|
5 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 6:56AM
#191
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
I really think we need to have a clear picture of what the Core is at this stage
This wiki page might help.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 7:11AM
#192
|
|
|
I wish one of their design goals was to make a game that makes people say, "Wow, this is how D&D should have been all along. These rules make sense to new players, and enable us to tell any story we want."
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 7:20AM
#193
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
I really think we need to have a clear picture of what the Core is at this stage
This wiki page might help.
Thanks for the link. This is indeed useful as a general reference.
What I tried to do is a breakdown of the core as it is in the current playtest.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 7:45AM
#194
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Um, because we want to be given the option to play core-only as well as core-with-modules, yet cannot concretely identify which is which, if there are modules?
Core Only would be exactly one or zero of everything.
One class, one weapon die, no feats, no skills, one monster, maybe one spell (if that one class is a spellcaster).
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 08, 2013 - 6:25PM
#195
|
|
|
No, you didn't.
If a class feature is based off of an option, what do you do if that option is not available (just delete the class)?
This isn't rocket science.
If a class feature is based off an option, and you're not using tht option, you don't get that class feature.
What becomes of the class?
..yes, "rocket science"...
No, it's not rocket science. If a class gives you optional stuff as a class feature, and you're not using that optional stuff, then the optional stuff just doesn't get used. You just don't like the answer so you're ignoring it.
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.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 12:04AM
#196
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
No, you didn't.
If a class feature is based off of an option, what do you do if that option is not available (just delete the class)?
This isn't rocket science.
If a class feature is based off an option, and you're not using tht option, you don't get that class feature.
What becomes of the class?
..yes, "rocket science"...
No, it's not rocket science. If a class gives you optional stuff as a class feature, and you're not using that optional stuff, then the optional stuff just doesn't get used. You just don't like the answer so you're ignoring it.
I am not ignoring anything, the opposite, I don't think a class should lose features and others not.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 12:06AM
#197
|
|
|
I might have believed this if they had left "core" at what we had in the very first playtest packet.
Hypothetically, the final result of D&D Next could still look something like the first playtest iteration. As far as I can tell, the playtest packets havent been evolving incrementally based on the previous playtest iteration. Rather, each iteration is its own surprise, to focus on specific issues. Presumably, the designers have flagged “favorites” from previous playtests even if they dont show up in a current one.
Finally, someone who actually "gets it".
I've said before, just because something disappears from one packet to the next doesn't mean they've removed it from the game (or consideration). They just want the playtesters to focus on something else.
Oh, I completely get it too, I just don't agree with it. Its not ok for someone to come on the forums and troll, yet its ok for WotC and Mike Mearls specifically to troll the entire play test? Where does that logic come from?
In what way, specifically, are they trolling the playtest?
Mike Mearls came out and said in an article that they are specifically putting things into the play test to elicit a negative response. They are literally trolling us to see what we will reject and what we will grudgingly accept.
I don't agree with that method at all...
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 12:32AM
#198
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
He didn't quite say that and who knows some of the tings they suspect will be hated may work out well.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 1:01AM
#199
|
|
|
He didn't quite say that and who knows some of the tings they suspect will be hated may work out well.
Which still fits the term "trolling".
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 1:06AM
#200
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2001
|
To many things are subjective and trying to claim "things I don't like" as trolling is moronic at best.
Reducing a character to a list of dice rolls and modifiers is not role playing*
*pg 30, AD&D 2nd Ed DMG, 1989.
|
|
|
