|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:02PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:16PM
#12
|
|
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
Can you point out where he says he doesn't respect the direction 5e is going? I can't seem to find it in the link provided.
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.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:29PM
#13
|
|
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
Can you point out where he says he doesn't respect the direction 5e is going? I can't seem to find it in the link provided.
Didn't you hear? Monte left 5e's design team.
République du Plateau, Montréal, Québec
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:34PM
#14
|
|
|
In the news article, Mearls says " No one voice can rise above the others, unless it is the voice of D&D fans as a whole". That, in my mind, might indicate some tension among the design team. One of the responsibilities of a team leader (like say Monte) would be to make the cacophony of voices more harmonious.
Initially at least, that one voice is gonna resemble the team leader's own. Starting out, he's responsible for setting the direction. Only after the public playtests can the voices of D&D fans as a whole be accounted for. Until we've actually playtested, we really have little to add-- aside from a lot of speculation  .
So, I'm thinking they jumped the gun just a bit here. It has me wondering: How much of the 20% playtest is Monte responsible for? What if the ideas he worked on and contributed turn out to be popular? What if they're carried forward into the final game? That could happen. So, maybe they wiped that part of the slate clean? Gotta avoid distasteful probabilities, even if they are remote, eh?
Just some rambling thoughts.
/\ Art
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:37PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
Can you point out where he says he doesn't respect the direction 5e is going? I can't seem to find it in the link provided.
I don't know why Monte left. But I now do not have the assurance that 5e is something that Monte would put his name on. So I have less assurance.
(Content removed) (ORC_Chaos: Edited-Edition Warring is against the Code of Conduct)
Moderated by
ORC_Chaos
on Apr 25, 2012 - 11:34PM
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:38PM
#16
|
|
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
Can you point out where he says he doesn't respect the direction 5e is going? I can't seem to find it in the link provided.
Didn't you hear? Monte left 5e's design team.
Yeah. I heard. He also said it was over differences with "the company." A lot of people are jumping to the conclusion that differences with the company means differences with the direction of the product. The term "creative differences" would have been much more accurate if this was the case. Since he was specific about them being differences with the company, I'm inclined to believe it means a contractual dispute or a difference of opinion about the OGL/GSL being considered for DDN.
A lot of people are also chicken little-ing this whole thing or ragequitting over undefined differences. The whole thing reminds me of the edition war during the 3e to 4e edition change. It's rather disgusting, but I figured that an edition war would rear its ugly head again. It looks like this is going to be the thing that starts it. I hope I'm wrong.
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.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:39PM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Nov 23, 2011
|
i think he doesnt agree with the speed at wich they are doing things, i mean the last thing i heard they where 20% done with the game, just how much of that and how much they put in that hasnt been much looked over is what bothers me. Afterall wizards has had a history of rushing product development and doing things to soon(im talking about 4th adition, although i like it and enjoy it as much as 3.5 edition i still feel that they could of waited a bit longer to not alienate fans).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:45PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Apr 23, 2009
|
I definitely went from auto-buying the initial books (for collector and nostalgia's sake) to saying - "You know if this is a steaming pile of crap I'm not going to buy it. I'm not going to keep pouring money into WOTC coffers for poor performance. I have to vote this time for real. I'm not going to be their patsy."
I will download the playtest. But I'm a very concerned shopper at this point.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:49PM
#19
|
|
|
I told you guys that Mearls was the 4e guardian.
I appreciate that Monte won't put his name on something he doesn't respect. That's why I had such hope.
Can you point out where he says he doesn't respect the direction 5e is going? I can't seem to find it in the link provided.
I don't know why Monte left. But I now do not have the assurance that 5e is something that Monte would put his name on. So I have less assurance.
I already know that Mearls will put his name on something poor. It's called 4e. I thought that at least in his own mind he had recanted once he'd played the game long enough which is kinda where I came from. I was gung ho at launch but I then played the game for a year. I came to hate it. I though didn't have the benefit of playtest which Mearls did.
I get that Monte's leadership encouraged you; it didn't encourage me, but I haven't followed Monte's career. I also get that you're discouraged now that he's left. The only hope I can offer you is a quote from Monte himself, "I may provide occasional consultation in the future." I don't think, if he is as honorable as you claim he is, that he would have made that statement if he disagreed with the direction of DDN so much that it prompted him to quit.
As for Mearls, again, I haven't followed his career either. You say that he will put his name on something poor, and you cite 4e. I'm not going to argue whether 4e was good or bad, that's just opinion on both our parts. I do think 4e had some good stuff in it. I want the next iteration of the game to be better than the last (which has been my experience with D&D thus far, going from AD&D 2e to 3e and then to 4e), and I want them to keep the good stuff from each edition.
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.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Apr 25, 2012 - 6:53PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Interesting. Surprising, given the effort it must have taken to get him on board in the first place.
Reading comprehension note: Monte went out of his way to indicate that his disagreement wasn't with the other designers. Don't read too much into this.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
