|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 4:29PM
#81
|
Date Joined:
Jan 13, 2012
|
I think 4e's content in general could have just looked a bit better if the "classic classes" were used where 4e's Power Sources sat.
So you would have had, in the PH1, Fighter, Cleric, and Wizard "classes", with what 4e called classes slotted in under those, instead of under power sources.
Would have wound up being the same thing - and being a little less clean, conceptually - but I think it would have felt a lot more familiar to people who care about that kind of thing.
I would like to add that they could also merge the whole "Fighter Cleric and Wizard classes" (You forgot to put Rogue) idea with the roles system for 4E since the concept of roles didn't really add to the game much and was more or less meaningless. The power sources and roles also seemed to act as pretty much the same thing so having both wasn't really necessary. After all, if I'm a guy who gets his power from being tough and burly, my role in the party is self explanatory. Same goes for if i'm quick and sneaky, or wise and creative. Also I would have the class abilities function in their own seprate mechanics to further separate how each class is its own identity. A fighter and rogue should be able to do their thing all day long regardless of how many times they used their class based abilities. Wizards and clerics on the other hand are working with limited resources; casting a fireball or summoning an angel isn't cheap you know.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 7:09PM
#82
|
Date Joined:
Jan 23, 2012
|
I think 4e's content in general could have just looked a bit better if the "classic classes" were used where 4e's Power Sources sat.
You know, sometimes I wonder what the reaction would have been if 4e looked more like AD&D in terms of art, page layout, language used, etc. Even if the game had been the same.
I think both of you are correct.
I have to admit I was put off by the layout of the book. It felt confusing. I play other RPG games, and don't mind learning new systems. But the initial experience was like when you are taking a sip of coke, only to realize you grabbed a Dr. Pepper. For a horrible second you are confused, and have not idea what you just drank.
It took reading these forms, and then looking at my D and D basic set again, before I was able to start wrapping my head around what is a very clean and easy system to learn.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 16, 2012 - 7:53PM
#83
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
My conscience is clear as far as giving 4e a fair shake. I was hot for the game when it first came out. I definitely defended it on these boards. (perhaps embarrassing now if those posts were found). I grew into disliking the game. The actual playing of the game.
I know others experience was the opposite. They started out hating and learned to love. I think I am pretty intellectually honest with myself. When I felt my dislike for the game growing within me I sought answers. Only after putting my finger on a few things did I realize why. I know different things matter to different folks. It just wasn't for me. I gave it an honest try though.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 6:00AM
#84
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Quite honestly this thread is defending major contributing factors for the niche within a niche status of D&D
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 7:28AM
#85
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
Quite honestly this thread is defending major contributing factors for the niche within a niche status of D&D
I would say that D&D is bigger than any single fantasy novel. Perhaps Lord of the Rings could rival it but not many others. D&D has penetrated our culture deeply. But I agree it has lessened some in recent years compared to the 80s.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 11:09AM
#86
|
Date Joined:
May 17, 2009
|
Quite honestly this thread is defending major contributing factors for the niche within a niche status of D&D
I would say that D&D is bigger than any single fantasy novel. Perhaps Lord of the Rings could rival it but not many others. D&D has penetrated our culture deeply. But I agree it has lessened some in recent years compared to the 80s.
Sure, but "Bigger than any single fantasy novel" isn't exactly a good goal for D&D. I'd much rather shoot for "Bigger than D&D is now." and not get complacent.
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.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 11:47AM
#87
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
Quite honestly this thread is defending major contributing factors for the niche within a niche status of D&D
I would say that D&D is bigger than any single fantasy novel. Perhaps Lord of the Rings could rival it but not many others. D&D has penetrated our culture deeply. But I agree it has lessened some in recent years compared to the 80s.
Sure, but "Bigger than any single fantasy novel" isn't exactly a good goal for D&D. I'd much rather shoot for "Bigger than D&D is now." and not get complacent.
I agree and thats why I'm for expanding the base instead of dynamiting it. 4e threw out too much. Let's just be additive and let people choose what they like or dislike. Things like Vancian magic, Alignment, Level Drain, Rust Monsters, The Great Wheel, Ability Scores, Armor Class, Straight Hit Points, etc.. are iconic to D&D. It's fine to offer other options and let people pick and choose. I'm for balancing it too. But where it can't be perfectly then just put a warning sign.
The greatest contribution to D&D that 5e can make is to recognize that DMs can define their campaigns to be a subset or superset or anything in between of the RAW. Most of us experienced DMs have always known this. I feel one bad trend in 3e and 4e has been the impetus to eliminate DM empowerment. When we all return to playing D&D in ways our groups enjoy regardless of what Gary Gygax or Monte Cook or Rich Baker say we will be the better for it.
As far as "mindshare" goes, D&D is pretty dominate in our culture. I bet more people have heard of D&D than can name their representative to congress. I don't mean know it well but they've heard of it.
The key is to to grow the number of people playing and by extension buying products.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 12:15PM
#88
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
Having heard of D&D, and being attached to or interested in or at all caring about "D&D's own thing" are very, very different things though. And the "DM empowerment" stuff is just, gah, so much nonsense. It's an attitude that's grown around the game, not (I think) because of things that 3e and 4e did, but because of the community - and probably the culture in general. I think 5e can help fix that - by going out of its way to tell people "No, look, don't be an idiot. Just because we printed this doesn't mean you have to use it. We're not forcing you. Stop it. Stop acting like that. And no, just because our rules are designed with an eye to balance now does not mean that you can't still just make up whatever the hell you want - you didn't care about balance before, why should you now? Because we do? We're doing something completely different than you are. Act like it." In fact... I wish I could write the introduction to the 5e books. 
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 1:47PM
#89
|
Date Joined:
May 29, 2007
|
I agree and thats why I'm for expanding the base instead of dynamiting it. 4e threw out too much. Let's just be additive and let people choose what they like or dislike. Things like Vancian magic, Alignment, Level Drain, Rust Monsters, The Great Wheel, Ability Scores, Armor Class, Straight Hit Points, etc.. are iconic to D&D. It's fine to offer other options and let people pick and choose. I'm for balancing it too. But where it can't be perfectly then just put a warning sign.
While I'll agree that 4th edition might've thrown out a bit more than was needed, and that there are things that are essential to the D&D experience, quite a few of the things you mentioned have no place being in the "core" of the system of 5e.
For certain, Alignment is essential.. fluff-wise (mechanically it should be a module), Level Drain should be a module, Rust Monsters' effect on gear should be a module (or the creature entirely, not sure if it would work without the effect), the Great Wheel should be a module.
I dare say Vancian magic should actually also be a module (I can well imagine not every DM wanting it in their world - I sure wouldn't want it in mine).. Kind of like D&D not being just a single fantasy novel.
Ability Scores, Armor Class and Hit Points are the only things you've mentioned there that I can see as something essential to the "core" mechanics of the game.
I would say that, for example with Vancian magic, they should use their creative juices to come up with several different ways of doing magic (scouring the vast supply of different {popular} fantasy novels for inspiration).
They can have these different kinds of magic in a modular way and you would still be playing D&D.
Edit: I feel I should clarify my position a bit more..
I have created my own world, which I would use with playing D&D (and I like playing D&D, my friends like it - I don't want to invest in some other game, and I feel I shouldn't).
For me, this world isn't solely for playing D&D (or else I wouldn't care, probably).
I think I should be able to, as a DM, change the game to fit my world, without having to houserule it to death as I normally have to (which is why I haven't been DMing in the last years).
From my understanding, this is the intent of the designers (though I might have misunderstood).. To be able to alter the rules to fit your campaign world, much like Dark Sun, or the like.
My world shouldn't be forced to be like a Jack Vance world, a J.R.R. Tolkien world, or any other writer's world, if I don't want it to be.
If they give this flexibility, I would say that I'm sold (in this regard, at least).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 17, 2012 - 2:06PM
#90
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
While I'll agree that 4th edition might've thrown out a bit more than was needed, and that there are things that are essential to the D&D experience, quite a few of the things you mentioned have no place being in the "core" of the system of 5e.
For certain, Alignment is essential.. fluff-wise (mechanically it should be a module), Level Drain should be a module, Rust Monsters' effect on gear should be a module (or the creature entirely, not sure if it would work without the effect), the Great Wheel should be a module.
I dare say Vancian magic should actually also be a module (I can well imagine not every DM wanting it in their world - I sure wouldn't want it in mine).. Kind of like D&D not being just a single fantasy novel.
Ability Scores, Armor Class and Hit Points are the only things you've mentioned there that I can see as something essential to the "core" mechanics of the game.
No disagreements there. Wanting something does not mean it has to be core. I imagine 5e core is going to be very lean and thats good. I would want martial healing, surges if they still exist, and martial daily powers to all be modules too.
I would say that, for example with Vancian magic, they should use their creative juices to come up with several different ways of doing magic (scouring the vast supply of different {popular} fantasy novels for inspiration).
They can have these different kinds of magic in a modular way and you would still be playing D&D.
I'd favor this even though I do like vancian. I like the magic classes being a system. I'd prefer the fluff be applicable everywhere.
Edit: I feel I should clarify my position a bit more..
I have created my own world, which I would use with playing D&D (and I like playing D&D, my friends like it - I don't want to invest in some other game, and I feel I shouldn't).
For me, this world isn't solely for playing D&D (or else I wouldn't care, probably).
I think I should be able to, as a DM, change the game to fit my world, without having to houserule it to death as I normally have to (which is why I haven't been DMing in the last years).
From my understanding, this is the intent of the designers (though I might have misunderstood).. To be able to alter the rules to fit your campaign world, much like Dark Sun, or the like.
My world shouldn't be forced to be like a Jack Vance world, a John Tolkien world, or any other writer's world, if I don't want it to be.
If they give this flexibility, I would say that I'm sold (in this regard, at least).
If not 100% on day 1, I doubt things progress far without this being possible. It depends on how far afield you want to go. I'm sure there will be a non-vancian arcane option on day 1. I'm not sure there will be a defiler on day 1. But you could reflavor maybe.
|
|
|
