|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:26PM
#261
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2012
|
We want to play D&D and D&D needs its iconic things. Period.
Otherwise I´d play something different!
As long as those iconic things aren't forced on people who don't want them, then by all means include them.
How far do you take that?
Nothing is forced. Tastes will differ. If people hate elves, they aren't being forced to play D&D.
Elves are not forced. Elves are presented but not automatically integrated to other parts of the system. For example, you don't have to be an elf to be a ranger. You are free to ignore the race with no mechanical implications. This cannot be said of all iconic things. Two of the biggies are alignment and vancian magic. Which is why it's great if these things can be present for those who want them but not be forced on those who don't.
I can totally understand the vancian thing.
Alignment...
Well, people have been ignoring that for decades. Writing "optional" beside it is nice I guess...
A few guidelines for using the internet:
1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart.
2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons.
3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves.
4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health.
5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:28PM
#262
|
|
|
We want to play D&D and D&D needs its iconic things. Period.
Otherwise I´d play something different!
As long as those iconic things aren't forced on people who don't want them, then by all means include them.
How far do you take that?
Nothing is forced. Tastes will differ. If people hate elves, they aren't being forced to play D&D.
Elves are not forced. Elves are presented but not automatically integrated to other parts of the system. For example, you don't have to be an elf to be a ranger. You are free to ignore the race with no mechanical implications. This cannot be said of all iconic things. Two of the biggies are alignment and vancian magic. Which is why it's great if these things can be present for those who want them but not be forced on those who don't.
I can totally understand the vancian thing.
Alignment...
Well, people have been ignoring that for decades. Writing "optional" beside it is nice I guess...
Well now that really depends. It's not just a matter of writing optional by alignment, though that's a good start. Past spells and magic items have keyed heavily off alignment and need to be taken into account as well if they are to be brought into DDN.
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:35PM
#263
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2012
|
We want to play D&D and D&D needs its iconic things. Period.
Otherwise I´d play something different!
As long as those iconic things aren't forced on people who don't want them, then by all means include them.
How far do you take that?
Nothing is forced. Tastes will differ. If people hate elves, they aren't being forced to play D&D.
Elves are not forced. Elves are presented but not automatically integrated to other parts of the system. For example, you don't have to be an elf to be a ranger. You are free to ignore the race with no mechanical implications. This cannot be said of all iconic things. Two of the biggies are alignment and vancian magic. Which is why it's great if these things can be present for those who want them but not be forced on those who don't.
I can totally understand the vancian thing.
Alignment...
Well, people have been ignoring that for decades. Writing "optional" beside it is nice I guess...
Well now that really depends. It's not just a matter of writing optional by alignment, though that's a good start. Past spells and magic items have keyed heavily off alignment and need to be taken into account as well if they are to be brought into DDN.
I guess that, as a DM, I just never had problem with stuff I didn't want in the game creeping in.
A few guidelines for using the internet:
1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart.
2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons.
3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves.
4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health.
5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:39PM
#264
|
|
|
I guess that, as a DM, I just never had problem with stuff I didn't want in the game creeping in.
It's not always about creep. Sometimes it's about desire. For example, you may not want to deal with mechanical alignment, but a circle of protection from evil spell might make a great deal of sense in your game world. Now you can either leave it out, allow it (thus letting alignment mechanics back in), or try to fix it by making it apply to specific things/creatures. You run into similar situations with spells like holy word, which might also be thematically appropo despite not using mechanical alignment.
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:42PM
#265
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2012
|
I guess that, as a DM, I just never had problem with stuff I didn't want in the game creeping in.
It's not always about creep. Sometimes it's about desire. For example, you may not want to deal with mechanical alignment, but a circle of protection from evil spell might make a great deal of sense in your game world. Now you can either leave it out, allow it (thus letting alignment mechanics back in), or try to fix it by making it apply to specific things/creatures. You run into similar situations with spells like holy word, which might also be thematically appropo despite not using mechanical alignment.
Sure. I guess I've just never looked at that as anyone forcing me to do anything. I suppose, growing up with D&D (may parents played) and doing 2e before I was aware it was a thing people thought hard about, I have always just been fine house ruling things.
EDIT: that said, it's obviously cool that they are approaching things from a more general view.
A few guidelines for using the internet:
1. Mentally add "In my opinion" to the end of basically anything someone else says. Of course it's their opinion, they don't need to let you know. You're pretty smart.
2. Assume everyone means everything in the best manner they could mean it. Save yourself some stress and give people the benefit of the doubt. We'll all be happier if we type less emoticons.
3. Don't try to read people's minds. Sometimes people mean exactly what they say. You probably don't know them any better than they know themselves.
4. Let grammar slide. If you understood what they meant, you're good. It's better for your health.
5. Breath. It's just a dumb game.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 10, 2012 - 10:45PM
#266
|
|
|
EDIT: that said, it's obviously cool that they are approaching things from a more general view.
Very much so.
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.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 11, 2012 - 2:58AM
#267
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
More of Mike's Tweets:
 @MexRAGE
i know your intention was good...but i think this may turn the rest of the party into the wizard's minions more than companion.
OK what is the context ie what is THIS ... in that sentence.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 11, 2012 - 4:49AM
#268
|
|
|
More of Mike's Tweets:
@MexRAGE
i know your intention was good...but i think this may turn the rest of the party into the wizard's minions more than companion.
OK what is the context ie what is THIS ... in that sentence.
If I had to venture I would say they're probably talking about Mearls' idea that wizard single-target spells are intended to make wizard the most effective character at taking down dragons and "big-bad-evil-guys."
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 11, 2012 - 8:10AM
#269
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
More of Mike's Tweets:
@MexRAGE
i know your intention was good...but i think this may turn the rest of the party into the wizard's minions more than companion.
OK what is the context ie what is THIS ... in that sentence.
On his article, he said that the wizard cast spell that will kill dragon, while the rest of the party distract the dragon by being annoying at him...hence the reason i mentioned that his idea sounded like the wizard being goku charging up the spirit bomb/genkidama, while the rest of the party are just the minor characters that distract the enemy... And that this basically give the wizard the status of protagonist at a mechanical level
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 11, 2012 - 8:26AM
#270
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
More of Mike's Tweets:
@MexRAGE
i know your intention was good...but i think this may turn the rest of the party into the wizard's minions more than companion.
OK what is the context ie what is THIS ... in that sentence.
On his article, he said that the wizard cast spell that will kill dragon, while the rest of the party distract the dragon by being annoying at him...hence the reason i mentioned that his idea sounded like the wizard being goku charging up the spirit bomb/genkidama, while the rest of the party are just the minor characters that distract the enemy... And that this basically give the wizard the status of protagonist at a mechanical level
hmmm there is always a risk... and yes everyone should be protagonistas most of the time.Though there are bound to be shining moments for one hero or the other as long as its properly distributed.
Sometimes the fighter uses the lance of dragon slaying we quested to get, and somtimes the wizard has an entombment ritual which requires you to get blood from the beast first. (ie bloody the thing and throw me the dagger with its blood on there so I can catelyize the spell...).
I think the above should come from McGuffins though and less from hardwired always baked in elements.
Teamwork is definitely primary.
Speaking of that, I want spells with current hp thresholds back, so useful and flavorful. (Mind control yes even charm is a brutalization... Good Cop Bad Cop bonus if you didnt attack and similar things)
|
|
|
