Have you ever heard that famous sentence from Einstein?
"I don't know how World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with woodsticks and stones."
That's exactly the situation I feel is going to happen with D&D4.
I don't know how D&D4 will be played, but I'm sure D&D5 will be back to the basics.
Because WOTC are destroying so much of the D&D we all love and know that people will be pissed off and will want to go back to the roots: 20 levels, vancian magic, alignments... When I'm playing D&D, I'm expecting to play D&D. if I want to play Exalted, I'll play Exalted. Same for other stuff: if I want a beer, I'll have a beer, not something with the taste of beer...
:)
4E is going to have nukes? Awesome! Now I won't need that falling anvil to eliminate troublesome PCs with.
|
Because WOTC are destroying so much of the D&D we all love and know that people will be pissed off and will want to go back to the roots: 20 levels, vancian magic, alignments... When I'm playing D&D, I'm expecting to play D&D. if I want to play Exalted, I'll play Exalted.Unless the old folio editions had it, the 20th Level thing was not a part of the rules.
The BECMI version (boxed, AKA Cyclopedia D&D) may have had 20th level as a limit, but I don't think so (Basic had 1-4, Expert went up to 8th level, Companion to, IIRC, 12, Master to 20, and Immortal "beyond 20" I think).
AD&D had some classes capping far below 20 (Monks at 18, Druids at 14), while most classes had no upper limit (+X,XXX,000 XP per level, + Y hp per level beyond ... end of table) - though most abilities did cap out (spell casters beyond certian levels gained no additional spells).
2e IMPLIED a cap of 20, but only "enforced" it, IIRC, for druids following the "Hierophant" path.
Even those tables had "guidelines" to go beyond the top.
One thing that I really did not like about D&D until 3rd edition was the level caps for different Demi-humans. They could go far in their preferred class but if they dual classed or were in a class that was not their preferred class then they capped out early. Sometimes very early. 3rd edition really fixed this and opened up the system so much more.
I wish they were just doing a 3.75 version and tweeking what they have learned does not work well rather than reshaping the entire game. I still reserve judgement until I can read the whole thing. Maybe I will use it as Unearthed Arcana and take what I like and bring it into my 3.5 game as house rules.
Nukes fall, everyone dies. :)
Heck, don't torture me with your 10000000000000000 levels, old timers!!!
I was just trying to be funny! ;)
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Nukes fall, everyone dies. :)
My rogue makes his save, everybody! No damage! Woo hoo!! Uh, everybody??
With original D&D, Basic set went 1-3, Expert 4-14, Companion 15-25, Masters 26-36, Immortal set didn't use character levels, but "deity levels", instead.
The 1E AD&D Players Handbook had spell tables up to 29th-level for clerics and "Magic-Users" (ie. wizard), and up to 26th for Illusionists.
The D&D Cyclopedia (the compilation of Basic/Expert/Companion/Master rules) explained that 2nd Edition AD&D was a different game --which, more or less, was true-- and gave conversion information. Tellingly, converting your character from D&D to 2nd Ed. AD&D reduced your experience level (something like halving the number of levels past 10, as I recall).
Yeah, AD&D. 29th level magic-users. Had to have something for Mordenkainen to aspire to.
(EDITTED to avoid discussion of cosmetics.)
So, all united against the great evil D&D4 mmmwwwaahhh!!!!!!! :)
No, seriously. When this crap comes out I don't even want to be close to it. Here in Ireland we didn't have to suffer 700 years of evil domination by the brits to have them back reincarnated in the form of a bad roleplaying-game.
Last statement, as you may have noticed, makes no sense...I shouldn't have watched my entire Monty Python collection last night...Ok I'm out...
:))))
Unluckiest rogue ever?
That depends on whether or not he breaks his glasses.
But really what more could you possibly need or want from 3E? Sure it hasn't been out quite as long as some other editions, but its had a good run, and there is enough material available to keep a dm and player running fresh stuff with plenty of options for years and years. So if you don't like the idea of all the changes being made with the new edition you are still well set up to keep running a 3E game for the next 100 or so years.
Have you ever heard that famous sentence from Einstein?
"I don't know how World War III will be fought, but I know World War IV will be fought with woodsticks and stones."
That's exactly the situation I feel is going to happen with D&D4.
I don't know how D&D4 will be played, but I'm sure D&D5 will be back to the basics.
Because WOTC are destroying so much of the D&D we all love and know that people will be pissed off and will want to go back to the roots: 20 levels, vancian magic, alignments... When I'm playing D&D, I'm expecting to play D&D. if I want to play Exalted, I'll play Exalted. Same for other stuff: if I want a beer, I'll have a beer, not something with the taste of beer...
:)
Unluckiest rogue ever?That depends on whether or not he breaks his glasses.
Then he'll go on to be the Penguin, and later coach boxing....
;)
You get a cookie. :)
I shall treasure it always... in my stomach.
You get a cookie. :)I shall treasure it always... in my stomach.
Come on, his cookies aren't that bad.
About Einstein's Relative Theory of D&D:
I think it just might happen:
4e tanks big time, Hasbro has enough, sends their goons out who execute every single Wizards of the Coast employee (as well as their family, pets, elementary school teachers, and the guys who did their tax reports), and then sell off D&D for a delicious cookie Mike or someone like him happens to have with him at the time (later, Hasbro remembers the old saying "Never negotiate on an empty stomach).
Whatever company (or maybe companies) employs whoever had the foresight to carry a loaded cookie box at all time gets to work on D&D The Second Coming:
What rules parts can be salvaged from 4e will be salvaged, and D&D is restarted with something that holds the game's history in high regard, a mix of 3.5 and 4e rules and some tweaks, with mechanical seasonings of former editions.
The flavour will be quite neutral so you can play D&D whether you want high-fantasy with over-the-top superheroes or grim and gritty horror where you expect at least one character in your party not to survive the adventure. The heads of numerous tax accountants are put on spikes that ring the Hasbro Headquarters, a new Clue where you find out who killed what school teacher with what weapon in what school room is released, both the new D&D company and Hasbro make wads of money, children can go out and play because their teachers are too missing to keep them at school, we get to play a proper D&D, everything's great...for the people who are still alive.
I'm just glad that people are letting go of their 3E stuff on Ebay. 20 bucks for PH, DMG and Psionics. 31 bucks for all 5 class tomes and arms and equipment.
Whoot! Whoot!
|
4E is a nuke. It's nuking D&D and something else that slightly resembles D&D but is really a horrid mutation will climb out of the rubble.
I hear that all the time. The cries of, "It won't be D&D anymore!", like somehow 3.5e is so very true to the original game.
Funny.
If 3.5e can be considered D&D, so can 4e.
I'm just glad that people are letting go of their 3E stuff on Ebay. 20 bucks for PH, DMG and Psionics. 31 bucks for all 5 class tomes and arms and equipment.
Whoot! Whoot!
And I've a feeling the deals will just keep getting sweeter and sweeter.
Most of my wars are fought with dice and graph paper.
And I've a feeling the deals will just keep getting sweeter and sweeter.I'm just glad that people are letting go of their 3E stuff on Ebay. 20 bucks for PH, DMG and Psionics. 31 bucks for all 5 class tomes and arms and equipment.
Whoot! Whoot!
I couldn't wait. They are a Christmas present for my 12 year old son.
No, seriously. When this crap comes out I don't even want to be close to it. Here in Ireland we didn't have to suffer 700 years of evil domination by the brits to have them back reincarnated in the form of a bad roleplaying-game.
Everyone loves us, huh. That's us Brits, Chaotic Evil to the core.
4E is a nuke. It's nuking D&D and something else that slightly resembles D&D but is really a horrid mutation will climb out of the rubble.I hear that all the time. The cries of, "It won't be D&D anymore!", like somehow 3.5e is so very true to the original game.
It's quite a bit more "true to the original game" than 4e even pretends to be. WotC made 3.x as compatable with earlier editions/versions as possible, considering the differences in the d20 mechanics.
D&D, up until now, has been based primarily on providing a game that lets people take on the role of characters from fantasy fiction (The Fellowship of the Ring, Fafhard and the Grey Mouser, Elric, Conan, etc.). It has also maintained a fairly consistent set of assumptions on cosmology, magic, races, etc. 4e, on the other hand, is blatantly based primarily on MMOs (EverQuest, WoW, etc.). It has also thrown out and replaced many of the assumptions that have defined D&D for 30+ years.
If 3.5e can be considered D&D, so can 4e.
I hear that all the time, too. The problem is, when you make massive changes, the burden of proof is up to the people making the changes. D&D means more than "d20 compatible rules." When the developers themselves state that converting existing campaigns will be so difficult as to be not worth it, that tells me 4e isn't "very true" to previous versions of D&D. Conversions from OD&D to AD&D to 2nd Ed to 3.x were all possible, so if the conversion to 4e is so difficult why should I consider it D&D?
Everyone loves us, huh. That's us Brits, Chaotic Evil to the core.
I always saw the British Empire as Lawful Evil, but I digress...
It's quite a bit more "true to the original game" than 4e even pretends to be. WotC made 3.x as compatable with earlier editions/versions as possible, considering the differences in the d20 mechanics.D&D, up until now, has been based primarily on providing a game that lets people take on the role of characters from fantasy fiction (The Fellowship of the Ring, Fafhard and the Grey Mouser, Elric, Conan, etc.). It has also maintained a fairly consistent set of assumptions on cosmology, magic, races, etc. 4e, on the other hand, is blatantly based primarily on MMOs (EverQuest, WoW, etc.). It has also thrown out and replaced many of the assumptions that have defined D&D for 30+ years.
I hear that all the time, too. The problem is, when you make massive changes, the burden of proof is up to the people making the changes. D&D means more than "d20 compatible rules." When the developers themselves state that converting existing campaigns will be so difficult as to be not worth it, that tells me 4e isn't "very true" to previous versions of D&D. Conversions from OD&D to AD&D to 2nd Ed to 3.x were all possible, so if the conversion to 4e is so difficult why should I consider it D&D?
I agree on all of your points. Even though, mechanically, 3.X is vastly different from AD&D, its fluff is remarkably similar.
Compare spell descriptions, magic item descriptions and powers, and class abilities. When comparing 1st edition (with Unearthed Arcana in the mix) to 3rd edition, you'll see a TON of crossover. I've been working on converting Castles & Crusades in order to make it more like AD&D meets d20 and I've been pleasantly surprised with how much carries over with relative ease. The 1st edition monk, druid, cleric and wizard (in particular) share more with their 3rd edition counterparts than you'd imagine.
The same cannot (by any stretch of the imagination) be said about 4th edition. It seems to be specifically designed to break from the past and, in doing so, has broken away from what I enjoy in D&D.
My rogue makes his save, everybody! No damage! Woo hoo!! Uh, everybody??
I'm guessing your rogue is going to fail that pretty stiff Fort save verses Radiation damage - which I'm sad to say is a worse fate than having failed the original Reflex save!
Well kind of going back to an earlier misspelling(for humors sake)... the Rogue rolled 1 thus requiring the Rogue's magic Rouge to make a save or be destroyed, which it passed. I think you've just discovered how so many powerful magic items end up surviving the apocalyptic fall of the civilization that made them. ; )
I agree that even 3e for all its supposed mechanical changes really is still D&D at its core. Even the 2e Kits can be squeezed into 3e under the heading of Racial Substitution levels or class variants. Just looking back at the difference between the 3e Paladin and 2e Paladin there isn't much of dramatic change. 4e seems to be totally rewriting the book an Paladin abilities which will make carrying older content over difficult at best, impossible at worst.
What also gets my dander up more then anything is the elements 4e is dropping, not just dropping but replacing. By removing a core races, gnomes and I think half-orcs, they're doing exactly what 2e did but much worse. They aren't just removing races and classes they are replacing them with totally different ones. This kind of blows legacy compatibility out of the water and changes the very nature of the game.
With each passing information release I get this feeling of the "baby being tossed out with the bath water," and all that's left are a few water droplets clinging to the tub.
If 3.5e can be considered D&D, so can 4e.
I hate to say you are truly right. The owner of the franchise decides what is or what is not D&D and since WotC is the owner they have all the right to do what they want with it. It is up to us to say if we play it or not. So we should say "I play classic d20 system" or "D&D 3.5 edition" I don't care a carrot if they destroy the game or blown it, I have what I need and that is all what cares to me.
D&D is dead! Long live D&D!
... or ...
Change happens. Get over it.
... or ...
It is just a game people.
... or ...
quit trolling.
D&D is dead! Long live D&D!
... or ...
Change happens. Get over it.
... or ...
It is just a game people.
... or ...
quit trolling.
Let's respect others' opinions
D&D is dead! Long live D&D!
... or ...
Change happens. Get over it.
... or ...
It is just a game people.
... or ...
quit trolling.
...or...
Let's respect other's opinions
D&D, up until now, has been based primarily on providing a game that lets people take on the role of characters from fantasy fiction (The Fellowship of the Ring, Fafhard and the Grey Mouser, Elric, Conan, etc.).
Hardly. More like a tactical war game and an exercise in accounting.
...or...
Let's respect other's opinions
Had to be said twice, eh? Or are you just getting up your post count?
And before you ramble on about how I'm the incarnation of all that is evil (flattery won't get you anywhere), let's consider remarks like "Change happens. Get over it." How's that respecting people's opinion that the changes stink? We're not allowed to have those opinions? Wizards can do whatever they want with D&D, and we have to SUABI (shut up and buy it)?
D&D, up until now, has been based primarily on providing a game that lets people take on the role of characters from fantasy fiction (The Fellowship of the Ring, Fafhard and the Grey Mouser, Elric, Conan, etc.).Hardly. More like a tactical war game and an exercise in accounting.
A consequence of 1) the origins of RPGs and 2) the demand for more detailed rules for determining actions. If you can run a completely consistent, free-form game experience, more power to you. The AD&D DMG included a bibliography of fantasy fiction that influenced Gary Gygax when developing the game, which was based on table-top wargaming, but included a lot more than combat.
Yes, the "loot, sell, buy" cycle of D&D probably detracts somewhat from the storytelling aspect. However, 4e is not going to reduce the tactical war game or accounting aspects, just change some specifics (at least, that's what it sounds like from the releases). Going by some of the information, it sounds like combat and "churn" are going to be even more central in 4e.
My mistake. I never meant to imply 4e would solve the problems with D&D. I must, however, disagree that you have to go to the other end of the spectrum with free form to avoid these issues.
My mistake. I never meant to imply 4e would solve the problems with D&D. I must, however, disagree that you have to go to the other end of the spectrum with free form to avoid these issues.
D&D without tactical combat and magical loot? :-/ It wouldn't feel right. The magical loot could be toned down, IMO; most (non-RPG) fiction has a lot fewer magic items. But one of the things I like about D&D (3.x in particular) is the tactical combat.
Free-form was a bit of exageration, but one of the strengths (IMO) of 3.x is the level of detail in how actions are resolved using attacks, skill checks, etc. while remaining relatively straightforward in execution. I play different RPG systems for different reasons: Ars Magica for atmosphere and character development, HERO for customization and flexibility, WFRP for the themes and gritty feel. D&D is flexible enough to handle many different styles, but also detailed enough to reward good tactics and teamwork without DM fiat. It's also fairly easy to jump into as a player, which makes it easy to get people started.
I guess my beef is that there are systems that also allow tactical combat and magical loot 1) with better implementation and 2) optionally without the entire system collapsing at first contact with players.
Feel free to invalidate my point by suggesting it is my opinion.
I guess my beef is that there are systems that also allow tactical combat and magical loot 1) with better implementation and 2) optionally without the entire system collapsing at first contact with players.
True, there are systems that do things better than D&D, but 1) relatively few players want to learn multiple rules and 2) D&D is the most available option. It's the system most gamers are familiar with. There's enough tactical detail to keep it enjoyable for me while allowing someone else (who isn't interested in tactical combat) to handle fights in a more straightforward manner.
I'd prefer to play other systems more, but (since I move a lot, serving in the U.S. Air Force) playing with a group at all usually means playing D&D.
I can relate; 8 years active army. Most of the people I gamed with during those years were people I taught role playing games, so I had them cut their teeth on my system of choice.
I can relate; 8 years active army. Most of the people I gamed with during those years were people I taught role playing games, so I had them cut their teeth on my system of choice.
For the last several years (probably since Hasbro bought WoTC) AAFES/Bookmark has stocked the WotC d20 material by default, which makes D&D the most available system for the casual gamer in the military. A lot of people I've gamed with have never used any system other than 3.x, thus point 1) in my post above.
|
|
If 3.5e can be considered D&D, so can 4e.I hate to say you are truly right. The owner of the franchise decides what is or what is not D&D and since WotC is the owner they have all the right to do what they want with it. It is up to us to say if we play it or not. So we should say "I play classic d20 system" or "D&D 3.5 edition" I don't care a carrot if they destroy the game or blown it, I have what I need and that is all what cares to me.
I disagree. If I owned 10,000 acres of forest I could call it "tundra" if I wished and try to sell you 10,000acres of tundra, but the fact remains that it is definitely a forest.
The label isn't what defines something.
Nukes fall, everyone dies. :)
Nuh-uh. My paladin smites the nuke and heals the party!