used? None? So how much of your previous game requires 4th ed and is based on that?

And I think you missed the whole point of my posting. I've quoted one example whereby RP is drummed down in 4th ed as compared to the previous edition, missing non-combat spells (ritual as a watered down alternative had been relegated to a mere 5 pages)

Many are considering that streamlining the gameplay is something that 4th ed had improved on in terms of combat yet in several dragon articles, that's the opposite of the designers intentions (read article of dragon 364).

Anyway, I'm not saying that 4th is no fun. As of now, I'm still having my kicks out of it but as a experienced gamer (and many others), 4th ed game system and rules lean towards combat and powers and after a while, it may lose its luster as mentioned by this thread's title.

Question: You and your party are in a tower of undead but an illusion casted by a necromancer of great power had granted all the inhabitants a decaying undead look and feel. There's a group of villagers held hostaged and charmed. Now there's 3 groups of these "undeads" hunkering towards you. What will you do?

Answer: Use any of the 4th ed rule system to rp this.

Note to WoTC: Put back more meat into non-combat orientation and combine the best of 3.5 with 4th.

I've wrote something like that in a thread in another website and I'm writing this again.

Firstly, let me clarify that I'm no newbie rpg gamer nor any youngster. I can easily rank myself amongst the mature gamers in the world. Hence, this isn't any "I hate 4th ed" thingie. Actually, i've collected everything 4th ed so far yet also games in 3.5 ed and even D&D basic (kind of a retro gaming with my many many years gaming buddies) and occasionally AD&D (even other rpg gamings).

Back to the topic. I've played one 4th ed game so far as a DM and understand me when I said that its too combat oriented. I've read through "Rescue at Rivenroar" and "Thunderspire and it kinda enforced that thinking.

Let's be objective here. Previous D&D editions had evolved over the years but this 4th ed is drastically different. WoTC must have realized its losing its shine over the internet gaming and multiple online player games over console. Hence, it needs something that doesn't take forever to play, almost no brainer, full of actions and very combat intensive (they didn't deny that too).

I'm not going to write this without supporting this point. Here's one very clear-cut evidence on this.

Spells.

If anyone takes a comparison between all spells from D&D basic to D&D 3.5 and the spells (or power or abilities) in 4th Ed, you'll notice that these spells are missing:

Cleric 1st level:
bless water
detect [alignment]
detect undead
deathwatch
hide from undead
protection from [alignment]

Cleric 2nd level:
augury
calm emotions
consecrate
delay poison
eagle's splendor
make whole
owl's wisdom
status
undetectable alignment
zone of truth

Cleric 3rd level:
create food and water
daylight
glyph of warding
locate object
magic circle against [alignment]
obscure object
speak with dead
stone shape
water breathing
water walk

There's some much more to name here and no, rituals don't cover enough of it at all.

These spells are mostly not combat oriented and its these spells that are removed from 4th ed. If they're not combat oriented, they're there to assist in role-playing.

Even utility powers/abilities are so geared towards combat...sigh...maybe 4th ed will be called hack & slash.

I'll still play it as new challenges are my cup of tea. However, its too different from any other rpgs. D&D in itself is somewhat less rp intensive as compared to some other gaming systems and 4th ed just pushed it further into the abyssal pits of rp.

4th ed losing its luster? I've just did one game and I'll try some more. As a game, its still fine but if compared to previous D&D, it doesn't shine at all. In terms of RP, its possibly the last nail in the RP coffin.

Yea...I'm in region 3 and if its not going to be region-free (or at least in various regions) then I'm going to miss out this great story! :(

Seriously though,

It's a hot, dry day in a tiny village just out of reach of the Keep in the Borderlands. A handful of peasant farmers are going about their daily routine, tilling dusty, clay-like fields hoping for rain.

Meanwhile, 100 or so yards out of the village proper 4 teenagers are hiding from their farmer-parents and chores, splashing in the water-hole.

Then hordes of orcs and ogres charge down to the village to begin slaughtering the women, raping the men and burning the village. The peasants grab some pitch forks, wood-chopping axes and the farming polearm to try to fight off the raiders but it all seems hopeless.

The teenagers frantically put their clothes back on and begin to charge to their families and home. But arrive too late. They grab a few weapons from the bodies of orcs and try to fight, only to flee from overwhelming numbers all too soon. Hiding in the hills minutes later, bruised and bloody they vow to follow the raiders and seek revenge.

The 4 teenagers, peasant farmers yesterday, angry adventurers today, follow the raiders deep in the wilderness to their cavern stronghold. Once inside they go area by area, quietly killing as they go. As one fight gets particularly messy one of the teenagers gets slashed across the back, blood spewing everywhere. Another has her leg smashed and is bleeding from a head wound.

Then, one of the teens swings the sword he took from an orc only hours earlier and screems

HEALING SURGE ACTIVATE! and all four teens' wounds are healed.

The end.

-W. E. Ray

Has it shipped? Did I miss the boat???!! :O

I need Xanesha!!!!!!

When will this cool piece be back in stock??!!!??? I can't breath...need skinsaw man!!! Help!!!!!!!!!!!

Any dates on when these really super cool minis are back in stock?? Paizo dudes and duchesses? Help?

mousey wrote:

Anyway, what's your definition of RP? Maybe we're going around in circles cos our definition differs :)

My definition of roleplaying is pretending to be someone else.

A diff between 3rd ed and 4th ed is at-will abilities (its these differences that define 4th ed right?). Does at-will ability help you to pretend to be someone else? If so, then for you (bold and underline the words "for you") 4th ed supports RP.

But what is my case thus far? Does it gravitate towards RP? Will a new player feel that at-will abilities help him to RP or to give him more power to achieve something? Why? Conversely, does the absence of at-will abilities restrict/reduce your RP? If not, how can it support RP?

Anyway, there's no end to this. Let's just say that rules are there to define our RP. Too little and its mayhem and too much it becomes focused on the rules and players become powerplaying (PP) instead of roleplaying (RP).

mousey wrote:

That's when we explore the intent of 4th ed...is it there to support RP or to do a cover up for a lack of RP?

All roleplaying games lack roleplaying - roleplaying is all in the use of the game and not in the game itself.

Anyway, what's your definition of RP? Maybe we're going around in circles cos our definition differs :)

So I guess how 4th Ed is perceived is every person's medicine or poison to RP. I've no issue with that :)

To some, more definition is good. To others, indiana jones didn't have cleave nor at-will magic missile but its always high adventure for him (in the temple of doom, at one stage, he didn't even have his trusty whip and gun) through his ingenuity and luck (a possible 5th ed stat?)

example 2 is more 4th ed and some loves it. No prob. Example 3 is neither 2nd, 3rd nor 4th. The rules supported RP when its required. Not intrusive but supportive.

WoTC publicised reasons for 4th ed is to fix broken rules, streamline gameplay, balance up play across all levels (hence there's always some spells for a 1st level wizard to cast) and add more oomph into play.

So does RP has a place in 4th ed? The only thing RP needs is "pretend"/"imagine" and any rule system is there to support it but not to replace it. So what do I think about 4th ed and RP? I believe that the 4th Ed rules does not gravitate or lean towards RP. It seeks to use flashy powers to replace it or to cover up the lack of it.

So is it bad? Like what CWM said, some people love it. I've no quarrel with that.

4th Ed is neither bad nor broken (as far as I know now...). It just doesn't solve RP from the move.

mousey wrote:

Neither do i dispute that CWM...WoTC do what it needs to do and hence 4th ED. It's not bad and its not broken (thus far based on my limited play and knowledge after reading it extensively) but it doesn't solve the RP issue.

Question of this thread: Why do you think RP has no place in 4th Ed?

My answer: To clarify, its not a bad edition; kinda fun but it doesn't advocate RP. Players can still do RP (remember my motto, the only rule required for RP is "Pretend..." or imagine) but the rules do not gravitate towards RP.

Envy them? They're just making a living...just like in every industry of work :)

Based on your definition mousey, I'm not sure I'd say any edition of DnD (that I'm familiar with) really supported RPing. Which, of course, is a claim that many people hold to.

Is that close to your claim?

Anything can support RP. All you need is pretend/imagine, tell a story.

I started RP with only teddy bears and dolls and RP with my younger bro even before D&D (i guess nearly all kids can do that :>)

D&D was made to define a rule system for RP (hence its a RPG). So is D&D any good at it in all its incarnations? I guess it really depends on the designers intent...if it supports RP, then i guess it should be fine but if its there to replace the lack of RP, well then the thread speaks for itself.

Of course I can still tell a good story with 4th ed rules; what's to stop me right? I'm the player. I'm alive and the book is dead. The thread's question is whether RP has a place in 4th ed. That's when we explore the intent of 4th ed...is it there to support RP or to do a cover up for a lack of RP?

mousey,

Some people actually like to play hack'n'slash. I do not find it to suit my personal tastes and I won't slight those that enjoy it. WotC has to deal with that reality as well. They can't take D&D and make it the Adventure of Baron Munchhausen.

WotC is trying to design a version of D&D that will appeal to all of the people that play it. I do not envy them in that regard.

Question of this thread: Why do you think RP has no place in 4th Ed?

My answer: To clarify, its not a bad edition; kinda fun but it doesn't advocate RP. Players can still do RP (remember my motto, the only rule required for RP is "Pretend..." or imagine) but the rules do not gravitate towards RP.

Envy them? They're just making a living...just like in every industry of work...they're not doing it out of goodwill dude :)

mousey wrote:

4th Ed is talking about D&D being a RP game (and spent a few pages on it) but instead advocates power...and more power.

And the players need it. My group thought their characters were "too powerful" when we started H1 and then they got the living crap kicked out of them by a handful of kobolds.

Power is relative. Yes a 4e PC seems more powerful and yet they seem to die just as easily as their 3e analogs.

And power does not prevent roleplaying.

CWM, 4th ed is not bad nor broken (i had said it before) but this thread is about RP in 4th ED...it can exist (depends really on players if they wanted to) in 4th ED but this edition doesn't lean towards it. WoTC looks at the problems of pen-and-paper RPG and felt that too few people are able to RP. So how to compensate for it? Give the game system more power. Emulate a console or PC game...

The audience of pen-&-paper gaming is shrinking as people are not inclined towards RP. So how to entrall? Give it more power and make it more accessible and more bells and whistles and more flashes...more HPs more levels....more this and that...RP? Did it try to resolve the RP issue?

mousey wrote:

Bleach, what is roleplaying?...

To me, roleplaying is taking on the life of a character. Questions that ask "How do you respond to X" help a person to know their character.

That to me is roleplaying. Saying "I have skill points in Craft" don't indicate roleplaying (otherwise you're basically saying that if you pick a fighter, you're not intersting in roleplaying)

For example, the paragraps you listed of the dwarf I thought were brilliant since to a new player, it gives you a clear idea as to what not only the expected dwarf acts like but also what an OUTCAST dwarf (said dwarf can be the one that has killed an elder etc...)

Now here's two questions.

In the 3E PHB, exactly what section/mechanic actually encourages roleplaying but more imprtanty, waht do YOU consider rolelaying?

Btw, is your knowledge limited to 3E and only D&D? Have you played 1st Ed? 2nd Ed? Exalted? Weapons of the Gods? Qin? Warhammer RPG?

Do you know that in Exalted there's such things as penalties? Likewise in Qin?

What were the reasons that WoTC gave for revamping to 4th Ed? Better RP?

Anyway, my earlier post mentioned, the only rule that I need to RP is "Pretend..." It's like acting and I need not act the most powerful and successful to be a good actor/actress but the rules gravitate towards the character to be more powerful (better than an average person...), more successful and all the bells and whistles.

Not that it isn't any good (please reread my earlier postings) but it ain't practising what it is trying to preach.

A question: Why is it so bad that a wizard has limited spells during low level? Does the game grind to a stop if the wizard can't cast any more spells? The player doesn't know what else to do?

Why does the fighter need more at-will abilities to have a fun and illustrative fight? Is it because the player cannot properly describe a fight and hence it devolves into a typical hack-&-slash? Lacking imagination?

DM: Before you stands a savage troll barring your entry to the cathedral whereby the priestess is being ravaged by a mad noble. What will you do?
Player 1: Attack!
Player 2: Oops! My wizard is out of spells. Guess I have to stand back and watch.
DM: Okie, roll your dies
/*Hack and slash....hack and slash*/
DM: Okie, the troll falls dead after 10 rounds of battle.
Player 1: Alright! Troll falls to my mighty dice rolling!
Player 2: /*Stiffling a yawn*/ Okie, let's go; lead and I'll follow.

So what did the WoTC people do to rectify this? Add more powers and at-will abilities

DM: Before you stands a savage troll barring your entry to the cathedral whereby the priestess is being ravaged by a mad noble. What will you do?
Player 1: Attack with cleave!
Player 2: Attack with unlimited magic missile!
DM: Okie, roll your dies
/*Next round*/
Player 1: Not dead yet? Ok! Attack with reaping strike!
Player 2: Use thunderwave to try to push the troll over the bridge! Hahaha....
/*Hack and slash....hack and slash in a different manner*/
DM: Okie, the troll falls dead after 10 rounds of battle.
Player 1: Alright! Troll falls to my mighty dice rolling!
Player 2: And mine too!!

How about this?

DM: Before you stands a savage troll barring your entry to the cathedral whereby the priestess is being ravaged by a mad noble. What will you do?
Player 1: I draw my sword to attack! Elaine, no time to waste! Our prietess is being violated by that evil fiend!
Player 2: Wait Roy! I know you love her but heading in recklessly will be suicidal! You can't hurt the troll enough to slay it. My mentor once told me the troll is able to mend its wound!
Player 1: No time for that! Stay with me or get out of my way!
Player 2: D@mn! I'm out of spells!
DM: Okie, roll your dies
/*Next round*/
Player 1: Gasping...blood oozing from various wounds...i can't last much longer and the troll had healed all its wounds!
Player 2: What can i do? Think! Well, we don't need to kill it; just need to get it out of the way. DM, I'm grabbing the rope from my bag, skirting around the melee fight between Roy and the troll and try to entangle the troll's legs and make it fall over the bridge!
DM: Okie, give it a shot!
/* internally, DM felt that this is a good approach to solving the battle and wonderful RP involved. The god (or dm) is smiling and is fated to be successful */
DM: Roll your d20 adding your dex bonus. The DC is 10 only as the troll isn't paying you any attention
Success!
DM: Okie, the rope caught around the legs of the troll and it stumbled, tottering at the end of the bridge trying to regain its footing or otherwise falling 100 feet into the crevasse.
Player 1: Die! DM, Roy, in his frenzy, rushes forward to give the troll a shaft!
DM: In your mad rush, the troll outstretched arms bearhugged Roy in an embrace of death!
Player 2: Noooo!!
Player 1: Can I struggle out?
DM: Try to pit your strength against the troll
/* Die rolls...failed */
DM: Sorry, the troll had a grip of steel and you're unable to break free...
Player 1: Sigh...no worries. Roy screamed at the top of his voice and stabs his sword downwards into the troll's eye "Die you fiend!" Falling, Roy looked over to Elaine and pleaded "Save her..." and disappears over the edge.
Player 2: I swear to the gods....I will....

Well? 4th Ed can also do this? Right. I agree but does it encourage this? How does it solve the hack & slash problem? What is it trying to emulate? MMORPG? No spells equate boring game? Fighter boring as it can only hack and then slash?

Sigh....

Tatterdemalion wrote:

I've said it many times, and others have also: 4e facilitates a different style of play than do earlier versions. Why is this so hard for many to admit?

I guess I just don't really see the stylistic difference that you see. Perhaps 4e is a bit more cinematic but not by much. I guess I would be more inclined to agree with you if you (or anyone) could help me understand what you are seeing that I am not.

The only difference I do se is that you can't create an intentionally weak PC. I have never understood why it was more a more "genuine" roleplay experience to play a PC that the party would then need to carry through every combat encounter.

To me roleplaying is what you do with the character regardless of its strengths or weaknesses.

4th Ed is talking about D&D being a RP game (and spent a few pages on it) but instead advocates power...and more power.

PS: I mean overall the rules ain't that bad and still possible for a good game but nature of it is different. Unless the player had been a experienced RPG gamer, the game will become another MTG or DDM.

mousey wrote:

Bleach wrote:

My issue with 4E not promoting roleplaying is that so many people ignore the 1st 2 chapters of the 4E PHB (the general comment seems to be for many critics "waste of paper, things people everyone knows already")

Yet to me, these ARE the essential building blocks for making a good roleplayer. Asking the player to think about questions such as "How does your character react to this situation" etc are all more likely IMO to actually encourage roleplaying.

I've never really equated the Profession/Craft skills as "roleplaying skills" but accounting skills.

I've bought the gift set of 4th ed and had read through the PH and DMG and most likely to start on it in parallel with my 3.5 stuff (actually, I also run AD&D too).

However, 4th Ed is like asking you to drive with character and style regardless of what car you own but only giving you a purely powered car.

Ok, I'm dumb...what does this analogy actually mean?

And again, why is something like asking the player to answer
"How assertive are you at a decision point" not conduicive to roleplaying yet skills like Profession (BasketWeaving) are?

Example:
In page 36, Play a dwarf if you want...
* to be tough, gruff, and strong as bedrock
* to bring glory to your ancestors or serve as your god's right hand
* to be able to take as much punishment as you dish out
* to be a member of a race that favors the paladin, cleric and fighter classes.

An excerpt from page 37 of PHB:
"...Dwarves believe in the importance of clan ties.....deeply respect their elders....dwarves seek guidance and protection from the gods..Dwarves never forget their enemies,...Dwarves harbor a fierce hatred for orcs....Dwarves despise giants and titans.....To a dwarf, it is a gift and mark of deep respect to stand beside an ally in battle...."

What does these two pages of the dwarf description contain?

Bleach, what is roleplaying? All powerful? Heroes? Paragon? Epic proportion?

4th Ed advocates roleplaying but what kind?

Read the short paragraph in page 18 again...yet what does the rules point toward?

Ever play a one-arm warrior? A blind rogue? Dwarf with phobia of the underground? Character who makes the wrong decision or freeze up during a battle? A drunken ex-paladin?

4th ed is not bad...just a different game altogether but only qualm is whether it is what it is trying to advocate...

My issue with 4E not promoting roleplaying is that so many people ignore the 1st 2 chapters of the 4E PHB (the general comment seems to be for many critics "waste of paper, things people everyone knows already")

Yet to me, these ARE the essential building blocks for making a good roleplayer. Asking the player to think about questions such as "How does your character react to this situation" etc are all more likely IMO to actually encourage roleplaying.

I've never really equated the Profession/Craft skills as "roleplaying skills" but accounting skills.

However, 4th Ed is like asking you to drive with character and style regardless of what car you own but only giving you a purely powered car.

Allow me to add my two cents worth:

A system doesn't make or break RP. A single rule "pretend you are.." is sufficient for any RP (if you're a good rp gamer).

However, 4th Ed does somewhat leans toward powerplay instead of roleplay. It needs to spell out every rule, make every character useful and X vs Y = success or fail...etc

I read some postings and people are critizing that bard sucks and hence not played and hence poor roleplay...hence 4.0 better than 3.5...sigh.

Give me a bard and I'll show you what is roleplay.

Even if my mage at level 1 cannot cast any more spells (only 1 level one spell and a few level 0), I can still roleplay and make the game more "real" and enjoyable...that's roleplaying! Not at-will powers at my beck and call! Usefulness doesn't warrant good roleplaying...think Raistlin in "Dragons of Autumn Twilight"....a featherfall and sleep and his rasping away...

Possibly those gamers who gravitate toward 4th ed isn't wrong except that they are already good roleplayers but 4th ed without proper guidance for new gamers will turn them into powerplayers.

Take for example: Do you see any MTG players roleplaying out a game? That's Hasbro.

Another example:
A recent outing at a local gaming store and I overheard a few gamers (and one RPGA DM to boot) talking about taking this feat and that (in 3.5 D&D)...so I popped a question (actually one leads to another), "shouldn't some feat require roleplay or a sort of quest to obtain instead of opening up the rulebook and choosing it? Or the character can learn it from a retired beggar who once is a mighty warrior?" What I got was a few shocked looks and open mouth?

My next question (after a few exchanges of opinions) was "can a character be allowed to perish if it lends to good roleplaying and the player is duly rewarded thereafter with another character with more abilities or something? I got another set of aghasted looks...sigh

So RP in 4th ED? It's not the rules but the players but the rules will attract that sort of play.

Actually, I don't think D&D is costly as compared to a electronic gaming genre.

I will not say about the situation now (as I can definitely afford it and sort of abuse my spending) but twenty years ago, all I had was the red basic box set, a dice set (those that you had to write the numbers on), paper and pencil.

Total cost = $39.90 (I think that's what it cost then). It took me at least over 2 months to save up the money (meanwhile "borrowing" from my friend's elder brother)

This in itself was sufficient to accrue months of fun between myself and friends (a group of 9). Subsequently, I remembered on that same year, we pooled our money and book the expert set and at least 2 game modules (second hand).

What I believe is we're living in an age of extravagant spending on our hobby. Just like the electronic version of gaming, if that gamer also spent extravagantly (gaming mouse, high resolution monitor, improved CPU, RAM, graphic card, heatsink, headset,...etc), it will be definitely much much more than our pen-and-paper genre :)