|
You can't stop a good DM.
that is so true. I remember someday in the late 8ties, we all wanted to play but had no books ready. Our DM at that time just made us define characters and we started to play - anthropomorphic RATS! It was one of the coolest games ever. After all these years I still remember Thomas, Baron Weisspelz fondly...
I think what he is getting at is with this system new DM's will has less in the way of creativity. I could be wrong but thats how it sounded to me.
Yes, I think that's it.
But this ... not to flay the rotting meat off the "4E=WoW" horse, but the PHB and MM, especially, read like video game manuals, not an RPG.
Not going to nickpick, but what are the reasons for you to believe that the 4E PHB and MM look like "videogame" manual, and the former PHB/MM don't?
The 4E MM has 38 lines of non-combat information for orcs. The 3.5E MM has... one paragraph.
The 4E PHB has 7 pages in the first chapter with role-playing and background suggestions for your character. Each race entry also has an entire page to help you depict the appearance and personality of your character. Where do you find this on the 3.5E PHB?
And the 4E DMG.. well, it's no surprise that you don't even mentioned the 4E DMG on your argument. The 4E DMG is entirely about a role-playing game. The only "crunch" is the combat chapter and the monster customization chapter.
I don't see where "DM creativity" is limited. The 4E DMG actively encourages improvisation, creation of house rules, and changes on the default assumptions of the setting. It offers many suggestions, but doesn't "restrict" anything, and it encourages various styles of play. Probably the most useful reference to newbie DMs ever.
I found that the class paths (such as warlock's pacts and rogue's brutal scoundrel and whatever whatever) are, in a way, limitting. Basically making certain choices suboptimal or unavailable due to a level 1 choice.
As made clear in the beginning of the chapter, class paths are optional.
The warlock, if it works as my quick look leads me to believe, is ridiculously limited and is my idea of poor class design.
The warlock is far more flexible than its 3.5E counterpart, who was basically a guy who threw black beams of energy. Still, I agree with you that the class seems to lack options compared to other classes.
I'm trying to get more 4E discussion going here, not more discussion about 4E. :P
Really, sorry could not help my self.
But if you look at the pathing that they are doing usually doing in the 4e phb you have two to three choices per class thats it. Cleric is a good Exp. you are either a holy warrior or a healer no in between.
thats what i mean by cookie cutter.
Btw I love the fact that only one class can use plate without spending a feat and it not the fighter.
Yeah, looking through the stuff I really don't see anything unique. I just see "MMORPG" styled character creation.
What really pisses me off is the lack of mutliclassing. It's sad.
I'm going to miss a lot of things in D&D, from multiclassing, to some of the classic monsters and extraplanar creatures, to the lore and canon of D&D, to spells and the way magic items have always worked, alignment...gosh, they really did kill a lot of sacred cows didn't they?
It does look like a really enhanced version of D&D Minis. I will admit one good thing about 4E: it's easy to get kids into or adults with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups and hack&slash). I will probably DM this with my both my sister-in-laws, who hates RPing, and the other is 13 years along and a couple others I know who'd enjoy this more than a real D&D game.
3E, 2E, and 1E are for the big boys ;)
There are premade class packages, and there are also paths that that are class features.
I'm going to use the rogue as an example, since it's the class I'm most interested in and also the only one I've looked at in depth.
It has two class packages that are archetype suggestions: brawny rogue and charming rogue. The brawny rogue archetype suggests you take the brutal scoundrel rogue ability instead of the artful dodger rogue ability, and the charming rogue archetype suggest you do otherwise. Those two abilities are part of a path feature I -think- is called "Rogue style".
The brutal scoundrel ability gives you a bonus to sneak attack damage equal to your strength modifier, while the artful dodger ability gives you +cha mod to your AC vs opportunity attacks.
The choice you make here also determines whether or not you get bonuses to certain powers. Brutal scoundrel gives a bonus to torturous strike while artful dodger gives you a bonus to .... whichever low level power lets you shift your opponent.
Someone who doesn't care about effectiveness can ignore all that, of course, but they are certainly trying to encourage you to take these abilities by providing these bonuses to powers that match with their idea of the rogue archetypes.
I'm also really sad there's no int rogue. :'(
Edit: thought I...
Statements clarified. =)
|
On looking closer I found that there was not enough... of what? Everything. I'm used to having 1,000 books to look through for feats, spells, and classes.
Then are you making a fair comparison? You are measuring the core books for 4e against all of the material available for 3.5? Nothing can stand up to that kind of comparison if you are looking for options instead of essentials.
|
|
I will admit one good thing about 4E: it's easy to get kids into or adults with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups and hack&slash).
You cannot cal me deluded. You cannot say I lack creativity.
You have continually implied that 4e is for idiots.
This has got to stop.
|
|
I say you can apply the "standing on the shoulders of giants" proverb to the 4th edition designers.
They had a lot of time to see and analyze the bugs in the 3.0 and 3.5 rules presentation.As a sidenote: There is still some time to digest the books and use the rules presentation as a template for Pathfinder RPG!
That is very true but it still takes solid design sense to do what they did. Far too often the people standing on the shoulders of giants fall off trying to pretend the giant isn't there.
|
|
I also think it's going to be very, very hard to find decent GMs for 4E. There doesn't seem to much reward for running the game. Almost all of the creative power the DM traditionally has has been stripped away, and there no support for doing any of the things that players can't do in computer games.
I disagree. As a GM I see 4e as liberating. I will no longer need to spend any time designing NPCs and monsters. Instead I can focus on creative elements like plot and setting. I Will have the time to create since i will no longer have to spend time calculating.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
That is very true but it still takes solid design sense to do what they did. Far too often the people standing on the shoulders of giants fall off trying to pretend the giant isn't there.
As a sidenote: There is still some time to digest the books and use the rules presentation as a template for Pathfinder RPG!
CWM,
I understand you posted this after reading certain people, so maybe it's coloured your perceptions, or mine.
I know you're not implying that any of our friendly design teams here or @ wizards would deny the giants, but it can be read that way.
No point in telling Razz to keep it friendly. You on the other hand, listen to reason. :-)
That said, it's my understanding that the layout is something worth emulating.
I will admit one good thing about 4E: it's easy to get kids into or adults with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups and hack&slash).You cannot cal me deluded. You cannot say I lack creativity.
You have continually implied that 4e is for idiots.
This has got to stop.
YES! I agree...theone thing I am hoping for in 4e is the streamlining of the DM role. I am sorry if that makes me seem lazy. I consider myself creative and patient, but the fact is, I have 2 small children and a busy job. I cannot devote the amount of time I would like to preparing for our sessions, and I sometimes feel that the game suffers because of it.
Making it easier to look up rules (the revamped combat session), making it easier to desing encounters on the fly and to increase/decrease monster CR...all of these I welcome with open arms!
3E, 2E, and 1E are for the big boys ;)
Careful there...I'm a big boy too and I play 4e (well, not yet, but I plan on it.)
However, I appreciate that you admit to potentially playing the game (even if it's with kids). If you're not careful, you may even purchase the books from those "soul-sucking" monsters at WotC. ;()
I also think it's going to be very, very hard to find decent GMs for 4E. There doesn't seem to much reward for running the game. Almost all of the creative power the DM traditionally has has been stripped away, and there no support for doing any of the things that players can't do in computer games.Gailbraithe, can you elaborate on the above statement? I thought 4th was meant to give the DM more power the easy create adversaries (easy monster creation) and social & skill based encounters (skill checks).
I do not have the books, so this is a real question.
Gailbraithe will have to speak for himself, but I have to say I completely disagree. I think that monster creation is easier than ever before. If you want to create a new monster, there is a section in the DMG all about doing so. And I think the crunch serves the flavor better than ever before.
One thing I like is one only needs the necessary crunch for any aspect of the game rules. In other words, the rest of the game is left up to the imagination. If you want your BBEG to be able to scry on demand, you don't necessarily have to figure out all the crunch of doing so. You just create the power for him if it serves your story. You don't have to create a spell and then make sure the monster has all the necessary prerequisites to get the spell. You just give the monster the desired power. You don't have to make sure a vampire who excels in historical knowledge about Thassalion heritage has enough skill points in Knowledge (Thassalion), you just give it too him. That's the beauty of making monster stats different than PC stats.
In my mind, 4e inspires the imagination because crunch is easier to create and vary and doesn't hinder aspects of the flavor.
...theone thing I am hoping for in 4e is the streamlining of the DM role. I am sorry if that makes me seem lazy. I consider myself creative and patient, but the fact is, I have 2 small children and a busy job...
Yes, it's lazy.
But it's a good lazy. You certainly have better things to spend your time on. As do many people here -- people with jobs, families, mortgages, whatever...
Streamlining and speeding play and DMing is a good thing and (arguably) long overdue.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Yeah, looking through Pathfinder RPG I really don't see anything unique. I just see overly complicated war-game styled character creation.What really pisses me off is the same bad mutliclassing rules. It's sad.
I'm going to miss a lot of things in D&D, from multiclassing, to some of the classic monsters and extraplanar creatures (like ilithids and beholders), to the lore and canon of D&D (the core 3e phb gods), to spells (it's BIGBY's crushing fist, not crushing fist) and the way magic items have always worked (you NEED to use identify to learn an item's powers) , rage points, sneak attacking golems, a fly skill, all races get a net bonus to their stats...gosh, they really did kill a lot of sacred cows didn't they?
Pathfinder RPG does look like a really enhanced version of 2e. I will admit one good thing about Pathfinder RPG: it's easy to get basement dwelling losers into or grognards with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups, hack&slash, and finding sneaky loopholes in complicated rules sets). I will probably DM Pathfinder RPG with my both my sister-in-laws, who hates RPing and loves micro-managing resources, and the other is 13 years along and a couple others I know who'd enjoy this more than a real D&D (i.e. 4e) game.
4E, 2E, and 1E are for the big boys ;)
Wow Razz, that's just not cool to go trashing Pathfinder RPG like that. There are a lot of people here who like the game, and that's just rude. I really hope you're not planning to start reposting all your prior 4e rants in every thread in the Pathfinder forums. That would be a rotten thing to do to those who like to read those threads. Can't you just ignore Pathfinder if you hate it so much and enjoy 4e?
And we shall dub thee, Sebastian Trollslayer! Rise, sir knight.
Wow Razz, that's just not cool to go trashing Pathfinder RPG like that. There are a lot of people here who like the game, and that's just rude. I really hope you're not planning to start reposting all your prior 4e rants in every thread in the Pathfinder forums. That would be a rotten thing to do to those who like to read those threads. Can't you just ignore Pathfinder if you hate it so much and enjoy 4e?
I have to say that I agree, Sebastian. All the classes only have abilities used to kill things. Some arent as good as the others (such as the bard), but its basically a system used for killing things.
Multiclassing in 3rd Edition is pretty lame: most combinations end up severely crippled to the point of useless.Pathfinder doesnt use the old cosmology, which was convenient what with all its symmetry. As someone who goes to school AND works full time, it was easy for me to create monsters and stuff. No ooze genie? Well I can do that. No acheron battle-elf? Forgotten Realms already has 30 different elves, one more cant hurt!
Magic items should be mysterious. I dont care if there are feats and spells that can instantly identify what they can do. Anything that can grind the game to a halt for a few real-time seconds as the characters tell me they sit down and ID is time I can spend working on my ooze genies.
It's easy to get basement dwelling losers into or grognards with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups, hack&slash, and finding sneaky loopholes in complicated rules sets).
I happen to be a basement dwelling loser and I don't have any patience for Pathfinder RPG. I strike you dead with my +5 grognard vorpal blade. Then I cast magic missile at the darkness, hee, hee, hee.
|
|
...theone thing I am hoping for in 4e is the streamlining of the DM role. I am sorry if that makes me seem lazy. I consider myself creative and patient, but the fact is, I have 2 small children and a busy job...Yes, it's lazy.
But it's a good lazy. You certainly have better things to spend your time on. As do many people here -- people with jobs, families, mortgages, whatever...
Streamlining and speeding play and DMing is a good thing and (arguably) long overdue.
It's not really lazy. It is like any good martial art - apply force for maximum effect with a minimum of waste. Simplicity in game design, at its best, should allow for a rich experience with a minimum of distraction.
|
|
I know you're not implying that any of our friendly design teams here or @ wizards would deny the giants, but it can be read that way.
Ah, yes, I did not mean it that way at all. I was actually thinking about games like Traveller: New Era or RuneQuest 3. Both games had an amazing base to work from but missed the mark badly.
I was actually thinking about games like Traveller: New Era or RuneQuest 3. Both games had an amazing base to work from but missed the mark badly.
TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
|
|
I was actually thinking about games like Traveller: New Era or RuneQuest 3. Both games had an amazing base to work from but missed the mark badly.TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
Yep. The transition from Traveller to MegaTraveller was solid. The game improved though many fans did not like the fluff changes.
When TNE came out our group was shocked. We just kept playing MT.
I was actually thinking about games like Traveller: New Era or RuneQuest 3. Both games had an amazing base to work from but missed the mark badly.TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
I felt that pain too. And the transition lost one of their best 3rd party publishers - Digest Group Publications. Not that I'm trying to draw any parallels with the 4e transition and WotC losing 3rd party publishers too... ;)
|
|
I felt that pain too. And the transition lost one of their best 3rd party publishers - Digest Group Publications. Not that I'm trying to draw any parallels with the 4e transition and WotC losing 3rd party publishers too... ;)I was actually thinking about games like Traveller: New Era or RuneQuest 3. Both games had an amazing base to work from but missed the mark badly.TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
Digest Group made MT possible. Some would say they forced GDW to adopt the task resolution system because it was so good - game changing kind of good.
Even the best 3rd party d20/OGL publishers have not had that kind of impact - at least not that I have seen. Digest Group revolutionized Traveller I don't see that kind of thing happening now.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
Digest Group made MT possible. Some would say they forced GDW to adopt the task resolution system because it was so good - game changing kind of good.
And yet... Traveller:TNE was mechanically a far better game than MegaTraveller, incorporating a lot of the best game concepts from Dark Conspiracy and 2300AD. (I would go so far as to say that MT was so riddled with important writing and editing errors that it was unplayable without seperate errata. Fun to read, though.)
The T:TNE design staff was very open about what lessons GDW had learned from MT (PC's didn't want to spend an entire campaign working for an Emperor candidate that turned out to be evil and a loser to boot) and how the new campaign was a better play-space.
They were right, but they'd forgotten a lesson: they knew that lots of their market was composed of people who just read, as opposed to played, Traveller, and they assumed that those readers didn't care much about the storyline fluff.
They were very wrong. You think you're upset about the Spellplauge? That ain't nothin' compared to a whole host of Traveller grognards upset that over a decade of their very particular campaign knowledge was randered obsolete.
Then again, GDW could have salvaged that, if it hadn't been for all the money the company had tied up defending itself against TSR over Dangerous Journeys.
Even the best 3rd party d20/OGL publishers have not had that kind of impact - at least not that I have seen. Digest Group revolutionized Traveller I don't see that kind of thing happening now.
I agree, and it's been a pity. That's what Ryan dancey was hoping for, with the Open Gaming Licence. He was hoping that Wizards' products could incorporate some of the creatures and rules popularized in 3rd Party OGL products.
A difference, though, is that DGP was as large as GDW; that is to say, each had a half-dozen people on staff.
Thanks for the insightful posts.
Digest Group made MT possible. Some would say they forced GDW to adopt the task resolution system because it was so good - game changing kind of good... Even the best 3rd party d20/OGL publishers have not had that kind of impact - at least not that I have seen. Digest Group revolutionized Traveller I don't see that kind of thing happening now.
Yep.
DGP was, IMO, by far and away the best 3rd party publisher any game has ever had. I think one could easily argue that they were better than the company they supported.
I miss them so :(
TNE -- painful memories from a MegaTraveller fan :(
I felt that pain too. And the transition lost one of their best 3rd party publishers - Digest Group Publications. Not that I'm trying to draw any parallels with the 4e transition and WotC losing 3rd party publishers too... ;)
I do think there are parallels with the WotC/Paizo relationship. IMO the support and products Paizo offered were of remarkable quality (as are their current products). I think WotC has carelessly, and perhaps recklessly, chosen to spurn that relationship.
They've got a good product, a good design team, and lots of resources -- I'm sure they'll be OK without Paizo, but they would've been better with Paizo.
IMO
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I do think there are parallels with the WotC/Paizo relationship. IMO the support and products Paizo offered were of remarkable quality (as are their current products). I think WotC has carelessly, and perhaps recklessly, chosen to spurn that relationship.They've got a good product, a good design team, and lots of resources -- I'm sure they'll be OK without Paizo, but they would've been better with Paizo.
IMO
Agreed. Can you imagine an alternate universe in which Paizo kept Dragon and Dungeon and as a result pushed 4e instead of leading the rebellion against it. I'm happy that Pathfinder exists, but whoever decided that having Dragon and Dungeon on a website was worth having a high quality publisher staying 3e and competing with WotC was a f%+$wit.
|
|
Now if they put out books at the rate that they have been putting out SWSE books, I'd own the whole set (if I bought them).
I actually do own them all. Does anyone know if 4th Edition has hit the shelves at Barnes and Noble yet? I'm heading there tomorrow and I would like to know. If not I'll just wait the 9 days and grab the SRD when they release it.
|
Agreed. Can you imagine an alternate universe in which Paizo kept Dragon and Dungeon and as a result pushed 4e instead of leading the rebellion against it. I'm happy that Pathfinder exists, but whoever decided that having Dragon and Dungeon on a website was worth having a high quality publisher staying 3e and competing with WotC was a f~~~wit.
That's the irony. They probably, like many people even on these boards, did not anticipate that Paizo would stay with 3.x or creat PRPG. They likely assumed that Paizo would follow along like the rest of the industry "obviously" would.
I think in such a universe, some people would be more open to 4E. Some would still take issues with the decisions made, but there might not be the same critique of bungled PR.
Can you imagine an alternate universe in which Paizo kept Dragon and Dungeon and as a result pushed 4e instead of leading the rebellion against it?
You mean an actual marketing campaign in mass produced magazines instead of...what are they doing again?
Can you imagine an alternate universe in which Paizo kept Dragon and Dungeon and as a result pushed 4e instead of leading the rebellion against it?
You mean an actual marketing campaign in mass produced magazines instead of... what are they doing again?
It's quite funny. The best print advertising for RPGs is gone -- their own magazines.
Serves them right :)
Then again, GDW could have salvaged that, if it hadn't been for all the money the company had tied up defending itself against TSR over Dangerous Journeys.
I don't want to drag this too far off topic, but that wasn't the problem. GDW went under as the result of two unfortunate business decisions. First, they had made a bundle of money off their Desert Shield Fact Book, and had ordered a huge, huge reprint of it just before the Gulf War broke out. The war ended before they could sell and distribute the copies and they were stuck with most of that print run.
Second, they had bought a new warehouse which turned out to be on contaminated ground. They ended up stuck with it because they couldn't resell it, couldn't afford to clean up the contamination, and couldn't use it so they had to rent another.
Oh, and I was one of the authors of TNE. ;-)
Wow Razz, that's just not cool to go trashing Pathfinder RPG like that. There are a lot of people here who like the game, and that's just rude. I really hope you're not planning to start reposting all your prior 4e rants in every thread in the Pathfinder forums. That would be a rotten thing to do to those who like to read those threads. Can't you just ignore Pathfinder if you hate it so much and enjoy 4e?
Yeah, looking through Pathfinder RPG I really don't see anything unique. I just see overly complicated war-game styled character creation.What really pisses me off is the same bad mutliclassing rules. It's sad.
I'm going to miss a lot of things in D&D, from multiclassing, to some of the classic monsters and extraplanar creatures (like ilithids and beholders), to the lore and canon of D&D (the core 3e phb gods), to spells (it's BIGBY's crushing fist, not crushing fist) and the way magic items have always worked (you NEED to use identify to learn an item's powers) , rage points, sneak attacking golems, a fly skill, all races get a net bonus to their stats...gosh, they really did kill a lot of sacred cows didn't they?
Pathfinder RPG does look like a really enhanced version of 2e. I will admit one good thing about Pathfinder RPG: it's easy to get basement dwelling losers into or grognards with no time, patience, or creativity (as in all they care about is power-ups, hack&slash, and finding sneaky loopholes in complicated rules sets). I will probably DM Pathfinder RPG with my both my sister-in-laws, who hates RPing and loves micro-managing resources, and the other is 13 years along and a couple others I know who'd enjoy this more than a real D&D (i.e. 4e) game.
4E, 2E, and 1E are for the big boys ;)
Your wasting your time. There is no particular reason to think he cares about PRPG. Look at his posts - there are none within at least 50 (and I looked at his posts a week or so ago so call it within the last 75) that have anything to do with PRPG or even 3rd edition in general.
The only thing he does here is make post after post that basically comes down to "I hate 4E and anyone who likes it is a moron with the intellect of a 4 year old." That is his only contribution to these boards.
|
|
Gailbraithe, can you elaborate on the above statement? I thought 4th was meant to give the DM more power the easy create adversaries (easy monster creation) and social & skill based encounters (skill checks).
I do not have the books, so this is a real question.
It's easy to create encounters because they've removed pretty much all creativity from the process. And thanks to the much expanded entry size, it's actually going to be a real pain in the ass to write up custom created encounters -- WOTC is going to sell more pre-made adventures than ever.
The bigger issue for me is that the new books strip the DM of all his traditional authority. The DM is no longer the judge of the rules, the referee. Now the DM is expected to consult with and defer to players on rules issues. The magic items are now in the PHB, which essentially signals that the DM no longer has any authority over what items are available.
I think 4E has done an amazing job of making the DM's role much simpler and easier, but at the same time have made it far less rewarding. Now the DM is little more than a tournament score keeper who rolls for the monsters. It's a position with little or no reward, and I can't imagine why anyone would want to play using it. Wearing the Viking Hat used to be the DM's trade-off for always having to lose. Now the DM just gets to lose and listen to players piss and moan about how unfair and bad he is if he doesn't give them everything they want.
I kind of suspect that 4E may be the game that finally give sus pay-for-play DMs, as I don't think many old school DMs are going to switch over (none of the DMs I know have any interest in 4E), and many groups won't be able to find anyone who is willing to pass on playing for the opportunity to DM.
And yet... Traveller:TNE was mechanically a far better game than MegaTraveller, incorporating a lot of the best game concepts from Dark Conspiracy and 2300AD. (I would go so far as to say that MT was so riddled with important writing and editing errors that it was unplayable without seperate errata. Fun to read, though.)<snip>
They were very wrong. You think you're upset about the Spellplauge? That ain't nothin' compared to a whole host of Traveller grognards upset that over a decade of their very particular campaign knowledge was randered obsolete.
<snip>
It wasn't just the fluff though. The changes in the rules were, quite frankly, jarring. The game was completely different and in ways that I didn't appreciate. The game went from being militarized in a sort of empire-state way, where military backgrounds are common in the way you expect to see in a sort of Victorian England where there are plenty of old naval or imperial army vets blathering on about their old campaigns, to hyper-militarized. The game system might have worked for Twilight 2000 and might have included some improvements (I thought starship combat had good potential), but its lack of continuity with the previous rules undermined it just as much as change in setting.
Sorry, Kevin. But despite the hard work that undoubtedly went into it, I think TNE was a bad misread of the player base.
not to flay the rotting meat off the "4E=WoW" horse, but the PHB and MM, especially, read like video game manuals, not an RPG.
I have the same impression. It's probably because Wizards has some ambition in the computer RPG/MMORPG industry. The 4th edition rules seem more easily adaptable to computer games than older editions.
It is like any good martial art - apply force for maximum effect with a minimum of waste.
Not to quibble too much, but there are lots of other ways of quantifying a good martial art besides "maximum effect with minimum waste." Some teach us other things too right?
Sorry, ignore this threadjack. I'm probably reading too much into a poor analogy made in haste. Return to the 4E SPOILER FEST. ;-)
Off topic comment...the pro-4th ed posts here have been the nicest I've seen around. Reasonable, intelligent, and not blasting 3.x like kids with Nerf Machineguns in a china shop. A nice change of pace to be dealing with mature people.
Agreed!
|
|
It is like any good martial art - apply force for maximum effect with a minimum of waste.Not to quibble too much, but there are lots of other ways of quantifying a good martial art besides "maximum effect with minimum waste." Some teach us other things too right?
Sorry, ignore this threadjack. I'm probably reading too much into a poor analogy made in haste. Return to the 4E SPOILER FEST. ;-)
Another good thing to keep in mind is that martial arts don't exist just to have fun, while that is the sole purpose of RPG's. Applying minimum force for maximum effect doesn't always mean that it's more fun. You all know by now that 4E just isn't my cup of tea. In the mad rush for balance and "playability", I think a good portion of the magic that made the game worth playing for more than the occasional pickup game is gone. Too much gamism. Too much focus on minis. Not enough magic, wonder, and customization. The powers just scream video game/MMORPG. Blech!
P.S. I have to say that I'm disappointed in Razz. He not only bought the game (money that went to WotC. Shudder!), but he said he might actually play it. I stuck to my guns and cancelled my pre-orders a while ago. I'd only consider buying the PHB if I got it used for about 5 bucks, and that is iffy at best.
It's easy to create encounters because they've removed pretty much all creativity from the process. And thanks to the much expanded entry size, it's actually going to be a real pain in the ass to write up custom created encounters -- WOTC is going to sell more pre-made adventures than ever.
Hmm? I can honestly say that the entry size of anything in a rule book has never stifled my creativity. I use book marks, for the most part, to easily find the pages I need.
And, really I do not mean to offend, but if someone (and I don't mean you) can't look at a monster entry, the mechanics behind some combat scenario, factor in the rules of terrain, figure the abilities of some PCs, and create a custom encounter that is fun, unique, challenging, and meaningful to their gaminng group, I'd say that it's not the rules fault.
The bigger issue for me is that the new books strip the DM of all his traditional authority. The DM is no longer the judge of the rules, the referee. Now the DM is expected to consult with and defer to players on rules issues. The magic items are now in the PHB, which essentially signals that the DM no longer has any authority over what items are available.
You seem to be taking the thought that players can't know what's in the DMG... one of the most silly thoughts I've ever run across. (Again, I'm not critizing you... I've known many people with this thought, and I simply disagree.)
Consider the following things from the 3.x DMG, which are all meant to be used by the players:
Leadership Feat
PrC
Creation of magic items
Players with knowledge of the rules do not take any authority away from the DM.
As what good DM never consults their players on rules issues? In my games, I expect my players to know all of the rules concerning their character. There are too many feats, PrC, classes, etc. for one person to know in depth.
And why do you say that the DM must "defer" to players? You are certainly taking liberties with the rules as written.
I think 4E has done an amazing job of making the DM's role much simpler and easier, but at the same time have made it far less rewarding. Now the DM is little more than a tournament score keeper who rolls for the monsters. It's a position with little or no reward, and I can't imagine why anyone would want to play using it. Wearing the Viking Hat used to be the DM's trade-off for always having to lose. Now the DM just gets to lose and listen to players piss and moan about how unfair and bad he is if he doesn't give them everything they want.
The rules, the system, the setting, or the complexity or simplity of any of them, do not make being a DM rewarding. It is rewarding to run a game that is meaningful and memorable for the gaming group.
The tools are there to be used. How well or poorly they are used are left up to the DM.
I kind of suspect that 4E may be the game that finally give sus pay-for-play DMs, as I don't think many old school DMs are going to switch over (none of the DMs I know have any interest in 4E), and many groups won't be able to find anyone who is willing to pass on playing for the opportunity to DM.
But... old-school DMs have already switched over. Look at Chris Perkins. Look at Bruce Cordell. Sure, they're the developers of the game, but they've been playing a long time.
Bruce Cordell mentioned that he ran a 4e game with Monte Cook in his group.
You may think that all of the play test reports were propaganda, but they all say how much fun they had in the game.
Hmmm. I'll think more about this.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
GDW went under as the result of two unfortunate business decisions.
Oh, and I was one of the authors of TNE. ;-)
Well, I'm happy to be corrected.
And, belatedly, thanks for TNE. I ran a campaign a couple years after its heyday,, and you folks are responsible for several hundred hours of exploratory fun. I still have three copies of the base rulebook, and it's still my favorite edition of the game. I'd start up another campaign in a heartbeat.
P.S. I have to say that I'm disappointed in Razz. He not only bought the game (money that went to WotC. Shudder!), but he said he might actually play it. I stuck to my guns and cancelled my pre-orders a while ago. I'd only consider buying the PHB if I got it used for about 5 bucks, and that is iffy at best.
Maybe Razz has a little kid inside him who whants to play 4E. =D
I kind of suspect that 4E may be the game that finally give sus pay-for-play DMs, as I don't think many old school DMs are going to switch over (none of the DMs I know have any interest in 4E), and many groups won't be able to find anyone who is willing to pass on playing for the opportunity to DM.
Well, now you know me. Nice to meet you!
It's a position with little or no reward, and I can't imagine why anyone would want to play using it. Wearing the Viking Hat used to be the DM's trade-off for always having to lose. Now the DM just gets to lose and listen to players piss and moan about how unfair and bad he is if he doesn't give them everything they want.
This is a strange way of thinking. The DM never "loses" the game. At least, not when his monsters are defeated. The DM "loses" when the group loses interest. And to provide fun from the players (and including himself) is the most important task of a DM. That's what the DMG 4E enforces. It's nothing really new: many of these tips were presented on DMGII from 3.5E.
To be a DM is rewarding because of can do things that players can't do: create your own world and story, control all sorts of creatures rather than a single character, and look at the reactions of your players when you put something funny or scary. It's not the authority who makes the DM task rewarding - although a 4E DM has much authority as the DM of any other edition.