|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 6:52PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Jul 31, 2007
|
I am of the opinion that whenever a book introduces a new class, then the entire class should be included. That means the core books, too.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 6:52PM
#12
|
|
|
Are you familiar with the 3rd edition epic level handbook?
Putting off high levels until after the game is published doesn't make anything better.
It wasn't publically playtested for an additional year and was a 3.0 product.
The same is likely to be true of trying to turn high level play into splat books in DDN. Or do you honestly think they're going to put every splat book in their production line through half the playtesting they are doing for core?
And what does being a 3.0 product have to do with it? They apparently thought it was good enough to let go on to 3.5 with only a few minor tweaks. This is something else I doubt would be any better in 5e if they try making it a separate book.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 7:01PM
#13
|
|
|
No, finish the game before publication.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 7:54PM
#14
|
|
|
I am of the opinion that whenever a book introduces a new class, then the entire class should be included. That means the core books, too.
Only if the class has an end. No reason that a L11-20 book couldn't be followed by a L21-30 book or even a L31-40 book.
Before posting, ask yourself WWWS: What Would Wrecan Say? My Webcomic: 5 Minute WorkdayUpdated every Tuesday and Thursday Spoiler:
Show
Updated Tuesday and ThursdayRead my blog on the WotC Community Site (updated irregularly to avoid spamming the "Featured Blogger" list). You can follow me on Twitter: "@DnDJester"
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 8:51PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
Ah yes, bounded levels vs unbounded levels.
As a player I like unbounded levels, it gives me an excuse to commit five kinds of genocide.
As a game designer I hate unbounded levels because it means the system has to be either excrutiatingly perfect or you have to make sweeping changes to the progression at some point, al a 3e.
As a story teller and world builder I'm torn because while there is always a bigger fish, on the other hand eventually you do hit a point of diminishing returns, especially if one's interests have expanded since the orc killing days.
I'd like it if there were other things to do with a peak level character's resources, things like creating nations, organizations, legendary magical artifacts, and whole new planes.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 9:18PM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
No.
Paragon and Epic play has to designed at the same time as Gritty and Heroic or the math won't wrk.
And if you designed paragon with herioc... you might as well release it.
Look at it this way.
The currect fighter starts with +3 Weapon attack and it increases by +1 at the 4th level. Following this pattern it would increase again at 8th to +5.The books goess to 10th level and is shiped out. The cleric's and wizard's attack never increases. Okay
The paragon is produced. The fighter gets +1 to attack at levels 12, 16, and is at +8 at 20. The fighter is +8. The cleric is +2. The wizaard is +2 Woah has bounded accuracy break?
Oh, I forgot the +1 to two ability scores. The fighter is probably maxxing his attack ability. The wizard is probabaly not putting many points to it. So the fighter is walking around with +16 and the wizard is holding +4.
The precedence of the first book might not workfor the second. So 10-20 needs its own set of crazy confusing dissassociated rules. And it's Epic Handbook all over again.
Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds.
Constitution Based Class for Next!
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 9:44PM
#17
|
|
|
I think everyone agrees, all levels, especially the highest levels, must be designed at the same time.
Im unsure about how I feel about presentation. On the one hand, it helps to focus on the specific range of levels that the players are going thru, the same way as an adventure focuses on the relevant levels. On the other hand, there should be encounters that are satisfyingly easy, and other encounters that players should run away from. So there is a need for a mix of levels, especially where bounded accuracy means high level heroes will continue to encounter low level monsters.
Despite 4e I dont think three 10-level ranges: heroic, paragon, and epic.
I still think in narrower 5-level ranges, always have:
• 0-4 (lowest)
• 5-9
• 10-14
• 15-19 (highest)
• 20+.
I often refer to the “lowest levels”, really meaning the Wizard doesnt have Fireball yet. These narrower tiers also work better when talking about adventures, where heroes are sometimes different levels for various reasons.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 10:00PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Why not the BECMI tiers?
1-3
4-14
15-25
26-36
37+
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 10:02PM
#19
|
|
|
Why not the BECMI tiers?
1-3
4-14
15-25
26-36
37+
Level 4 is awefully different from level 14!
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 03, 2012 - 10:05PM
#20
|
Date Joined:
Oct 21, 2008
|
I think it depends on page space limits jester and the benefits of making such a move.
What additional game modules/ classes/ monsters/ dm guidelines are we gonna get for a lets say 1-10 core set?
Do they need more time to balance things better in higher levels?
Is the price lower (smaller books)?
Perhaps a survey before such a move could be beneficial to all, showing us the pros and cons of such a move.
But right off the bat, no I wouldnt mind a 1-10 level core set.
|
|
|
