|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 1:55PM
#41
|
|
|
It would seem to me that the biggest reason for disliking the higher level start rules is that the higher level characters who start high are 'less powerful' (i.e., they have less cool stuff) than characters who have been developed from lower levels.
So if your play group only plays paragon tier, and you have to build new characters there, shouldn't all the characters be as limited as the other characters? No individual PC would be more powerful than the others - so that removes a reason for complaint.
If you don't think high level starting characters are capable of handling the appropriate tier because of 'less cool stuff', clearly that's a design issue in the game or the modules. Your characters' (and parties') ability to handle the missions shouldn't rely on "I have a bigger gun than you do." It should rely on player creativity and role-playing, with just a tiny amount of luck.\
I mean, think about it - how many iconic fantasy characters are defined by more than three or at most four magical items?
Creating a character at higher levels should be about that - using the magic items to define your character, not flesh them out because they lack a half dozen things you wish they had as a person.
A lot of people who've been playing a long time have a stable of 5-12(or more) characters they've been playing over the years. While a new player, or somebody who doesn't have a pile of characters of various tiers has to deal with getting less items, others at the table might not have that problem. There is also the issue of conventions, where you go and play with new and strange people, many of whom may have played from level 1 and have much better gear than the character you created at level 8 or 11. If you pick your items well, any character played from level 1 will have significantly better items than a character created at a higher level. 4E is all about character balance, and the differing rules for items go against that by making characters started at a higher level mechanically weaker. As a 4E player, I'm all about balance, at the very least balance of opportunity, and that is not what we have here.
While in some cases its balanced, like if everybody starts out at a higher level, the reality of LFR means that isn't always the case.
...whatever
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 2:04PM
#42
|
|
|
I have always had a problem with the "If you don't like it, don't play." mentality because that is how bullies think and operate. "If you don't want to get beat up, you'll do what we tell you." This is wrong and should not be the default statement given when someone brings up a complaint or an issue that bothers them.
However this is actually the result of having any rules at all.
Don't like having only 22 points for ability scores? Don't play.
Don't like not being allowed to be a bugbear with oversized? Don't play.
Don't ..... Each and every rule you create will be a "Don't like, don't play" for someone. And even a complete free for all will be a "don't lilke don't play" to many.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 2:30PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
I think LFR has done a valuable thing for the gaming community by allowing players to choose whether they want to start at 1st level or not.
For the next decade or two, any shared world campaign contemplating such an action will look back at the results here and realize that allowing such a thing means that for the rest of the campaign's life, they will be unable to have a single discussion about character creation without that conversation being overrun with complaints that those who want to start at high-level aren't being given enough.
It's small comfort for this campaign, but at least LFR's sacrifice means that future campaigns will not have to suffer through this.
LFR's high-level character creation rules allow you to create good playable characters of the appropriate level. I would expect that a group of well-designed created 11th level PCs should have no problem with an AL 12 LFR adventure.
If you would like to argue that LFR adventures are too difficult for created characters to play, that's a worthwhile discussion, but I would be rather dubious about that claim.
Does the campaign reward people for playing their characters through LFR adventures? Sure. If you don't think they should, then you're not getting the basic idea of a living campaign, and perhaps LFR is not for you. For that matter, D&D might not be for you--a review of the core reward system and core high-level creation system makes it indisputably clear that the core rules think it's okay that a character played from 1st level earns more magic items and gold than a character created at higher level.
I think that complainers are also unreasonably overlooking the fact that created characters can gain rewards to offset their perceived shortcomings. There are, for example, a number of adventures (four I can think of, off the top of my head) that grant purchase access to an Uncommon item of your choice, as well as a handful of adventures that outright hand out a magic item, upgrade or boon without requiring a found magic item slot.
Sure, the higher level you create a character, the more opportunities you miss out on, and these things require actually playing adventures and earning story awards, but I consider both of those to be features, not bugs.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 2:46PM
#44
|
|
|
I think LFR has done a valuable thing for the gaming community by allowing players to choose whether they want to start at 1st level or not.
For the next decade or two, any shared world campaign contemplating such an action will look back at the results here and realize that allowing such a thing means that for the rest of the campaign's life, they will be unable to have a single discussion about character creation without that conversation being overrun with complaints that those who want to start at high-level aren't being given enough.
I do love how people like to forget that the higher level creation rules existed before item rarity, and didn't suck when first introduced. They only started to suck after item rarity was applied in an unbalanced fashion to higher level starts.
It's small comfort for this campaign, but at least LFR's sacrifice means that future campaigns will not have to suffer through this.
LFR's high-level character creation rules allow you to create good playable characters of the appropriate level. I would expect that a group of well-designed created 11th level PCs should have no problem with an AL 12 LFR adventure.
If you would like to argue that LFR adventures are too difficult for created characters to play, that's a worthwhile discussion, but I would be rather dubious about that claim.
A character can be mechanically penalized by having weaker items and still be playable. That character would still be mechanically penalized, which sucks. I don't want playable, I want awesome.
Does the campaign reward people for playing their characters through LFR adventures? Sure. If you don't think they should, then you're not getting the basic idea of a living campaign, and perhaps LFR is not for you. For that matter, D&D might not be for you--a review of the core reward system and core high-level creation system makes it indisputably clear that the core rules think it's okay that a character played from 1st level earns more magic items and gold than a character created at higher level.
The core LFR rules are wrong then. 4E is about balanced play, and everyone at the table having the same chance to contribute. The rules don't allow for the the same opportunities to contribute.
...whatever
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 3:02PM
#45
|
|
|
thecasualoblivion, you're not saying anything here which you haven't already said repeatedly, in numerous other threads. May I politely suggest that you stop from further sidetracking yet another thread with this particular topic?
"Of course [Richard] has a knife. He always has a knife. We all have knives. It's 1183, and we're barbarians!" - Eleanor of Aquitaine, "The Lion in Winter"
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 02, 2011 - 6:47PM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2006
|
The draft is up. As it so happens one of the items that got a significant change was the rule about starting higher-level characters and their magic item selections.
I will not describe the change as "good" or "bad" since there will be people who fall into both camps.
I will, however, say that the change came about for two reasons: one, it was unnecessarily complicated compared to the previous version (the text about spending your L, L-1, L-2 found-item slots was way too long) and two, it did contain one unintentional weakening factor which was that the newly-created character began with zero found-item slots.
The new version is much more like the old rules for creating higher-level characters. (In fact, if you are creating a 5th-level character with the new version, some will say that we have gone too far in the other direction, because of the simplification back to level - 1, level, and level + 1, and allowing either Common or Uncommon items in any of those three slots.)
I'm really not looking to prolong the endless flame war on this subject, but once more into the breach, I guess. I feel pretty good about this version and fervently hope that it will be the last time we have to do anything with these rules.
Talk to you later --
Sean
----
M. Sean Molley | sean [at] basementsoftware [dot] com
LFR Global Administrator
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 03, 2011 - 6:12AM
#47
|
|
|
I have always had a problem with the "If you don't like it, don't play." mentality because that is how bullies think and operate. "If you don't want to get beat up, you'll do what we tell you." This is wrong and should not be the default statement given when someone brings up a complaint or an issue that bothers them.
However this is actually the result of having any rules at all.
Don't like having only 22 points for ability scores? Don't play.
Don't like not being allowed to be a bugbear with oversized? Don't play.
Don't .....
Each and every rule you create will be a "Don't like, don't play" for someone. And even a complete free for all will be a "don't lilke don't play" to many.
Agreed. For every single rule there will be a group of people who like it and a group of people who don't like it. Ideally the majority of players will like the rules, but it is simply impossible to please everyone. (There may be a player out there who is very unhappy that his 1st level character can't wield a +6 vorpal weapon, but the majority of us can agree that that's a good rule and promotes the health of the campaign.)
Also, there's a difference between "Don't like, don't play" and "If you don't like option X, option Y is available instead." For example, if I didn't like the rules for the Shaman class, I have the option to play a different class instead. No one is forcing me to play a Shaman. It's not "If you don't want to play a Shaman, you can't play 4e." If a player doesn't like the high level start rules, they still have the option of starting a character at level 1. If a player's community refuses to play anything below paragon tier and forces everyone to use the high level start rules (or already have a character of that level), that's an issue to take up with the community.
Of course, hopefully this whole thing is moot now that the new CCG has come out. *keeps fingers crossed*
Lori Anderson
WotC Freelancer, LFR author
@LittleLorika
CALI3-3 The Agony of Almraiven (co-author)
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author)
CALI4-1 Plain of Stone Spiders (author)
QUES4-1 Liberation (co-author)
EPIC5-1 Plaguewrought Prism (co-author)
TotalCon: http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 03, 2011 - 10:18AM
#48
|
|
|
Agreed. For every single rule there will be a group of people who like it and a group of people who don't like it.
Just by deciding that we play D&D 4e and play it in the Forgotten Realms we already said "Don't play" to a lot of people. 
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 03, 2011 - 9:31PM
#49
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2005
|
Agreed. For every single rule there will be a group of people who like it and a group of people who don't like it.
Just by deciding that we play D&D 4e and play it in the Forgotten Realms we already said "Don't play" to a lot of people.
I thought we were playing in the Athasian Eberron Realms of the Nentir Vale. Are Warforged legal now?
|
|
|
