FWIW, I think non-combat skills are some of the worst spots in 3E in terms of powergaming. Anyone ever seen a character designed to crank Diplomacy? Or Bluff? Even with heavy circumstance penalties, it is easy to get characters who can still roll 20 or 30s without breaking a sweat, at really low levels. Amp the levels up a bit and you have guys able to out-bargain Balors LONG before they could actually fight them.Ok, I give, how about a little love for Craft, Profession, or Perform then?
Sure thing. If you're looking to power game, Craft, Profession, or Perform can be some of your biggest friends in 3rd edition, especially at low levels.
Some people mght use them to roleplay, but I've used them to roll-play. I am both a power gamer and a role player, and I have always loved these skills.
Because these skills can be used to make money. If you've got a blacksmithing craft skill, then you can set up a forge and churn out the gold making masterwork weapons, which you sell at a slight discount to corner the market. If you are a wizard or cleric, or know one, said money can then be used to make magic items, which can jack up the power level of yourself or the entire party to a sickening degree.
Profession and Perform don't work as quickly, but they do the same basic thing. They provide a mechanical system to make money, and money equals power in D&D.
There's the powergaming love for those skills, and I think it illustrates rather well why I don't agree with the idea that Craft and Profession skills are a roleplaying tool and somehow prevent or reduce the impulse to power game.
Any mechnical system can be used for both power gaming and roleplaying. It's all in how you use those systems during play, not whether they exist or not.
What this kind of skill does is add depth to the mechanics of a game, and whether thats important depends on how much you like or dislike using a standardized general rule like the one given on page 42 of the new DMG. (Folks have been refering to it as Rule 42, which I rather like.)
Rule 42 gives a simple system for determining success or failure, based upon the base attributes possessed by ever character, for any situation. You can use it to adjudicate what used to be a Perform check, or you can add the Perform skill to the skill list. Either way, there's a neat system in the rules to do anything you like in D&D 4th edition.
That's the kind of system which encourages Roleplaying, because it allows the DM to react in a consistant way to anything the players want to do, but also allows the DM to guide the story throught he DC's without just invoking DM fiat.
*laughs*In which Wizards forum was this thread posted? Was it character optimization? You have to consider the source. If you go to a Ford enthusiast website, you will see a lot of posts that say that if you drive a Chevy you will have no fun at all. In the same manner, if you go to a character optimization thread, you will see a lot of posts that say that if you do not have an optimized character you will have no fun at all.
Three years ago, on the WotC messageboards, there was a thread along the lines of "Con is vital for every character class, but especially wizards and sorcerers." That, if you played a wizard or a sorcerer with a low con, then you would have no fun at all.
Well I remember hearing it in non-character optimization threads, mainly when talking about how having wizard as the favored class for elves was dumb. The point was that spellcasters more than anyone else needed not to have a really low Con (because their HD was so small to begin with), and elves with the Con penalty made this a poor choice for a favored class. I don't know if I heard the "you would have no fun at all" part, but I did probably here comments that playing a low Con spellcaster could get annoying. I mean if you are getting knocked unconscious by a kobold sneezing (A KOBOLD!), then that can be unfun. As an example, I remember hearing that an "official" stat up of Raistlin had him with a positive Con, which surprised some.
In my own 3.5 games, elves' favored class is bard and gnomes' is wizard, not because of this Con issue but just because I feel it fits better with the flavor of the races.
Any mechnical system can be used for both power gaming and roleplaying. It's all in how you use those systems during play, not whether they exist or not.
I would agree somewhat. There's definitely a difference, in my opinion, between powergaming and exploiting. Powergaming to me is about leveling (mostly) and exploiting is about finding loopholes or places where the rules are weak (Diplomacy build exploits).
I don't necessarily feel like 4e should have specific rules about what perform or craft can do, and leaving it up to the DM will definitely minimize any player trying to exploit those mechanics. I just feel like they need to be there to say to everybody "Hey, this game is also about these things."
In like fashion, I wouldn't mind if a player wanted to come up with any specific knowledge skill they wanted, as long as it was limited in scope in some way. That expands their character depth by explaining what their character excels in.
Well, the skill exploits in 3.5 exist because WotC was foolish enough to micro-codify what the skills could do and then immediately relate them to the combat-mechanics of the game. They should have adopted a less 'crunch' and more narrative approach to the use of skills, I believe.
Sorta like how 4E handles Intimidate and things like that? Instead of the specific number targets of 3.5?
|
now, this is just an opinion (you know, i state that so people don't think i think everything i say is gospel truth), but i hear a lot of folks saying stuff like "4e cuts down on munchkinism and powergaming", whereas i look at it and say "yeah, they do, since they just built it into the rules in the first place".In what ways do you see powergaming built into the 4e rules?
not power gaming, per se, but the trappings. the system is too balanced at this point to really "min/max" or "powergame" (they really did do a fine job of that, i admit, but i wonder if, down the road power creep wont come into play when they start releasing 4e splatbooks...). in earlier editions, half dragons and tieflings could, in a way, unbalance a group otherwise consisting of core races. now, the people who would be attracted to such a race for "coolness" value can do so, feel "uber" about it, but not upset the party balance. that's what i meant by "they just built it into the rules".
now, to qualify that, i'm definitely NOT saying that everyone who wants to play a dragonborn paladin is doing so because it is "cool", i'm just saying having the option lets munchkins and power gamer types have the "feeling" of playing something "better" without it being mechanically unbalanced.
[edit: sorry this is so late, just got off work...]
now, having said that, they DID jack up the power a tad, at least at lower levels (with a high enough constitution and healing surges, a 1st level fighter could, theoretically, take more damage in a day than, say, an eigth level fighter in 3x). but, it works within the confines of the system, and does give the flavor that player characters are a much higher cut above the norm (i.e. common npcs without classes) than lower levels in earlier editions did.
so, 4e does, i think, appeal to power gamers on that level, but still works for role players and people looking for a well balanced system.
|
Power Creep officially starts with the Forgotten Realms preview, apparently. (Take a look at the Genasi, for instance...)
Well, Realms characters have had a habit of being more powerful or unbalanced than typical core characters, for many reasons.
Except for Halastar, he should whup anyone's behind!
|
|
some really reasonable and well thought out stuffI can see your point. Yes, first level characters are more potent than they used to be but the higher levels seem less potent. And yes - there is balance now but the coming splat books may see and end to that.
Cheers!
i think the impression that the characters at higher levels are "less powerful" than their earlier edition counterparts is more a function of the class to class balance than any lack of relative power. wizards in earlier editions were weaker than their counterparts through low levels, balanced through mid levels, but really started to outpace the party in higher level play. in 1e, this wasn't too much of a problem, since it was relatively easy to disrupt casting and whatnot, but in 3x, with the "concentration check" and having to ready an action, it made it a bit more difficult if the opposing caster was too busy to ready a counterspell (and he or she had to have the proper spell in his repertoir, AND had to have an action readied), so 3x spell casters were harder to neutralize in that respect. (now, i did kinda like that, as a dm, as i could have a caster a few levels higher than the party be an effective opponent without having to surround him or her with a massive support staff, but that's beside the point, i think...)
but, when you compare the 4e level progression against the level appropriate encounters laid out in the MM, i find that there really isn't a "powerdown" within the system itself.
i hope, for the sake of 4e players, especially new players coming into rpgs, that WotC learned their lessons from the power creep in their later releases for 3x (which, i think, may be a large issue on why a lot of gamers felt the system was "broken" - WotC trying to "keep up with the joneses" i.e. mongoose, malhavoc, et al. actually was what BROKE the game, imho) and will consider the question of "will this new book/power/feat unbalance play?" before they release the suppliment.
i'm still playing my "fixed" homebrew 3x game, occasionally play 4e at the FLGS, and am looking closely at the developments with pathfinder, so the above hopes for 4e players is largely academic for me, but i would like to see WotC follow through for the new people and the people who are investing their gaming time in the new system and not screw it up.
and, on a somewhat unrelated note: i also think WotC should offer everyone who has been waiting for a fully functional DDI (that is, the hardcore 4e fans who, imo, have been more than patient with the delays) a free module or something. it would be a nice "thank you for your support" gesture...
|
|
and, on a somewhat unrelated note: i also think WotC should offer everyone who has been waiting for a fully functional DDI (that is, the hardcore 4e fans who, imo, have been more than patient with the delays) a free module or something. it would be a nice "thank you for your support" gesture...
They should - you paid the money, and did not get what they advertised.
I think they should extend the free DDI for a month after it comes online, to entice people to buy 4th Edition. People who bought 4th Edition before then should get 2 months free after it comes online (but by then, they should extend the free period for those customers until New Years).
I think if you are looking back on your youth and think that you were wise, smart and stylish unlike the kids these days then you are making the same mistake every crusty old 'back in my day..' windbag has made since 10,000 BC.
|
|
Why does 'it is present' in the Pokemon Generation, or the WoW Generation, have to mean 'it is rampant'?
Wow; twenty-eight minutes! Your reactions are slowing down, old man!
And great job in the misquoting there. It's like you didn't even read what I wrote. I guess that comes from you kids being unable to actually read ... or at least being unable to sustain your attention long enough to read accurately.
I wasn't quoting you; if I were, there'd be a box round the text like above.
I was making the comparison to the earlier post about a few power-gaming grognards not being representative of their generation.
The same thing holds true for the younger generation of players, too.
There's been a lot of insults thrown at younger gamers, on this thread, and in general, especially since the 4E announcement. Low attention-span, power-gaming, poor vocabulary, no appreciation for 'proper' fantasy, anime-junkies, etc.
It's tiresome, and it's killing the hobby. If new players can't join a group due to elitist prejudice, then they will go do something else. Then, when your group falls apart via death, divorce, parenthood, job pressure or relocation, you won't be able to find a group, because all the players who would have formed one got driven away from the hobby by insular covens of fatbeards.
|
It's tiresome, and it's killing the hobby. If new players can't join a group due to elitist prejudice, then they will go do something else. Then, when your group falls apart via death, divorce, parenthood, job pressure or relocation, you won't be able to find a group, because all the players who would have formed one got driven away from the hobby by insular covens of fatbeards.I don't think it's the age of gamers, I think it's the marketing. Like I said, if the makers of the game say "THIS is how you're supposed to play it", then that's how most of the target audience is going to play the game.
Ok. Since the DMG offers up quite a diverse view on how to play the game then there is nothing to worry about.
There's been a lot of insults thrown at younger gamers, on this thread, and in general, especially since the 4E announcement. Low attention-span, power-gaming, poor vocabulary, no appreciation for 'proper' fantasy, anime-junkies, etc.
If you actually read those posts in this thread within the context they were written, you would see that they were in jest, not in insult. This thread was meant to be a light-hearted grognards' spewing of a "kids-these-days" tiatribe. All old people will do it. Somewhere along the line, the jests were taken as direct insults. Lighten up, people. This wasn't meant to be a rules thread.
|
If you actually read those posts in this thread within the context they were written, you would see that they were in jest, not in insult. This thread was meant to be a light-hearted grognards' spewing of a "kids-these-days" tiatribe. All old people will do it. Somewhere along the line, the jests were taken as direct insults. Lighten up, people. This wasn't meant to be a rules thread.
It's true what you say about the tone of this thread. It has been an entertaining read to say the least, and I definitely see the "light-hearted"-ness in the thread, without a doubt.
However, as Snorter states, it's sort of disappointing that this stereotype is not limited to this thread, where it is dealt with jokingly. It's not as wide-spread as it once was, but it used to be thrown about quite often on these boards, particularly around the launch of 4E. Now, I can't say that I really mind the use of the stereotype (I can't say that I've ever put too much stock in the opinions of "Internet peoples" that I don't know particularly well), but I can see Snorter's argument that it is stifling the growth of these younger players and the hobby, to some degree.
The inexperienced gamer should be helped along by the experienced gamer, showing them the so-called "ropes" as well as teaching them about how the game was played before, and to look beyond the rules, etc. This whole us vs. them mentality is getting kind of lame.
So, what we should do is all get together, get drunk and play ping-pong!
There's been a lot of insults thrown at younger gamers, on this thread, and in general, especially since the 4E announcement. Low attention-span, power-gaming, poor vocabulary, no appreciation for 'proper' fantasy, anime-junkies, etc.It's tiresome, and it's killing the hobby.
insular covens of fatbeards.
Pot, meet kettle? Or do you consider 'fatbeard' a term of endearment?
The inexperienced gamer should be helped along by the experienced gamer, showing them the so-called "ropes" as well as teaching them about how the game was played before, and to look beyond the rules, etc. This whole us vs. them mentality is getting kind of lame.So, what we should do is all get together, get drunk and play ping-pong!
Unfortunately, (and this is not meant to be baiting ... as I have been known to do ... or insulting) when an older gamer gives advice or offers an opinion based on their experiences gaming, some of the younger gamers attack and insult the older gamer before considering the intent. It's a dual-edged sword ... you want to offer your advice, but you get attacked because another younger poster doesn't want to change their way any more than many older posters want to.
Showing an inexperienced gamer "the ropes" as it were is all well and fine, but when suggestions of injecting reality into the game or offering suggestins about how situations have been handled in the past are met with insults, it kind of defeats the point.
Also, I think true sarcasm has become a lost artfom.
|
|
Unfortunately, (and this is not meant to be baiting ... as I have been known to do ... or insulting) when an older gamer gives advice or offers an opinion based on their experiences gaming, some of the younger gamers attack and insult the older gamer before considering the intent. It's a dual-edged sword ... you want to offer your advice, but you get attacked because another younger poster doesn't want to change their way any more than many older posters want to.
Showing an inexperienced gamer "the ropes" as it were is all well and fine, but when suggestions of injecting reality into the game or offering suggestins about how situations have been handled in the past are met with insults, it kind of defeats the point.
I think I understand where you're coming from. I've seen it many times, maybe it's part of that whole "forming your own identity" thing that causes people to ignore advice from the ages of 16-22, and then you sort of realise, "Hey, wait, those advice-givers did this before me! Maybe they've got some good points!"
Not saying we should necessarily listen to the advice of those that came before us blindly, but at least it should be considered. And certainly not dismissed. Just as I would not like to see the advice I might have concerning some field I've spent a lot of time in dismissed, I can see how giving gaming advice and getting it thrown back in your face could get fairly frustrating. Quickly.
So all I can say is to keep throwing out the advice! You never know when someone is actually listening, particularly on the Internet, where lurkers abound. Maybe you'll manage to help someone with their game! Who knows?
Also, I think true sarcasm has become a lost artfom.
Not in my household, it hasn't!
|
There's been a lot of insults thrown at younger gamers, on this thread, and in general, especially since the 4E announcement. Low attention-span, power-gaming, poor vocabulary, no appreciation for 'proper' fantasy, anime-junkies, etc.It's tiresome, and it's killing the hobby.
Pot, meet kettle? Or do you consider 'fatbeard' a term of endearment?
insular covens of fatbeards.
Rule number one of the interwebs.
He who smelt it, dealt it.
Not saying we should necessarily listen to the advice of those that came before us blindly, but at least it should be considered. And certainly not dismissed. Just as I would not like to see the advice I might have concerning some field I've spent a lot of time in dismissed, I can see how giving gaming advice and getting it thrown back in your face could get fairly frustrating. Quickly.
And I agree. Nobody should take advice blindly, but when it is dismissed out of hand, it does defeat the purpose.
So all I can say is to keep throwing out the advice! You never know when someone is actually listening, particularly on the Internet, where lurkers abound. Maybe you'll manage to help someone with their game! Who knows?
One thing many younger gamers may not understand (and many older gamers avoid admitting) is the fact that all of us were at the same stage, be it powergaming, short-attention span, or whatever. It's like the advice you get from your parents or teachers. It's not offered in a vacuum; it's offered from a place of concern in the hopes the advisee doesn't make the same mistakes or miss out on something good due to inexperience. It's advice that will never be heeded. When the advisee gets older, they will realize "oh ... *that's* what those old guys were talkin about."
It's the wway of things ... as Drjones mentions above.
Pot, meet kettle? Or do you consider 'fatbeard' a term of endearment?Rule number one of the interwebs.
He who smelt it, dealt it.
That's why there's Febreeze in my office. ;-)
|
|
It's advice that will never be heeded. When the advisee gets older, they will realize "oh ... *that's* what those old guys were talkin about."
It's the wway of things ... as Drjones mentions above.
As someone who has just gone through the phase you mention above, I totally know where you're coming from on this.
Plus I'm still pretty young! It's all uphill from here!
Oh, wait. The aging...
Forgot about that.
;)
It's advice that will never be heeded. When the advisee gets older, they will realize "oh ... *that's* what those old guys were talkin about."
It's the wway of things ... as Drjones mentions above.
As someone who has just gone through the phase you mention above, I totally know where you're coming from on this.
Plus I'm still pretty young! It's all uphill from here!
Oh, wait. The aging...
Forgot about that.
;)
Eh ... the aging ain't so bad if you treat yourself right. Eat right, exercise a bit, walk rather than drive ... that kind of stuff. My generation seems to have aged better than previous generations.
40 is the new 30
|
|
40 is the new 30Yay! I'm 30 again!
Does that make me 16?
Also I do have to stress that it really isn't about age, I cut my teeth on 3.5 and I have been a hardcore roleplayer going so far as to cut stat boosting from games I play in, no magic spells or items that give a boost to stats alone are allowed. So no belt of strength or owls wisdom. I've told players that feats represent training in action and that a feat just means they do what they could allready do without feats just without checks or failure penalties. So I have first level characters trying to jumpkick and wizards attempting to metamagic without the feats. My games I play in I never create a build I let what happens to the character determine what skills or feats are chosen. Was I just a 20 year old 40 year old when I learned to play? And as to the sad state of children today, it's not so much the children as the culture. The culture is suffering and it is reflected in the children.
By 'suffering' do you mean 'changing'?
|
|
By 'suffering' do you mean 'changing'?When I was in college we read a translation from an ancient Egyptian scholar writing about the lax standards of the younger generation and this was hundreds of years before the peak of the Pyramid building civilization.
In History of Rome, we got the same thing, a long diatribe that was read before the Senate about how the youth were disrespecting their elders, hanging out on the streets in 'gangs,' and basically acting like teenagers, and how it was a sign of the decay of civilization or whatever.
Same poop, different millenium.
Also, I think true sarcasm has become a lost artfom.I blame Stephen Colbert. He can do an entire show with his [sarcasm] on. Makes kids unable to tell the difference.
"Figh" on thee, successful geek!
Well, quiet frankly, if you turn on Comedy Central and expect serious political commentary, you are fairly stupid anyway ... the key word being "Comedy". Just ask Tucker Carlson.
|
|
Well, quiet frankly, if you turn on Comedy Central and expect serious political commentary, you are fairly stupid anyway ... the key word being "Comedy". Just ask Tucker Carlson.
Also, I think true sarcasm has become a lost artfom.I blame Stephen Colbert. He can do an entire show with his [sarcasm] on. Makes kids unable to tell the difference.
"Figh" on thee, successful geek!
And here I thought all political comentary was "comedy"!
Ironically, only stupid people would be insulted by your comment. ;)
|
|
Now, reading the thread, and going from experience presented all over, I'll sum up the 'generational difference' for you, as a general trend...
Old > I tell stories of what my characters do and have done.
New > I talk about how powerful my characters are.Honestly, ask most of those guys about their characters and you'll get a stat block and some min-maxing detail. When even the PHB says not to waste time with background material and just go for the dungeon, it's saying something.
Gone are the days of kicking back and having some laughs about what your characters were doing in town (or what was being done DO them), or the challenges they faced by that terrifying lich guy named 'Xyklon', and so on.
It's now all about the numbers, and that's how the game is PUSHED.
That is why I feel old about gaming.
Yes, I'm very late to the party. Is this true? Does the new players handbook really say "Don't waste time" with character background? I don't have the book so I can't check for myself.
I think it is a reasonable thing for the poster to have been excited about - the chance for his fighter to really be a hero, and have an interesting array of options before him in every combat.and my point was, I always have. Then again I didnt just "hit, repeat until dead"
I'd say few Roleplayers did nothing but hit and repeat, however now the fighter is more specialised at ....fighting. The fighter can turn round and go 'right with a sweep of my sword I'm going to try and knock the enemy warriors legs out from under him' and uses Spinning Sweep on an enemy soldier. In previous editions he'd say the same thing then be asked 'have you got improved trip?' (or suffer an Aoo)if so then roll to hit, then roll opposed by the opponents Dex or Str.
It resulted in lots of rolls. Or driving the enemy backwards with sword strikes and a smash from the shield with Tide Of Iron.
To me it's a better visual. The guys a fighter, it shouldn't be so difficult for him to do such actions.
|
|
I stumbled on this thread by mere accident and it made for a fascinating read. Ixancoatl's posts are especially interesting in a way with which they mention some things I wholeheartedly agree with (merits of improvisation, character development and role-playing in the RPGs) while still managing to be rude and arrogant. I really enjoy Paizo products and I couldn't care less about 4E and yet, reading this thread and others like it throughout this year made me realize that the reputation of Paizo Messageboards - as the best RPG company out there having downright annoying fanbase - is, unfortunately, justifiably deserved.
|
|
I'd say few Roleplayers did nothing but hit and repeat, however now the fighter is more specialised at ....fighting. The fighter can turn round and go 'right with a sweep of my sword I'm going to try and knock the enemy warriors legs out from under him' and uses Spinning Sweep on an enemy soldier. In previous editions he'd say the same thing then be asked 'have you got improved trip?' (or suffer an Aoo)if so then roll to hit, then roll opposed by the opponents Dex or Str.
It resulted in lots of rolls. Or driving the enemy backwards with sword strikes and a smash from the shield with Tide Of Iron.
To me it's a better visual. The guys a fighter, it shouldn't be so difficult for him to do such actions.
Just to play the advocatus diaboli:
4th: You can only use spinning sweep if you have the power!
3rd: You can always use Trip attack though it is less useful without the Improved Trip Feat. Even without Improved Trip you can use a reach weapon to circumvent the AoO.
4th: You can only use tide of Iron if you have the power and a shield
3rd: You can use Shield Bash as off Hand Weapon with Two Weapon Fighting and make a Bull Rush attack.
What is true for 4th is that the rules for doing all this are really smooth whereas you have to get used to the higher complexity in 3rd to do the same thing.
Just to play the advocatus diaboli:4th: You can only use spinning sweep if you have the power!
3rd: You can always use Trip attack though it is less useful without the Improved Trip Feat. Even without Improved Trip you can use a reach weapon to circumvent the AoO.4th: You can only use tide of Iron if you have the power and a shield
3rd: You can use Shield Bash as off Hand Weapon with Two Weapon Fighting and make a Bull Rush attack.What is true for 4th is that the rules for doing all this are really smooth whereas you have to get used to the higher complexity in 3rd to do the same thing.
To play the devils advocate's advocate (if that's how it's said..hehe)
In 3rd ed..ANYBODY...would have the same chance to do the same Trip or Shield Bash and Bull Rush..even the local mage. Granted the local mage would have to be strong but a mage with a +3 Str would stand a better chance to knock an opponent over than a fighter with +2 Str. This was proven horribly by a particular member of the group who relished knocking the big bad end of adventure boss down and forcing multiple Attack of Opportunity.
But there you go.
|
|
This thread is like a battle involving spiked cream pies being thrown back and forth -- on the one hand, you can't stand it, and on the other hand, you can't look away. =)
Actually, this thread was like a recording of "a battle involving spiked cream pies being thrown back and forth" that you, apparently, couldn't help but watch. And ressurect.
Why?
Why drag a 4 month old thread back out so that people can argue again?
|
|
To play the devils advocate's advocate (if that's how it's said..hehe)
In 3rd ed..ANYBODY...would have the same chance to do the same Trip or Shield Bash and Bull Rush..even the local mage. Granted the local mage would have to be strong but a mage with a +3 Str would stand a better chance to knock an opponent over than a fighter with +2 Str. This was proven horribly by a particular member of the group who relished knocking the big bad end of adventure boss down and forcing multiple Attack of Opportunity.
But there you go.
Ok, I take the Gauntlet!
If your Local Mage has a +3 Str he is probably lacking in other abilities, mor vital to a Mage than STR.
Anyway, your Mage doing a Trip attack or a Bullrush has either to use a Reach Weapon untrained or get the Improved Trip or Bullrusch Feat or Weapon Proficiency to avoid the AoO from the to be tripped or bullrushed opponent. With his less than stellar HPs a good AoO will severly hurt the Mage and deny his Trip.
If he has said Feats he lacks in other areas that are probably more vital to a Mage, namely Metamagic or Item creation feats.