Pondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this: *Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill...
View full commentPondering the direction of skills. I asked myself what skills would I say I possessed in my life. Sadly, I can only think of two exemplary (Carpentry and Performance - day job vs. aspiring actor). My conclusion is this:
*Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill or several.
*Skills can vary with type of game - DRIVE, for instance isn't necessarily a useful skill for a fantasy game where most vehicles are animal powered. Handle Animal you say? As would I, but, should Handle Animal be generalized to all animals? Can a horse trainer equally be a lion tamer? I say no. But, If we generalize Handle Animal and produce sub-skills therein (Horses, Lions, Dogs, etc.), we can say that a skill an be flexible contingent on another factor. What might that be? See below.
*Advancement - Should a character that makes little use of a certain skill advance the same as one who makes greater use? IMO, no. How do we progress then? This is where we are with our playtesting.
SUMMERY:
*Skills should be an optional, but in the basic package.
*The list should include general/specific skills (under different game types - fantasy, sci-fy, dark age, etc.) The ability score to represent should be flexible depending on the group (i.e. - Climb might be Str or Dex based or average of both).
*A skill that can be broken down into sub-skills can be adjudicated by ability score modifiers. Handle Animal (potentially based out of Cha) might cover one or more animal types based on modifier.
*Base Modifier - IMO the Skill Die works.
*Advancement - Feat based. All start with their (four?) skills (which may have subs, broadening variety) and beginning level Skill Die (d8?). Buy Skill advancement with feats - die increase, specialist, etc.)
I like being creative. I am even a fan of some "over the top" concepts. However, just like in a movie, special effects can be overdone; likewise, special effects can't always compensate for a bad movie. One of the main reasons I cannot take modern horror movies seriously is because they too often spray gore and blood around and hope the audience won't notice that the movie is terrible. In contrast, I don't believe Hitchcock ever actually showed a person being murdered in his movies; yet,...
View full commentI like being creative. I am even a fan of some "over the top" concepts. However, just like in a movie, special effects can be overdone; likewise, special effects can't always compensate for a bad movie. One of the main reasons I cannot take modern horror movies seriously is because they too often spray gore and blood around and hope the audience won't notice that the movie is terrible. In contrast, I don't believe Hitchcock ever actually showed a person being murdered in his movies; yet, he's still viewed as one of the best directors of the genre.
I do agree that players often remember the oddities and wackiness of a campaign. However, the most amount of pride I ever took away from a game was when the players remembered the story itself as being good. To be sure, there was a lot of cool stuff I included in my last 4th Edition game. I had arcane hover bikes; high speed chases, and all manner of other things, but none of them would have been anything without the underlying quality of the campaign. This article gives great advice, but sometimes you can do a lot with very little.
Quite literally all of those have happened in my groups campaigns... Probably the most over the top thing that has happened was a character in a campaign became the avatar of Olidammara, after being given a deck of chaos which was used to choose which of the party members would ultimately be the champion. The characters then meet this character again some years later in the next campaign and find that the character has transported to the Dark Sun campaign setting where he then split in 5 parts...
View full commentQuite literally all of those have happened in my groups campaigns... Probably the most over the top thing that has happened was a character in a campaign became the avatar of Olidammara, after being given a deck of chaos which was used to choose which of the party members would ultimately be the champion. The characters then meet this character again some years later in the next campaign and find that the character has transported to the Dark Sun campaign setting where he then split in 5 parts to become the ultimate Lawful Good, Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, Chaotic Evil, and Chaotic Neutral beings which then had to duke it out highlander style (one controlled by the player who's character it really was) for the ability to be called the only one. All of this is happening while they have armies coming to invade their town (run by the party under a false pretense of not being magical (one was a blood mage and another a wizard) and helping sorcerers escape) while they put sorcerer's into a ghetto to "protect them" before ultimately giving them up and climbing a sorcerer's tower where the illegitimate son's of one of the character's children grow up and turn out to be Bigby and Mordenkainen who were raised in an artificial time loop to kill their father because he caused the death of their mother (a prostitute he chose not to pay) with his defiling magic. All leading up to the epic final battle where the gods come into Dark Sun in order to stop the players from becoming gods Bahamut leading the final attack.
(con't) I think that the game does need to reward both good Character Building AND good Party Building. I mean, it is fun sometimes to make a special group that breaks from the norm, but part of the reason that is fun is because it does in fact make the whole concept more challenging. A group of all fighters is great in straight combat, but the lack of the other 3 archetypes makes it harder to avoid traps, handle swarms, counter magic, and heal magically, as well as repel undead. A party of all...
View full comment(con't) I think that the game does need to reward both good Character Building AND good Party Building. I mean, it is fun sometimes to make a special group that breaks from the norm, but part of the reason that is fun is because it does in fact make the whole concept more challenging. A group of all fighters is great in straight combat, but the lack of the other 3 archetypes makes it harder to avoid traps, handle swarms, counter magic, and heal magically, as well as repel undead. A party of all Clerics is a little more rounded, especially if each is a cleric of a different God/Domain so they are better able to sub for missing archetypes, but still, their not quite as good at AOE as if they had a Wizard type, they aren't as good at trap-finding than if they had a Rogue, etc... A group of all Wizards is drastically hurting in the AC and HP departments. Much weaker in toe to toe fighting, however, with properly diverse spell selection, they can handle a lot of situations. They are still shy on healing.
Reward good Role-playing, reward good Character Building, reward good Background/storytelling, and reward good Party Building. Simple as that!
I love playing clerics, but I also like the option of DMing a world inspired by Lord of the Rings or Game of Thrones - both settings with lower magic and less healing. Just as Mike Mearls likes to run an all day castle siege, and Chris Perkins a new campaign with lots of political intrigue, I think the basic rules should allow for an easy to use option for non-magical, or more rare, or slower forms of healing. Keep up the good work, Mike - and thanks as always for listening!
I don't like Alignment restriction for dragons or Genies... it's up DM what use or Aligment he wants his Dragon or Genie have.... been always against Aligment Restriction for those creatures.... and why is Shadow Dragon always Chaotic evil???? it like copy paste some kinde of Black Dragon again.... but if we said that Shadow dragon usually are of neutrall aligment then we will have a very interesting Dragon race.... after all the plane of Shadow are a neutrall plane... it's mortal denizens...
View full commentI don't like Alignment restriction for dragons or Genies... it's up DM what use or Aligment he wants his Dragon or Genie have.... been always against Aligment Restriction for those creatures....
and why is Shadow Dragon always Chaotic evil???? it like copy paste some kinde of Black Dragon again.... but if we said that Shadow dragon usually are of neutrall aligment then we will have a very interesting Dragon race.... after all the plane of Shadow are a neutrall plane... it's mortal denizens are most of the time of neutral aligment... only creature that have been tainted by the of pocket energi of the negative energi plane are evil (mostly undeads and some living tainted creature like Nightcrawlers)...
and were are the most interesting dragons of all time The Gem Dragons???? they are core dragon who have been neglected in 4 edition... Big Mistake i must say...
Move Shadow Dragon to Gem Dragon Family and call it Onyx dragon or something
and use mercuri dragon and steel dragon as metall dragon.. plus take back purple and brown ( brown was called yellow dragon in 2nd edition AD&D) and grey to chromatic dragon family...
I agree. Alignment has been part of the rules for a long time and should continue to be in the rules. And DMs have always ignored any rule that they didn't like so if some DM doesn't like alignment they don't have to use it, but the rest of us want it in the game.
Today I find that I am more disliking the poll questions then the editorial itself. I like some things, if not most, but the poll questions do not compensate for that. I get to tell you whether i hate them or like them or in between, but not a way to state which parts i like. So, unless i write something, my vote can be interpreted incorrectly. All that would be needed is to add in one or two more poll questions to see what i did or did not like to get a more focused answer would have been...
View full commentToday I find that I am more disliking the poll questions then the editorial itself. I like some things, if not most, but the poll questions do not compensate for that. I get to tell you whether i hate them or like them or in between, but not a way to state which parts i like. So, unless i write something, my vote can be interpreted incorrectly. All that would be needed is to add in one or two more poll questions to see what i did or did not like to get a more focused answer would have been better. And use check box options so that we are not locked to one answer. Don't get me wrong, I like the direction I see wizards going, just dont pidgeon hole the poll questions like this one here to be so black and white. Keep options in the polls to show the shades of grey like you have in other polls. Otherwise I'm afraid to answer. Anyways, just my thoughts on better getting our opinions especially if i dont have time to write "what i really mean" after each vote.
As someone who really likes the concept of golems, and constructs in general, I would really like to see them become more flexible for campaign use. If not specially "Golems" it would be nice to have a range of constructs across a wide range of levels. I feel like just lifting the 3e ones is a waste of potential for something better. For example, how often is the berserker rage of clay and flesh golems really relevant to gameplay? It's only really there to be an obstruction for PCs that...
View full commentAs someone who really likes the concept of golems, and constructs in general, I would really like to see them become more flexible for campaign use. If not specially "Golems" it would be nice to have a range of constructs across a wide range of levels.
I feel like just lifting the 3e ones is a waste of potential for something better. For example, how often is the berserker rage of clay and flesh golems really relevant to gameplay? It's only really there to be an obstruction for PCs that might want to make golems of their own. And really, why should they suffer for that? It would be awesome to play a kind of arcane puppet master with a powerful golem ally as an alternative to the summoner or necromancer concepts.
As for their spell immunity, it's a tough call for me. As an Ogre Battle fan, I'm used to the idea of a golem as a ponderous, physical wall whose weak spot is actually magical assault. On the other, there's of course the DnD tradition of an ageless, magic-resistant juggernaut. Still, while it's good for casters to get taken down a bit every once in a while (speaking as someone that loves casters) no one should ever be completely shut-out of a fight, nor have to resort to cheesing to remain relevant. I think the solution is to give them resistances, but exchange immunity off several golems for other abilities that provide interesting, even puzzle-like challenges. for instance, maybe clay or stone golems constantly heal so long as they are in contact with natural earth or stone, and let iron golems be the bulwarks on which spells shatter. Give flesh golems the potential for intelligence maybe. Just take the chance to make them something more.
On a side note, when I create pirate NPC's, I usually include a mix of fighters, rogues, and fighter/rogues, as well as some casters. Clerics of sea gods or wizards with parrot familiars, even a druid with his water and air magicks and a monkey companion, works great. When I PLAY a pirate, however, I generally create him with the ranger class. Why? Because when I play a pirate, I like to dual wield a sword & dirk (or a sword & flintlock, if they're available). The ranger's inability...
View full commentOn a side note, when I create pirate NPC's, I usually include a mix of fighters, rogues, and fighter/rogues, as well as some casters. Clerics of sea gods or wizards with parrot familiars, even a druid with his water and air magicks and a monkey companion, works great.
When I PLAY a pirate, however, I generally create him with the ranger class. Why? Because when I play a pirate, I like to dual wield a sword & dirk (or a sword & flintlock, if they're available). The ranger's inability to wear heavy armor is just fine, too. Plus, he typically gets the right skills for the job (in 3e, for example, he got Climb, Intuit Direction, Knowledge: Nature, Profession: Sailor, Swim, Use Rope, and Wilderness Lore, which are all useful on the open see).
Although favored enemy isn't necessary to the concept, choosing an aquatic favored enemy did assume a certain oceanic history for the character. Similarly, spells weren't absolutely necessary, but in a magical world, spells like resist elements, protection from elements, water walk all came in handy, while spells like animal friendship, summon nature's ally, animal messenger could be used to for very piratey toucans or parrots.
Tracks was the only ability that was rally out of place, so I would usually ask the DM if I could trade it out for something more appropriate (even something like skill focus in profession: sailor). Barring that, I just tied it to the character's life before becoming a pirate.
Hello My name is Kine, It's my pleasure to write you today after viewing your profile on this website , i just want to say hello and how was your day? Well, i will like to known little more about you, and also i want to tell you more about my self, please i will be very happy if can reply me via my email address, so that we can move further for knowing each other (kinemabou @ yahoo.com) I will be waiting for your response, Thanks Yours Kine. (kinemabou @ yahoo.com)
View full commentHello
My name is Kine, It's my pleasure to write you today after viewing your profile on this website , i just want to say hello and how was your day? Well, i will like to known little more about you, and also i want to tell you more about my self,
please i will be very happy if can reply me via my email address, so that we can move further for knowing each other (kinemabou @ yahoo.com) I will be waiting for your response,
Thanks Yours
Kine.
(kinemabou @ yahoo.com)
This is... very awesome. I like the idea of moves you activate when needed. You don't necessarily have to risk wasting a daily power when you might miss, you can just follow up a successful strike with an opportunistic combo. It also clearly separates the fighter's fighting mechanic from the wizard's casting mechanic, which is always activated daily-power style (with a few exceptions, like Feather Fall).
"We thought about casting minor spells as the kind of thing a wizard might use around a laboratory that also happened to be useful in a fight. For example, a cantrip used to ignite a torch could also burn a goblin. At the last minute, however, we decided that trying to make that design work would take too long to hit this playtest." - M.Mearls This is what I expect from DnDNext. Original ideas that may or may not work, but sound awesome. Give us the chance to playtest it and find out if...
View full comment"We thought about casting minor spells as the kind of thing a wizard might use around a laboratory that also happened to be useful in a fight. For example, a cantrip used to ignite a torch could also burn a goblin. At the last minute, however, we decided that trying to make that design work would take too long to hit this playtest." - M.Mearls
This is what I expect from DnDNext. Original ideas that may or may not work, but sound awesome. Give us the chance to playtest it and find out if it does or not. The rest of the article I have likes and dislikes about.
*Skills are vague in most cases - Looking at Perform (not a listed SKILL in this iteration as yet), obviously there are many types of performance (Dance, Oration, Acting, Painting, Sculpting, etc.). So it seems to me that a general Skill (ARTISTRY) can represent a sub-skill...
View full comment