| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 16:59:42
|
Vancian swordplay might work, too. Where a low-level fighter can only swing his sword twice per day, or perhaps use specializations and special techniques a few times daily once reaching higher levels.
Vancian pickpockets, too. And Vancian blacksmiths, Vancian bakers, Vancian butchers. |
[/Ayrik] |
 |
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4459 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 17:54:23
|
Why can't both systems be supported (vancian/spell-point)? Isn't it possible to have one caster be Vancian and the other use spell-points to differentiate between styles yet still be balanced AND in the core rulebooks?
What I would implement is a sort of "go-to" spell system that either is always known or doesn't use spell-points so mages don't have to resort to mundane weapons if their DM isn't forth coming with magical items.
For fighters, I understand people's dislike of their Encounter/Daily power system of 4E and this needs to change. What about melee/martial character gaining "stances", something that's always "On" and provided certain bonuses when in a stance. You can then change the stance to suit different effects and give bonuses to weapons. So a Fighter that uses the Shieldsman Stance grants a minor benefit to an ally that near him (gotta stay away from square terminology) or maybe the Ferocious Stance, dealing a bit more damage with two-handed weapons? I think this puts a little more power into these classes while not making them seem like video games. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 19:04:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For fighters, I understand people's dislike of their Encounter/Daily power system of 4E and this needs to change. What about melee/martial character gaining "stances", something that's always "On" and provided certain bonuses when in a stance. You can then change the stance to suit different effects and give bonuses to weapons. So a Fighter that uses the Shieldsman Stance grants a minor benefit to an ally that near him (gotta stay away from square terminology) or maybe the Ferocious Stance, dealing a bit more damage with two-handed weapons? I think this puts a little more power into these classes while not making them seem like video games.
Actually, having seen that mechanic on a couple of my own toons in LotRO, that seems very much like a video game. |
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
4459 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 19:37:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For fighters, I understand people's dislike of their Encounter/Daily power system of 4E and this needs to change. What about melee/martial character gaining "stances", something that's always "On" and provided certain bonuses when in a stance.....I think this puts a little more power into these classes while not making them seem like video games.
Actually, having seen that mechanic on a couple of my own toons in LotRO, that seems very much like a video game.
What I was attempting to establish that Stances are less video-gamey than the Martial powers with Encounter/Daily based re-charge times. Stances at least have historical ties and it's not a far stretch to assume these same techniques or aspects could be applied to a game like D&D. Besides that, the idea is basic enough that it's not something a player has to keep a consistant eye on to "activate" which means less time picking and figuring out what "power" to use every round.
If not, well then I just don't know. I feel fighters until 4E have gotten the short end of the stick with D&D. The power curve of past iterations was a joke and I don't think going back to that is in any way, shape, or form a good idea. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 14:41:22
|
Characters are central, dynamic, motive, vibrant, they are vital and make a story live, without them you have a setting populated by mannequins. Toons are simply avatars in a game, they offer limited variety, they're largely interchangeable in the end, they're even disposable - they can be killed off or deleted and replaced with new toons within moments.
Calling your characters toons is almost like an unconscious admission of how you really judge the characters and the game/story setting they exist within. It's a practice I personally discourage. Single-encounter NPC redshirts are toons, vital PCs and NPCs are not. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36871 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:25:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Characters are central, dynamic, motive, vibrant, they are vital and make a story live, without them you have a setting populated by mannequins. Toons are simply avatars in a game, they offer limited variety, they're largely interchangeable in the end, they're even disposable - they can be killed off or deleted and replaced with new toons within moments.
Calling your characters toons is almost like an unconscious admission of how you really judge the characters and the game/story setting they exist within. It's a practice I personally discourage. Single-encounter NPC redshirts are toons, vital PCs and NPCs are not.
I used the word because I was, specifically, referring to my characters in an MMO.
I've been fiddling with making them into Realms NPCs, though.  |
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! |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:03:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For fighters, I understand people's dislike of their Encounter/Daily power system of 4E and this needs to change. What about melee/martial character gaining "stances", something that's always "On" and provided certain bonuses when in a stance. You can then change the stance to suit different effects and give bonuses to weapons. So a Fighter that uses the Shieldsman Stance grants a minor benefit to an ally that near him (gotta stay away from square terminology) or maybe the Ferocious Stance, dealing a bit more damage with two-handed weapons? I think this puts a little more power into these classes while not making them seem like video games.
So basically a redo of Bo9S (Book of Nine Swords)? |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4459 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:33:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For fighters, I understand people's dislike of their Encounter/Daily power system of 4E and this needs to change. What about melee/martial character gaining "stances", something that's always "On" and provided certain bonuses when in a stance. You can then change the stance to suit different effects and give bonuses to weapons. So a Fighter that uses the Shieldsman Stance grants a minor benefit to an ally that near him (gotta stay away from square terminology) or maybe the Ferocious Stance, dealing a bit more damage with two-handed weapons? I think this puts a little more power into these classes while not making them seem like video games.
So basically a redo of Bo9S (Book of Nine Swords)?
Yes and no. I'll admit that I found that tome really really intriguing and I probably wouldn't play a melee-base class without at least some of those elements. But it doesn't have to get as magical as all that. I like how stances work (in the Bo9S and 4E) and I like how some maneuvers can be executed, like Wolf Fang Strike (move and attack with both weapons) but it doesn't have to get more ridiculous such as Shadow jumping, flying with flaming wings, or stealing strength of a targets body though necrotic draining. It can be more "realistic" than that IMO. |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:43:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Yes and no. I'll admit that I found that tome really really intriguing and I probably wouldn't play a melee-base class without at least some of those elements. But it doesn't have to get as magical as all that. I like how stances work (in the Bo9S and 4E) and I like how some maneuvers can be executed, like Wolf Fang Strike (move and attack with both weapons) but it doesn't have to get more ridiculous such as Shadow jumping, flying with flaming wings, or stealing strength of a targets body though necrotic draining. It can be more "realistic" than that IMO.
While I found overall the Bo9S to be quite awful, I thought the concept was quite excellent, so I share your yes and no thoughts on it. |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:29:49
|
A Mana-point system that plays like both 4e ("dailies") and Vancian is possible - I had several hybrids myself.
You limit the spells known using a Vance-like system, and then allow them to cast as many as their points allow. Limited spells, without limiting their usage. It works, trust me. Other Spells not "stored in memory" are in a PC's spellbook, and can still be accessed, but then the ritual-rules kick-in (open the tome, read accurately, prepare components, etc - all time-consuming). This same system can be extended so folks can actually cast spells that are normally too powerful for them (and you can have interesting Sorcerer's Apprentice style scenarios). Just because you can read a spell in a book (and cast it) doesn't mean you can memorize it, or control it.
You control the over-usage of more powerful magics by combining Fatigue with Mana points, so players do have the option of casting multiple potent spells in a row, at the risk of leaving themselves drained for several hours. The players will have to learn to balance their needs with the risks (in other words, use magic frugally, even if they have the points to spare). If they do not want the very real simulation of fatigue, then they only need make the spells exponentially more costly at higher levels. A stat that has to do with "how many points at once" can also be a controlling factor, almost like the cool-down clock in CRPGs. In other words, if you had a Spell Power stat that was 50, and you spent more points then that in a single encounter, you would have to make SR's to continue casting. Like i said - several ways to implement it and still make it feel like D&D.
Mana Points are not bad unto themselves, but a system must be designed to handle any abuses players will contrive (and they will - its the nature of the beast).
As for the announcement - can't say I am surprised by it, but I can say I am surprised the announcement came so soon. I feel positive about that - they (WotC) have finally learned Full Disclosure is the best policy where the fans are concerned. Kudos to them.
I hope 5e is everything it can be, and that FR will rise from the ashes like Phoenix. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 12 Jan 2012 21:37:02 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4692 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 23:34:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
Well maybe they will go for Mana points *shrugs*
Everything at-will all the time?
*Not entirely a joke! (See 3.5 warlock for reference.)
Cheers
That class and two others are reasons I refused to buy anything 4th (3.5 did not do well either). |
"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 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Big news tomorrow (01/09/12) for WotC?
