Action vs. actions

[mistrlittlejeans]

Here is my response to Chatty DM's statement (see below).

"This is an excellent post, and as other posters have already said, it summarizes a lot of (my personal) feelings out there today. I do have one point of contention regarding “It (4e) is, bar none, the best heroic fantasy action roleplaying game out there.” I respectfully disagree with you here, but then again you’ve played a lot more RPGs than I good sir, hence the “respectfully” My only point is that I think ACTION is a big part of that statement, and that is one thing I’ve never been comfortable with regarding 4e. I think ACTION depends on the perspective of the players. 4e definitely wins out in my experience insofar as it gives the players the most options during their turn which equates to taking several actions (standard, move, minor, action point, powers that grant extra “actions” like a basic attack, etc.). However, I think that is distinct from a higher ACTION – the context in which the players are fighting, running, chasing, etc. In this regard, I think 4e performs poorly compared to other games.

Then again, I’m just one of those guys that has realized his dissatisfaction with 4e and is looking for other RPGs to fill his shelf."

Here is Chatty's response: mistrlittlejeans: That particular statement was definitively one that wasn’t backed by science, but based on my personal experience. I won’t argue our different definition of Action and I’ll encourage you in your quest of finding the game that meets your needs.

To elaborate a bit further, I think my issue with 4e is that the fluidity of play required to create cinematic action doesn't arise organically in 4e; IMO the mechanics of the system, the presentation (oh God the presentation!), and the malignant tumor of errata innately repress the building of cinematic action in the game.

[anarkeith]

Nate,

I think I understand your complaints about 4e better now. To summarize: You feel that to simulate cinematic action is difficult using 4e mechanics because of the complexity of those mechanics and how they are implemented. Thus many action options do not equal a lot of action.

I find myself wondering if there is a point at which deep familiarity with one's character and the system would result in more fluid play. Here's why I wonder that: I create art with computers. I work with a lot of artists who use computers. Many of those artists hated computers when they were first introduced to them. They struggled trying to create art because they didn't have enough familiarity with computers and graphics software. It took time for them to learn the new mechanics well enough that they could create art in uninhibited ways again.

Obviously a game is a different kettle of fish. And why would one be motivated to spend time working towards deep mastery, when more intuitive options may be available? That's the player's choice obviously. There are a lot of exciting options out there depending on what type of roleplaying you prefer. Game in hand, the next step is finding a group of people who want to play it with you.

[djkester]

This made me think back to my first email about 4e when this discussion first started coming up.

6. Effectiveness vs effect. D&D 4e is all about effectiveness and little about effect. Does anyone every say, Fucking Fireball anymore. No they say, "for my standard I do a fire ball, and then I move, and then I use a minor to draw my dagger." Sure the turn is effective but the effect of the action is lost. The story is lost. I mean only a few times in the past 18 months can I actually recall the effect my character had in a fight. And nearly all of them are standard actions. If you want to make healing not an effect then why not just make it free. Oh i heal you... and then I fucking fireball the dragon in the face. YEAH BABY!!! This healing is a minor action came out of the backlash from MMORPGs. Where some characters like my WoW Priest were just heal bots. D&D and a few other MMORPGS developed in the 2006-2008 time frame tried to eliminate this effect in RPGs by making healing something of a side effect.

THe problem with systems where the effectiveness is valued over effect is that the Heroic action is lost. For example, in Aaron's campaign we entered in a large chamber where resided the Queen Giant Ant. The effective thing to do was to stay to one side and form a line. But the Heroic action was to run across the room and dig for an NPC who had just gotten covered in a cave in.

Now DnD 4e didn't do anything per see to make this moment more or less awesome. The problem IMO is that the game system is to "designed" to much thought has been done in figuring out what can and can't happen in a single turn.

In AD&D the rule was pretty simple. You have six seconds, during that time you can make one "effective" attack. It wasn't meant to be precise it was supposed to be abstracted.

The problem is that abstractions take away from realistic action if they are imposed as "rules" or worse in some systems imposed as "reality."

As we continue to discuss this I'm becoming more and more clear about what is missing from my perspective in the games I've been playing.

[anarkeith]

Dec 19, 2010 15:32:01 GMT -5 djkester said:

The effective thing to do was to stay to one side and form a line. But the Heroic action was to run across the room and dig for an NPC who had just gotten covered in a cave in.

Now DnD 4e didn't do anything per see to make this moment more or less awesome. The problem IMO is that the game system is to "designed" to much thought has been done in figuring out what can and can't happen in a single turn.

But there is nothing that explicitly prevents you from taking the heroic action, correct?

That's where I struggle with trying to decide what is wrong with 4e. Just because the rules or power descriptions describe an action, does not mean you as a player are limited to that action. It's up to the player to present an alternative action to the DM, and for the DM to adjudicate that action in terms of game mechanics, or a facsimile thereof.

[djkester]

Keith,

agreed. I do not think the rules stop from you doing anything. I just realized that they world the present can feel this way.

to be fare to 4e my gripes are not about the game play necissarily. I actually have a very fun time everytime I play 4e. Just like i do when i watch LoTR again. Its not my perfect vision of a system but its pure fun none the less.

[1]

@keith - Yeah, you nailed it on the head.

@keith and Dave - I agree with both of you guys that 4e doesn't prevent you from taking the Heroic Action... after all, I was playing the warlord that ran across the room, leaving his party behind and putting himself at terrible risk from the giant ants, to save his old friend from certain death The friend was no more than an NPC at that point and could quite possibly have had no importance to the story, BUT he was important for my character's story. I digress...

Like I said, in 4e you can always take the heroic action. In fact some powers even exemplify this (Warlord's Fearless Rescue ((best Daily IMO))). However, Dave as you suggested, many mechanics do not encourage heroic action. I guess that is okay - not every character has to be a hero.

[mistrlittlejeans]

That last post was from me by the way

[anarkeith]

In looking at ways to encourage cinematic action by the PC, that don't in turn require a lot of actions by the player, I wonder if there is some menu of basic combat actions that would fit the bill for most players. For example, I got a collection of house rules from this blog that included these combat maneuvers:

Disarm
Knock Down
Push Back
Switch Positions
Slip Past

The mechanic for how these were implemented was,

“Tell me what you want to do to your opponent before you roll to hit. A critical means that happens, a normal hit means your foe decides whether to let that happen or take damage instead.”

[mistrlittlejeans]

This is really cool. I was thinking of something similar coupled with basic attacks for melee classes for 4e. My thought was to have the player roll a "condition" die on a critical, ala the dragon die from DARPG. I like the list you found though too. Actions are always more heroic than conditions.

[anarkeith]

Dec 23, 2010 8:24:27 GMT -5 mistrlittlejeans said:

My thought was to have the player roll a "condition" die on a critical, ala the dragon die from DARPG.

Nate, I love the Dragon Die from DA. But one of the things I'm looking at is a way to map the available powers in 4e to gain the option for actions or extra damage. For example, on a certain roll (either of the to-hit die, or a separate die) a player could opt for an heroic action or effect (condition), or additional damage.

In addition to that, I'm looking at making the "menu" from which these actions are chosen to be class-specific. (e.g., the fighter can disarm, knock back, or other physical effect; the rogue can gain positional advantage; and a ranger might inflict mobility restrictions.)