| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
 Posted - 09 Nov 2011 : 05:46:05
|
Was reading Mr. Cook's new weekly article and I was loving the idea of simplifying the game. I don't play 4th edition, and barely have my head around the basic rules for 3rd edition. Maybe I'm getting old, but it all seems so overwhelming to learn. I remember back in the day the only thing my DM used during 2nd edition days were the saving throws and maybe turn undead page from the DMG.
Guess I kind of wandered off point there, anyways, Monte Cook explains what if the game was able to be played with just the core rules, race, stats class etc. If you want to add feats or skills/proficiencies it's all optional as a form of customization. So really you could run games that are similar to 2nd, 3rd, or 4th edition if i understood it right.
What's everyone else think about that? I think I kind of like that idea, thought maybe it's just my selfish wish to have a modified 2E reinstated. ;)
original source link of his article: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20111108
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4494 Posts |
Posted - 09 Nov 2011 : 13:00:26
|
After having read it I'm just not so sure. I can understand the elegance of simplicity and the ease of character creation which usually helps games start much faster. Without TONS of options and sub-rules to learn and understand translates to faster game-play. Fighters aren't worried about specific feats/powers during each and every round, wizards don't have to feel pressured into looking into each and every supplement for spells and so on.
Yet many of those options are things I feel 90% of gamers are going to incorporate into their game. The loads of options is what makes cuztomization that much more fun and exciting to build characters (even if it's just for the fun of making new characters). Then you run into different groups using different options and thats going to get confusing. It's like a TON of house-rules and each group adding in their own variant of them based on what they like in their game. I'm all for house-rules if they make the game better but their usually only a few instead of whole sub-systems being added. It sounds like no one will be on the same page IMO. At least with each edition change, us as gamers know the rules each other is going by when we say "I play 4th, how does the Serpent's Strike power work" or "I play 3rd, what are the benefits to grapple when I grow bigger from Enlarge Person". If all of this is under the same edition, I think it'll be harder for people to campartmentalize the sub-systems of the edition.
An additional concern is how these options will factor into fighting monsters and if it'll require Base, Advanced, and Exceptional monsters to take on multiple variants of PCs in the game system. Will fighting a Manticore with my 1st level Basic Fighter (using Basic rules) be the same as if I were to play a Fighter with proficiencies, skills, feats, and martial powers and if not, how will a DM handle simple vs. complex monsters and will it add on LOADS of time if the group likes running lots of options |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
 |
|
|
Rils
Learned Scribe
USA
108 Posts |
Posted - 09 Nov 2011 : 17:44:22
|
I'm not a huge fan of modularization either. If I want to play 2e, I'll just play 2e. I want 4e, I'll play 4e.
That said, there are some intersting ideas floating around the WotC boards that kind of compromise 3e and 4e: retain the 4e "powers", but organize them more like the 3e spell domains/schools. Every power, whether arcane, martial, whatever, gets assigned to a thematic grouping. Each class then has access to particular groupings from which they can pick their powers. The thematic leanings of the groupings from which you pick powers then defines the "feel" of the class. I dunno, it's an interesting idea, though I'm sure it has its quirks like anything.
These articles by Mearls/Cook make me wonder just where exactly things are headed... |
Dugmaren Brightmantle is my homey. |
|
|
|
Rhewtani
Senior Scribe
USA
508 Posts |
Posted - 09 Nov 2011 : 19:28:14
|
| I think a core problem is when you use the same system for everything, which seems to me to be what 4E is about. When a fighter power and a wizard power are only really different by the "flavor text," I think the depth of the game suffers. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4494 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 04:20:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rhewtani
I think a core problem is when you use the same system for everything, which seems to me to be what 4E is about. When a fighter power and a wizard power are only really different by the "flavor text," I think the depth of the game suffers.
Except it's only the same in appearance (literally, with the color codes and all). Yet when you get down to the nitty-gritty, things change wholesale. Ignoring Power Sources (arcane, divine, martial, psionic, shadow, primal, etc.) and going to the main meat of any power you have Keywords which are very very important. They decide what the power does. Lightning, Thunder, Fire, Radiant, Reliable, Zone, Conjuration, Summoning, and the list goes on and they all provide benefits to specific things. Fighters, for one, have very few elements on their powers. They're all usually Martial, Weapon, and sometimes Reliable (meaning a miss doens't use the power). Wizards gain a whole slew of cool, unique, and varying effects based on what spell they feel like selecting.
From there you have targets and going along the Fighter vs. Wizard comparions, Wizards can target multiple creatures at will with various spells in addition to single targets, walls, zones, conjurations mean-while fighters can target.....well 1 or two (if they're adjacent), use Daily powers to make multiple attacks against adjacent enemies, and mark creatures.
The fundamental differences are astounding between the two classes as are the power's effects. Many wizards powers allow them to shift, change, or alter the position of enemies on the battlefield. So a Monster who just escapes your nice Wall of Fire is then thrown back into it or maybe they're shoved off a cliff or knocked prone. Fighters, OTOH, get to push 1 creature if they hit them or possible damage two creatures that are standing right next to each other.
Even the damage expressions change as Fighter weapons all have varying die such as 2d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d12, 2d6 and when a Power states 3{W} with a 2d6 weapon, it's dealing 6d6 for that attack. Wizards powers, however, are static and don't change regardless of what implement they're using so their Burning Hands is always going to deal 2d6 + Int. mod fire damage, period.
I can understand why people can see the powers as being very similar, uniform, and such because they work on the same scale. The classes all get At-Wills, Encounter, Dailies and the damage expressions might be similar but there is just so much more to it than that. It also doesn't help that the format is the same throughout the Edition so Fighter powers and Warlock spells and Cleric prayers look identical. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 20:25:16
|
Haven't read it yet - just clicked on the link.
Before I make any other comment, I have to give high praise keeping stuff like this on the free portion of the site. 
Burying all their best goodies on the pay-side only allows their customers to read them, which does nothing to grow the IP. I've used the 'drug dealer' analogy before, but I thibk it bears repeating:
You want folks to buy your crack, you have to get them hooked first.
Non-customers don't spend money on your product - you want 'em, you gotta 'dangle the carrot'.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4703 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 21:32:04
|
*Blink* Roll stats in order was a bad thing?
As far as free articles, ones like that clearly will not get me addicted. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36989 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 21:44:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
*Blink* Roll stats in order was a bad thing?
I don't believe I've ever had to roll them in order... That can be quite limiting, so yeah, I'd call that bad. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4703 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 22:10:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
*Blink* Roll stats in order was a bad thing?
I don't believe I've ever had to roll them in order... That can be quite limiting, so yeah, I'd call that bad.
Well I suppose it depends on how you look at it. Character history is what results in stats. With D&D, for the most part, not having child stats - what you end up with an adult, that is Strong, Wise, and so on. Stats in order let you select that class you wanted to select, back story mattered less of course. I will grant that some DMs could have abused their powers, requiring players to play lower then average Stat.
Stats are the genes of a character and as such it indeed should be random, that is stats in order. The good DM always allowed the player to reroll if stats were too low OR the player did not want to play a viable class based on the rolls.
It was quicker, then saying I want to roll up a wise farmer that will become a thief and adjust dice to make that most possible.A player that decides career path based on arranging stats scares me more then a player. In my view each character starts with their abilities, does the best with them. Their future should not be planned by player or DM. Some will succeed, some will fail.
Oh roll and place dice were wanted does make character creation quicker, but it in some ways also is not real. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
896 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 22:18:41
|
| I agree (with Wooly), rolling stats in order can easily make the character you had in mind unplayable. It's not about min-maxing, if you want to play a mage, you won't be able to if you rolled 8 on INT, even if you rolled 18 everywhere else. In that case you'd probably switch to a fighter or something, and THAT is optimising (something many here frown upon). |
Edited by - Kilvan on 10 Nov 2011 22:23:40 |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
896 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 22:47:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
In my view each character starts with their abilities, does the best with them. Their future should not be planned by player or DM. Some will succeed, some will fail.
Oh roll and place dice were wanted does make character creation quicker, but it in some ways also is not real.
You seem to take realism in character creation extremely seriously. I guess I'm more permissive as a DM because I just want everyone to have fun with the character they had in mind next, in some cases for a few years! I'm not saying fun is not your priority, I just don't give realism that much importance in a fantasy game as you do. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36989 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 22:52:45
|
Indeed. Allowing a player to assign his rolls as he or she wants gives a better chance of getting a desired PC, and of having a balanced party. Not a lot you can do with an 18 Constitution and 9s and 10s elsewhere.
I had to play once with rolling in order... I wound up with a very sub-par fighter that I really didn't like. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 10 Nov 2011 22:53:50 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4703 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 23:11:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kilvan
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
In my view each character starts with their abilities, does the best with them. Their future should not be planned by player or DM. Some will succeed, some will fail.
Oh roll and place dice were wanted does make character creation quicker, but it in some ways also is not real.
You seem to take realism in character creation extremely seriously. I guess I'm more permissive as a DM because I just want everyone to have fun with the character they had in mind next, in some cases for a few years! I'm not saying fun is not your priority, I just don't give realism that much importance in a fantasy game as you do.
Oh I am not that extreme and roll in order is not in all games. I do take the game as a game, fun for all. I also realize for some reason many players refuse cleric. Stats in order starts the path of sometimes needed characters. Allowing all players to adjust stats to suit their goal could result in 5 fighters and no magic users.
When one looks at role play, one has to play their role. Not everyone can be leading man. In fact D&D is all about team building of classes working together bring various skill together to accomplish a quest.
Yes it is my view that Min/Max is bad in many games. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36989 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 00:11:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Oh I am not that extreme and roll in order is not in all games. I do take the game as a game, fun for all. I also realize for some reason many players refuse cleric. Stats in order starts the path of sometimes needed characters. Allowing all players to adjust stats to suit their goal could result in 5 fighters and no magic users.
When one looks at role play, one has to play their role. Not everyone can be leading man. In fact D&D is all about team building of classes working together bring various skill together to accomplish a quest.
Yes it is my view that Min/Max is bad in many games.
Stats in order could also result in 5 fighters and no magic users. Letting people pick their own stats doesn't make them all want to be the leading man, but it does let them play what they want.
Heck, I've only once been the leading man in D&D, and only once have I had to play stats in order -- and those were separate events.
It's perfectly acceptable DM fiat to say the players have to form a balanced party -- and you're more likely to get a balanced party with choosing stats than you are with stats in order. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 11 Nov 2011 00:12:45 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4703 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 00:29:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Stats in order could also result in 5 fighters and no magic users. Letting people pick their own stats doesn't make them all want to be the leading man, but it does let them play what they want.
Do you want to see the odds of that occurring? Stats in order never force a player, reroll stat should always be possible, sometimes needed.
When you act, you do not always get the role you want. I was a bell once, missed getting being the bridge. |
"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
896 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 02:00:17
|
| I dunno, being forced into a class I didn't want doesn't seem fun. It's not about acting, it's about playing a game. But if it works in your games, I could understand that if every players don't mind for a specific class, it could work. Personnaly, I think our next set of characters won't even roll for the stats, we'll use the 32 points system. Last time one player got three 18s. It wasn't game-breaking or anything, but we all agreed that a balanced party is more fun for everyone. We'll at least try it. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36989 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 04:49:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Stats in order could also result in 5 fighters and no magic users. Letting people pick their own stats doesn't make them all want to be the leading man, but it does let them play what they want.
Do you want to see the odds of that occurring? Stats in order never force a player, reroll stat should always be possible, sometimes needed.
When you act, you do not always get the role you want. I was a bell once, missed getting being the bridge.
So you're cool with someone not being able to play what he wants because he rolled 18 too early?
And if I roll 5 9s or lower and a single 17, where that 17 falls pretty much forces the choice of class -- assuming it's not in Constitution, in which case the PC is basically cannon fodder.
If rerolling stats is acceptable, why isn't arranging stats to suit also acceptable?
The one time I had to roll stats in order, we wound up with an unbalanced party and no one getting to play what they wanted. And that campaign petered out very quickly, because no one cared about the characters they were forced to play.
When I roll up a new character, I have the concept in mind that I want, and I arrange the dice to suit the concept. I do not see how having something forced on me is better. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 11 Nov 2011 04:53:08 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4494 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 12:23:23
|
I've done the Roll Stats in order but I can't say the style was fun or exciting. Sure, people are sort of "shoe horned" into playing a specific class but in other campaigns, I've had little to no problems getting people to make a balanced party. There's usually one or two that liked playing the Cleric, a few more that liked playing Arcane casters, and a few more that liked playing Combat-oriented characters.
Stats rolled in order works a bit better "IF" you allow a (4E) Feat called Melee Training which allows you to use another ability score for melee attacks except Strength though you only apply 1/2 your modifier to damage rolls from the new stat. So a Fighter with 11 Str but Con 18 could take Melee Training (Con) and get the full-bonus for attacks yet only deals +2 on their damage rolls. Not a bad trade-off IMO.
|
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36989 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 18:05:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I've done the Roll Stats in order but I can't say the style was fun or exciting. Sure, people are sort of "shoe horned" into playing a specific class but in other campaigns, I've had little to no problems getting people to make a balanced party. There's usually one or two that liked playing the Cleric, a few more that liked playing Arcane casters, and a few more that liked playing Combat-oriented characters.
Stats rolled in order works a bit better "IF" you allow a (4E) Feat called Melee Training which allows you to use another ability score for melee attacks except Strength though you only apply 1/2 your modifier to damage rolls from the new stat. So a Fighter with 11 Str but Con 18 could take Melee Training (Con) and get the full-bonus for attacks yet only deals +2 on their damage rolls. Not a bad trade-off IMO.
So because he's healthy, he can attack as well as his stronger buddy?  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4494 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 18:53:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Stats rolled in order works a bit better "IF" you allow a (4E) Feat called Melee Training which allows you to use another ability score for melee attacks except Strength though you only apply 1/2 your modifier to damage rolls from the new stat. So a Fighter with 11 Str but Con 18 could take Melee Training (Con) and get the full-bonus for attacks yet only deals +2 on their damage rolls. Not a bad trade-off IMO.
So because he's healthy, he can attack as well as his stronger buddy?
That's a pretty narrow view of how real-world vs. game rules would be applied. The idea of being stronger equating to a better fighter really doesn't make sense. A guy who's extreamly fit, healthy, and has great "core" strength though maybe not "explosive" strength is deterred via the rules when it comes to fighting. Yet for someone who just hits heavy weights all day long and has good muscle-mass but gets winded after running 3/4 a mile is perfectly fine with weapon attacks??
Strength comes in when you actually connect with an attack and dealing damage as your strength can put more pressure into the strike, but not really the attack itself. That is shown with this feat, because the other Ability score is only adding 1/2 it's modifier into damage. Another example would be someone who adds Intelligence instead of Strength to their melee attacks. This sorta translates to the "thinking" fighter, plotting strikes, counters, and feints to get those attacks through the target's defenses yet their pitiful strength score won't add much more damage than the edge of their blade.
|
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Monte Cook's weekly wotc article
