I have the 4E books but am doing Pathfinder. That said, you all might find this relevant.
In a few campaigns (in 2nd and 3rd edition) I've experimented with ways to encourage noncombat activity.
One method was awarding action points based only on non-combat tasks that PCs completed in service of their deity. Each deity had a list of a dozen tasks that worshipers of that deity learned about and often strove to complete. Easy tasks awarded 1 action point; the complex or hard ones gave up to 5 points. For example, the PC who worshiped a dragon deity did a bunch of things to convince a dragon to let him ride it. This made deities a lot more relevant in the campaign because if two PCs worshiped the same deity they worked together to get the tasks done. It was an interesting experiment.
Another method: I would give a +0% to +20% XP bonus to a PC after each session based on pure role-play activity, such as speaking in character, dealing with your character's background or long term goals, taking up a romance, etc. Some of this could occur in combat, but it mostly came up as player-driven initiatives when in town. When the session ended, we would all offer up who did memorable role-play so it didn't feel like me the DM playing favorites. The session after I announced this, the two power gamers in the group (who rarely "wasted time" on such stuff) started doing a bunch of noncombat RP and were actually rather good at it!
A third method was allowing players to pick a personality ("temperament") for their PC. Each temperament had a list of typical activities. For example, a Protector would plan and prep before adventures, act to rescue allies, seek to get the party to act in a coordinated fashion, and so forth. Acting in support of the temperament earned XP. And each PC had another temperament that was a "shadow side"; if a PC did those activities then he would lose XP. I used this in lieu of alignment. This generally encouraged participation and breathed some life into the PCs, and although I haven't used it much since found I liked it more than alignment.
Anyway, my impression from these experiments: create prompts and potential rewards for noncombat role-play, and the players will be motivated to fill in the details as they like.
So we had (HAD) a player who insisted he name his aberrant druid, Plopper.
It was an evil campaign, so no surprise when Plopper died.
We thought that was the end of the "worst character name" ever. But wait... the player worked up a new character, Plopper's twin, also an aberrant druid named Plopper.
Though heavily optimized and highly paranoid, he was killed by the party (the character, not the player, yet).
To be the Little Engine That Could, Plopper III was born.
We're a fun-loving bunch, we really are, but this was a Plopper too far.
Please, for the love of G-d, don't allow a character named Plopper.
I've happily played:
--Battle sorcerer (with Arcane Strike feat, and arcane bloodline feat/s from Dragon magazine)
--Cloistered cleric
--Spontaneous divine caster (by the way, also MUCH easier to make and run as NPCs, and makes divine PCs more flavored to their deity and/or role, IMO).
Allowing a cleric (or paladin) to replace turn undead with an equivalent turning ability (or other ability) feels like a simple way to differentiate clerics. I miss the priests of 2nd Edition.
One of my players also ran an avenger druid from level 1 to 14, but with the witch spell list from the DMG. Not optimal, but the rage and wildshape etc really made her a chaotic fey-like witch.
I'm not sure whether PHB, PHB II, and UA are all that's needed. I played a Hexblade for 5 levels. I suppose he could be duplicated as a battle sorcerer with a couple new spells (bestow minor curse, etc).
Looking at the new pit fiend, what I see is...
Players will have an easier time memorizing monster stats; and since the pit fiend has only a few combat options, the players will have a far easier time planning a killer attack against it, since they know what it MUST do versus what it MIGHT do. Since KISS (keep it simple and stupid) is a 4.0 philosophy, I suspect there will be less suspense, less need for divination and contingency prepping, fewer surprises, etc... and less room for the DM to play around with the creature.
I wonder if there will be an easy way to easily add a bunch of character class levels to monsters or a different role with corresponding different abilities? Even then.... Maybe I'm just being cynical.
IconoclasticScream wrote: The title pretty much says it all. I'm totally shocked. How sad for such a super actor, and with a little daughter too. Hmm, how many of fame die around age 27 - 28? Tragic.
Tequila Sunrise wrote: To practice my InDesign Fu I'm writing up a pdf document of all the best house rules and variants of 3rd edition. What a great project! I mostly stick to RAW, but here are some rules that feel to me to meet the criteria of easy, fun, with few bad ripples...
1. Sorcerers get Eschew Materials for free at 1st level. It fits their flavor without major impact.
2. Wizards and sorcerers can swap out their familiar for a feat.
3. Skill-boosting feats like Athletic turn the skills into class skills for you. All of a sudden, they're worthwhile feats!
4. Bonus 4 skill points at 1st-level for everyone, but usably only toward Craft, Perform, Profession, and Speak Language.
5. I encourage the battle sorcerer and cloistered cleric from Unearthed Arcana. They work well, although I'd say the Bloodline feats from Dragon 311 (and later) are needed to offset the battle sorcerer's weak spell list.
6. A player can take an LA+1 race but gets 4 fewer points using the point-buy method compared to everyone else. (I usually do 32 point buy, so aasimar, hobgoblin, et.al. start with 28 point-buy instead).
7. I give +0% to +20% bonus XP for good role-playing. At the end of the session, when we list out what obstacles the party overcome, the group also names who did what RP-wise that was interesting. Basically, +5% per notable playing.
8. I encourage fighter types to take Wild Talent and the psionic feats Psionic Weapon, Greater Psionic Weapon, etc. These boost weapon damage to keep pace with spellcasters. The PC can name the feats something else if s/he doesn't want the psionic flavor.
9. After expending a feat slot, a spellcaster can swap out all of his/her spells for the day to bind a vestige instead.
10. Certain class / prestige class abilities such as poison use and trapfinding can be taken as feats.
11. I give 1/2 treasure compared to normal, because a) Christmas trees should come put only once a year, and b) characters with 32-point buy made by power gamers are already above their normal CR.
12. Recently, I'm toying with no Leadership feat and no animals companions. Druids and rangers can get speak with animals or something instead.
13. No divine meta-magic feats. Clerics are servants, not gods.
I'm DMing two campaigns on-and-off, one with a dragonborn gnome archivist, and one with a gnome rogue / sorcerer / effigy master. Both are among the most flavorful PCs I've ever run (although the players might have more to do with that than the build). Being small, smart, and wily is a nice combination. I myself have never played a gnome, though am inspired to try one someday.
I haven't had time to run Pathfinder, but I enjoy reading the adventure paths for the sheer pleasure of it. At its best, following the path is like reading a serialized adventure novel (with illustrations, in condensed form, because I have so little time to read actual novels and am looked on great visuals.) Hook Mountain Massacre was really fun (oh, that picture of Mammy Graul!) It reminded me of 19th century adventures of Englishmen trapsing through the wilderness, running from cannibals, etc, with even a sad lovely lady at the end. The last installment wasn't as fun to read, but I ended up using several of the new monsters (hound of tindallos, shining child of thassilon, the black abbot) in my own campaign. Since no one else in the group subscribes to Pathfinder, the encounters came off as strange, challenging, and shall we say, rather deadly (it also helped to have a power gamer run the monsters as a 2nd DM. Oh the look of glee on his face....) I intend to subscribe to Pathfinder for quite a while, regardless of which game edition I end up playing or whether I have time to run a path.
ancientsensei wrote: Fair warning: players can break binders really fast. Without doing too much work, I made a 16th level binder that was completely out of control in an 18-20th level party, without buying a single magic item.
It's like Hunter-Druid(UA)-With-Vow-Of-Poverty broken. Only I just hadn't chosen magic items YET.
AncientSensei, I'm curious about your experience with binders. Perhaps you could tell us more? In my experience, since vestige abilities are preset and very few feats or prestige classes work with supernatural abilities, the number of munchkin options seems really limited. But then I haven't tried very hard to break the ToM binder.
By the way, I'm the author of Secrets of Pact Magic. Anything binder-related that might be broken is of interest to me, if anything to minimize any problems in 4th edition.
Unearthed Arcana describes how to build a divine spontaneous spellcaster. Since it's OGL and on d20SRD, I've reposted it below. One of my players ran a spontaneous druid for 14 levels (along with the avenger druid variant also in UA) and has been pretty happy with it.
Spontaneous Divine Casters
As a twist on the traditional divine spellcaster, this variant converts the cleric and druid into spontaneous spellcasters. Such characters have a limited number of spells known, as the sorcerer does, though their selection is not quite as limited as the sorcerer's list.
Like other spellcasters, a character using this variant system can cast a certain number of spells per day. His base daily spell allotment is the same as a normal cleric's number of spells per day (not including domain spells), plus one spell per day of each spell level he can cast. For instance, a 1st-level cleric using this system can cast four 0-level spells and two 1st-level spells per day.
However, the divine caster's selection of spells known is limited. At 1st level, the character begins play knowing four 0-level spells and two 1st-level spells of your choice, plus his two 1st-level domain spells (if a cleric) or summon nature's ally I (if a druid). At each new level in the character's divine spellcasting class, he gains one or more new spells, as indicated on Table: Spells Known.
Table: Spells Known
Level Spells Known
0 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
1st 4 2 — — — — — — — —
2nd 5 2 — — — — — — — —
3rd 5 3 0 — — — — — — —
4th 6 3 1 — — — — — — —
5th 6 4 2 0 — — — — — —
6th 7 4 2 1 — — — — — —
7th 7 5 3 2 0 — — — — —
8th 8 5 3 2 1 — — — — —
9th 8 5 4 3 2 0 — — — —
10th 9 5 4 3 2 1 — — — —
11th 9 5 5 4 3 2 0 — — —
12th 9 5 5 4 3 2 1 — — —
13th 9 5 5 4 4 3 2 0 — —
14th 9 5 5 4 4 3 2 1 — —
15th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 0 —
16th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 2 1 —
17th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 0
18th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 1
19th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 2
20th 9 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3
Characters who use this option lose the ability to spontaneously cast cure, inflict, or summon nature's ally spells in place of other spells. However, each time the character gains a new spell level, he gains one or more bonus spells known to add to his list. A cleric may add his two domain spells to his list of spells known, while a druid may add the appropriate summon nature's ally spell to her list of spells known. (An entry of 0 on the table indicates that the cleric knows only his domain spells of that level, and the druid knows only the summon nature's ally spell of that level.)
Upon reaching 4th level, and at every even-numbered class level after that, a cleric or druid can choose to learn a new spell in place of one he already knows. This functions identically to the sorcerer's ability to swap out known spells, except that a cleric may never choose to lose a domain spell and a druid may never choose to lose a summon nature's ally spell.
For example, a cleric has chosen the domains of Good and Healing, which means that at 1st level, he automatically knows cure light wounds and protection from evil. In addition, he chooses four spells from the list of 0-level cleric spells (cure minor wounds, detect magic, light, and read magic) and two spells from the list of 1st-level cleric spells (bless and shield of faith). He now knows four 0-level spells and four 1st-level spells.
Another example: At 4th level, a druid learns a new 0-level spell and a new 2nd-level spell. She can also choose to replace one of her 0-level spells known with a different spell of the same level. She chooses to replace know direction with detect poison.
Some really interesting comments so far.
I've run groups from 1st through 14th level. Some observations...
1) Running a game when people are tired (as from work). This is so bad, I insist on weekend / holiday gaming only.
2) Players who failed to update their character.
3) High-level play. Specifically: as level increases, monster hit points greatly out-pace damage output. A 1st-level barbarian can kill a 2 or even 3 Hit Die monster in one blow. Not so even for evenly-matched units at high level. Also, too many options for players at high level, yet most of the options are ineffectual (i.e. DCs too easy to make, spell damage is measly, etc). A circle of death against a pack of 6 hounds of thassilon got just 1 of the hounds.
4) Rules-lawyers / power games who don't actually know the rules (yes, I've had one of those; kicked him out and the game sped up tremendously).
5) Wildshape and polymorph. Wildshape is easier to handle: I created a spreadsheet with all the critical animal stats.
6) Looking up spells (until I got folks to make spreadsheets of their spells with all critical info in one place).
7) Cohorts. I've found that familiars and animal companions aren't so bad compared to classed cohorts who have spells, multiple attacks, etc just like PCs. And NPCs traveling with the party.
8) Frantic attempts by players to explore every possible way to reduce / avoid harm from monster / trap / etc. Do they really think I'm going to kill off their beloved characters? ;-)
9) Too many people at the table. I prefer 3 players, personally, so everyone has time for role-playing fun side-trek stuff. 4 is fine. 5 is already too many, although I understand other DMs handle more well.
Something I stumbled upon as really fun at high levels: Pact magic. Unlike a spellcaster who might have dozens of low-level (read, ineffectual) spells, a binder has a small set of supernatural abilities - bypass most kinds of protection, all the abilities are on 1 page in the book right in front of the player's nose, etc). Which is why I wrote Secrets of Pact Magic! (excuse the shameless self-promotion)
I really hope 4E demonstrates how to speed up play. Even if I stay with 3.5, I would love house rules to speed up play. I'm thinking of fewer hit points all around (maybe: Hit Die + Con modifier + size modifier like constructs have, + 1 to 4 hp / level as determined by class). Might also make players think twice before attack everything. Or maybe not.
Hi Blackdirge, just want to complement you on the quality of your free-be, "About the Author." Blackdyrge reminds me some of my changeling dread necromancer. :-)
Antioch wrote:
Even in 3rd Edition, there are a good spread of damage spells. Some, like unseen servant, remind me of feats like Negotiator and Persuasive: feats that seem nice in concept but are too utterly useless in normal games for anyone to take them (especially considering how broken skills like Diplomacy already are with flat DCs).
I cant think of anyone who takes unseen servant and uses it with any regularity. Its more like a spell that simply exists to explain how someone might have an invisible guy running around doing chores. Kind of like how Item Creation feats exist mainly to explain where magic items come from: I cant fathom a PC wizard who takes these and uses them with any...
The unseen servant spell has a huge number of creative uses! A gnome sorcerer in one my campaigns took reduce and unseen servant as his two 1st-level spells known. He uses reduce to shrink to size Tiny, which makes him light enough to be lifted by the servant. So, 1st-level, and he can basically fly! Spells such as these have survived 30 years and 3 editions because they do more than take up page space. I mean no disrespect, but a lot of folks enjoy using spells like these in ingenious ways.
PS. I don't mean to suggest pro/con for 4E by this post, only to point out the uses of non-blaster spells.
PPS. I once played a Hexblade who took Persuasive at 1st-level. At 2nd-level, he had 5 ranks in Intimidate and Bluff. His 16 Charisma provided +3 to each. 5+ ranks in Bluff give +2 synergy bonus to Intimidate. So his Intimidate at 2nd-level was +12. While I agree the skill focusing feats are not fabulous, used wisely they result in some pretty neat results. And yes, Intimidate has uses in combat :-).
Perhaps you've heard of the grieving process? I'm wondering where everyone is in the grieving process regarding Dragon, Dungeon, 4E, 3E, etc? I've included 7 stages below (the oft-heard 5, plus 2 my Sicilian grandmother taught me).
1. Denial
2. Anger
3. Bargaining
4. Depression
5. Acceptance
6. Revenge
7. Satisfaction
Examples:
1. "What?!?! I can't believe they canceled Dungeon and Dragon!"
2. "I despise WotC. And I despise anyone who doesn't despise them. They lied and betrayed us! 4E isn't fit for an otyugh"
3. "OK, the DDI sucks, but I may stick with Paizo even if they go 4E. Or maybe they'll do a 3.75? Pathfinder and Kobold Quarterly are filling my RP needs. And even if I disagree with half the people here, we can all be civil, right?"
4. "Gosh, it's quiet around here. To think I've gotten all worked up about a game?!? Maybe I should get a 2nd job instead?"
As for stage 6, the best revenge is success, right? Mammy Graul is dead. Long live Mammy Graul.
Thanks all, this has been interesting.
I've been DMing happily since 1982, but I've kept far away from modules / pre-planned stuff because of bad experiences (the modules were decent, but as for me....) So I've stuck really closely to having about half of my adventures moderately planned and half improvised, which has worked well.
Now, I love the RofRL material and I'm wondering how to successfully run it by-the-book. Or maybe I should just draw elements from it? Do you all play closely to the modules? And if not, do you still find the PCs stay on the adventure path?
Oh, and thank you for the suggestion about random dice rolling to keep players on their toes!
From what we've seen so far, 2008 blows; but I'm still hoping it's gonna be awesome. Obviously, if I had a brain, I should wait until 2008 is over, when we've seen the whole year in context, to know whether I want to try it or not.
This week I DM'd 3.5 for a group on Wednesday and another group on Friday. The two games were pretty different, and I suspect I know why. I'm wondering how many others have the experience described below.
The two games:
Wednesday
---------
14th-level group
4 players, plus a co-DM to run the monsters
mix of role-play, travel/traps, and combat
preplanned encounters
spent many hours preparing
mediocre result
Friday
------
8th-level group
4 players
mix of role-play, travel/traps, and combat
improvised encounters
spent little time preparing
awesome result
I've had awesome experiences with the Wednesday group, so I know it wasn't just that group.
Looking back on games I've run, the ones with better results have used "improvised encounters" and the one's with worse results have used "preplanned encounters." Besides me being a boob at running modules, what's going on?
Well, I noticed something:
The Friday group approached a bartender as an early encounter in a tavern. I presented his personality clearly, but that MIGHT only be one side of him.
--I kept a mental list in reserve of additional, POTENTIAL sides. If the party were to need help, he might be a source of information or sell them a special item.
--If the players were getting bored or needed a fun role-play diversion, he was there for humor and/or romance.
--As it turned out, the party was heading too quickly into the final encounter and would likely get killed. So I turned the bartender into a low-level henchman of the BBEG. I hadn't planned this. I just slapped some hit points on him and gave him a 3rd-level vestige (which easily provided him with a thematic set of level-appropriate powers). The ensuing combat made for dramatic foreshadowing and knocked some caution into the PCs.
I improvised several times during the Friday game, offering the PCs information, red-herrings, diversions, obstacles, etc. as the need arose.
In contrast, during Wednesday's game, I did none of this. I executed encounters as preplanned. And when something didn't fit perfectly, I and the co-DM just modulated it tactically.
From now on, I'm thinking of separating NPCs from the roles they play. For example:
NPC Roster
------------------
tavern owner
bartender
tavern dancing girl
bounty hunter
dwarf miners
wilderness guide
treant
Role Options
------------------
wealthy patron
information source
secret henchman of BBEG
obvious mook
role-play diversion
the BBEG
rescuer if needed
So the dwarf miners might be there to rescue the PCs if needed, or they might be there as the BBEG's mooks. The PCs likely meet and/or hear about the dwarf miners early on, but the miners' "true" nature would not be revealed until later.
Of course not everything is improvised -- in Friday's group I DID have a basic set up (and desired outcome) for the players.
Anyway, three question for you:
1) Do you find you ever improvise this way?
2) Would you ever want modules to be published with this DMing technique in mind?
3) Might players meta-game differently if they think the DM is using a specific system to improvise?
THANK YOU!
Warforged Goblin wrote: Hate? No. Hate's a strong word with strong feelings tied to it. [and all the rest].... What Warforged Goblin said.
Moff Rimmer wrote: Sebastian Hero wrote: ... Sebastian has a hero? Does he even know?
:-)
Sebastian Hero was my screen name on the WotC site, when I dated that *^&#%. <sarcasm> Now it has sentimental value. </sarcasm>
So I've only read the new monsters.
Awesome stuff, really and truly! :-)
I also play (and DM) Eberron. What has added the most:
-- Lords of Madness
-- Secrets of Xendrik
Both of them have tonnes of adventure sites, inspiring
graphics and plot-hooks, and are totally built for Eberron.
You can always look up psionics online in the SRD.
Some runner-ups:
-- Spell Compendium
-- Races of Dragon (cos, you know, Eberron's a dragon)
-- Heroes of Horror (the archivist fits well in Eberron)
DangerDwarf wrote: GentleGiant wrote: Although the mechanics changed dramatically from 2nd to 3rd edition, at least they kept, as a minimum, all the races and classes from 2nd edition (and then added some). This allowed one to more smoothly transition to the new edition.
I didn't think so, because I was suddenly trying to explain the appearance of dwarven wizards, gnome paladins, halfling monks, etc.
Where they just in the closet all those years?
;P Very funny!
I'd just said, "Hey, you want to play a halfling monk? Wonderful! By the way, you are the only one in the world that you know of." Just because the PHB made it legal for PCs didn't necessitate anything else changed. So it was no big deal then.
As for now, don't know. Where to put dragonborn? Yes, where to plop down dragonborn. No, no, and not there either. Hmm. Must make boobed reptilian fit into square hole. Sorry, had humor.
For 25-years I've played rangers, spellcasters, and shapechangers, who --
--do problem solving (outsmart the DM's evil NPCs)
--wallop the enemy,
--fight for the party and friends no matter what, and
--get the party into trouble with "friendly" NPCs
1E:
NG human ranger (from 6th - 21st level!)
NG human illusionist (my only female PC)
2E:
CG hengeiyokai ranger with two bastard swords (in 3E, requires Monkey Grip! :-)
CG human cleric with read thoughts and other mind and time sphere (domain) spells
3E:
LE human hexblade (his familiar was a priceless guard while sleeping, cos I earned a whole bunch of enemies!)
CN kobold wizard (loved reduce and silent image along with alter self later, cos being Tiny is awesome!)
CN warforged warlock
LE fiendish changeling dread necromancer with Arcane Domain feats (healing and trickery) (passing as a paladin, priceless).
LE hobgoblin battle sorcerer with fey bloodline (Arcane Strike + wraith strike = lots of damage to dish out).
Hmm, I suddenly noticed I started a dark theme during 3E!?!
1E was high school, 2E was graduate school, and 3E is as working adult.
I loved them all, may they rest in peace :-)
Saurstalk wrote: The only thing I would add is now this has raised discussion that we need stronger security in America's malls.
I'm picturing airport lines to enter malls."
The whole "check to get into the mall" is how it is in Israel, but they're quick and efficient there regarding the lines and such, and everyone walks around with guns, so the guy would have been shot back at immediately.
I mean this post as a sociological rather than political comment... as an anthropologist I find the comparison between cultures very interesting.
Is there a logic to magic?
Historically and across cultures, yes there is -- traditionally, magic is not viewed by human beings as "anything can happen." Magic comes about as a result of certain methods and assumptions that turn out to be unscientific, but are there nonetheless.
So what are these rules of magic? I will use examples from D&D and real life. The list is not exhaustive.
Sympathism - Look at the material components for the spider climb and jump spells. In spider climb, the caster swallows a spider. The spider has the quality the caster wants, so the caster takes the spider into himself (swallowing it) to gain that quality. Life is sacrificed for a brief gain of power.
Ritual - A Native American rain dance is an example. Superficially, dancing has little to do with rain. However, dance is a common ritual method in Native shamanism, and the act of correctly and authentically completing the dance leads to more rain. Note that you can't dance just any old way. Purity of heart and correct methods are required, suggesting you must put in time and energy to receive a result.
Pattern Recognition - Romans viewed animal entrails, others view tea leaves and even the pattern of coffee remains in a cup. The assumption is that a properly trained person, and/or a person with an innate gift of "sight", can see the hidden patterns that connect (and reflect) all things.
Power of Belief - In the Matrix, Neo is introduced to the idea that the world as he knows it doesn't exist. Just hearing this isn't enough. He must "believe." As he gains belief, he gains more power. In magic, if one "truly" believes, then normal limitations can be crossed. If one doesn't truly believe, then failure can be disastrous (the person trying to fly falls and dies). The "power of love" is an old staple in fantasy as well (The Princes Bride, among others).
Pact / Contract Magic - The character bargains something away in order to gain magical ability in return, usually from a supernatural creature such as a genie or devil. As with Faust, souls are the main trade for magic, although in mythology we often see mortals completing quests for gods in order to "pay respect" or "pay homage" to the god, to gain a benefit in return (such as a loved one returned to life). Interestingly, gaining magical ability can be viewed as a curse. In Ann Rice's stories (if I recall correctly), Marius was cursed by God for eternity to be a vampire. Although Marius gained great power, it was at a terrible price.
Supernatural Inheritance - The character is born with power due to a bloodline or tampering with his or her birth by a supernatural being. There is an X-Files episode with an autistic half-celestial girl.
Enlightenment / Gnostic Knowledge - This is most common among Eastern cultures, where practitioners of magic must undergo years of hardship and training (often within a particular school under a master) in order to "realize their higher nature" or otherwise unlock some form of secret human or spiritual potential.
Divine Intervention - A popular one in modern Western religions. You pray that your football team will win. If you have good intentions and pray hard enough and god/gods have your best interests in mind, then the result will happen. In Catholicism you can pray to saints to ask them to go to God on your behalf (note that the saints can't grant divine magic; instead, there is an assumption of a celestial court of some sort and a patronage system).
Advanced Technology - There is a modern saying that if something is technologically advanced enough from what we understand, then it seems to be magic. For example, a caveman encountering a TV, car, or stereo system. In this view, magic is actually technology or use of scientific knowledge. In Apocalypto, the astrologers use their astronomy knowledge to time a series of human sacrifices with a solar eclipse, so the people will believe that divine magic is at work.
Blood Energy - This refers to vital fluids like blood or... you get the idea. The blood carries the spark of life (the soul). Although ritual may be involved, the ritual is technique (which can be improved upon) that maximizes the concentration or exchange of energy within or between people.
I could go on.
There are several principles in mind throughout all of these. One is a "conservation of magical energy." This might sound silly -- after all, doesn't a teleport spell defy conservation of energy? But we need to discard our modern scientific definition of energy to understand what magical energy is. Something is always exchanged or taken (a soul, time, pride) in order to transcend normal limitations.
Over the years, D&D has shifted to some extent. The recent Eastern influence is magic that comes from enlightenment and gnostic knowledge, as well as the appeal to supernatural inheritance. This lends itself to "cool powers" which differ in tone and style (and consequences) typical of sympathetic magic, divine intervention, pacts/contracts, and pattern recognition, which are staples of traditional Western views of the supernatural (whether ancient or medieval).
The point: D&D has traditionally attempted to appeal to several laws of magic, whether sympathism or divine intervention or what-not. A purely gamist version of D&D can dispense with laws of magic, but I suspect there are many folks who prefer to keep this quality of the game.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents.
I love HP Lovecraft - so hard to pick... so so so ha@76wds,,a
Anyway,
Gabriel García Márquez - "One Hundred Years of Solitude" (In case you're ever inspired to run a world based in magical realism)
Milan Kundera - Yeah, I might say "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" ... BUT, for this crowd, I suggest "Life is Elsewhere." Lots of fantastical scenes and the main character is evil (and like all good evil, doesn't even know it).
M. Scott Peck - "People of the Lie." His "Road Less Traveled" is far more well-known. But his case studies of his absolutely worst patients will give "Rise of the Rune Lords" a run for its money (for example, his story of the parents who gave their teenage son a rifle for Christmas... sounds fine, except it was the same rifle his old brother used to commit suicide the year before).
Oh, and C.S. Lewis's "The Screwtape Letters." Screwtape is a devil, and each letter is a correspondence with his infernal superiors on how to tempt folks into the 7 deadly sins. :-)
Kevin Mack wrote: Im sure this has probably been mentioned before but would it really kill them to hire a profesional spokesperson or advertising specalist to promote 4th edition? I mean when selling a car to the public you dont have the car designer come up with the advert for it. I suspect that was folded-in as part of Scott Rouse's job role. Unfortunately, IMO, WotC has rolled out Scott far better than they have rolled out 4th Edition.
alleynbard wrote: Wicht wrote: ... I want to know these guys are carrying on a proud tradition of roleplaying and not ... Nicely said.
Perhaps the folks at WotC might do better to think of themselves as "brand stewards" rather than "brand managers." Alas, stewardship requires patience, inclusiveness, dialog, compromise, humility, and many other traits that are counter-intuitive to off-the-shelf business practices. I'm not condemning a profit motive; some companies learn to walk what is a fine line in an unusual market like role-playing.
What's painful (for me): So far I tend to like most of what I see about 4th Edition, and under normal circumstances would likely be jazzed. I agree the designers are surely doing their best and are talented. But the day I learned that Dungeon and Dragon were going away was the last day I posted or even visited wizards.com. It has been like someone I just don't want to see around anymore.
Cool stuff.
You might be interested in...
www.pactmagic.com
There is an open call for material for a new release next year.
It has taken me some time to learn the 3.x rules sufficiently to run games sand-box style. I was just getting comfortable again with improvising (doing so felt easier in 1st-edition).
I anticipate that running 4.0 will - as the designers claim - be simpler mechanically, but then there will be a learning curve. Perhaps by the time I master the new rules, there will be enough supplements out with alternate stuff to offset the benefit any initial simplifications. Perhaps I'm being cynical.
I don't care a lot about the flavor changes. I've run Eberron and home-brew (and one of these days will have free time to run Pathfinder, which I've loved reading). Just because dragonborn and such are PC options doesn't mean they're common, or even uncommon in my world. The PCs can be misfits. I've never used published deities except for the Eberron campaign, so I don't care about that. I will keep gnomes and half-orcs in my setting as PC options, as best I can.
Perhaps the biggest headache for me will be recreating from scratch the NPC character generator I scripted; that has saved me much time. I don't foresee using the DI. I prefer my own stuff.
Several of us love playing 1st-3rd level adventures, which involve running away from wolves and such. I prefer to think that heroes are made and not born. That said, the new mechanics probably will likely smooth out the progression process. I love the idea of "bloodied." I wonder if someone will include optional rules for "scarred."
One player has expressed his desire to DM but has been daunted by the rules. Perhaps 4th edition, if it is simpler, will encourage more players to DM.
Mostly, I really hope the new system stymies the creation of god-characters-of-brokenness and places a mute-button / tazer on the rules-lawyers.
Cheers!
PS. I plan to buy far fewer books this time around. If a player wants to use a class in Players Handbook VMXIII he can get the book himself. It kills me that the stuff in Lords of Madness, Heroes of Horror, and Fiendish Codex series for example will be mechanically incompatible. Gods, just thinking about it upsets me. I have become more open to buying and using 3rd party materials and will likely continue to do so.
I've played a dread necromancer from Heroes of Horror for 13 levels. I can't say he's the most powerful. A few things helped:
-- the summon undead spells are useful.
-- ghoul touch, spectral hand, command undead, and false life are incredibly helpful at low levels. I found these 2nd level spells more helpful than most 3rd level spells I had access to! Although speak with dead is a DM's bane :-)
-- at higher levels, commanding shadows and ghosts is very useful, since they are incorporeal and not as obvious/messy as other undead (especially when traveling in urban areas).
-- take the Arcane Disciple feat once or twice (from Complete Divine). This gives you access to spells of a cleric domain. Each day, you can cast each spell on the list once (assuming you are high enough level to cast the spell). The domains need to be of your god, so pick your deity wisely! Although domains like Fire might sound useful, I found Trickery and Travel were pretty useful (turning invisible is priceless! later, teleporting is a live saver).
In terms of role-playing, my character Cal was a changeling, which gave me a second angle to play him as a spy, etc. Anything that gives a second angle besides "death, death, and more death" can make play more enjoyable. Bringing zombies into town only evokes the ire of clerics and other do-gooder types, not to mention fear from the locales. I preferred to play Cal as discrete - death as a science to study and an art to use quietly behind the scenes.
Hope this helps.
|
