Aid Another will still be useless ("ah the goggles do nuzzing!") with my terrible roll.
Will rack my brains to think of something better for her to do...
I'm better off using Knowledge (Religion) to... er... notice a weak spot in shrine construction! Yes, that's it...
|
JSL:
Don't worry, I'm not plotting against the party again. Not even Vesh (nor his player) is that dense.
What do you think about making some of the effects of the Milk of Lamashtu permanent? Negative along with positive? I was thinking of something along the lines of a minor bloodline (as per Unearthed Arcana). I was looking at a monster bloodline since it is Milk of Lamashtu. Troll seemed to work, but it was kind of random. Then it hit me, goblin! Like goblin backwash or something. A minor goblin bloodline would probably look something like this:
4th=Stealth skill +2
8th=Alertness feat (perception +2)
12th=Dex +1
At 12th level (or before) he would have to take a level of "goblin" or take a 20 percent xp penalty.
I don't know. Might be fun to RP a slight change in Vesh b/c of this experience that is different than "he becomes dark and brooding" which is just another form of pouting anyway. He could take on a more sickly skin tone and be given to making up rhymes. Just a thought.
Thanks for the input on my 'book of questions'. :)
I agree that I probably would be better off if I hadn't been in such an all fired hurry. AND my reactions are definitely influenced by the fact I have been playing (basically) the same way for almost 30 years now! 4E is most assuredly a different mind set.
In short, I agree that I would probably enjoy playing a game of 4E, but i'm not sure that trying to 'translate' a character is the best idea. Too many differences. Best to start off fresh and see what I can find that looks like fun.
A new question,...
Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind/for all the 'move' and 'shift' actions?!? It seems that every successful use of a Warlock power 'shifts' the opponent or the warlock at least 2 spaces!
A new question,...
Can someone explain to me the reasoning behind/for all the 'move' and 'shift' actions?!? It seems that every successful use of a Warlock power 'shifts' the opponent or the warlock at least 2 spaces!
Ooh, ooh, me, me, I know this one!
Besides the closer association between the tabletop game and the minis game (progression from 3e, I believe), the primary benefit is...no AoOs. I imagine this would be especially handy for a wizard who survives best by not getting hit.
[
Ooh, ooh, me, me, I know this one!
Lol! Great! I'm glad YOU do! :)
Besides the closer association between the tabletop game and the minis game (progression from 3e, I believe), the primary benefit is...no AoOs. I imagine this would be especially handy for a wizard who survives best by not getting hit.
Not excited about my RPG being turned into my Minis game (I already HAVE several Minis games!) but no AoO's,... Wizzie like! ;)
Rule #1 of how not to be seen: Don't stand up.
Its 4e analogue:
Rule #1 of how not to get hurt: Don't get hit.
Well, it was a nice try... what DC am I trying to get with these Str checks by the way?
Also, there are several skill choices to try - and a success is a success.
The primary skills for the challenge are Religion and Strength. Of course Perception and Intelligence might come in handy, too.
Aack! Is everyone required to roll a Perception check? I thought in the 6 successes before 4 failures game that a success was a success, almost regardless of the skill used. I want to avoid using a Str check (only +1) and I was actually nervous about rolling a Perception check (+5) because I wasn't sure if it would be enough. What's the score now?
EDIT: Looking back, this is what I have:
Round 1
Salome: Religion check -- success
Ehlissa: Strength check -- failure
Slidell: spellcasting
Round 2
Salome: Perception check -- success
Ehlissa: Percepton check -- failure
Slidell: Arcana check -- success
Round 3
Salome: No check yet (does spellcasting override?)
Ehlissa: No check yet
Slidell: Perception check -- unknown
Veran: Perception check -- failure
Zieke: No check yet
JSL: If (in Round 3) Salome, Ehlissa, and Zieke have successful checks -- of whatever skills -- would that override Slidell and Veran's Perception checks? Or are we doomed? And if we are doomed, what happens next?
ACK! Ok, whoa! I read that part too, but didn't realize the implications!
OK, I thought the 'success or failure' part of the skill checks was referring to the characters (Primarily Salome and Ehlissa, since they have Religion) while they were fighting the statue with holy prayers and such. This part WOULD probably include Slidell if he uses his Arcana check to help with the ceremony.
GOOD point about Veran too. I guess we could presume that the familiar uses the master's save roll? Or do we want to keep him as a separate entity? (After all, he does give me 2 Per checks for the price of one!) I wouldn't be worried at all if I still had another Prot/Evil as he would be protected as well via the share spells ability. If separate, he needs to leave before he succumbs! (Owie! Lamashtuu empowered Raven! ACK!)
But first, we have to tip over this statue. Does the ''6 successes before 4 failures" include trying to tip it over too? If so, then we DEFINITELY do not want to try again until all are lined up and aiding the main pusher! (One push attempt with aid anothers more likely to succeed anyway).
Do the perception checks trying to see if the statue has a weak spot count in the 'success vs failure' game? If so SLi is going to STOP that now! Cuz his Per stinks!
So, second round, I would probably NOT make the Arcana check. Cancel that, I will re-roll later if I participate in the ceremony. I would cast Enlarge on either Ehlissa or Zieke, then we all aid another on the enlarged to help him/her topple the statue.
THEN we can 'start the ceremony' and make religion, arcana, etc. checks.
Thanks for pointing that out Dreamer! I think we were getting ahead of ourselves! (Says the guy who 'jumped' in the well!) ;P
So, we work together to topple the statue first, yes?
Do the perception checks trying to see if the statue has a weak spot count in the 'success vs failure' game? If so SLi is going to STOP that now! Cuz his Per stinks!So, second round, I would probably NOT make the Arcana check. Cancel that, I will re-roll later if I participate in the ceremony. I would cast Enlarge on either Ehlissa or Zieke, then we all aid another on the enlarged to help him/her topple the statue.
THEN we can 'start the ceremony' and make religion, arcana, etc. checks.
If it were me, I'd keep the Round 2 Arcana check (a success is a success) and cast Enlarge during Round 3 (Salome is also casting a spell) rather than the Perception checks (in case they both turn out to be failures, and since Salome's Perception check was high enough that any more Perception would probably be redundant). In Round 3, maybe Ehlissa can aim for a "gimme" skill, or both she and Zieke can make another Strength check, taking advantage of Aid Another. Round 4 (if necessary), Enlarged Zieke (scary thought, though not as scary as a possessed mutant raven) can roll a Str check and the rest of us in the room can roll Aid Another checks.
Everyone in the room MUST make some form of skill check (as everyone is taking part in defeating the statue), and they all count towards the skill challenge if JSL is running it as per 4E.
Everyone in the room MUST make some form of skill check (as everyone is taking part in defeating the statue), and they all count towards the skill challenge if JSL is running it as per 4E.
Is that even if a spell is cast that round? (I'm OK either way; I just would like to know if I can/should do an additional skill check. That would also put Slidell's Arcana check in the first round, right?)
Hmm... good question. I would assume that that would 'count' as your action for that round. Or maybe it would depend on the type of skill? It's up to each of us whether using a spell is an effective use or not. We're not under time pressure here so much as we are under the pressure of the Will saves.
|
|
JSL:
Bloodlines are actually in the SRD. They don't have examples for all monsters, but they give you a table for making your own--I based the goblin minor bloodline on the goblin entry from the SRD. You saw the positives, the negatives come in the form of a modified level adjustment scheme. Essentially, the character takes a level in his or her chosen bloodline--for those with a minor bloodline that level has to be taken any time before 12th level. It's essentially an empty level. It affords almost nothing--not even hp! Here's how it is described in the SRD:
Over the course of his career, a character with a bloodline becomes more powerful than one without a bloodline. Because the power gain is gradual over a span of twenty levels, a static level adjustment doesn't truly reflect this difference. instead, a bloodline character must take one or more levels of "bloodline" at various points in his career, as noted on Table: Bloodline Levels. Before a character with a bloodline reaches the indicated character level, he must take one class level of "bloodline." Class levels of "bloodline" do not increase a character's character level the way a normal class level does, but they do provide certain benefits (see below).If the character does not take a class level of bloodline before reaching the character level indicated on the table, he gains no further bloodline traits and must take a 20% penalty on all future XP gains. As soon as he meets the minimum bloodline level, he gains all bloodline abilities due him according to his character level, and the XP penalty no longer applies.
For example, A 1st-level character with a major bloodline (silver dragon) receives a +2 bonus on Sense Motive checks as a bloodline trait. When he reaches 2nd character level, he gains the Alertness feat as a bloodline trait. Before he reaches 3rd character level, he must take a level of bloodline in order to continue gaining bloodline traits. if he reaches 3rd character level and has no bloodline levels, he does not gain the bloodline trait due him at 3rd character level (Strength +1) and must take a 20% reduction on all future XP gains. If he later meets the minimum required bloodline levels, he gains his 3rd-level trait at that time (as well as any other traits he may have failed to receive for not taking his bloodline level right away), and the XP reduction no longer applies to future gains. Before reaching his 6th character level, he must have taken two levels of bloodline in order to keep gaining bloodline traits. If he takes his third bloodline level before reaching 12th character level, he becomes eligible to gain all the traits of his bloodline (as they become available when he reaches new character levels).
A bloodline level grants no increase in base attack bonus or base save bonuses, no hit points or skill points, and no class features. It counts as a normal class level (with no class skills) for the purpose of determining maximum skill ranks. Levels of bloodline never result in XP penalties for multiclass characters.
Include the character's bloodline level when calculating any character ability based on his class levels (such as caster level for spellcasting characters, or save DCs for characters with special abilities whose DCs are based on class level). The character doesn't gain any abilities, spells known, or spells per day from the addition of his bloodline levels, though—only the calculations of his level-based abilities are affected.
If a character has levels in two or more classes in addition to his bloodline levels, each class gains the benefit of adding the bloodline levels when calculating abilities.
For example, a 2nd-level sorcerer with a major bloodline takes a bloodline level when earns enough XP to advance in level. He is treated as a 3rd-level spellcaster for the purpose of spell durations, caster level checks, and so forth. But he doesn't gain a 3rd-level sorcerer's spells per day or spells known.
Similarly, the stunning attacks of a 3rd-level monk with one bloodline level have a save DC equal to 12 (10 + one-half class level) plus her Wisdom modifier, since the bloodline level is treated as if it were a monk class level when calculating the save DC. A 3rd-level monk/3rd-level sorcerer with two bloodline levels would be treated as a 5th-level spellcaster and a 5th-level monk for determining level-based abilities.
Check the link.
I just noticed that I only posted a sample goblin bloodline to 12th level. I think it'd probably finish out like this:
16th = Darkvision 60' (ex)
20th = Goblin Affinity +2 (to bluff, diplomacy, gather info., intimidate, and perform vs. Goblins)
A Gnoll minor bloodline might look like:
4th = +2 Perception
8th = Power Attack
12th = Strength +1
16th = Darkvision 60' (Ex)
20th = Gnoll Affinity +2 (as above vs Gnolls)
Again, I'm basing this off of the SRD info. on Gnolls, the fewer the abilities of the monster, the harder it is to make a proper bloodline.
|
|
JSL:
One more thought...
The SRD doesn't say so explicitly, but in looking at some online forum somewhere, it seems that because the bloodline level is essentially an ECL, it does not count towards the character's level for the purpose of feats either. I couldn't find anyone that posted a gnoll bloodline anywhere. You know, I've got Savage Species somewhere, I should refer to that to see if there is any input.
I have a problem with the whole concept of the Gnoll in 3.5. It seems very Strength-based and disjointed--not connected to real-world hyenas in any way. I don't know if 4E corrects this (my books are in the car and the online D&D compendium is a joke), but the "re-imagined" pathfinder book certain does not--at least not mechanically.
I might keep the Gnoll bonus to STR to keep them scrappy, but I might consider changing it to a CON bonus--not sure. They should have Dodge or Track as a feat...or better yet, Improved Trip, Scent as an extra-ordinary ability, and Low-light vision instead of Darkvision (Darkvision for Gnolls??? Darkvision is WAY overused in humanoids in 3.5).
Here's how I'd write a Gnoll bloodline using those guidlines instead of the SRD:
Minor Gnoll Bloodline
4th = Perception +2
8th = Run
12th = CON +1
16th = Track
20th = Gnoll Affinity (as previously outlined)
Intermediate Gnoll Bloodline
2nd = Perception +2
4th = Run
6th = CON +1
8th = Track
10th = Gnoll Affinity +2
12th = +1 Natural Armor
14th = Survival +2
16th = Improved Trip
18th = STR +1
20th = Scent (Ex)
Intermediate bloodlines require two levels in "bloodline" one before 6th and one before 12th level.
Hmmm,... I suppose, That changing the movement rules like this might make it easier to imitate your favorite movie battles at least. Swashbuckling is always a lot more fun if you can move around while doing it! The climatic fights always seem to occupy at LEAST the entire room. And a lot of times they end up in another part of the building from where you started. And I have no trouble with certain powers/spells 'knocking' characters around. (Heck, the HERO/Champions System has 'Knockback', to simulate the amount of flying around the super heroes do when they get decked by the villain! And, um, vice-versa of course!)
I did a little more reading today. I have a few more questions I'm brewing, but only one for now. (EDIT- And a comment! I gotta be me!) ;)
Implements: I get that you add the '+' of the implement to your att (& dmg??) rolls with spells that have the 'implement' keyword. So far so good. (Harry Potter just happened to get a gift of a +5 or +6 wand from the start!) But even the high lvl items seem,... weak. I get that 4E focuses more on using your OWN at-will powers instead of items, but,... Does anyone else think that every example item is weak? Almost every example item had only one power. And only once/day at that! NO at-wills, Not even encounter, just dailies.
And I noticed a discrepancy. All of the Wand descriptions had their power listed as Daily. But the wand intro specifically mentions the wand powers as being Encounter. Typo? And if so, which direction?
I can see that adding ANOTHER at-will power to a wizard's or warlock's already potent list of At-wills might be overkill, (Even though you can only use one/round, so it still comes down to choices) But wouldn't a creator make a magic weapon or item that was useful more than once a day? Even the 'utility' magic items were 99% dailies. And usually only last one turn (round?).
Example-Magic Carpet is listed as At-will, but 'Boots of flying' is listed as daily, and ends on the end of your current turn. To me that's not flying, that's feather fall. (& maybe levitate.)
I DO think I could have some fun with this. I need to see how powers/actions interact, but I'm already seeing some fun possibilities. Definitely easier to get my head wrapped around it when I WASN'T trying to think of how to shoe-horn an already-established character into the new system!
My thoughts for the day. Going to bed now, laters all!
I think also one has to approach it in some ways by way of a player/character knowledge dichotomy. i.e. You the player know that such and such an item or power only works once a day but the character might not think of it that way, they only manage to say the keyword or have chance to use it at a dramatically appropriate moment.
Or... "the power of the Seven Cobra Strike is not one to be used lightly, young one"
Or... as Roger Rabbit would say "Not at ANY time, only when it was FUNNY..."
|
|
JSL
Just a thought (last one, promise)...
I thought about the claw thing a little more...I'm not sure about taking the negative hit to CHA based checks all the time. But, what about if it happened when he was bloodied?
When bloodied:
1. Gets the two claw attacks at 1d6 (no penalty for off-hand attacks)
2. Makes ALL other attacks with melee or ranged weapons as non-proficient (-4)
3. Can't cast or steal spells (though he can still deal sneak-attack damage)
4. WILL save to end
I think this fits with Vesh's whole struggle with abuse--he now becomes violent when bloodied. Ironic.
I was playing around with a concept of compelling him to attack the nearest enemy combatant, but I think what I've got above sort of does that without forcing it--all other attack options (except spells) are still open to him, but at a pretty steep penalty. This gives Vesh a little flavor, a little risk, but doesn't put the at too severe a disadvantage.
Also, the effects of this should fade over time. He's planning on "retraining" his weak-will flaw at some point, and as he gains levels, his WILL save will increase. If it becomes too much of a distraction in-game, I'm also willing to spend the craft-points to have Father Z. remove curse on him or something.
What do you think?
I think also one has to approach it in some ways by way of a player/character knowledge dichotomy. i.e. You the player know that such and such an item or power only works once a day but the character might not think of it that way, they only manage to say the keyword or have chance to use it at a dramatically appropriate moment.
Or... "the power of the Seven Cobra Strike is not one to be used lightly, young one"
Or... as Roger Rabbit would say "Not at ANY time, only when it was FUNNY..."
ROFL!
Thanks Fabes, I needed that!And yes, that is also a good point. Even though I managed to stop trying to figure out how to 'clone' Sli, I'm still thinking in terms of D&D that I'm used too. I just need to think of this as a different system altogether and I'll probably be fine!
(But I stand by my opinion that if a mage makes a magic item that allows him to fly, He's going to make it work for more than ONE ROUND/DAY!) ;) (imho)
In fact, I think there would have been less flak altogether if they had just done that to begin with! As I mentioned earlier, I'm no stranger to different game systems. (And I tend to think of characters in terms of those systems!) And just looking at this I see where I am saying 'THAT might be fun!' But I still have a bad taste in my mouth from the first announcement. IF they had just come out and said "This is the new WotC RPG, we've taken everything we didn't like about D&D and changed it". Well, you'd still have a flame war, because some people are just jerks, but I think there would have been less of it. <shrug> Who knows?
Ah well, I'm off to peruse more options and interesting combinations! later!
Agreed, But just to be safe Someone should help Zieke with Aid Another on moving the plate. If Ehlisa can help Zieke with the plate, maybe Salome can Aid Another on Sli with his INT check? Unless she has another check to make that round?
Just a thought!
In general, when is it a good time to Aid Another? It seems like there are times in combat when an enemy needs a really good wallop or, as happened a couple of times in game, there's a task that someone really can't do alone (e.g., Climb Rope for those of us who are over-armored). I also think that toppling the statue is a legitimate use of Aid because certainly no one could do it alone.
I'm less enthused about using Aid Another to handle the plate and the Int check. First of all, they seem like tasks that Zieke and Slidell would normally be able to perform on their own. (+3 seems like OK odds for success to me; less than that and I'd worry.) Second, Salome would also need a success (and therefore a potential failure) to Aid with either of those skills -- and Str and Int aren't her fortes -- too much liability for a preparatory round.
I don't mind waiting for JSL before I skill check (don't want to do something rash or irrelevant), but I don't want to draw this scene out too much longer because Vesh and Mal are still in the hall with nothing to do until this gets done. JSL has explicitly said to roll Strength and Intelligence or Alchemy. I think it's OK to at least do that much and keep things moving.
JSL has explicitly said to roll Strength and Intelligence or Alchemy. I think it's OK to at least do that much and keep things moving.
Agreed. And, typically, it's the DM's decision on which actions can benefit from Aid Another. Some can. Some can't. The statue toppling seems like a no-brainer. INT checks seem more individual-based to me. STR checks vary. It just depends on whether multiple people can gather around something and apply coordinated leverage. The plate may be small enough that only one person can do it. In which case, Zieke is obliged to try his hand at it. I just want to make sure everyone's in agreement that the plate removal takes precedence now. And apparently it appears to...so I'll go ahead and post Zieke's action.
When IS a good time to Aid Another?
Basically I would agree with NSpicer, technically you can aid another at any time, (I believe it takes a standard action to do so,) Otherwise, it is up to the GM (DM) to determine if anybody can get into position to help you with your task.
My suggestion involving having Salome help Sli with the Int check was to ensure that we didn't have another failure. Salome would only have to roll a 10 or better to provide a bonus to Sli. I justified it in MY mind by thinking that Salome was familiar with potions in general, and was the one who knew specifics about the Milk in the first place. (I just try to justify how a character might know things. Though it possible for ANYbody in a fantasy world to know something possibly useful just from stories and tales they might have heard!)
In general, a failed attempt to Aid Another does not incur any penalties for the person attempting the action/check. It merely provides a bonus if the other person succeeds. Kind of a win-win situation!
But, I haven't read up on Skill challenges in the 4E yet, (another thing I need to do!) So I'm not sure if a failed Aid Another attempt would count as a failure! Better not to risk it,... :)
I agree, let's roll with what our esteemed DM has given us and go from there.
I shall move my electronic presence over to the IC thread, and post Sli's action,... Post-Haste!
(OH! The puns! I kill me!)
Have I mentioned that I'm easily amused??? ;P
EDIT-OH! SAnt! Nice dream as usual! Very creepy! Was NOT expecting THAT little twist! :0
|
|
...but I don't want to draw this scene out too much longer because Vesh and Mal are still in the hall with nothing to do until this gets done.
Take your time. Doesn't look like Arctaris is around, and this gives me a good excuse to get some work done. Also, I had a job interview yesterday, so it's not like I'm posting a ton right now anyway--dream aside.
Thanks for the dream feedback. Again, Vesh is fun to write for--I don't stretch those creative limbs as much as I ought to (as I can see from my deteriorating sense of correct usage and punctuation). Having him wake up is mechanically incorrect, however. Several things are intermingling. Once Sleep wears off, I assume that Vesh will lose the handful of temporary hit points that he got from the milk. Zieke beat a good 17 points of subdual damage into Vesh's head--Vesh was at 15 of 17 before this mess. SO, Vesh is unconscious when Sleep wears off. Perhaps he wakes, screams, the hitpoints wear off, and he falls back unconscious. Yep--that'll work.
As far as the fallout: I imagine that it'll be rough for both of them in different ways. Vesh has broken a trust (twice) with someone that was beginning to trust and open up to him--we've already seen that he's been in the reverse position growing up.
There is tons of RPing that can be done here, and JSL and I have been exploring ways to mechanically represent some change in Vesh as a result of the exposure to the milk that doesn't resort to comic-book cliches (look! he's a monster/mutant/werewolf/hulk/thing) or overshadow the party's story overall (let's watch Vesh hog the spotlight) or become mechanically cumbersome (templates, bloodlines, yuck).
We'll see!
It's pretty cool to me that I can ask questions of a group boasting some 130 years of total D&D/RPG experience -- and they don't immediately know or agree on the right answer.
It tells me I'm doing my job (both in-game and out-of-game): I like to make people think.
There's nothing like a good question for making one think. I'm just really glad that Vesh is out cold with the way I've been rolling lately.
Ah fickleness, thy name is Invisible Castle! ;)
Thanks JSL, I always appreciate your input, (And everyone else's too!) Even if I don't agree with something, (and that's not really that often,... usually) It makes me think, and I like that!
Re:Wands powers,... Daily vs Encounter- I hope your right. A wand with an Encounter Power built in seems much more feasible to me than a daily.
Re: Spells vs Rituals (Specifically Flight) Ok, Your above response makes sense. In that powers you cast 'in combat' or at least 'in encounter' are hurry-up-and-do-what-you-can-now types of things in the new system. (IE-Short flying or dimensional hops) And Rituals are for long term, imbue magic into an item permanently or cast long lasting spells like creating a cape or carpet of flying that lasts all day (8 hours). As 4E has broken these kinds of things up, that works.
I agree that it always WAS difficult to 'balance' combat and non-combat spells in 1 through 3E, especially when making a magic item. (I don't anyone who thinks that a 'magic missile' use is the same as a use of 'Locate Object') BUT, I always enjoyed finding new uses for old spells, and you would be surprised at how many 'utility' spells I found a creative use for. (Not necessarily combat, but still requiring that I be able to cast it in the ROUND, not in 10 minutes!) And this becomes much more of a 'plan ahead' thing in 4E, (Not a problem for me, BUT,...) It does make 'creative on the fly' uses of spells more difficult!
Re: IS this why people think 4E doesn't 'feel' right:
I'm crashing soon, I'll think about this some and post more later, but my first response is 'Yes, that probably has something to do with it'.
Like you, I have played several different systems, but my characters were always tied to the system I was using in my mind!
"Ragadolf' was a Hero System (FAntasy Hero) character. And the single most fun character I've ever played (until Sli!) But while I can play a mage in different systems, And conceivably duplicate a close version of Rags in almost any system allowing magic, Rags will always be tied to the system he was created in for me.
Because while I can play a wise-cracker or a snooty mage in any system, I do tend to develop 'habits' for that character based on the system I'm in.
And your right, I have referenced several things via Sli that directly relate to the game system, (Though I have tried to 'flavor it up' a bit, '2nd order of the merlinscale' instead of '2nd level spells', etc.)
Ok,... caffeine gone,... will post more later. Thanks again for the responses! Please continue unless/until I drive you crazy with questions! (And maybe a lil bit after!) ;)
I'm more with JSL on the 'characters are ignorant of what they are numerically' scale of things. Hence why Ehlissa is a bit puzzled if referred to as a 'paladin' - she just thinks of herself as Ehlissa. She also doesn't 'know' that she can 'detect evil' at will, she just gets a bad feeling sometimes.
I'm not saying this to be critical, only out of curiosity, but is this - i.e., the underlying mechanics are too abstract to make sense as PC knowledge - the reason that 4e doesn't feel like D&D to some people?
Perhaps for some players. But I can't imagine that's my reason. I too have played many different systems, many different genres...and though I (the player) will have a sense of how things work mechanically...I strive not to let that bleed over into the character's knowledge.
As for Zieke's comment on calling Ehlissa a "paladin" in-character, I've always gone with the sense that plenty of people in the game world know and use the word "paladin" to define a warrior with a heavy devotion to a god or goddess. In Korvosa (where Zieke comes from), I imagine there's a significant awareness of paladins, whether it's the Hellknights from the Order of the Nail, those who serve in the Korvosan Guard or Church of Abadar, or even the history of Korvosa as a Chelish colony before Cheliax fell from within to devils and paladins have become an even more important part of the region's politics.
So, when Zieke used that term for Ehlissa, I didn't mean to imply he knew everything mechanically about what a paladin is and can do. It's more of an impression or even a teasing side to their relationship by observing 1) how she carries herself and behaves, 2) the prominence with which she displays her devotion to Iomedae on her shield, armor, etc. Zieke just connects things like that and then assumes there's a bit of paladin-like philosophy behind her...whether he knows it to be true or not.
In the meantime, getting back to JSL's question about why many people say 4e doesn't feel like D&D anymore...I think it's much larger than thinking of their characters in mechanical terms. There are plenty of fantasy-genre, sword-and-sorcery game systems out there. They can all be used to roleplay these same types of characters. So 4e, as a system, doesn't change anything with respect to that...just like Rolemaster, GURPS, Savage Worlds, D&D 3.x, AD&D, OD&D and a host of other systems.
No. D&D 4e is leaving more long-time, old-guard D&D players cold because of the number of radical changes all taking place at once. The emphasis on a style-of-play that's more like a computer game in its execution. More hack-and-slash. More powered-up. Less roleplay-oriented. More keep the action moving from combat encounter to combat encounter.
Now having said that, we all know a game is what you make of it. If you want a roleplay-heavy 4e game, you can still do one. But the system, including many of its mechanics and rules changes from previous editions, are promoting a different thing in an obvious attempt to draw in new, younger players interested in a certain style of play that mimics CCGs and MMORPGs more than table-top RPGs of yesteryear. Hence, 4e doesn't "feel" like D&D as people have always known it for the past 30-40 years. I think that's the biggest component of it.
My two-cents,
--Neil
No. D&D 4e is leaving more long-time, old-guard D&D players cold because of the number of radical changes all taking place at once...
...But the system, including many of its mechanics and rules changes from previous editions, are promoting a different thing in an obvious attempt to draw in new, younger players interested in a certain style of play that mimics CCGs and MMORPGs more than table-top RPGs of yesteryear. Hence, 4e doesn't "feel" like D&D as people have always known it for the past 30-40 years. I think that's the biggest component of it.
I don't blame the "old-guard" for feeling uncomfortable/displaced/turned off, etc. by the new system. People, in general, dislike change.
There was a similar off-putting to the "old-guard" when 3e came out. New illustrations, new feats, new mechanics... lots of things that are now accepted as "classic D&D" that didn't exist before 2000. I found many of the changes to Dragon magazine to be very off-putting as they tried to be "edgy" and "push the envelope." (That's about when our subscription ran out.) Clearly, they were pandering to the middle-school/high school set, trying to recruit new players for hack-and-slash games; some of it was dumb, some was offensive, and some was just inscrutible. And these young players, certainly, didn't care what the game used to be like; they wanted something fun and entertaining (to them) to play now.
On the other hand, every generation of media (movies, music, etc.) has to appeal to the younger generation in order to survive. D&D is not going to pick up many "converts" in their 30s-40s; if they were going to play, they probably would have picked it up when they were...
...in middle school or high school.
Oh.
Thank you Dreamer and Zieke, for making the explanations much clearer and logical than I was obviously capable of last night!
I pretty much agree with the above 2 posts, almost verbatim.
Re: character knowledge vs player knowledge-
I agree that just because Paladins are heard of, it doesn't mean that everyone who's heard of them can recite their list of abilities. BUT, Even if you keep player knowledge COMPLETELY separate from the Character's, a character would know his own abilities. (I certainly know my own RL abilities, and lack of sometimes). But I agree he wouldn't refer to himself (in 'Real Life') as a 12th level fighter. But He WOULD tell a 5th level fighter. "You don't stand a chance boy, I've years more training and experience than you. You can't hope to beat me."
Or-an 18th lvl Wizard with the Archmage PrC vs a 5th lvl Wizard wouldn't say "I'll incinerate you with a 9th lvl spell", But he Might say, "I can cast spells and manipulate them in ways you can't even conceive of. If you insist on fighting me I'll destroy you with my first casting!"
This sort of reference by a character to his own abilities, or the abilities of others, doesn't bother me. (I have always done it in fact, though as I mentioned before, I do try to 'game-ify' the statements). Any more than the guys at the gym refering to the amount of weight they can bench press bothers me. (Other than it makes me jealous!) ;P
Am I misunderstanding JSL's original statement? Did you mean that this sort of thing bothers you as player/DM? Or were you merely contemplating how much a character realizes about his abilities and the world at large? Or making a comment about how players tend to refer to their abilities in game terms without 'real-ifing' it?
Re: 4E system changing too much too quickly-
I agree (IN fact I think I said the same thing earlier, just not as eloquently!) They have admitted that they were changing the game to more closely emulate MMORPG's, (Or, as has been surmised, to more easily BECOME one in the future!) Whether or not that was a smart move on their part, we will see! (How many new players they bring in vs how many they 'loose' over this change). I think that NSPicer is correct, in that they changed too much too quickly, and that is why many people (including me!) have said that whether the system works or not is no longer the problem. It is the fact that SO much has changed it doesn't 'FEEL' like D&D anymore. I may like the system. I will probably play the system eventually. (I have a friend ready to get our old group back together as soon as the DDI tools go online) But I will forever think of it as "WotC RPG' not D&D.
Re: 'Role' Playing in 4E vs 'Roll' Playing- I agree with NSpicer completely on this one! The new 4E system (looks like it) tries it's best to force the game into an encounter-based, move-along-and-keep-fighting mentality. Based on MMORPG's (AND CCG's! I hadn't thought about that one! Thanks NSpicer!)
BUT, this in no way prevents those those who want to role-play in any way from doing so! One thing 3E did was introduce a skill system, which made it easier (IMHO) to bring more role-playey aspects to the game.
BUT, those in my main game group were Roleplaying way back in AD&D and 1st Ed. And we never had any problems doing so.
A game system is merely a framework with regulations for determining the winner in a conflict or contest. The system itself cannot prevent the players from roleplaying if they want to! (I do believe that a system can encourage rp-ing, which it looks like 4E does not!) How the players choose to interpret and use the rules is up to them! (I know a few 'hack-n-slashers' that will probably LUV 4E!)
Thanks again for the thoughts guys and gal! I love how hard this group makes me think! (I was getting almost as lazy mentally as I've been getting physically, Time to change BOTH of those!)
Thank you Dreamer and Zieke, for making the explanations much clearer and logical than I was obviously capable of last night!
Who's this Zieke fella you speak of...and what does he know about roleplaying games? ;-)
There was a similar off-putting to the "old-guard" when 3e came out. New illustrations, new feats, new mechanics... lots of things that are now accepted as "classic D&D" that didn't exist before 2000....Clearly, they were pandering to the middle-school/high school set, trying to recruit new players for hack-and-slash games; some of it was dumb, some was offensive, and some was just inscrutible. And these young players, certainly, didn't care what the game used to be like; they wanted something fun and entertaining (to them) to play now.
I would perceive all of that to be true as well. Sometimes, the changes alone are off-putting enough that it will stir up unrest or dissent from those unwilling to migrate to a new edition. With 4e, however, I don't believe that's the only factor in play.
On the other hand, every generation of media (movies, music, etc.) has to appeal to the younger generation in order to survive. D&D is not going to pick up many "converts" in their 30s-40s; if they were going to play, they probably would have picked it up when they were...in middle school or high school....Oh.
It's true that they need young blood to carry on into a new generation if they're going to survive. But you also don't cut off your nose to spite your face by totally cutting loose those who are already your core supporters and consumer base. And I'm getting the sense that a lot more of that is happening with 4e than 3e because of the extreme nature of the changes and the heavier marketing towards a different style of play than the "old-guard" has been used to...or cares for...
In my mind, the reason 3e weathered the transition from 2e is because they (i.e., Wizards) successfully marketed it enough that a) several "old-guard" players were enticed into trying it and then embraced it, b) enough younger players were brought into the RPG marketplace that it created a wave of new enthusiasm for gaming in general, which in turn spurred the "old-guard" to renew their interest in order to support and play alongside them, and c) they made it easy and understandable to convert.
Can't that happen with the transition to 4e from 3e as well? Not as much, IMO. That's beause 3e and 2e were close enough (mechanically-speaking) that the "old-guard" players were more willing to give it a try. 4e doesn't even propose to be similar to 3e. In fact, they don't even bother with a conversion guide this time around so players can bring over cherished characters, etc. Instead, the official line from WotC is that you should "start over." And, in some ways, this examination that Rags is going through over how to "convert" or portray a 4e Slidell, goes down that same path. Because of the differences, it's ultimately easier for him to simply cast aside a direct Slidell-analogue and simply "start over" and create a new wizard, which he could admittedly roleplay similar to Slidell, but who would have different powers under a different set of mechanics...some of which don't quite fit. And, since the variablility and versatility of wizards gets played down in 4e, it's a tougher sell in that respect as well.
In addition, I think 4e will struggle to bring over the same numbers of the "old guard" 3e players because 4e hasn't been marketed all that well (comparatively-speaking to 3e) to create a large enough wave of new enthusiasm among younger gamers so as to sweep up the "old-guard" in its wake. Instead, you've got 3e players, many of whom where quite satisfied with the mechanics of that system, posing major questions about the need for all the radical change in 4e. You put up a number of third-party publishers (e.g., Green Ronin, Paizo Publishing, etc.) deciding not to sign-on to the GSL (for very pertinent business reasons) and the overall RPG industry is fragmenting back into the days before the D20 system sought to unite everything. It's cyclical, basically. We're now about to go back to the old days of multiple competing systems. I suspect 4e will continue to dominate, of course. Wherever the 400 lb. gorilla goes, the majority of the consumer-base will follow. But maybe not as many as followed when 3e came out. And in the end, that could pose significant enough business turmoil that Hasbro might decide to cut loose "the world's most popular roleplaying game" or go in the other direction and start formulating 5e...which I suspect the R&D staff is already discussing.
Just my additional two-cents,
--Neil
I agree that the marketing hasn't been as successful; not nearly the enthusiastic "buzz" I remember from last time. On the other hand, I don't think 3e really took off until there was a popular context from which to play it (i.e. Eberron). 4e doesn't have that yet. I don't even know if there are complete published modules yet. Many popular classes haven't been described in 4e terms yet, and there will certainly be more of everything (classes, spells, items, supplements, etc.) as time goes on.
There always is.
I can't comment on the state of the RP gaming industry (I don't even know half of those abbreviations!), but I can see how the people who create and market the products have to decide who they want to please and who's going to get snubbed. It's a marketing decision and a risk: "Will this be the product that obtains the most lucrative share of the market?" Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, often you appeal more strongly to one segment than another, and even if you don't grab the full market share, if you're lucky, a whole culture of loyal fans arises out of your brand or philosophy (Apple, anyone?).
It will be interesting to see how all this shakes out and where these games and products are in a year or so.
I agree that the marketing hasn't been as successful; not nearly the enthusiastic "buzz" I remember from last time. On the other hand, I don't think 3e really took off until there was a popular context from which to play it (i.e. Eberron).
I've heard people make that analysis before, but I'll be honest...I never got into Eberron. It wasn't what drew me to 3e. So there's at least some segment of the "old guard" for which that campaign setting wasn't the context from which to play 3e. It was just more of a combination of 3e not being all that radically different from 2e...and enough young fans who'd already made the switch or just jumped into RPGs that stirred enough overall gaming interest in me to not only play, but invest in the books, and run an occasional game to the point that it became an acceptable replacement for the previous edition...to the point that I no longer played 2e at all afterward.
At this point, it will take quite a lot more from 4e to get me to that same place. I have no plans to buy the books whatsoever, though I've skimmed them quite frequently. If I ever do, it will likely be because of my interest in freelancing on occasion...which should cover all potential systems in order to widen one's opportunities.
Many popular classes haven't been described in 4e terms yet, and there will certainly be more of everything (classes, spells, items, supplements, etc.) as time goes on....There always is.
I'm not sure that will draw me in either. The D20 3e/3.5e "splat" books as they're called, never pulled me over from 2e. If it wasn't the core books standing on their own merits, the supplements don't do it for me. As it stands today, I own the 3.5 PHB, GMG, and most of the Monster Manuals. But no additional books for classes, prestige classes, etc. With the possible exception of Unearthed Arcana...which I chose more for the variant rules and game design insights than a desire to expand upon my character options from the core rules.
Regardless, I don't disagree with your premise. For many players out there, the "splat" books will draw them in...or allow some of the "old guard" to set aside their reticence to switch. I just know myself better than everyone else out there. I know it won't make or break 4e for me. So I suspect there's likely others who'll share that philosophy. How many? I have no idea. But again, it seems clear at this point that the support for 4e isn't quite at the same level that 3e enjoyed in its early days.
I can't comment on the state of the RP gaming industry (I don't even know half of those abbreviations!), but I can see how the people who create and market the products have to decide who they want to please and who's going to get snubbed. It's a marketing decision and a risk: "Will this be the product that obtains the most lucrative share of the market?" Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, often you appeal more strongly to one segment than another, and even if you don't grab the full market share, if you're lucky, a whole culture of loyal fans arises out of your brand or philosophy (Apple, anyone?).
For anyone other than WotC, it's not about obtaining the most lucrative share of the market. Wizards of the Coast is the 400 lb. gorilla that no one will ever come close to touching in terms of consumer base. The D&D brand eclipses all else. Even so, a smaller company with smaller overhead can easily prove successful on very small slices of the pie. Paizo did the math. And obviously, they feel they can survive (and even thrive) with the direction they've chosen in sticking with 3e...or 3P...or whatever people want to call it. It also sounds like Paizo is waiting out this early period of 4e and the GSL to see either a) what kind of adjustments are done to them that make them more third-party-friendly or b) how long this particular edition lasts before a better one (5e) comes along that they're better positioned to support rather than their in-house system (Pathfinder RPG).
The bottom line for me, however, is that Wizards chose to exercise a much greater amount of control over the GSL this time around. Unfortunately, it's a control that's so great, they've pretty much forced third-party publishers to opt out of supporting 4e. There will be some who do (e.g., Goodman Games, Necromancer, etc.) and some key ones who don't (e.g., Green Ronin, Paizo, etc.)...and that will cause the marketplace to fragment back to the way it was before Ryan Dancey came up with the D20 OGL. That will make for much more interesting times for the industry in these next few years. And it's part of the reason why I'm going to GenCon this year. I want to see what the other publishers are planning.
--Neil
JUst a(nother) random thought,...
I have been devouring HArry Dresden novels lately. And the new 4E system fits the use of magic in those books like a glove.
In brief,... (Yeah, right, I know, it's me!)
Harry Dresden can do a multitude of spells that would fall under 'Rituals' in 4E. He can track a suspect by using a drop of the villains blood, put up a protective circle that almost nothing can break through, or use the circle to trap a devil, demon, fairie, etc. in. Even the uses of these that he calls 'on the fly' take a few moments to set up and cast. Though he can set up some in a hurry during combat, (Protective circle anyone?)
On the other hand, he says in every book that the only spells he can cast 'in a hurry' are Evocations (Yes, he uses that term!) which he refers to as 'Fire/flash-in-the-pan/blasty spells' And he uses the same spells over and over. Fire blasts (channeled through his 'blasting rod') (wand), Wind gusts of various strengths to close or open doors, or knock opponents off of their feet, And force fields channeled through his bracelet. Sometimes he uses his staff to channel his spells, he says it gives him more control over them. (When he doesn't use an implement, the spells tend to be area effect and blast everyone in the way)
And he tends to 'run out of steam' when he's been casting/fighting all day, and the BBEG still has to be beaten before midnight.
SPOILER ALERT! (For those who might want to read the series)
AT one point, Harry made a bargain with a his Fairy Godmaother, (Fey pact anyone?) And later he (unintentionally) made a bargain with a fallen angel, who gave him assistance in the form of her centuries of knowledge, as well as Hellfire to make his spells stronger. (Warlock multi-class feat?)
I see both Fey PAct and Warlock multi class feats in the above!
And Harry is one of those characters I love. Wise-cracking, in the face of death (usually his!) and usually figuring things out at the last minute, when he should be busy dieing, he's saving the day with a last-minute plan!
So, obviously there are aspects to this system I like when I loo at it this way!
(Just have to be my own worst critic!) ;P
True, there was an aspect to low-level play, especially in 1e and 2e, that involved "McGuyver-ing" mundane items and low-level spells that is largely unnecessary in 4e thanks to a reduction in such items/spells and different resource management. I'll admit I enjoyed doing this, too, but it was as much born out of desperation as anything else. When you only have two hp and one spell, you have to make them count.
Abso-freakin-lutely! And While I complained as much as anybody about the lack of spells at 1st lvl, (and liked the specialists in 2E, and LOVED the sorcerer in 3E) It didn't ruin my enjoyment of trying to get a character to live past the first 2 levels! (Trying more often than succeeding! But I never really got too attached to those early characters like I did later when they became a little more survivable!)
Could someone cite something specific that is taken from an MMORPG, but was not first taken from D&D by the MMORPG developers? Then maybe I would better understand this argument.
Best example I can think of is an Encounter power. (Now that I know what it is) When you fire off a spell or power in EQ2, it takes a few seconds before you can use it again. (SOrt of like an 'At-Will' with a 4-10 second recharge time.) Also, your SPells/powers use 'Mana', which means if you run out in the middle of a fight, you aren't casting ANYthing! But the less you do, the faster the bar recharges. The 'At-will' and Encounter powers seem to emulate this without having to actually keep track of 'spell points' or their return time. Does this help?
I will say one thing, though. The rules do allow more potential for optimization than 1e or 2e. However, they probably allow less than 3e due to the more stringent multi-classing limitations. Optimization is clearly very important in a competitive game, like I imagine MMORPGs to be. And I am turned off by obsessive optimization. However, optimization is not as necessary in a cooperative game. And I think they have taken care to have fewer poor choices in the mix so that characters are less likely to end up so suboptimal as to be less fun to play. I am also turned off by characters like this because they don't do their job in the party and die at inconvenient times.
Hm,... I see all the systems as being able to be optimized, (though I'll agree that some are easier/better for it than others) Optimizing to me is fine, but the way most people use the word it is just another word for 'powergaming'. And that I really don't care for. Because as many options as there are in 3E, all of the 'optimized' fighters or Wizards usually look pretty much the same Stats, powers & Skill-wise. (I'm generalizing, of course)
To me, the MMORPG's are all about 'optimizing' (Both uses of the word!) Because if you are not optimizing your toon's stats every level, you simply will not fare as well in endless combat as other players will. Whereas in a RP game, being 'weak' in one area allows for opening up various RPing opportunities, but rarely proves fatal! (Unless that one low stat prevents you from making that do-or-die saving throw of course!)I'll admit that I have not played EVERY possible character from the PHB yet. But I have friends who have! And I think they are closely enough 'balanced' that there are really no 'suboptimal' or poor choices to play. But if a person ends up playing a character that they really don't want to play (Some people would rather die than be the party cleric. I have a thing against playing straight up fighters, don't know why.) Then yes, those characters end up dying at the most deucedly inconvenient times! ;)
If it's as good as the old SSI licensed games - "Pool of Radiance", "Curse of the Azure Bonds", etc - I'd be willing to give it a shot.
THOSE were good games! Bar none! I still have all my floppies and original boxes for those games! (Yes, pity the geek! I know,...)
I think that NeverWinter Nights is the best/closest that 'Real' D&D has come on the PC. You can play the scenario in the boxes for hours by yourself or with friends, create your own adventures, or log into a friend's PC with all your buddies and run together as a group!,...In other words, social encounters that didn't end in the PCs favor almost always turned into fights because there were rules for fights. You could win a fight and you could grab the MM and rules to prove it. But that 42 you rolled on Diplomacy? Sorry, but the DC was 43; pulled straight out of the DM's shorts!
3e helped, but it only started the job...
True, I remember several times that we ended up killing a critter that we wanted to capture because killing it was just easier. 2E introduced 'subdual' dmg and that helped,... otherwise you had to use a net and hope it couldn't cut it's way out,...
There is this conception that 4e is all about fighting, but I'm not seeing it.,...
I really do not understand the statement that 4e encourages a hack-and-slash style. The combat rules are simpler. There is less that you can do in combat, not more.,...
OK, I confess that I still have not yet read the PHB all the way through. (Time permitting, please remind me to re-visit my impressions once i have read the PHB and DMG completely) But my first impression is that it goes back to the 1E & 2E of being combat-centric. Whether more or less so than 3E I'll have to actually finish reading the books first to give my opinion.
Again, I haven't finished the book yet, I may have simply not read the chapter that makes it more RP than H&S.JSL, you seem to be very convinced that 4E makes the DM's job easier, and have given ample evidence to support that PoV. Would you mind going into a little more detail as to why/how you believe that 4E promotes RPing?
EDIT- NM, I re-read the rest of the statement that I quoted above! Thank you!
I think this answers my original question. Per your statement, role-playing the history, mannerisms, and personality as Slidell, but under a different set of mechanics is "a new character". To me, it is still Slidell: the gawky, careless, foot-in-his-mouth, happy-go-lucky wizard with the back-talking bird who is discovering that his powers might have some connection to a dark secret in his past. This has nothing to do with whether he casts Magic Missile 5 times per day or 50, whether his hit points are 14 or 35, or whether his Int modifier affects his AC and Ref defense. What parts, specifically, do not convert well? (Having done a conversion, I have my thoughts - and I've rationalized them, but I'd like to hear others.)
I cannot speak for others, so I'd welcome NSpicer & SAnt's take on this, but for me,...
As I said in an earlier post, part of how I play the characters are based on how the system works. (At least in my mind, I suppose)Now, you have a good point(s). I accept that I can (and have, and probably will again) play a trouble-making, foot-in-mouth, wise-cracking, happy -go-lucky wiz with the smart-@$$ familiar. (They are just so much fun!)
In ANY system. And again, I'll admit that I already have played a version of this in a few systems. But to me, the player, it does make a difference. If he had a basic attack that never ran out, the character wouldn't be so worried about whether to cast his precious spells now or later. Or hoarding all of his scrolls for emergencies one moment, then gleefully using 2 in the same round the next!
Yes, this does not preclude ALL that you mentioned above, it is (possibly/probably) purely arbitrary to me, the player. But if the powers/spells/abilities change, then the character will feel different to me. The personality is Only half of the character to me (Probably the bigger half, but still) the other is the system and stats.
Example-IN 4E, Slidell would probably be a lot more hyper (imagine THAT if possible!) because of the increased move-during-combat rules. (Better be careful, I'll talk myself into asking you to switch in a moment!)
Now (MY own worst argument I am, at least I can see both sides of a discussion!) I have already confessed that if we switch, I will stay. Because I just do NOT want to leave this group! Will Sli 'feel' different to me? Probably. Will I still have fun with him? Undoubtedly!
Now to be fair, if 4e suddenly had the wizard healing the party (though they could cast Heal in 1e, IIRC) that would be a big change to swallow.
Agreed, Completely. Can't remember offhand, but if they did, it was the only healing spell they could cast! (Though I vaguely recall a mid-lvl HP drain spell that could recharge a Wiz who was low on HP)
JUst a(nother) random thought,...
I have been devouring HArry Dresden novels lately. And the new 4E system fits the use of magic in those books like a glove.
Even randomer thought, and totally off topic:
Saw "The Prestige" a couple of weeks ago. (Highly recommend it.) According to imdb.com, as a tribute, Harry Dresden's name appears on a list of performers at a magic show.
JUst a(nother) random thought,...
I have been devouring HArry Dresden novels lately. And the new 4E system fits the use of magic in those books like a glove.Even randomer thought, and totally off topic:
Saw "The Prestige" a couple of weeks ago. (Highly recommend it.) According to imdb.com, as a tribute, Harry Dresden's name appears on a list of performers at a magic show.
That's flippin' brilliant! NOW I have to rent the Prestige just so I can see that! :)
(Actually, I had heard it was good and wanted to see it anyway. NOW i just have another reason!) ;)|
|
This is what I get for not posting over the weekend--a novel. Don't you all have lawns to mow??? Sheesh! I'll need a second cup of coffee before I get into all this...
EDIT: I just couldn't read it all in 15 minutes, and now I've got a meeting to go to. Ah work.
There are some really nifty observations going on here, so I hope that I've got time to come back and finish going through everyone's comments.
I'll offer this little tidbit before I hafta run. As you all know, I was in the negative opinion/wait-and-see camp on 4E for some time. Most of the things (at that time, reported things) that turned me off were not mechanic, they were aesthetic. No gnomes, addition of Tieflings to the PHB, all of that screamed MMORPGs to me. What next, Blood Elves?
I've since come around. My opinion started to change when I listened to Mearls and Noonan go over the MM on a podcast. Their descriptions of exception-based monsters and abilities really made so much more sense to me than feat-based, template-overlayed, too-much-time to roll up monsters in 3.5. The fact that they could flip through the MM and put together encounters for a party of five characters of X level in real time, as they were podcasting, right there, boom. That was brilliant.
Having said all that, there are some significant things about 3E and 3.5 that I'll miss. ALL aesthetic, mind you. I'll get to those after my meeting in RL. If only my workgroup could meet at a smoky inn to plan our future adventures (er, projects) and count up loot. I'd be a happy camper. As it is, I'll have to be content with no windows and florescent lights in the meeting room (er, dungeon).
As Rags says, laters!
This is what I get for not posting over the weekend--a novel. Don't you all have lawns to mow??? Sheesh! I'll need a second cup of coffee before I get into all this...
Not yet, but I'm working on it! :D
Not to give you TOO much more to read,... but,...To be obnoxious, I could argue that this was probably the best way to adopt the limited magic system of D&D into a real-time game.
Obnoxious or not, you wouldn't necessarily be wrong. As much as I LOVE NWN (NeverWinter Nights) it is a pain to have to keep going back and resting so often with casters.
And I tried my hand at the D&D Online, Wizzies are a bloody disaster in the strenuous real-time combat settings of an MMORPG!But I understand that is not the point. There is something to preparation that is unique to D&D. I hope that the rituals can be expanded to fill that void. There is one ritual that you perform ahead of time, but activate as a standard action. Perhaps that can be precedence for a class of "triggered" rituals.
I saw that one you are referring to. And I thought the same thing. Isn't it great when great minds think alike?!? ;)
In 3e, you generally don't get in trouble if you stay with one class. Where you get in trouble is multi-classing. For example, if you sample levels in two or three classes that all have the same weak save, you could be at character level 9 (say 5/2/2 or 7/1/1) and have one really bad save bonus. Similarly, if you are a multi-classed spell-caster,...
I agree completely. Though the non-casting classes seem to have less of an overall problem (IMHO) take for example the fighter who starts with a level of Rogue to get all those juicy starting Skills points and a basic backstab. Or the fighter who doubles with ranger to get all the two-weapon fighting feats for free. Not too much of a drawback overall that I can see. But I comPLETELY agree that multi-classing casters gets hosed. The only way to 'successfully' be 5lvl fighter/5th lvl mage is to pick all buff spells to enhance your fighting. And then you still usually don't end up with with the same 'to-hit/dmg' as a 10th level fighter, though you may be a teensy bit better protected via spells.
Note-I saw the examples of how to build characters in the latest postings on WotC. The teleporter was interesting, and I admit I eagerly examined the Fighter-mage. Their example of a fighter taking multi-class Wiz feats had some interesting things about it I liked.
(Am I reading the rules right? A fighter with a Mage feat casts Magic Missile at the exact same damage as a 5th level mage?)
But, I have to ask, Swapping out powers back and forth at EVERY LEVEL?!? I understand that being able to swap out powers is a good thing when you want to. (Especially being able to swap out a 1st lvl at-will for a 10th lvl at-will!) But their example of the best possible fighter-mage had them swapping out powers EVERY level, and the next level swapping back for the one they just got rid of!
Let me re-read over that again. I may end up thinking that it's brilliant. (Constant optimization I mean), But at first read-through that seemed a little excessive to me. (Possibly it was merely an example of what you COULD do with the new system? and not what you may actually WANT to do?)
,...If we switch, and there is not support for familiars, we will house-rule whatever we need to to keep Veran.
:) Thanks, When it all comes down to it, That's all I was hoping to hear! :)
After all, We ALL know it's really about the bird, right? ;)
Thank you for all of the feedback and discussion JSL and all. I am still interested in reading everyone's thoughts (If any!) But I'll probably take a break from adding any more to the novel for a couple of days! ;)
(Give me some time to read up more and figure out what I'm talking about!)
Laters! :D