At this point in the game, I think D&DN needs guys that know how to build systems, not worlds. Mathematicians, not story tellers.
There is no way I can express how much I disagree, but whatever blows your skirt up.
Meh. Look, I'm a D&D cosmology guy. I'm all about the fluff and history, but I'm not about to say, "Hey, who cares about having a workable system! Just make sure that you include the 2e planar model and I'll be happy, bro! Oh, and don't forget to retcon the 4E Forgotten Realms, 'kay? All of my hate!"
If you've got a weak base, you've got nothing, especially when you consider the number of excellent systems out there. Just "being D&D" isn't going to be enough to sustain the new edition's sales, especially when you consider the number of customers interested in Dungeons & Dragons as a more universal engine around which they can build settings and stories. As important as I believe D&D's universal history to be (there aren't many around that can outshine me with regards to that topic), I understand that the history can be found in setting books.
You want a strong game? Well, nowadays especially... you've got to have a strong system to back it up. It's not enough to have one without the other.
Edit: And stop imagining me in women's clothing, ya friggin' perv. Trust me, it wouldn't be a pretty picture. Skirts, sheesh. Indeed!
You mean a derivative of 4th Ed; yeah, operate under another assumption
So, DDN should have absolutely no inspiration or qualities of 4th edition, either bad or good? Because the game I'm seeing in 13th edition has certain things from 4E that were good, but is so greatly different from 4E that referring to it as some sort of 4.5 is ridiculous in the extreme.
Want the tl;dr of my posts? Read the bold text; I put it there to highlight the main points for ease of skimming.
I was operating under the assumption that "the DDN that should have been" was a new game that did things in a new and interesting way; a game that is innovative and offered a new way of doing things.
You mean a derivative of 4th Ed; yeah, operate under another assumption
13th Age shouldn't be called a derivitive of 4e at all. It does contain some 4e-inspired elements (as does Next, although Next's are not as elegantly applied), but it's generally wrong to think of 13th age that way. I think that the extent to which that's the case gets overstated, because a lot of people are too quick to make the 3.5:Pathfinder::4e:13th Age analogy, which isn't very apropos. 13th Age is a new system. It's overall D&D enough that it feels like it could be an edition of D&D, but it's not a repackaging of any existing system. That's very far off the mark. In fact, "The DDN that should have been" is a pretty good way to describe it. It combines what I see as the strongest elements of every D&D edition into a cleaner, simpler and more coherant whole than I would have thought possible. It does differ from Next in that it does not try to be everything to everybody. It's happy to decide that things work some way or another, although the rules are naturally somewhat modular. I wouldn't expect every last human to like 13th Age, but it's hard for me to imagine someone who enjoyed any edition of D&D (and isn't absurdly closed-minded about the very idea of 13th Age) to find it pretty exciting.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer.
Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
Soul- I agree with the wonderings about a IH/D&D next, but I dont think their going there or anywhere near there even with the dice pools. funny thing... that 13th Age game is using "stunts" in an almost identical way to IH it seems.
I'm hoping the Advanced game and/or modules/houserules will get me where I want to go with DDN. I'll have to take a closer look at 13th Age though, if they're using "stunts" like in IH.
RE: 4e, na not for me everything was too controlled, which was good for the DM but bad I think for creativitiy and the players, I tended to agree with some others that at least for me it was more small unit tactics wargaming than what I liked about more a freestyle RPG.
I've grown tired of 4e's shortcomings myself, so I'm not arguing with you; my point was not on the style of gameplay but the fact that high magic vs. low magic isn't baked into the game, because it's so eminently reflavorable.
As someone who loves both D&D 4E and 13th Age (as well as a bit of 3.5E), here's what I have to say on the matter: 13th Age is NOT D&D 4E. At all.
4E is supposedly tied to a grid, 13th Age uses zones.
4E is strictly AEDU up to Player's Handbook 3 -- and even then there isn't much diversity, as Power Points effectively serve as encounter abilities, while Essentials trade off martial dailies for empowered basic attacks -- whil 13th Age classes are each built differently but the power of their abilities are restricted by a combination of level availability + frequency of use (for example, it is completely possible to build a Sorcerer that's 100% daily spell-centric, while most non-casters heavily use basic attacks even though they can take up a per-battle or even a per-day ability depending on build and class).
4E class features are barely customizable (I'm guessing no one ever dared try swapping, let's say, Hunter's Quarry with Combat Challenge), 13th Age class features are expected to be swappable if it fits the character's story.
4E has detailed equipment complete with feat support, 13th Age equipment are played up for laughs more or less (utilizing Gamma World 7E's weapon/armor list, and encouraging DMs to not be so serious on the price lists, since each town would likely have a different price list, not only on a per-town basis, but also on a per-event basis [e.g. a world-famous event would likely jack up prices like crazy]).
4E magic items were part of the system math, 13th Age (like D&D Next) does not take magic items into mathematical consideration and expects them to make you REALLY powerful but at a price (mostly in the form of roleplaying quirks).
The only things I can find as common to 4E and 13th Age would be
Difference in monster/PC design (made obvious with mooks and Large/Huge enemies, as Huge enemies take 3x longer to kill than normal enemies and hit 3x as hard, while mooks are designed to be run in swarms and die fast, much like 4E minions)
Unification of the attack/save roll
saves are, like in 4E, restricted to save ends effects, like death saving throws [which are deadlier in 13th Age on account of needing a 16 to succeed, although unlike in 4E rolling a 16 on your death saving throw in 13th Age lets you heal up; either way, you're not going to be rolling death saving throws for more than 3 rounds]
following the footsteps of 3E's simplification of saves and 4E's unification of the rolls, 13th Age further simplifies defenses from AC/Fort/Ref/Will to AC/Physical/Mental
Recoveries/healing surges
except healing in 13th Age is MUCH more limited than in D&D 4E; for one, everyone gets only 8 recoveries [unless the DM says so, and/or they take class features that increase their number of recoveries]
Similarity in character creation algorithm
ability scores, ability modifiers, and a bunch of other math-related stuff
- - - - - Aside from "a love letter to D&D", 13th Age is often cited as "a book of every houserule you didn't know you wanted" (or something to that degree, memory fails me on that one). So I think this is the part about 13th Age that Baalmoth would like: most of 13th Age's features are so modular in design he can, as desired, take most of the system and houserule them into his Pathfinder game with little to no changes.
One Unique Thing
Icons and Icon Relationships
Magic Items and the Karma system
Rituals (only similar to 4E's Ritual in the fact that it's an out-of-combat resource; otherwise it's more like Ars Magica's freeform magic at least)
The background system (which is basically the same as FATE's Aspects, but without being tied to Fate Points) requires quite an amount of hammering to get it to fit Pathfinder / 3.5E design since it's tied to 13th Age's character progression system, but it's still possible Also, specific class features might catch his fancy if he likes 'em.
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
Oh, and I've heard it whispered that Monte left because the art department refused his repeated requests for more leather straps and buckles. Seriously, whoever said that needs to raise their hand and be recognized.
Um, but seriously... I think Cook left due to better offers from another corner. Sad in some respects, a boon in others. While Cook is very much one of my favorite idea men in the industry (he comes up with great, great setting material), his actual work on system design can be, at times, a little... sketchy.
At this point in the game, I think D&DN needs guys that know how to build systems, not worlds. Mathematicians, not story tellers.
EDIT: Also, Numenera looks like a really, really cool concept.
Actually, the rumours I've heard is that Mr. Cook didn't really want to work under a former 'employee'. Especially one he thought didn't have a chance to go anywhere without his own name on the products this employee made.
Oh, and I've heard it whispered that Monte left because the art department refused his repeated requests for more leather straps and buckles. Seriously, whoever said that needs to raise their hand and be recognized.
Um, but seriously... I think Cook left due to better offers from another corner. Sad in some respects, a boon in others. While Cook is very much one of my favorite idea men in the industry (he comes up with great, great setting material), his actual work on system design can be, at times, a little... sketchy.
At this point in the game, I think D&DN needs guys that know how to build systems, not worlds. Mathematicians, not story tellers.
EDIT: Also, Numenera looks like a really, really cool concept.
Actually, the rumours I've heard is that Mr. Cook didn't really want to work under a former 'employee'. Especially one he thought didn't have a chance to go anywhere without his own name on the products this employee made.
That employee? Mike Mearls.
Interesting.
I'm still puttin' my money on the lack of leather straps and buckles in the artwork, however!
Having largely bailed on 3e, my primary familiarity with Cook is from Labyrinth of Madness. If that's indicative of his usual work, I'd say DDN dodged a bullet.
As I realize more and more that my gaming group will not be putting down Pathfinder in favor of Next, I decided that if I want to DM ever again, I’ll have to start twisting and shaping PF to what I want to play.
I’ve always been in favor of low magic worlds, and hate games that follow Dancy’s character advancement scale of gritty-fantasy hero-wuxa-super hero. I decided to check out E6 and the more I read about halting character advancement at 6th level… the more I realized that E6 really is what I want to be running… but a problem… so far no game is really giving me the cinematic/tactical combat that I enjoy even at higher levels.
Once you start asking people about low magic E6… inevitably they start talking about Iron Heroes. I was completely unfamiliar with the game but once I heard that it was designed by both Mearls and Cook I really started taking an interest.
I can’t say I love the game, it’s entirely too crunchy, there is little balance between classes magic classes are interesting but greatly flawed… It isn’t really a finished game as far as I’m concerned but I did like some aspects of the combat and resolution systems… in particular…
Iron Heroes has a wonderful stunt and challenge system, similar to what I have seen in other story telling systems where you can use skills to delay or effect combats. I also liked the synergy of some of the classes… just the way that doing what they were designed to do leads to bigger and bigger combat advantages (tokens).
All of this led me to wonder…
Monte Cook left D&D Next due to disagreements with the company but not the other designers… (I still wanna know what all that was about) and was a complete surprise to Mearls… what would have happened if Cook didn’t leave?
Might D&D Next have looked a little more like Iron Heroes? Would we have the stunt/challenge system included?
I heard that now Cook is working on Numenera, (new men era?) the follow up to planescape. I went to the website and read a little news… the art is pretty amazing, they claim they have been playtesting for several months (Hummm… disagreements or better offers including a way in to the MMO market?) I think when Next comes out, I'll get it and see who did a better job... Cook with his design team of two or Next with all of WotC's resources... should be and interesting comparison...
numenera.com
I don't know if these points have been cleared up yet but...
1) Numenara is not a followup to planescape. The original developers of Planescape: Torment wanted to make a new planescape game, but the Torment setting is currently owned by WotC. So they had to use a new backdrop and Numenara just happened to fit the bill. The two are completely different things.
2) Monte Cook has never outright said it, but we've heard enough talk from fellow employees with similar issues that he probably left due to creative rights. Wizards claims creative rights over anything created by its employees in certain departments. This includes any non D&D related projects, such as Numenara. Once he was sure that the company wasn't going to let him publish Numenara outside of WotC, he decided to leave. Another employee had the exact same situation happen to him and he left because of it too. I'll try and dig up the article if I can find it.
what do you mean I cant try and throw sand in his eyes because thats a 4th level rogue ability? are you saying I have to be a rogue to fling sand?
If that's the way you think 4e worked, then you either had a poor DM or haven't actually played it. You could do plenty of things outside the abilities explicitly granted by your class, you just had to have a DM that actually read the DMG.
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?
Also, specific class features might catch his fancy if he likes 'em.
