|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 3:38AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Nov 29, 2012
|
I've followed quite a lot of threads, and usually they all boil down to math and statistics. Of course the math should be sound, otherwise the game would be unplayable. But my group and I approach the game not as a math-hammer game, but as a roleplaying game. And we are mostly happy with the look of the classes so far. They are unique in their own way, and suitably streamlined to allow customizing and house ruling (or as the devs call it.. adding modules). But we focus on how the classes fill a role in the narrative. Not how they are all equal in combat. And we are worried that what we feel is a promising take on DnD, and possibly the best itteration of DnD ever (we played them all, but I won't get into edition reviewing), is turning into yet another math-hammer statistics roll-play game. My point is this:
Our wizard is insanely creative in his use of spells. He hardly ever casts a damaging spell in combat, but somehow manages to either aid the party or cripple the baddies anyway. And if his spell slots are being depleted or he hasn't got any spells prepared that suit the situation, he always has a staff or wand to unleash arcane fury. So while he may not be as effective as a fighter by looking at pure stats, once you account for roleplaying influences such as equipment and creativity, the wizard is a force to be reckoned with.
The same applies to the rogue. I get the sense that many people play the rogue as an assassin type stealth killer (at least that is my impression from reading the math arguments), but the rogue in our group works entirely different. Being the kliché halfling rogue, he's the one who crawls, lurks and filches his way into places the others cannot, opening doors, disabeling traps and generally aiding the party outside of combat. And pair him with the wizards creative spell use, and the two of them can wreak havoc on a dungeon or village. But during combat, he rarely bothers to deal direct damage. He jumps, tumbles, hides and sneaks around the battlefield, tripping, grappling and hampering the baddies any way he can, getting in sneak attacks when possible. But usually he does so to aid the party in dealing damage.
One time he climbed onto an owlbear and stabbed its eyes out, vastly improving the odds of the encounter. He even spent a large part of an encounter climbing and scaling the tapestries, bannisters and ropes of an inn, only to drop the chandelier onto a group of rowdy orcs, ending the encounter instantly. (That the encounter started because he tried to steal their gold in the first place is a different story).
But we feel as a group that if you want to talk about balance, you need to account for how the class plays as a role and account for how the class is intended to fill a narrative role, and not solely rely on math and statistics. We feel that the heavy emphasis on math and statistics is what ruined 3e and 4e for us.
But how do you feel about accounting for roleplay? Since the devs state that Next should be about getting back to the story rather than overly complex rules, is it okay that the classes aren't equal in math and combat, as long as the class has its own feel and part to play in the story?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 6:07AM
#2
|
|
|
I am playing a rogue currently. Whislt I love the versatility out of combat I would like the rogue to have more of a distinct role in combat that is made mechanically possible by maneuvers or special abilities. I could care less about his damage potential or equality. Maneuvers that would allow him to slow opponents movement, or put them at disadvantage, or poison them, etcetera I would prefer to just straight sneak attack (of any flavor) damage. I also don't want to have to rely in every situation on DM fiat to allow me to do such things as climb up an owlbear and blind it. Our group is not adverse to that kind of thing but I would prefer there to be some mechanics that more defined the rogue's role in combat, and not as a damage dealer.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 6:21AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Sep 22, 2012
|
Our wizard is insanely creative in his use of spells...
The same applies to the rogue...
I agree with you the game do not relly only in a math-hammer. Indeed wizards and rogues are more complex classes that allow a nice roleplaing, but the roleplaying part and statistics are orthogonal and both need to be adresses. Statistics are imperative to balance combate, but equally imperative is adress well roleplaying and exploration for each class.
But we feel as a group that if you want to talk about balance, you need to account for how the class plays as a role and account for how the class is intended to fill a narrative role, and not solely rely on math and statistics. We feel that the heavy emphasis on math and statistics is what ruined 3e and 4e for us.
Umbalance and a broken system after 10 level in fact rined 3e, while homogeneity and low emphasis in roleplyaing and exploration ruined 4e.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 6:34AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 29, 2009
|
I guess one of the reasons the discussions often look at the math, is that the math is pretty objective and equal for all. The judgement calls involved in roleplaying nad improvisational actions are not nearly as easy to discuss across playing styles and expectations.
Personally I like my D&D (and rpgs in general) to have plenty of room for improvasation, so that goes for all classes. So if it seems fair that the rogue can climb on the back of the Owlbear and stab it in the eye, it seems equally fair that the fighter might jam his shield in it's beak and render it unable to bite or something. So whether or not those sorts of things are allowed at a given gaming table (since it relies heavily on DM fiat not all peopel will like it) it doesn't do much to balance classes. Unless of course it is used so much that class abilities go in the background, but in that case it hardly matter which rules you use.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 7:39AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2008
|
I doubt there are almost any players on this forum who want an entirely math-based approach. Role-playing is the name of the game, but how are we supposed to determine how a class "fits into the narrative structure" of a game? The narrative structure is determined by the players and the DM and it is almost impossible to judge how a class fits into a story. For example, a Wizard in an Ebberron setting is completely different from a Wizard in a Dark Sun setting. How do we determine if the wizard we have fits into either of these settings?
On the flip side, math is easy. You plug and chug the equations and you get answers. The Rogue doesn't need to deal crazy damage, but his current damage is a little too low. I can accept that. These numbers are important for the game design, and at this early stage in the game they are what we can work with the most. Now as things move ahead the numbers will fade into the background like they do and we will be talking more about how things will work in a story.
Besides, you can ignore the math if you want and still have fun. The OP just made a good case for it above, but unbalanced math will cause problems for the game as a whole if it is released that way.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 12:38PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Our wizard is insanely creative in his use of spells. He hardly ever casts a damaging spell in combat, but somehow manages to either aid the party or cripple the baddies anyway. And if his spell slots are being depleted or he hasn't got any spells prepared that suit the situation, he always has a staff or wand to unleash arcane fury. So while he may not be as effective as a fighter by looking at pure stats, once you account for roleplaying influences such as equipment and creativity, the wizard is a force to be reckoned with.
So, basically, you let the wizard cheat, because he describes things creatively?
That's fine, but you're not playing an RPG.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 1:31PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
I've followed quite a lot of threads, and usually they all boil down to math and statistics. Of course the math should be sound, otherwise the game would be unplayable.
This is the only part of your post which is valid.
But my group and I approach the game not as a math-hammer game, but as a roleplaying game. And we are mostly happy with the look of the classes so far. They are unique in their own way, and suitably streamlined to allow customizing and house ruling (or as the devs call it.. adding modules). But we focus on how the classes fill a role in the narrative. Not how they are all equal in combat.
Yea, here is the thing: I don't know how you guys judged the classes. I don't have access to your subjective and holistic thought process. But I, who also primarily care about how classes fill a role in the narrative, am not happy with the game's current balance. For the most part things are working well. However, the fighter is outperforming the monk and the rogue by far too large a margin. I can show why I think that mathematically. Keep in mind, the monk's role in the game is also a combative one. I can also show why I don't feel that the rogue is currently capable of filling the role of a stealthy sneak who comes up behind his foes and takes them out with a dagger when they don't expect it. I can also show why, mathematically, overall, including all the different roles of the game, the fighter is a little too good at the moment. I can do that mathematically. And, like you said, the math of the game must be sound.
The same applies to the rogue. I get the sense that many people play the rogue as an assassin type stealth killer (at least that is my impression from reading the math arguments), but the rogue in our group works entirely different. Being the kliché halfling rogue, he's the one who crawls, lurks and filches his way into places the others cannot, opening doors, disabeling traps and generally aiding the party outside of combat. And pair him with the wizards creative spell use, and the two of them can wreak havoc on a dungeon or village. But during combat, he rarely bothers to deal direct damage. He jumps, tumbles, hides and sneaks around the battlefield, tripping, grappling and hampering the baddies any way he can, getting in sneak attacks when possible. But usually he does so to aid the party in dealing damage.
One time he climbed onto an owlbear and stabbed its eyes out, vastly improving the odds of the encounter. He even spent a large part of an encounter climbing and scaling the tapestries, bannisters and ropes of an inn, only to drop the chandelier onto a group of rowdy orcs, ending the encounter instantly. (That the encounter started because he tried to steal their gold in the first place is a different story).
I would love it if the rogue actually had mechanical edges which allowed him to play the role you describe. Unfortunately, the mechanics of the game currently do not support such a reality. His sneak attacks are so weak that a fighter deals better damage without sneaking. So, "when he can" get sneak attack he still doesn't shine. Mighty Exertion helps a fighter with climb just as much as Skill Mastery helps the rogue at the same task. So, there is no reason why a fighter cannot do the same sort of thing to the owlbear you described. In fact, due to his high health, AC, and likely strength score, he would be better at doing that sort of thing. Same goes for grappling, tripping, and otherwise hampering enemies. The mechanics for that sort of thing rely on strength. Between Mighty Exertion and a fighter's likelihood of having a higher strength score, he is just better at that sort of thing. As for opening doors, the only time a rogue really gets to shine is when the door is too sturdy for the fighter to have any chance to just break it down. Which leaves the rogue more capable at exactly one type of thing: sneaking about*. Now, certainly, the rogue is better at that. But, exactly how does the rogue doing that benefit the party (most of the time)? It is not like the rogue can use that ability to confer any real benefits on the group.
Sorry, but I am not with you. Currently, the math of the game is not sound. That bothers me.
*Please note, when I say sneaking about I do not just mean using the sneak skill. I mean the various ways in which Skill Mastery can help a rogue move about in places that other characters cannot get to, be it via overcoming a hazard, or bluffing your way into an area.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 1:46PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Nov 29, 2012
|
Thanks for the replies. Honestly we like how Next is turning out so far, but the (sometimes heated) discussion about math and who should have more and who should have less was pretty much the reason I didn't join the discussions till now. I find it rather hard to draw any sort of meaningful interpretation of what people want. Fighters want more unique powers, rogues and clerics want more damage and wizards want better spells. But at the same time people complain that the monsters are too weak?!? I'm really happy I don't work for WotC...  But your replies give me faith that Next isn't being overrun by math-hungry min/max gamers, and that actual roleplaying is still something people care about. So thank you for that. And no, the wizard doesn't cheat.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 29, 2012 - 7:12PM
#9
|
|
|
Bravo, PedaGak! Your group is an inspiration. Unfortunately, Wizards knows that books sell because they have content, which means creating much more rules and statistics than are strictly necessary to play the game. And then players are subconcously compelled to try to use all the rules appropriately - whether the rule is needed or not, or whether it really works or not. If it doesn't work, it's more likely to be hosueruled than simplified or dropped entirely. It's human nature. The economic realities D&D must face directly contribute to over-emphasis of roll-play. Which is quite sad to me.  Long live the white box!
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Nov 30, 2012 - 6:22AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
If you're letting him unleash "arcane fury" when he doesn't have any spells prepared to suit the situation, how is that not cheating?
What is he using, mechanically?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
