|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:18PM
#101
|
|
|
Absolute opposite. I'd rather have more classes than I'll ever even read in full, much less use, than have to kludge together a concept I've played numerous times in multiple games rather than just being able to start as that thing from level one.
and drow stay. At this point, they're as iconic as anything other than elves humans and dwarves.
Drow thing is pet peeve after playing a campaign where all drow were CG and used 2 swords.
In my experience, the 4e drow fixed this. the assumption that any good drow was a drizzt clone is gone, in groups that play 4e, IME.
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.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:21PM
#102
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
Trick's not the right word, but I want them to be appealing and not feel like these obscure oddities that were shoved in peoples' faces. That's the reaction I got when first exposed to them (I still kinda feel that way) and I don't want the same feeling. Hence refitting them into previous D&D concepts or other ideas I came up with. Plus, a redesign would be nice. Make the half-dragon (dragonborn) look like semi-bipedal dragon creatures if need be, not bad cosplayers. Also, Eladrin to me were celestial creatures, not a redundant elven form. Not to mention, I don't think Tieflings should make it unless their celestial-blooded cousins make it in too 
Disgruntled ghost of the Knights of W.T.F.
(Keep D&D alive, end the edition wars!)
"And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Disclaimer: Most of my posts are based on opinions (and are sometimes humorous, other times inspirational)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:33PM
#103
|
|
|
Trick's not the right word, but I want them to be appealing and not feel like these obscure oddities that were shoved in peoples' faces. That's the reaction I got when first exposed to them (I still kinda feel that way) and I don't want the same feeling. Hence refitting them into previous D&D concepts or other ideas I came up with. Plus, a redesign would be nice. Make the half-dragon (dragonborn) look like semi-bipedal dragon creatures if need be, not bad cosplayers. Also, Eladrin to me were celestial creatures, not a redundant elven form. Not to mention, I don't think Tieflings should make it unless their celestial-blooded cousins make it in too
But "bad cosplayers" are a traditional look for D&D. Seriously, go back and look at some of the older humanoid animal/monster races. Besides, no one is forcing anyone to use those races.
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:39PM
#104
|
|
|
Irrelevant.
Your character can look like whatever you want it to. If you want 'old school' tieflings, just describe your tiefling as looking like that. same with Dragonborn, Eladrin, humans, dwarves, everything.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 12:23AM
#105
|
Date Joined:
Aug 25, 2007
|
also somthing to consider, some former classes might come back as themes/ background.
for example from 4th edition
witch
bladesinger
mage
arcanist
Sha'ir
in my opninion should all become wizard themes.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 2:23AM
#106
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2006
|
I wonder about factotum (dungeonscape), spellthief (complete adventurer) and beguiler (player handbook II). Will they be mixed and fused like D&D Next class?
"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)
Book 13 Anaclet 23
Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 2:43AM
#107
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2012
|
However, you can only simplify so much before you start cutting out things that people think are important.
Absolutely. However, you do realize no matter what they do, they are GOING to anger people? No matter how many races they put in there, somebody is going to think the races they leave out were important.
That's why I think it's best just to keep it bare bones, and allow people to add what they want. It's much easier than taking it away once it's in the core rules. For example, I like Half-Giants and Troglodytes, but there's no reason for me to expect that to be in a core rulebook. I'll just add it in if it's not there.
I think a part of my hardcore preference for "keeping it simple" is that being a DM for nearly 30 years, you get comfortable improvising and hacking the rules whenever it doesn't suit your campaign. But you learn quickly that the more complicated the rules are, the harder it becomes to hack them (it can lead to all sorts of domino-effect problems when you remove something that's baked into the core rules than is to layer new rules on top).
This post is full of Thruth. I completely agree with you.
DM: Products of MY Imagination ©. Since 1986.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 2:44AM
#108
|
Date Joined:
Jul 11, 2012
|
I wonder about factotum (dungeonscape), spellthief (complete adventurer) and beguiler (player handbook II). Will they be mixed and fused like D&D Next class?
I could see spellthief as rogue spec, and beguiler as wizard or warlock spec. Factotum otoh? no idea...
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 5:05AM
#109
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2011
|
However, you can only simplify so much before you start cutting out things that people think are important.
Absolutely. However, you do realize no matter what they do, they are GOING to anger people? No matter how many races they put in there, somebody is going to think the races they leave out were important.
I realize there are going to be people like that. However, I also realize that there will be people who cry "this isn't D&D either" just because dragonborn are in the book. Does that mean we should consider those extreme positions as ones we should cater to? Heck no. The basic ten races ensures that players of every edition have access to all of the races available at the launch of their preferred edition. That is the most sensible solution, especially since they've stated the goal of including every edition's first PHB classes in the DDN PHB.
Actually, I thought they had said they were going to include every edition's first PHB classes in D&D Next period. I'm not sure they're necessarily going to have every one of those classes in the PHB1. (Although that would be nice  )
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 23, 2012 - 5:13AM
#110
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2011
|
Lets see.
Avoid like plague:
New classes for every little niche out there (41 base classes in 3.x last count)
Drow
Absolute opposite. I'd rather have more classes than I'll ever even read in full, much less use, than have to kludge together a concept I've played numerous times in multiple games rather than just being able to start as that thing from level one.
and drow stay. At this point, they're as iconic as anything other than elves humans and dwarves.
What with The Legend of Drizzt, and War of the Spider Queen, drow are becoming very popular. It would be quite foolish to exclude them entirely from D&D Next. The only question is whether or not they'll be in PHB1...
|
|
|
