|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:26PM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Mar 21, 2012
|
I'm not convinced with these design goals. Until I see evidence that the design team is actually following them I'm not committing anything to D&DN. The way I interpret it WotC wants me to be dependent on their modules to access those optional rules. It's like they want me to buy a half-baked game and if I want a "complete experience" of D&D I'll need to get those modules. I agree with Chakravant that those options or at least some of them should be in the core books. Rules that drastically change the game would be best left as modules. But anything that barely changess the fundamental game system or serve as a minor alternative should still be provided. It has been done before especially in the 2nd ed DMG so I don't see why WotC can't do the same.
And to whom is are the Standard Rules targeted to? The Basic Rules seem to be targeted to those who never heard what an RPG is or never played D&D at all. I'd see most if not all veteran players and DMs jumping to the Advanced Rules. So who will buy the Standard Rules set?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:32PM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
The core can't be everything to everyone, no. Neither should it be nothing to anyone. Tactical combat, alternate spellcasting, and many of the more contentious rules on that list need to be in core. The core needs something, no matter how small, that appeals to every individual. There is also the problem associated with what ends up becoming "base" DDN. A three-tiered system is just going to be revised by the masses into a common universal version, and if you don't like that common universal version you will either have to fight for the rules you like , play with only a select group, or give up and accept that you're SoL. DDN under the current system actually encourages this kind of "put up or shut up" mentality.
Again, I could not disagree with you more. Those contentious rules, present in a core fashion, are likely to do this edition more ill than good. I would not buy this edition if tactical, grid based rules were part of its core. Likewise, as 4e proved, many other people will not buy this edition if core spellcasting is not vancien. Adding those element into the game via a set of modular options is a far smarter move.
Put plain and simply, I don't think they would ever be able to please you. I think that if they were to design the game in such a way as to please the demographic you represent, they would push other demographics away, and this edition would become a flop (ala 4e). I think their current course is far smarter, and I think that any reasonable players ought to be satisfied if their desired rules can be found as a modular option in the advanced rules section. For example, I like gritty lasting wounds. I don’t need them to be part of core, though. Placing them in the advanced rules is good enough. Yes, of course, that does mean that you need to find like minded players to form a group. But, again, I think that is ok.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:34PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
And to whom is are the Standard Rules targeted to? The Basic Rules seem to be targeted to those who never heard what an RPG is or never played D&D at all. I'd see most if not all veteran players and DMs jumping to the Advanced Rules. So who will buy the Standard Rules set?
There will be some advanced rules within the core rulebooks at the outset. In other words, you won't buy them separately (or at least you won't buy all of them separately). And I think you're right that a lot of people will use some of the advanced rules, but unlike the basic and standard rules, the advanced rules aren't a ruleset, per se. They're a collection of different ways you can modify the standard rules. So almost everyone will probably be using at least part of the standard ruleset.
<Ioun> they're apparently making a MolIsCool pp
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:34PM
#24
|
|
|
Oh look, it only took 3 pages for the edition warring swill to flow.
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:37PM
#25
|
|
|
And to whom is are the Standard Rules targeted to? The Basic Rules seem to be targeted to those who never heard what an RPG is or never played D&D at all. I'd see most if not all veteran players and DMs jumping to the Advanced Rules. So who will buy the Standard Rules set?
There will be some advanced rules within the core rulebooks at the outset. In other words, you won't buy them separately (or at least you won't buy all of them separately). And I think you're right that a lot of people will use some of the advanced rules, but unlike the basic and standard rules, the advanced rules aren't a ruleset, per se. They're a collection of different ways you can modify the standard rules. So almost everyone will probably be using at least part of the standard ruleset.
Yes, advanced rules stack on top of the standard structure.
My two copper.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:39PM
#26
|
|
|
And to whom is are the Standard Rules targeted to? The Basic Rules seem to be targeted to those who never heard what an RPG is or never played D&D at all. I'd see most if not all veteran players and DMs jumping to the Advanced Rules. So who will buy the Standard Rules set?
There will be some advanced rules within the core rulebooks at the outset. In other words, you won't buy them separately (or at least you won't buy all of them separately). And I think you're right that a lot of people will use some of the advanced rules, but unlike the basic and standard rules, the advanced rules aren't a ruleset, per se. They're a collection of different ways you can modify the standard rules. So almost everyone will probably be using at least part of the standard ruleset.
Yes, advanced rules stack on top of the standard structure.
Except when they replace or alter it.
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:42PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
Oh look, it only took 3 pages for the edition warring swill to flow.
Where do you see edition warring in this thread?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:47PM
#28
|
|
|
Oh look, it only took 3 pages for the edition warring swill to flow.
Where do you see edition warring in this thread?
Your memory is short, read your own posts.
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:48PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
- Create rules for giving mechanical weight to character motivation, personality traits, and so on.
- Create variant XP rules, using XP as a way for a DM to place the emphasis on fighting, interaction, exploration, finding treasure, and so on.
- Add in rules for firearms, including both a historical take and one driven by fantasy.
- Include rules for mass combat between armies, both for resolving two armies fighting and battles where the PCs can play a role.
- Design rules for speeding up battles that involve lots of monsters and the characters.
- Create rules for realms management and strongholds.
- Provide rules for horror and sanity, along with other rules to change D&D's genre.
Stuff Orzel cares about
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!
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Jan 27, 2013 - 10:53PM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Jul 24, 2002
|
While I like the idea of mass combat, I hope it won't be rendered all but irrelevant with the presence of high level characters.
|
|
|
