On another note here is a nice entry from JD Wilker's blog. I saw this on ENworld first. http://jediwiker.livejournal.com/57390.html
"Seriously, you can't judge a game by reading the rules, any more than you can judge a movie by reading the script."
I think I can. And I did. Okay, that was long after I judged the game by what I read about it and by how wizards acted, but still.
On another note here is a nice entry from JD Wilker's blog. I saw this on ENworld first. http://jediwiker.livejournal.com/57390.html"Seriously, you can't judge a game by reading the rules, any more than you can judge a movie by reading the script."
I think I can. And I did. Okay, that was long after I judged the game by what I read about it and by how wizards acted, but still.
C'mon KaeYoss... The blog entry says much more. And JD doesn't like 4th ed.
|
'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.Wait. I've been doing this for years. You mean it's actually wrong or something?Ummm... I plead guilty too. I rarely bothered to assign precise skill points and other stuff for NPC etc etc etc...
Guilty as charged then!
So now they tell us that what we did (employ common sense)for so many years, is actually part of the new fantastic mechanics they invented? Bright chaps! Way to go!
So've I, but for a lot of people who've just started, they feel they have to stat them out properly or it's cheating (thinks back to days of youth with red box...aaaah, bless). Anyway, while I'm not changing to 4E for several reasons, none of which are really relevant here, I think complaining that the designers are encouraging what experienced DMs have done for years is hardly a cause for complaint with the new system.
So've I, but for a lot of people who've just started, they feel they have to stat them out properly or it's cheating (thinks back to days of youth with red box...aaaah, bless). Anyway, while I'm not changing to 4E for several reasons, none of which are really relevant here, I think complaining that the designers are encouraging what experienced DMs have done for years is hardly a cause for complaint with the new system.'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.Wait. I've been doing this for years. You mean it's actually wrong or something?Ummm... I plead guilty too. I rarely bothered to assign precise skill points and other stuff for NPC etc etc etc...
Guilty as charged then!
So now they tell us that what we did (employ common sense)for so many years, is actually part of the new fantastic mechanics they invented? Bright chaps! Way to go!
Perhaps I am just pissed with 4th ed marketing in general. You know, "3.5 was so broken, get rid of it quickly, drink the Cool-ade and buy our new GREAT invention, with GREAT mechanics by GREAT designers". Some of their great new ideas are simply common sense employed by experienced DMs for years as you say. They are just re-inventing the wheel and try to pass that as brand new ideas.
|
|
Perhaps I am just pissed with 4th ed marketing in general. You know, "3.5 was so broken, get rid of it quickly, drink the Cool-ade and buy our new GREAT invention, with GREAT mechanics by GREAT designers". Some of their great new ideas are simply common sense employed by experienced DMs for years as you say. They are just re-inventing the wheel and try to pass that as brand new ideas.
Funnily enough, that's one of my reasons for not going ahead with it, too. But that's because of the piss-poor marketing rather than the advice.
C'mon KaeYoss... The blog entry says much more.
I know. I'm not criticising the whole entry, just that part. I think you can judge a game by its rules. That's what I want from a game. If they stink, I'll get a different game.
But Paizo will be able to write the stories that WE ALL love, run the business their way (which includes fan input ala Open Testing), and -- potentially -- dominate a vacated market. Ultimately, buyers vote with their dollars, and while they've lost yours, they've* gained mine.
Had to bold that, and this comment is quoted for truth. Check near my name and youll see I now have 2 subscriptions and will soon pick up chronicles as well.
Oh and Bugleyman... If you want cable to adapt to your TV, thats easy, subscribe. Consider Paizo akin to sattelite radio, if you want it, you can subscribe, if you dont, theres still AM/FM. You now have a choice.
|
'Exception-based design' allows a DM to simply assign powers to adversaries, within set ranges for the party level, without worrying about having to show the internal math, as in 3.5.
Wait. I've been doing this for years. You mean it's actually wrong or something?
LOL
No, not at all; just that now that it is the new standard, it removes one of the main obstacles that was often cited as a reason for needing pre-written adventures.
I'm sure lots of DMs have run sessions off the top of their head, but woe betide them if their players found out! Especially if a PC died! Oh, the humanity!
("That result doesn't count", "We should start again from the beginning, before we set off the trap...", etc)
Now that it's simpler and faster, more intuitive, more transparent, there's less excuse for 4E DMs not to roll their sleeves up and write their own.
