|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 12:23PM
#141
|
|
|
I also want to say that Jharii has some great logic in the posts I read.
That is a weird tangent to go off on. You could have just said his analogy needed some work. I think I got his point.
It seems like what he was describing was that something practical for one person isn't always practical for another.
Thank you for the kind words, bajatmerc.
The problem was that it was his analogy of the car-plane. I merely exposed it by saying that very thing: what is practical for someone may not be for another.
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 07, 2012 - 12:31PM
#142
|
Date Joined:
Feb 17, 2012
|
I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 08, 2012 - 8:38PM
#143
|
|
|
I stand by the meaning of my statements.
I do, however, apologize to the forums at large for turning the thread into a snark fest.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 11, 2012 - 4:50PM
#144
|
Date Joined:
Jan 24, 2006
|
Okie Dokie. Jharii: Totally agree. Your ideas are epic. I want to play a certain character and I want the rules to allow me to do that. Not the other way around. When I created my own free RPG, Challenger, I used a combination of 36 classes and roughly equal number of races. You can also multi-class into 1 additional classs for free and pay 1 power point for additional classes. What this gives you is infiniate options and the ability to play 'exactly' the character you want to from day one. Whether you want to play a Necromancer (level 1 class), a Shaman Barbarian (With multi-classed with Barbarian) or perhaps an Immortal undead skeleton Warrior/Ninja/Shape-Shifter you can do that in Challenger. Okay, admittedly it does have a few kinks and you can end up with some pretty crazy character concepts (one player I know played a squirrel). However, despite what some people are saying, it 'can' be done. I know, because I've done it. So do the 50,000+ gamers and readers who've downloaded my book for free. I guess you could say it's a combination of: point-buy, classes, single free multi-class, and huge race/class lists. It does make it a little harder on new players, and there are a few balance issues I'm still working out; but on the whole it lets you play whatever character you want from day one. It's doable. Basically I just asked my players to list every class and race concept they'd ever want to play. I then designed a rules system to accomodate those player choices and balance them as best I could. At it's heart the game is based on player choice, not perfect balance. You can play a Pyromancer, a Master Thief, a Ninja, a Teleporter, a Shape-Shifter, (working on Telekinetic by request), and a lot of other cool stuff right from the start. I see no reason D&D can't let people play Necromancers or whatnot from level one. Also, a lof of people have been saying you can just 'tweak' some classes with feats to make it what you want. True, but then you could basically just have 'fighter' and 'wizard' and be done with it. Everything else is pretty much just tweaks, right? Cleric: healing wizard. Rogue: weak fighter with skills. etc. I think an argument for more playable classes at first level is valid. It's something I've wanted for a while in favor of prestige classes/whatever. Yes, I like getting cool stuff when I level up, but I'd actually more appreciate being able to actually play the character I want right away instead of waiting 5 years to maybe be able to have fun playing it later. Sure, Challenger is very 'top heavy and front end loaded' but really, to play what you want at level one requires that. Kaldric: Totally agree, great posts. DoctorBadWolf: No problem.  Snark makes things fun. --David
David L. Dostaler
Author, Challenger RPG (free)
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 11, 2012 - 6:55PM
#145
|
|
|
Thanks for the kind words, Snotagnome2. Yes, I absolutely get how crazy combinations might occur. But the opposite side of that problem is just too delicious to disregard. The ability to play fully imagined characters is the holy grail, imho. The caveat can be placed that the open character generation is for more advanced players, and the DM may wish to approve the characters before they enter play. I doubt it's a perfect solution, but it seems to be a huge step in the right direction. I am glad that it worked out for you. I'll definitely have to check out Challenger. And if done right, those concrete, more restrictive classes can also be provided. That's why I think it's a win-win for both parties. If you want those standard PHB classes, and don't fully trust your players not to abuse the open architecture, they're all still there. "Choose from the core 32 classes, players." I'll continue to tinker with it outside of the 5E rules, but once I start seeing the 5E stuff, I can start to attack it as a valid option for 5E. Anyhow, thanks again!
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 11:43AM
#146
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2008
|
Why should a Necromancer necessarily be a thing that someone aspires to be at higher levels? Wouldn't a powerful organization affiliated with the undead be training Necromancers from day 1? I mean a Necromancer doesn't have to summon a whole army of the dead from day 1 just like a regular old Wizard doesn't have to be tossing Fireballs from day 1, but it should still have a Necromancer feel to it. I don't mean just make a version of magic missile with necrotic damage and call it a day. I mean something like having an actual "pet" zombie or skeleton at first level and at-will abilities that are more Necromancer appropriate(making a fewer amount of enemies suck instead of flashy minion clearing AoEs).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 12:24PM
#147
|
|
|
Why should a Necromancer necessarily be a thing that someone aspires to be at higher levels? Wouldn't a powerful organization affiliated with the undead be training Necromancers from day 1? I mean a Necromancer doesn't have to summon a whole army of the dead from day 1 just like a regular old Wizard doesn't have to be tossing Fireballs from day 1, but it should still have a Necromancer feel to it. I don't mean just make a version of magic missile with necrotic damage and call it a day. I mean something like having an actual "pet" zombie or skeleton at first level and at-will abilities that are more Necromancer appropriate(making a fewer amount of enemies suck instead of flashy minion clearing AoEs).
So instead of a reflavored spell, you opted to reflavor a special ability (animal companion).
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 12:32PM
#148
|
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2008
|
One would hope it was actually a different special ability instead of just a reflavor. If there is no mechanical difference between a Ranger's panther companion and a Necromancer's zombie minion then it is a failure imo. The example of having an undead companion is just one example. Other things like spells that focus on debuffing/draining are usually there but not commonly available at lower levels.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 2:21PM
#149
|
|
|
Why would it be a failure if they both were designed to behave in exactly the same way? Exactly what mechanical difference are you looking for? The flavor of one is the result of building a ranger. The flavor of the other is the result of building a necromancer. Unless you define something functionally different with animal/undead companion, there's no need to reinvent the wheel.
Of course other abilities would define their respective classes. A ranger is more than animal companion and a necromancer is more than undead companion.
Whatever, I just found it odd that your example of doing something poorly was a reflavor while your example of doing something right was nothing more than just a reflavor.
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 12, 2012 - 8:19PM
#150
|
|
|
I think the ability to raise any fallen enemy in battle as a level equivalent zombie/ghoul/ghast/ghost minion would be all that was needed to differentiate them. You could make it an encounter power for balance, but since it dies with one hit, its not exactly a game breaker.
With daily powers you could instead have an army of undead that rise up (4-6 undead). They would take opportunity attacks against anyone that moves away from them. The caster could expend a move action to shift each one 1 square, and a standard action to allow them to make a basic attack, sustain minor.
|
|
|
