Tiger_Dave > The Wizards Community

Brapnor voted in the poll, "Sometimes spells should require attack rolls and target defenses, and sometimes they should require saving throws.".

Brapnor voted in the poll, "Casters should make a check of some kind to set a DC for spell saving throws.".

Brapnor voted in the poll, "Saving throws versus spells should not exist.".

Brapnor voted in the poll, "Casters shouldn't have to ever make spellcasting checks.".

Marandahir voted in the poll, "What Type of D&D Next Seminar Support Would You Like to See at Gen Con?".

Tiger_Dave Ready to TPK players on Saturday!

Mood: mischievous

Tiger_Dave added a comment to The_Jester's blog post.

Why We Need Role-Playing Mechanics

Let’s talk about role-playing mechanics for a second. Now, I know the...

Show previous 5 comments...

2 / 12

Balesir

I can see a yearning for a focus of play/rewards that is not related to overcoming challenges, here, but I think (as I mentioned in response to your earlier blog) you lose the thread when you lump it all into "roleplaying". I get a slightly better view from this blog what you think of "roleplaying" as, but I honestly think your next move needs to be delving into what you really are after. "Roleplaying" is a cipher term; we all mean different things by it, sometimes we are even inconsistent with...

View full comment

February 12, 2012 7:33 AM PST

Incenjucar

There are certainly people who feel a personal need for RP mechanics, and they have every right to have that need fulfilled. Rules can certainly be written to that end. Those rules, however, need to stay as far away from the core mechanics of the game as possible.
For me, specifically my own roleplaying (I'd never force it on others), I treat roleplaying as an art form to be practiced for the sake of its own expression and as way to entertain myself and my friends. The people I game with,...

View full comment

February 13, 2012 12:27 AM PST

Tiger_Dave posted to LordArchaon's forum thread on the DnD Next group.

Forum Topic: Finally, a playtest confirming there's a lot of 4e in Next

Tiger_Dave posted a new blog post.

My idea of the PERFECT D&D Next release/character generation options (a...

LordArchaon

I deeply agree with nearly everything! Only thing in which I beg to differ, is what regards GSL/OGL. I think they need much more in the way of third party options, and I'm happy to have read they have are at least seriously considering a return to openness...

February 5, 2012 4:45 PM PST

Tiger_Dave

Thanks for commenting LordArchaon!
Because we don't get numbers I have a hard time saying how impactful OGL/GSL is on Wizards numbers. For us players its usually a good deal. The problem I mostly see is that these parties have the ability to develop "raw", whereas I'm wondering if WotC needs more oversight, which would fall more under standard licensing practices.
Perhaps there are two approaches, or two levels of open-source they can use: a generic OGL-compatable level, and then a...

View full comment

February 6, 2012 9:07 PM PST

Tiger_Dave Just because ...

Mood: mischievous

Tiger_Dave posted a new blog post.

"My Smitey Sense is Tingling ..."

The role and functionality of the Cleric (and by association, any class...

LordArchaon

Very nice to see some proposed mechanics! And I think they're extra-good, because they nail a fundamental aspect of D&D Next: scalable complexity. A Basic Cleric could come in two pre-packaged forms (like Sun and Storm in Essentials), then you'd have the ability to get more domains, choose powers instead of going to defaults, and then again, make those powers variable. Variable powers also address the issue of having too many powers. Players and DMs alike get confused by all the names of 4e....

View full comment Very nice to see some proposed mechanics! And I think they're extra-good, because they nail a fundamental aspect of D&D Next: scalable complexity. A Basic Cleric could come in two pre-packaged forms (like Sun and Storm in Essentials), then you'd have the ability to get more domains, choose powers instead of going to defaults, and then again, make those powers variable. Variable powers also address the issue of having too many powers. Players and DMs alike get confused by all the names of 4e. Much easier to have fewer powers and then small variations on them. An example of this good practice is (IMO) one of the Hunter's at-will and the Hunter's encounter. They're both variable, so they make for a lot of possibilities. You could make a good archer class with just those two powers, and you'd be able to format them in a more narrative way, if you don't like the power format.

Returning back to the Cleric topic, I think 4e possibly defined any type of possible Cleric... When it comes to combat. But I think what D&D Next needs (and I blooged about that, talking about the Fighter) is identity for classes that goes beyond roles. I'd go as far as saying that any class should be able to cover any role if built to do so (talking about advanced options of course). The point is, tactical role (4e's roles) is something too narrow to focus an entire class on. We need identity. This is accomplished in a few ways. First of all, in combat there's not just tactics, but strategy. As I wrote, the Fighter's Strategy is to be in the thick of the battle, well visible. Then he could be striking, defending, controlling, or leading: the important thing to be recognized as a fighter is fighting upfront. Just as the Rogue fights dirty and sneaky and the Ranger fights hitting and running or moving a lot.

For Divine classes, it would be a little redundant to define them just from strategy. It's quite ok for Martial, but Divine need something more. Just as Arcane differentiates by method of gaining spells (studying, innate, pact etc), Divine could do that too, but I think that being all divine classes representatives of a higher being, what should really distinguish them is their relationship to that being and to the followers. Their hierarchy in a way, but not only that.

Well I'm talking too much without saying much..! To end this rambling, I think the Cleric powers and tactical roles are already set in stone, we need to find an identity that goes beyond that. If we limit divine classes to just Paladin and Cleric (and consider Invokers a type of Cleric and Avengers a type of Paladin), I think identities could be clearer. But then again, I don't have them clear enough in my head to write here the true identities of the two iconic Divine classes as I did for Martial or Arcane ones. Hope you'll do it maybe :) The big question is: what makes a Battle Cleric different from a Healing Paladin? It's from the borderline cases that we should think the true differences between classes...

Cheers! :)

February 19, 2012 8:03 PM PST