I am a mathematician and software developer. I am logically driven to a fault. I am also a humanoid (without a subtype) and therefore, emotionally driven.
I despise WotC for how it is going about 4e.
I am a huge fan of Monte Cook. He was talking about his 3.0 + House-rules campaign long before 4e was announced. I am thrilled to get a look-see at his ideas.
Third Edition has tons of problems. I do not see this product as a patch.
These are all separate things. Proximity does not necessitate causality.
That second statement I am in total agreement with. I like the basic ideas that have been put forth for 4e but it just seems like WotC is bungling the execution. Both content wise and on the public relations front.
If WotC were to suddenly print a 4e PHB that included the prior D&D setting elements/flavor and the existing races/classes in the 3e PHB I would be far more charitable toward the new edition. I would still be disgruntled over the split between monsters and players, but it wouldn't be as much of an impediment.
I am interested in seeing these house rules, particularly the process of converting existing 1st-9th level spells into 1st-20th level ones.
I like his stuff, and I wanna see his house rules. I don't know why this is such a flashpoint. I don't know why there is this clarion call for amateur armchair psychoanalysis. How does one little pdf seem to be so threatening?
Because each side can use it to fit their own arguments:
Anti-4e: See, you can fix the bad things in 3.5 without releasing new core rule books!
Pro-4e: See, there are things in 3.5 that need fixing, so we need new core rule books!
If this thing had come out 2 years ago, it would have gotten a small amount of press, but would have been largely ignored. I suspect Monte knew that the time was right for this. He did, after all, swear of rpg publishing a year or so ago to write novels.
Greg
Director of Sales
|
I like his stuff, and I wanna see his house rules. I don't know why this is such a flashpoint. I don't know why there is this clarion call for amateur armchair psychoanalysis. How does one little pdf seem to be so threatening?
Just as the full moon seems very bright at night, but actually produces no light, the flashes you see in this thread are merely a reflection of big explosions elsewhere.
Just as the full moon seems very bright at night, but actually produces no light, the flashes you see in this thread are merely a reflection of big explosions elsewhere.
Ooops. Excuse me.
|
If this thing had come out 2 years ago, it would have gotten a small amount of press, but would have been largely ignored. I suspect Monte knew that the time was right for this. He did, after all, swear of rpg publishing a year or so ago to write novels.
Greg
To be fair to Monte. These fixes are things he did in his home campaign. In his blog he wrote about them. Blog readers kept asking him to publish said changes.
So he did now.
Good choice to do this, Monte!
So there are some ideas which might be good or bad: Keep using spells all the time, spell level = character level, and so on.
Some look interesting on paper, but how will they be done?
It's something I'll have to see for myself.
Now, there's two ways to get those changes.
1: I pay something like 90 bucks to a company that keeps telling me how much my favourite game sucks and has insulted me and my fellow gamers quite a lot lately, to get a set of books that will make the dozens of books I have bought in the last 8 or so years useless, since they went out of the way to trash the old stuff - not only rules but the whole history and background of the game. If I do this, It's either a complete overhaul or working to incorporate what I like about 3e in the new game.
2: I pay 9 bucks for an ebook done by someone who did a lot of stuff I worked (can't think of anything I didn't like, though I haven't seen all of it). A guy who didn't insult me or anyone I'm aware of, and who I have more confidence in to make those things right than wizards of the cost. If I do this I get handed a set of optional rules. I can look at them, apply as much and as little of it as I want, without having to work a lot at either the rules or the assumed background in any of the books.
My choice is clear, and my only question is: What do I do with the other 81 bucks?
|
1: I pay something like 90 bucks to a company that keeps telling me how much my favourite game sucks and has insulted me and my fellow gamers quite a lot lately, to get a set of books that will make the dozens of books I have bought in the last 8 or so years useless, since they went out of the way to trash the old stuff - not only rules but the whole history and background of the game. If I do this, It's either a complete overhaul or working to incorporate what I like about 3e in the new game.
2: I pay 9 bucks for an ebook done by someone who did a lot of stuff I worked (can't think of anything I didn't like, though I haven't seen all of it). A guy who didn't insult me or anyone I'm aware of, and who I have more confidence in to make those things right than wizards of the cost. If I do this I get handed a set of optional rules. I can look at them, apply as much and as little of it as I want, without having to work a lot at either the rules or the assumed background in any of the books.
Excellent analysis.
My choice is clear, and my only question is: What do I do with the other 81 bucks?
Contact me offline and we'll arrange for me to receive the $81 in question. ;)
My choice is clear, and my only question is: What do I do with the other 81 bucks?Contact me offline and we'll arrange for me to receive the $81 in question. ;)
What am I getting in return? Remember, it should be about nine times as good as the stuff I'm getting from BoeM. :P
I'm not fond of Monte's spell system for Arcana Unearthed; some effects he made way too hard to get to (basic healing), a few other spells are way too powerful for their level.
My general impression is that Monte designs what he thinks is "cool," and doesn't really care about the balance behind things if it would interfere with that perceived "coolness." So if he doesn't have a development team to do the math for him, I don't trust him to get 20 levels of spells balanced right.
Plus, if I want to use Monte's 3.75 spell system, I'd have to re-write all spellcaster NPCs in any published adventures I might want to run. 11th level wizard? Replace his spell list and tactics with Monte's spells, presumably of levels 1 thru 11, and come up with some new tactics. On the other hand, 4E promises easy conversion of adventures from 3.5 - give the 4E wizard NPC a quick handful of spells and powers that he'll need for the scene in question, and I'm ready to go.
So while this is only $9, I don't think it's for me. A few years ago, to get insights into the design of the game I was playing, maybe. Now, when I'm switching away from 3.5, no.
For those planning on sticking with 3.5, and particularly for Ptolus fans (I stopped looking at Monte's stuff before that came out), I can see why you'll feel differently. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying, this one's not for me.
|
On the other hand, 4E promises easy conversion of adventures from 3.5 - give the 4E wizard NPC a quick handful of spells and powers that he'll need for the scene in question, and I'm ready to go.
Where did you read this? This statement goes against everything I have thus far read about 4E. Please enlighten me!
On the other hand, 4E promises easy conversion of adventures from 3.5
Come again? They're stressing how we better trash our current campaigns because you can't convert 3e to 4.0. And the other stuff we heard supports that over your assertion. You'd have to remake NPCs, because the rules are totally different, swap out some NPCs races or classes in those cases they simply dropped the races concerned, or completely overhauled it, change tactics in those cases where they got rid of the rule employed, and remake tactics that no longer work in 4e. And we haven't talked about flavour changes yet. Need I go on?
|
I'm not fond of Monte's spell system for Arcana Unearthed; some effects he made way too hard to get to (basic healing), a few other spells are way too powerful for their level.
My general impression is that Monte designs what he thinks is "cool," and doesn't really care about the balance behind things if it would interfere with that perceived "coolness." So if he doesn't have a development team to do the math for him, I don't trust him to get 20 levels of spells balanced right.
Excuse me? Where did you get this impression? I have used a lot of Monte's material and never had a problem with balance. In fact, this is the first time I have read a serious complaint of Monte's work when it comes to balance. I have heard the complaint his material is a little more "high magic" than some prefer but I rarely hear about balance issues.
Please point out where in the text you see a lack of healing or where there are spells that are too high for their level? AE has two forms of healing spells. And spells are balanced on two factors, level and availability. Rarer spells are more powerful. You can't look at an exotic spell from AE and compare it to a spell of the same level in D&D. There is a reason it is exotic.
In fact, the major complaint I have heard is that the magister is a bit less powerful than the wizard when placed head to head.
|
|
It's because 4e also "fixes" what's NOT broken. Haven't you been paying attention?
I know you are being sarcastic but I think what really should be said is:
"4e "fixes" what's not broken but the Book of Experimental Might provides options for those who want to explore new ideas in the bounds of the 3.5 game."
One assumes Monte thinks that stuff is broken and I think his track record speaks against that assumption.
I think that is what is important. Might not be right for everyone but at least he is more respectful about presenting his ideas. Ideas, mind you, that people in his online community requested he publish.
|
|
Hm. I wonder if Monte is in some way trying to beat WotC to the punch because he thinks they stole a lot of his ideas and are now going to sell them as 4e?
I find it interesting that I read about his ideas for wizards nearly two years ago. At that time the thoughts were vague but essentially stated wizards should have some mechanism where they can use certain powers all day and have a set of spells they prepare like normal.
These ideas end up as house rules in a couple of his future campaigns, which insinuates he was working on this material for a while. He mentions these ideas in more detail at a Q&A session at this last Gencon and the audience requests he release this material if he can. Soon after 4e is announced and one of the big things they tout are some of the same ideas he first mentioned on his site.
After Gencon Monte goes into even more detail concerning his house rules and the community there requests he publish this material. It takes some convincing but now we have the Book of Experimental Might.
What does this prove? Nothing expect designers probably talk with each other all the time. So either great minds think alike or two people took the same idea they discussed and ran with it. .
|
|
[Excuse me? Where did you get this impression? I have used a lot of Monte's material and never had a problem with balance. In fact, this is the first time I have read a serious complaint of Monte's work when it comes to balance. I have heard the complaint his material is a little more "high magic" than some prefer but I rarely hear about balance issues.
Okay I didn't see that bugleyman did express his concern over spell power. So forgive me if I was bit harsh.
But I still would like to see some specific details. I have not had a problem in any of my games and I use most of Monte's material. And, honestly, this is the first time I have ever heard of someone having a problem with his concept of balance.
Am I wrong about this? Are there others who think his options are broken or severely unbalanced in any way?
I am open to convincing arguments that I might be wrong. :)
Haven't you been paying attention?And being snippy like that is supposed to help ... how?
Well, it made me feel better. ;)
Oh, I get that. I may even buy it myself because i like his work.My reaction comes from the level of denial I have seen here. Denial that 3E has some problems. But if Monte says its ok to see them then people see them?
I am trying to come to terms with that.
And, in about a year's worth of time, 4th Edition will have its problems. Double that number each year, and, well, we'll probably be seeing you here arguing about 5th Edition or 4.5E being released in just three years and you just might see where us grognards have been and felt all along. :D
Which is why I see no point in re-writing entire systems...ALL of it. Why can't just some of the mechanics be re-written, but still allow easy compatibility or conversion from previous editions and also stay true to game's roots and mythology? Why must everything be retconned so many times?
I have infravision...no, wait, darkvision...no wait, now I suddenly have low-light vision.
Fireball's a 3rd-level spell. No, dude, it's a 6th-level spell. What? That's too high. No, it's just right. Spell levels go from 1-30 now. What? That's confusing, why not keep the spell levels where they were at?
And so on.
The solution should never be "Make a new edition" but always "let's fix the current edition and keep on trucking."
TSR did it...and I am glad they stretched the editions as far as possible. And, what's great, 1E is easily compatible and convertible to 2E. 3E was tougher, but possible.
4E? Never. Literally forget all that came before. You won't? We'll make sure you guys do. Nothing will convert.
Well, WotC, I say shove it!
|
|
So, does this qualify as a definition of irony:
Anti-4e: Why buy 4.0 when you already have all these 3.5 options?
Pro-4e: Why buy new 3.5 options when you already have 4.0 coming out?
Because Monte's costs 9 bucks. If it sucks, I'm out 9 bucks and I'm OK with that. 4e will cost (most likely) in the area of $100-$130 just for the core three books.
Anti-4e: If I go 4.0, I'm going to have to restat the NPC's in my old stuff.
Pro-4e: If I go 3.75, I'm going to have to restat the NPC's in my old stuff.
Restatting my 3.5 to 3.75 will take two minutes. Restatting (which isn't possible... you must "recreate the essence" since there is no direct translation) to 4e involves creating a brand new npc.
Anti-4e: For all you know, Monte's stuff is ten times better than 4.0.
Pro-4e: For all you know, 4.0 is ten times better than Monte's stuff.
Two words: Nine Bucks.
Anti-4e: WotC is just releasing 4.0 in an effort to milk money from the market.
Pro-4e: Monte is just releasing 3.75 in an effort to milk money from the market.
WotC $130 at a time, Monte.... nine bucks.
Anti-4e: I already spent big bucks on 3.5, so why buy into 4.0?
Pro-4e: I already spent big bucks preordering 4.0, so why buy into a 3.5 fix?
That's a good point. If you've already committed to 4e then it would be stupid to buy anything for 3.5 anymore. As to the wisdom of having committed to spending the money without seeing the product... well, the wisdom of that decision is questionable. At least those who have committed to NOT buying the books aren't out anything at all.
Anti-4e: WotC is already planning dozens of splat books to ruin 4.0, so why switch?
Pro-4e: WotC has already released dozens of splat books to ruin 3.5, so why stay?
I can pick and choose between my 3.5 splat books... I can allow all, none, or anything in between and play any number of variations and options for my characters. Understandably 4e will lag behind the options available in 3.5 for several years.
Anti-4e: WotC's just doing all the same stuff Monte is.
Pro-4e: Monte's just doing all the same stuff WotC is.
Monte is publishing his first, and seems to have publicly posted notes and hints about a lot of it before on his blog and elsewhere. I once again put forth the idea that I think he's doing it because it looks as though the "designers" of 4e may have ripped off his stuff. He wants his cut first... at NINE BUCKS a pop.
NINE BUCKS.
:)
Plus,....succubi are still demons.
That's what we call a "selling point". Heathy, do the industry a favor and forward this revolutionary concept over to WotC, would you? ;-)
Only nine bucks to add 4E-style flavoring while keeping my tasty 3.5 ruleset? Sign me up.
|
|
Bumping this thread because Monday we'll have the next BoEM available!
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_BOXM2
Even with the awesomeness that is the Pathfinder Alpha Release project, I'm definitively giving it a look, as the first one was really a treasure chest of inspiration and resources for roleplaying.
EDIT: sorry, I thought that this thread was in the 3rd Ed./d20 forum. It was just the first that came up with the search function.