|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 3:56PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2008
|
I find it amusing that so many people try to make a point by saying, "I was interested in D&D Next but then they added or changed one thing. Now I will never play it."
Can we make a list of issues that people have made this statement about?
1. Vancian magic
2. Skill Dice
3. Dead levels
4. Bounded Accuracy
5. Too much balance
6. Not enough balance
7. Various healing modalities
Anybody else have other issues.
While I may or may not like D&D Next by the time they are finished tinkering with it, I am certain if I don't play it, it would not be a single issue.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 4:37PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
There is only one issue that will cause me to leave and that's if the system isn't open to house rules.
As an old school gamer I have no problem extending a basic system. I just don't want it rewrite large portions of a complex game in fear that it might break the system. With 4e I felt paralyzed when confronted with the design goals of the system, which were completely contrary to how I played.
So far I'm happy to see that some rules like Resting are optional.
If the expectation is set that not every DM or gaming group will have the same rules on the table and that house rules are part of the course then there won't be a single issue.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 4:41PM
#3
|
|
|
D&DN is a done deal. They've decided on a design direction and will not alter their course. That direction leaves me completely uninterested in anything they produce henceforth.
They had the chance to make the best version of D&D yet, and they blew it by pandering to nostalgia rather than innovating because that's what they imagine will bring lapsed players back into the fold. Well they are wrong about that and the inevitable commecrial failure and subsequent mothballing of the D&D roleplaying game will prove it. Mark my words.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:04PM
#4
|
|
|
- rogue doing more damage in combat than the fighter?
- rogue not doing more damage in combat than the fighter?
- no epic levels
- epic levels
- lack of multiple attacks
- multiple attacks
and, as seen above, the nebulus "design direction."
One thing I find funny about all this fighting over DDN mechanics, is that what whill determine DDN's success is whether or not it is able to attact new players. None of us here are new players, and many people don't even really try to imagine it from a new players perspective.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:18PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
Probably bounded accuracy as currently designed and boring classes/races would be the big ones here.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:31PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 31, 2008
|
D&DN is a done deal. They've decided on a design direction and will not alter their course. That direction leaves me completely uninterested in anything they produce henceforth.
This pretty much sums up my feelings. There's no one deal-breaker, but the overall direction is just not where I want to go.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:49PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Mar 11, 2008
|
Shazbot and Telwar:
The core mechanics (How to Play Packet) is the only thing that's anywhere near completion. Look at the changes to classes, spells, feats, etc. over each packet. and you can see the designs shift on a dime. If you are concerned about a design philosophy, please elaborate.
I think the general direction (not the specifics, which need massive tweaking) is moving forward. They are attempting to incorperate what they think people liked about each edition. They may be failing (as some 4E posters contend), but that is the design philosophy as I see it. As a grognard, I have played every edition, and I can see the elements they are trying to use. Some things are new, however, such as Marital Dice, Skill Dice, and Advantage/Disadvantage. That is, IMO, the best way to move forward: keep the best of what works, and inovate the rest.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:51PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 22, 2008
|
D&DN is a done deal. They've decided on a design direction and will not alter their course. That direction leaves me completely uninterested in anything they produce henceforth.
This pretty much sums up my feelings. There's no one deal-breaker, but the overall direction is just not where I want to go.
They are still playtesting and yet you are certain you won't like it.
I am in agreement with dmgorgon. As long as they allow for house rules to easily change certain aspects, I can live with just about anything. We'll just adapt it to our style when all is said and done.
Having said that. I want a little more originality. The main thing that would keep me from buying it, is if it is just not any different than anything else.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:51PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2004
|
If they change the D&D logo again, I eat my neighbor's daughter alive and without anesthesia. And I'll eat anyone trying to stop me !
More seriously, if the next edition is a mix between any previous edition without something new, which is currently the case except for two rogues schemes, I won't buy it.
But it's far too early to judge it, as it's possible that the devs will keep some surprises for the edition launch.
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - thecasualoblivion
"Vancian isn't broken, you just have to set your game to the wizard's clock!" - Oxybe
"In many ways, making a new edition of D&D is alot like trying to sell a car to the Amish." - Dwarfslayer
"Encounters are the heart of the AD&D game" - PHB AD&D 2nd edition.
"you shouldn't even bother trying to become like me." - Gary Gygax (Elfcrusher confirmed)
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 03, 2013 - 5:55PM
#10
|
|
|
Disadvantage. There's another dealbreaker. Whoever thought it would be a good idea for players to ever see their successes revoked by the rolling of a second D20 clearly has never had a significantly diverse player base to understand player emotions in an RPG. A player often feels like that success is theirs, not their character's. The neurochemical response to seeing that removed from them is not one that supports the longevity of a game with such a mechanic.
|
|
|
