I just read this and I found it worth sharing here. I hope you agree.... (if it has been pointed to before I apologize)
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35776
Just read it. Boy, that guys excited about the 4e experience. Sounds like he's taking a lot of flak about "coming out" as a gamer.
Anyway, nice to see another review by one of the playtesters. Thanks for the link.
Wow. This column actually makes me want to see the game.
I just read this and I found it worth sharing here. I hope you agree.... (if it has been pointed to before I apologize)
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35776
By the way, the designer refered to by Massawyrm is Ari Marmell, Mouseferatu on ENWorld. Ari confirmed it here. He is the author of Draconomicon I: Chromatic Dragons, with Bruce Cordell and Rob Schwalb. It is due out Nov. 18, 2008 according to Amazon.com.
The second part of the review which touches on DMing is found at : http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35799.
Thanks to Cruelaide and Guillaume Godbout for the linkyies. I guess I'm looking for things to make me excited about 4e. Those articles fit the bill. Mahalo!
I was optimistic when I read Nick Logue's review but this guy makes me pessimistic all over again. There's absolutely no way that 4th ed. could live up to this review. He liked it so much he sold all his books? Come on! I'm sorry but I think this review is horrible . . .
Hearing that this guy's working on 4th edition material doesn't really come as a surprise. His only real complaint seemed to be that 4th ed. was almost too awesome. Well that and a pile of D&D miniatures are now worthless. I'm sorry but it's hard to take this guy seriously.
He's not working on 4th edition material. Ari, the guy in his group, is. NOT the reviewer.
|
Interestingly, I found his review and Ari's quite similar. I am sure it had nothing to do with any conspiracy or WOTC marketing strategy or anything of that nature, but *might* have had something to do with groupthink that tends to creep in within groups. Happens much more frequently and subtly than one realizes.
I'm not that worried about bias, but I found the GMing part of the review puzzling. My experience with game systems (not just D&D) is that difficulty never scales linearly, and does not scale the same for challenges of different kinds. So it is hard to imagine a non-broken implementation of "You just need 1200 points of creatures--it totally does not matter if this is 12 100 point creatures or 1 1200 point creature."
I could see it happening if all creatures were pretty much the same--just more hit points for the bigger ones--but clearly, from the playtests, they are not. The boneshard skeleton strikes me as a really good example of a creature that does *not* scale linearly. Get too many of them in one place, and you'll likely see an unsurvivable chain reaction.
The fact that he didn't discover this during his playtests worries me quite a bit. There were other omissions of the same kind, too. It may be that his play style is so different from mine that his experiences just don't have any predictive power for my game at all; certainly that was the impression I got.
Mary
I'm not that worried about bias, but I found the GMing part of the review puzzling. My experience with game systems (not just D&D) is that difficulty never scales linearly, and does not scale the same for challenges of different kinds. So it is hard to imagine a non-broken implementation of "You just need 1200 points of creatures--it totally does not matter if this is 12 100 point creatures or 1 1200 point creature."
I could see it happening if all creatures were pretty much the same--just more hit points for the bigger ones--but clearly, from the playtests, they are not. The boneshard skeleton strikes me as a really good example of a creature that does *not* scale linearly. Get too many of them in one place, and you'll likely see an unsurvivable chain reaction.
The fact that he didn't discover this during his playtests worries me quite a bit. There were other omissions of the same kind, too. It may be that his play style is so different from mine that his experiences just don't have any predictive power for my game at all; certainly that was the impression I got.
Mary
I'll admit upfront I didn't read the particular part of the review you're referencing (I skimmed through part 3 only) but I would think (based on your quote, assuming is lifted from the article) that he is referring to the new ... power level, for lack of the actual term.
Each monster has a power level ranging from minion to solo, which determines the number of pcs represent an equivalent challenge. In one designer's comments, they said there were rules for making a regular monster a solo one, and I'd assume back and forth (and to the ranges in between) would be possible. Hope that helps!
Cheers! :)
I was optimistic when I read Nick Logue's review but this guy makes me pessimistic all over again. There's absolutely no way that 4th ed. could live up to this review. He liked it so much he sold all his books? Come on! I'm sorry but I think this review is horrible . . . I almost thought to read it over looking for hidden messages, you know like in those detective stories when someone's on the phone with a gun to their head?
Hearing that this guy's working on 4th edition material doesn't really come as a surprise. His only real complaint seemed to be that 4th ed. was almost too awesome. Well that and a pile of D&D miniatures are now worthless. I'm sorry but it's hard to take this guy seriously.
For what its worth, Keith Baker pretty much agrees with this review too.
For what its worth, Keith Baker pretty much agrees with this review too.
Hearing that this guy's working on 4th edition material doesn't really come as a surprise. His only real complaint seemed to be that 4th ed. was almost too awesome. Well that and a pile of D&D miniatures are now worthless. I'm sorry but it's hard to take this guy seriously.
So does Andy Collins, Mike Mearls, Dave Noonan, Scott Rouse, and everyone else who is writing for WotC. Like word for word. It's like 4e is the most awesome and cool thing that has ever happened to this or any other hobby. Or the Manchurian Candidate. Take your pick.
-Frank
Interestingly, I found his review and Ari's quite similar. I am sure it had nothing to do with any conspiracy or WOTC marketing strategy or anything of that nature, but *might* have had something to do with groupthink that tends to creep in within groups. Happens much more frequently and subtly than one realizes.
Yes, groupmind behavior does act very frequently and in subtle ways.
Also does trust in the authority figure... and since he is, it seems, in Ari's group, he is in link to the authority figure of sorts... thus WotC.
Interestingly, I found his review and Ari's quite similar. I am sure it had nothing to do with any conspiracy or WOTC marketing strategy or anything of that nature, but *might* have had something to do with groupthink that tends to creep in within groups. Happens much more frequently and subtly than one realizes.Yes, groupmind behavior does act very frequently and in subtle ways.
Also does trust in the authority figure... and since he is, it seems, in Ari's group, he is in link to the authority figure of sorts... thus WotC.
I would say that it has to do with the fact that they game together, and are friends, so probably share similar tastes when it comes to gaming.
I tried to read it, but it was like drinking fountain pop without the water added.