|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:44PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Dec 12, 2005
|
That's my point, all of these game elements were added because that's the way they did things in older editions, not because they actually make a better game.
Where is your basis for believing that the "only" reason they were added is because that's the way they did things in older editions? That's like saying that there's absolutely nothing in an older edition that could make the game better. If that were true then we should just throw out the entire game and play something else. I've played every edition of D&D and I think a lot of these older concepts are far better and make a far better play experience than a lot of stuff they put into 4e.
My LFR Modules: Spoiler:
Show
EAST1-3 Unbidden (H3)
EAST2-3 Nightmares (P1)
NETH3-1 Secrets and Shadows (Paragon Tier) (Author)
ELTU3-6 True Blue (Heroic Tier) (Author)
EPIC3-3 The Tangled Skein of Destiny (Co-Author)
ABER4-3 A Little Rebellion (Paragon Tier) (Author)
WATE4-1 Paying the Piper (Heroic Tier) (Co-Author)
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:54PM
#32
|
|
|
I'd much prefer a cleric or alchemist or herbalist be able to produce X magical healing potions per day that last for a single day. Since these potions are magic they don't break anyone's verisimilitude. They can then work much like surges work.
To be fair, as soon as you think about HP as an actual indicator of "wounds," your verisimilitude has been dashed to pieces. 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:54PM
#33
|
|
|
That's my point, all of these game elements were added because that's the way they did things in older editions, not because they actually make a better game.
Where is your basis for believing that the "only" reason they were added is because that's the way they did things in older editions? That's like saying that there's absolutely nothing in an older edition that could make the game better.
Let's be fair, now. I don't agree with everything he said, but he did give individual reasons why he thought these specific things he called out made the game worse.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:55PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jan 25, 2007
|
3e and 4e, as imperfect as they are, at least have clear design goals. The only design goal of Next seems to be to make it like the older editions.
If you believe this, then there's a communication problem. The point behind Next is not to make it be like older editions, the point is to take the best parts from all of them and make the best D&D evar.
Your statement stands in contradiction. Taking the best parts from all of them is in fact making it like older editions =/ "take the best parts" is mutually inclusive of "make it be like older editions." To what extent is arguable, I know a lot of 4e fans feel like it has very little 4e in it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:59PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
3e and 4e, as imperfect as they are, at least have clear design goals. The only design goal of Next seems to be to make it like the older editions.
If you believe this, then there's a communication problem. The point behind Next is not to make it be like older editions, the point is to take the best parts from all of them and make the best D&D evar.
Your statement stands in contradiction. Taking the best parts from all of them is in fact making it like older editions =/ "take the best parts" is mutually inclusive of "make it be like older editions." To what extent is arguable, I know a lot of 4e fans feel like it has very little 4e in it.
No, it's not a contradiction. There are lots of things in the older editions that aren't the best parts.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 4:59PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2010
|
Where is your basis for believing that the "only" reason they were added is because that's the way they did things in older editions? That's like saying that there's absolutely nothing in an older edition that could make the game better.
No, it's really not.
Things like rolling for hit points are terrible ideas. It's unfair, is not fun and adds nothing at all to the game. The only reason the designers wouold ever add a mechanic like that to 5E is if they're purely trying to appeal to nostalgia. That should be pretty obvious.
The entirety of 5E has a purely retro feel to it. We're past the point of "taking good stuff from every edition" and are making AD&D 2.75.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 5:05PM
#37
|
|
|
I think that trying to artifically limit an adventure day by hit points was bad game design - not being able to keep pushing on because your healing somehow was not working anymore?
The same criticism could apply to Vancian spellcasting.
Yeah, I can see that being a problem for grid combat but not so much if you dont use the grid.
This I really don't understand. How does not having a grid make it easier to visualize complex areas of effect?
That's like saying that there's absolutely nothing in an older edition that could make the game better.
I implied no such thing. The fact that a mechanic existed in an older game is not sufficient evidence that the mechanic would be either a good or bad addition to Next.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 5:07PM
#38
|
|
|
Where is your basis for believing that the "only" reason they were added is because that's the way they did things in older editions? That's like saying that there's absolutely nothing in an older edition that could make the game better.
No, it's really not.
Things like rolling for hit points are terrible ideas. It's unfair, is not fun and adds nothing at all to the game. The only reason the designers wouold ever add a mechanic like that to 5E is if they're purely trying to appeal to nostalgia. That should be pretty obvious.
The entirety of 5E has a purely retro feel to it. We're past the point of "taking good stuff from every edition" and are making AD&D 2.75.
Well maybe some people might feel like the underdog for rolling less hps than others.
Used properly as a story tool by the DM the story of this underdog surviving a tough challenge might make the player shine and turn a disadvantage to an advantage.
I am not sure how you can simulate this in a game where all similarily specced fighters will have the same HPs.
This is not nostlagia talking - this is an element of the game that in my opinon is missing from 4th edition however unbalanced some peopel might consider it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 5:10PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
So, you're saying there is no way at all to simulate "the story of an underdog" unless we have randomized HP?
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 5:23PM
#40
|
|
|
Used properly as a story tool by the DM the story of this underdog surviving a tough challenge might make the player shine and turn a disadvantage to an advantage.
I am not sure how you can simulate this in a game where all similarily specced fighters will have the same HPs.
This is not nostlagia talking - this is an element of the game that in my opinon is missing from 4th edition however unbalanced some peopel might consider it.
Arguing in favor of playing a 5th level fighter with a 16 Con who has less hit points than a Wizard with a 12 Con is an argument for bad game design. Why not have fighters just roll a D4 for Hit Points to make them an "Underdog"? Are we going to argue that players should keep a natural 1 rolled on Hit Points to make them an "Underdog"?
Rolling for Hit Points is a Board Game mechanic that needs to die. Board Games force players out. That's a key component of Board Games - to force players out by chance alone. Go directly to Jail, do not pass go, do not collect 200gp. All by chance. A Fighter is forced out when they die from not having enough Hit Points. Having the same Strength and same Weapon doesn't spec fighters? Not having enough hp to do the job kills them. It forces them from the game on a one time chance they cannot fix until they have a new character. For people who constantly argue against the "video game" aspect of DnD it's odd that they're forcing people to make a new toon.
|
|
|
