mathematicians took over the game

I think the biggest problem with dungeons and dragons is that they fired the literature people and hired mathematicians.  Modern rpg's are just way too crunchy.  Look at the supplements pre 3.x and you see very few new rules.  They are there and optional, but fewer.  They used to put out cool books like Cult of the Dragon, Scarelet Brotherhood, etc.  They were books that detailed settings and playstyle rather than crunch.  Just my humble opinion.
The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.

Danny

The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.




Keep playing warcraft and everquest
The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.




Yeah, this.  Someone with a basic ability to compute probability would be nice ...
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
because people realized that anyone can do fluff, but doing crunch was what took work and forthought. and anyone who has a custom home campain has no use whatsoever for alot of that fluff.

there are a great many people who buy games for and only for the crunch, they can transplant fluff from anywhere.

you get horrible mechanics when the people who make the game dont understand the math, you get spells that "sound good" but that are horriblely overpowered becuase the person writing did not understand that (for example) 1d6 per level was way to much.

Insulting someones grammar on a forum is like losing to someone in a drag race and saying they were cheating by having racing stripes. Not only do the two things not relate to each other (the logic behind the person's position, and their grammar) but you sound like an idiot for saying it (and you should, because its really stupid )
the best DM I ever had couldn't calculate thAC0 without consulting a table.

 
The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.




Yeah, this.  Someone with a basic ability to compute probability would be nice ...



The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.




Keep playing warcraft and everquest


Yeah!  Get off his lawn!
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.



The plural of anecdote is not data.  Your personal experiences are just that, not the guideposts of the universe.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.



The plural of anecdote is not data.  Your personal experiences are just that, not the guideposts of the universe.



And neither is your opinion 
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.



The plural of anecdote is not data.  Your personal experiences are just that, not the guideposts of the universe.



And neither is your opinion 



Never claimed it was.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I've got to agree with the majority here. Anyone can make fluff, but making a system is hard work. That's not saying making interesting fluff doesn't take talent, it just takes far less training.
My two copper.
The math in D&D is widely regarded as some of the wonkiest, weakest math in all the land... mathematicians taking over would be a godsend.




Keep playing warcraft and everquest


Yeah!  Get off his lawn!

;)

Danny

I've got to agree with the majority here. Anyone can make fluff, but making a system is hard work. That's not saying making interesting fluff doesn't take talent, it just takes far less training.



Very few people can make good fluff.  Though I think everyone should try and enjoy it. 
Before this turns into a flame war...

Opinions are not fact and cannot be proven right or wrong.  That leads to insults, CoC violations, and thread closures.

More than anything, D&D Next must strive for balance.  Not in the mechanical sense, but a balance between Tradition and Innovation, Mechanics and Flavor, Story and Math.  No one "side" in any of these debates is right or wrong.  The truth lies in discussion, compromise, and healthy debate.

All around helpful simian

*quickly puts out his flaming longsword*

Say what? 
My two copper.
Very few people can make good fluff.  



What constitutes 'good' fluff is subjective, as it revolves entirely around what one likes and dislikes.  I think the 'fluff' of Lord of the Rings was boring and horrible, but other people think it was fantastic.  

A solid rules base is an objective measure, which is why it needs more work and effort.  It doesn't matter how pretty the house is, if the foundation crumbles, you have nothing.  The house is the fluff, the foundation is the mechanics, math, and ruleset.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
I agree that the system could use some better math majors crunching. However, more "fluff" wouldn't be bad either.

Just roll some dice.

 

RADIO FREE BORDERLANDS:

Explore the new D&D podcast that is a celebration of all eras of the game! Discussing the loves, challenges, topics, ideas, and news of this great hobby in both a contemporary and historical view.

http://radiofreeborderlands.libsyn.com/

We do need mathenaticians for this edition. With so many new features, it's important to balancing out before it become official. 

You can throw as much fluff as you want into a game, but when it's broken. It will ruin the illusion of the game. For example....

I was going to make an assassin like rogue until recent update on 5e. Now I'm thinking how my character going to dps when his sneak attack is 1d4 instead of 2d6?

The math is important.  
Very few people can make good fluff.  



What constitutes 'good' fluff is subjective, as it revolves entirely around what one likes and dislikes.  I think the 'fluff' of Lord of the Rings was boring and horrible, but other people think it was fantastic.  Some people liked Firefly; I thought it sucked giant turkey ass.

A solid rules base is an objective measure, which is why it needs more work and effort.  It doesn't matter how pretty the house is, if the foundation crumbles, you have nothing.  The house is the fluff, the foundation is the mechanics, math, and ruleset.



Oh, man.  I thought I was the only person on the planet who disliked LotR and Firefly.

Anyway, I think that both fluff and numers are important.  Currently, however, the playtest should really focus on the rules of the system in order to balance things properly, and then fluff can follow as soon as we can all come to an agreement balance-wise.  As it stands, I would not consider D&D Next due to its current rules alone, and I hope to contribute to the improvement of the system.  Inversely, if the fluff is largely garbage, and I feel that Forgotten Realms, which seems to be the default setting, is in fact garbage, I can simply apply the game mechanics to a setting that I prefer.

Rules are codified and fluff is not, so rules need to come first.  I am all for fluff in the future, however.  If we were to establish a new setting from the ground up, I feel that fluff would be priority.

The next person who claims "anyone can write fluff" best be prepared to provide evidence of theory New York Times bestseller status.
And now for a bit of personal opinion...

There are a few of us "old schoolers" (I use the term loosely because I enjoy all editions and playstyles for different reasons) who would rather house rule to match flavor than reflavor to match rules.

I often change the rules to fit the world I've created or make up a rule on the spot to cover the current situation, even if there's already an existing rule I don't happen to like.

That said, I hate math and don't want to have to do much of it during the actual session which means that the core math of the game needs to be solid so it can sit in the background.

So, there must be consideration of both solid math and solid flavor...as well as freedom to tinker with both.       

All around helpful simian

Could the solid flavor of next be raspberry? I love raspberries
My two copper.
Very few people can make good fluff.  



What constitutes 'good' fluff is subjective, as it revolves entirely around what one likes and dislikes.  I think the 'fluff' of Lord of the Rings was boring and horrible, but other people think it was fantastic.  Some people liked Firefly; I thought it sucked giant turkey ass.

A solid rules base is an objective measure, which is why it needs more work and effort.  It doesn't matter how pretty the house is, if the foundation crumbles, you have nothing.  The house is the fluff, the foundation is the mechanics, math, and ruleset.



Oh, man.  I thought I was the only person on the planet who disliked LotR and Firefly.

Anyway, I think that both fluff and numers are important.  Currently, however, the playtest should really focus on the rules of the system in order to balance things properly, and then fluff can follow as soon as we can all come to an agreement balance-wise.  As it stands, I would not consider D&D Next due to its current rules alone, and I hope to contribute to the improvement of the system.  Inversely, if the fluff is largely garbage, and I feel that Forgotten Realms, which seems to be the default setting, is in fact garbage, I can simply apply the game mechanics to a setting that I prefer.

Rules are codified and fluff is not, so rules need to come first.  I am all for fluff in the future, however.  If we were to establish a new setting from the ground up, I feel that fluff would be priority.




If I weren't already married ...
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
And now for a bit of personal opinion...

There are a few of us "old schoolers" (I use the term loosely because I enjoy all editions and playstyles for different reasons) who would rather house rule to match flavor than reflavor to match rules.

I often change the rules to fit the world I've created or make up a rule on the spot to cover the current situation, even if there's already an existing rule I don't happen to like.



*raise his hand* Me!

I was going to creat a monk who use a kuni with chain so I can disarm enemies, but then I realize
that the monk can't use chains. So I say screw the rules, I want my ninja monk. 

Come to think of it. Will there be weapons that give advantage to disarm or trip like in 3.5e? 
I kinda miss that. 

Very few people can make good fluff.  



What constitutes 'good' fluff is subjective, as it revolves entirely around what one likes and dislikes.  I think the 'fluff' of Lord of the Rings was boring and horrible, but other people think it was fantastic.  Some people liked Firefly; I thought it sucked giant turkey ass.

A solid rules base is an objective measure, which is why it needs more work and effort.  It doesn't matter how pretty the house is, if the foundation crumbles, you have nothing.  The house is the fluff, the foundation is the mechanics, math, and ruleset.



Oh, man.  I thought I was the only person on the planet who disliked LotR and Firefly.

Anyway, I think that both fluff and numers are important.  Currently, however, the playtest should really focus on the rules of the system in order to balance things properly, and then fluff can follow as soon as we can all come to an agreement balance-wise.  As it stands, I would not consider D&D Next due to its current rules alone, and I hope to contribute to the improvement of the system.  Inversely, if the fluff is largely garbage, and I feel that Forgotten Realms, which seems to be the default setting, is in fact garbage, I can simply apply the game mechanics to a setting that I prefer.

Rules are codified and fluff is not, so rules need to come first.  I am all for fluff in the future, however.  If we were to establish a new setting from the ground up, I feel that fluff would be priority.




If I weren't already married ...



I'd make a terrible spouse.
And now for a bit of personal opinion...

There are a few of us "old schoolers" (I use the term loosely because I enjoy all editions and playstyles for different reasons) who would rather house rule to match flavor than reflavor to match rules.

I often change the rules to fit the world I've created or make up a rule on the spot to cover the current situation, even if there's already an existing rule I don't happen to like.

That said, I hate math and don't want to have to do much of it during the actual session which means that the core math of the game needs to be solid so it can sit in the background.

So, there must be consideration of both solid math and solid flavor...as well as freedom to tinker with both.       



THIS.

Just roll some dice.

 

RADIO FREE BORDERLANDS:

Explore the new D&D podcast that is a celebration of all eras of the game! Discussing the loves, challenges, topics, ideas, and news of this great hobby in both a contemporary and historical view.

http://radiofreeborderlands.libsyn.com/

Will someone explain to me why they think the math in Next is broken? 4e?  3rd?

Tell me how a mathematician is supposed to be able to "balance" a cleric and thief who do two totally fifferent things.  How much is a healing spell worth versus a lightning bolt?  How much is disarm trap worth versus being able to swin g a sword for a lot of damage?  How much is being able to hide from a group of 50 orcs worth versus being able to give an ally +2 to hit?  How much is accuracy worth over the ability to fly over a trap?

Oh wait, I have the answer.  It's all based on context.  And since everyone out there seems to play a different style game...

I'm not saying balance shouldn't be used to make the game fun, keep obvious broken mechanics at bay, and allow for all players to feel a sense of self worth.  But, there has to be a bit of common sense that says, "Hmm... Not sure the game can actually be balanced."
The next person who claims "anyone can write fluff" best be prepared to provide evidence of theory New York Times bestseller status.


Anyone can write fluff that works period. It's better to argue that not everyone can write "good" fluff.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.


I'm a good roleplayer.
I can also Mix/Max

So...do I not exist? Frown

I'm a good roleplayer.
I can also Mix/Max

So...do I not exist?


Well...I've been trying to figure out how to tell you this for awhile, Engs, but...you're fictional.

It's not so bad, though!  I'm fictional, too. 
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
There is no reason why good fluff and good math can't coexist. As far as what I prefer in development, defiately the math. Because I always adjust the fluff to fit the game. Even as a player I adjust the appearance of spells to fit my guy.. etc...

There are very few instaces in game design where perfect fluff can't work around proper math.  

My mind is a deal-breaker.

Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.


Coincidence, nothing more.

In my experience, some people can do more than one thing well.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.


Coincidence, nothing more.

In my experience, some people can do more than one thing well.


Khan, I know this is hard, but you're gonna have to accept that you don't exist.  I've seen you roleplay, and I've seen you play a mechanically effective character while doing it.  That means you're not real.  Like a unicorn.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Then I'm... I'm... I'm not real either. 

Danny

Then I'm... I'm... I'm not real either. 


We might have to look into Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Additionally the best roleplayers I have seen couldn't min/max a character.


Coincidence, nothing more.

In my experience, some people can do more than one thing well.


Khan, I know this is hard, but you're gonna have to accept that you don't exist.  I've seen you roleplay, and I've seen you play a mechanically effective character while doing it.  That means you're not real.  Like a unicorn.


Unicorns aren't real?!?!?!?

Noooo!!!
Will someone explain to me why they think the math in Next is broken?



Here's an example for you: Level 3 feat Divine Healing. 1/day you get to cast cure light wounds. It's a great feat when you get it but as you level you might as well forget you even have it because the most it can cure is a paper cut. A player taking this starts out as an epic manifestation of their god who can restore half your health and ends up handing out asprin and bandaids at high levels. It's such a tiny speck of HP at high level that nobody would even notice if the player forgot they had the feat.

The entire game is littered with things like this where abilities are drastically [over|under]powered
Will someone explain to me why they think the math in Next is broken?



Here's an example for you: Level 3 feat Divine Healing. 1/day you get to cast cure light wounds. It's a great feat when you get it but as you level you might as well forget you even have it because the most it can cure is a paper cut. A player taking this starts out as an epic manifestation of their god who can restore half your health and ends up handing out asprin and bandaids at high levels. It's such a tiny speck of HP at high level that nobody would even notice if the player forgot they had the feat.

The entire game is littered with things like this where abilities are drastically [over|under]powered



I agree with you. Some of them are just weak. Some of them, I want more questions like....

The durable speciality. I use the average hit point to gain hp. How this is going to effect me?

Will someone explain to me why they think the math in Next is broken?



Here's an example for you: Level 3 feat Divine Healing. 1/day you get to cast cure light wounds. It's a great feat when you get it but as you level you might as well forget you even have it because the most it can cure is a paper cut. A player taking this starts out as an epic manifestation of their god who can restore half your health and ends up handing out asprin and bandaids at high levels. It's such a tiny speck of HP at high level that nobody would even notice if the player forgot they had the feat.

The entire game is littered with things like this where abilities are drastically [over|under]powered



I agree with you. Some of them are just weak. Some of them, I want more questions like....

The durable speciality. I use the average hit point to gain hp. How this is going to effect me?


I just went to look it up, but I can't find any rule on it anywhere... My understanding was that, when you level up, you roll for HP, but you can then choose to take the listed number instead of what you rolled. So you always get half+1, but can potentially get more. The durability specialty would then still help, because you have a better chance of getting better-than-average numbers.

If I'm wrong, and you must choose before rolling if you want to roll or take average, then you could adjust "average" by +25% of the die, so for example if your die is a d8 (averaging 5), then you add 2 to the average, resulting in 7.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

To me, D&D never had a "math" issue as  much as it had cases of things that felt were created in isolation and just were wonky when you put them together. Too many cases of "how the heck did this and that make in?" cropping up.

It felt like D&D was stuck in the old school era of TCGs where the feeling of the players was that stuff was just made, to heck with the consequences.

Structure and clear goals. One noticeable to the players.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

Sign In to post comments