I thought cover art in 3.5 was great! I loved the look of old tomes and books bound in blood, it felt more real than the clearly computer-art renderings of brightly colored races in 4.0.
I know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these...
View full commentI know this is a long shot, since your comment is 5 months old at the time of my reply, but bounded accuracy essentially describes a paradigm shift in the "mathematical engine" that runs behind the scenes. In earlier editions there was this ever-escalating quasi-arms race between the PCs and the DM, with the PCs gaining ability bonuses and attack bonuses every level making it increasingly difficult for the DM to construct challenging encounters. The bounded accuracy system spaces out these bonuses better making them feel special to your character, like they have crossed some important milestone in their adventuring career. Taking the place of the attack bonus bumps is damage. Now your damage goes up with level, representing a higher competence in regards to the placement of your sword in the troll's back, or the dragon's exposed underbelly. A orc raiding party facing a first level party would be an almost insurmountable task at 1st level in past editions. Whereas at 20th level, that raiding party is a cake walk. Bounded accuracy now says that that at 20th level, these orcs should still be a tangible threat without having to artificially inflate their statistics. Instead, just throw more of them at the party.
Thanks for the input on this, PrestonSnow. Now it makes sense. And you nailed something I do to this day in 4E - "level-up" creatures so they are a challenge to the party.
I also agree with the style guidelines listed - great start! And Westerness has a great point: "rating" is still very subjective, and the US (presumably the biggest market) is quite prudish compared to many other first world countries. I think many have already said this but it's worth repeating: it's probably easiest to start with a slightly more prudish standard to push the broad-based appeal, and open up more risqué materials for those who want it. That seems to be the standard...
View full commentI also agree with the style guidelines listed - great start!
And Westerness has a great point: "rating" is still very subjective, and the US (presumably the biggest market) is quite prudish compared to many other first world countries. I think many have already said this but it's worth repeating: it's probably easiest to start with a slightly more prudish standard to push the broad-based appeal, and open up more risqué materials for those who want it. That seems to be the standard marketing approach, anyway: the trick is to make sure you don't make it too boring/sanitized or quash too much creative output.
This list sounds perfect. As far as the survey, I'm not sure which level to pick, but I'd like to see definite hints of "sexy" in D&D artwork. Cover most of the bum and bust (is that armor realistic), but you can definitely allude to them (and everything else is fair game). Give equal "sexy" treatment to males. Remember Hennet from 3.5? There's nothing wrong with some male chest. Focus on very expressive facial expressions. Accentuating the eyes also usually has good effect. In a fight...
View full commentThis list sounds perfect. As far as the survey, I'm not sure which level to pick, but I'd like to see definite hints of "sexy" in D&D artwork. Cover most of the bum and bust (is that armor realistic), but you can definitely allude to them (and everything else is fair game). Give equal "sexy" treatment to males. Remember Hennet from 3.5? There's nothing wrong with some male chest. Focus on very expressive facial expressions. Accentuating the eyes also usually has good effect. In a fight scene, don't be afraid of dirt on faces, messed up hair, even a little wounding (bruises, small amount of bleeding) etc. As far as being more creative with the "sexy" (clothes ripped off, people tied up, women pinning men down...), I want depictions to be true to context (would a battle or cult or woman warrior do that - then do it), but don't go so far that I'd be afraid of opening a book around pubescent children.
Also, consider how sexy non-traditionally sexy people can be? Something kind of fun that I incorporate into games and stories is the idea that a larger person, an amputee, a person with scars or a deformity (etc) can find himself/herself sexy or be paired with someone who finds them sexy. Through that perception, they can become as sexy as a more traditionally sexy character. It's about attitude (often expressed in the face/eyes/body posture).
Finally, in 3.5, some friends and I really wanted to see artwork that depicted adventurers on a good day. Why couldn't the adventurer's (of all sexes) go shopping and not get jumped just one time. Why not show some bro's helping each other don some armor? Why not show a nice campfire scene? Why not show an obvious romantic context (not a bedroom, but maybe 2 adventures look at each other for a few seconds too long)? Most scenes should be battle, but one or two vignettes of daily life could be fun too (& not just all of them at a bar or Mialee messing up a spell).
First off, I like the Hit Dice mechanics for healing, and don’t have a problem with how HP’s are gained each level. Those are fine, but I think some of the other posters are right, just call ‘Hit Dice’ used for natural healing something else (surges, first aid, recovery dice, etc). ‘Hit Points’, as defined by M.Mearls, raises my hackles. Actually, it’s just a different way of saying ‘Wound Points’ and ‘Vitality Points’ like the Star Wars games. Which I liked, and they worked well, but...
View full commentFirst off, I like the Hit Dice mechanics for healing, and don’t have a problem with how HP’s are gained each level. Those are fine, but I think some of the other posters are right, just call ‘Hit Dice’ used for natural healing something else (surges, first aid, recovery dice, etc).
‘Hit Points’, as defined by M.Mearls, raises my hackles. Actually, it’s just a different way of saying ‘Wound Points’ and ‘Vitality Points’ like the Star Wars games. Which I liked, and they worked well, but it’s not how I see ‘Hit Points’ in DnD. Maybe I could even get behind your definition if it works well, except for this:
By stating that this is how you view ‘Hit Points’, and making that part of the Core system, you are taking away how I see ‘Hit Points’ and replacing them with your version. I don’t want you telling me how to play a class, or what roles a class should fill. So don’t try and tell me how I should view ‘Hit Points’, either.
Also, it ties into another problem with DnDNext that, as I understand it, is still being worked on. That is the Armor situation. People take M.Mearls definition of ‘Hit Points’ and use it to rationalize why Armor makes PC’s harder to hit, rather than provides protection from damage. I don’t like that Armor works like that in DnD, and always house-rule it differently. So don’t force your definition of ‘Hit Points’ on me, because I have more than one reason to ignore it.
I've got a know-it-all in a game I'm running: a shade thief who was locked in the main boss' dungeon with the players (he was there when he awoke) named Grimm. Grimm has given the PCs some good information, helped them out of many a scrape - even somehow managed to put a sending stone "bug" on the main baddie to hear his plans. I'm interested to see the reactions on the cliffhanger of the adventure in a week or so when they learn their friend was a know-it-all...and the right hand man of the...
View full commentI've got a know-it-all in a game I'm running: a shade thief who was locked in the main boss' dungeon with the players (he was there when he awoke) named Grimm. Grimm has given the PCs some good information, helped them out of many a scrape - even somehow managed to put a sending stone "bug" on the main baddie to hear his plans. I'm interested to see the reactions on the cliffhanger of the adventure in a week or so when they learn their friend was a know-it-all...and the right hand man of the main baddie, employed to keep tabs on the PCs. >:)
I'm a guy. I like pretty women. But all these bikini-clad or bare-midriff adventurers are ridiculous. It makes NO SENSE. It breaks immersion. And it makes it that much harder for many girls or young women to find D&D approachable. Also, as a guy who likes playing funny characters, I think the occasional funny-looking guy or gal is perfectly appropriate. D&D is about adventure, but there should be room for other elements, and one of those is humor. Don't make D&D so...
View full commentI'm a guy. I like pretty women. But all these bikini-clad or bare-midriff adventurers are ridiculous. It makes NO SENSE. It breaks immersion. And it makes it that much harder for many girls or young women to find D&D approachable.
Also, as a guy who likes playing funny characters, I think the occasional funny-looking guy or gal is perfectly appropriate. D&D is about adventure, but there should be room for other elements, and one of those is humor.
Don't make D&D so 1-dimensional (or even 2-dimensional). Leave some room in it for the real world to creep in, where sometimes you fall in love with the average-looking but wonderful girl...
One thing about #6 that I find strange is the notion of "If the fighter can get close, the wizard's dead." That seems to be the angry old-school consensus, along with the related "If the wizard can keep the fighter at a distance, the fighter is dead." Whatever happened to "I ready my bow and shoot him in his eye"? Why should a fighter's ranged attacks be less deadly than his up close ones, if he is truly versatile (#4 above). I admit, I do love the idea of balance across classes so I never...
View full commentOne thing about #6 that I find strange is the notion of "If the fighter can get close, the wizard's dead." That seems to be the angry old-school consensus, along with the related "If the wizard can keep the fighter at a distance, the fighter is dead." Whatever happened to "I ready my bow and shoot him in his eye"? Why should a fighter's ranged attacks be less deadly than his up close ones, if he is truly versatile (#4 above). I admit, I do love the idea of balance across classes so I never feel like my class was a bad choice unless I'm the one playing it badly. I don't want to be the wizard's caddie at high level anymore than I want to be his mommy at low level. I want him by my side, being awesome while I do the same. Our jobs aren't exactly the same, but I want to feel cool while I do mine and clap and yell encouragement as he does his. I very much loved the roles of different classes, and hoped that they would expand on that idea across classes. I wanted a wizard defender who wasn't a swordmage but instead used magic to up his defenses, who tanked the demon prince while wearing a dress and flip-flops, armed with a stick and a headful of hoodoo. One of the failings of 4th ed is they have never hammered out the martial idea enough to come up with a really good, solid martial controller. They took the idea of martial meaning "no magic at all" too far and painted themselves into a corner.
I actually totally agree a high level fighter should be able to hit a wizard with a bow attack, its just that on average arrows do less damage than heavy weapons since you don't get your str bonus unless you have a special bow, and this would mean it takes 3 or 4 rounds of arrows (whatever) to take down the wizard outright, giving the wizard hope of escape (teleport). I posted the earlier comment purely in response to #6 above suggesting that a high level fighter should be close to immune to a...
View full commentI actually totally agree a high level fighter should be able to hit a wizard with a bow attack, its just that on average arrows do less damage than heavy weapons since you don't get your str bonus unless you have a special bow, and this would mean it takes 3 or 4 rounds of arrows (whatever) to take down the wizard outright, giving the wizard hope of escape (teleport). I posted the earlier comment purely in response to #6 above suggesting that a high level fighter should be close to immune to a full assault of a high level wizard. I actually don't think of PC vs PC contests much when I play. I love playing wizards and I love playing barbarians, pretty much the two extremes role wise. I worry less about balance and more about fun.
Al-Qadim (aka Arabian Adventures)
Birthright
Blackmoor
Council of Wyrms
Dark Sun
Dragonlance
Eberron
Forgotten Realms
Ghostwalk
Greyhawk
Hollow World
Jakandor
Kara-Tur (aka Oriental Adventures)
Maztica
Mystara (aka The Known World) -includes Savage Coast and Red Steel sub-settings
Planescape
Ravenloft -includes Masque of the Red Death sub-setting
Spelljammer