|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:42PM
#11
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:42PM
#12
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:44PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2003
|
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!
 
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:44PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2008
|
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.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:46PM
#15
|
- VCL Emeritus
- The Inquisitor
|
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.
Quentin Small
WotC Online Community Coordinator
All around helpful simian
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:47PM
#16
|
|
|
*quickly puts out his flaming longsword*
Say what?
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 8:48PM
#17
|
|
|
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.
Moderated by
ORC_Aria
on Dec 09, 2012 - 10:04AM
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 9:02PM
#18
|
|
|
I agree that the system could use some better math majors crunching. However, more "fluff" wouldn't be bad either.
I prefer 2nd Edition AD&D. But I have played basic, 1E, 2E, 3.5, & 4E, and found all to be fun.
IF IT'S D&D, I'LL PLAY IT, NO MATTER THE EDITION.
Just roll some dice.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 9:04PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 14, 2010
|
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.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Dec 08, 2012 - 9:06PM
#20
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
