|
Why is it irrational to want to shape the game to my desires, as gamers have done with Dungeons and Dragons, all editions, for nearly 30 years now.
Because painting a bull black and white does not make it a cow. If 4e, at its very core, will not allow you to play the way you want to play then why not simply play a different game?
|
|
No one's giving 4e a free pass,...
Absolutely. 4e has a crappy skill system, lacks some fundamental classes, and needs a type of ability between the fast powers and super slow rituals. It also has an overly simplified mechanic for area of effect spells (it needs cones and lines), and why oh why are there two kinds of elves?
We all have complaints about the game but I will still play 4e before I go back to 3e because I have more complaints about 3e.
I don't see any value in harping on the complaints. I would rather explore the game and talk about the differing perceptions of it. For example, I now see the encounter structure as being potentially problematic and by talking about it I am beginning to understand it better.
|
|
Is that what we're now being forced into? "If you don't like 4E, shut up and get the hell out?" That's effectively what you're arguing, though you may not realize it. How is that going to be productive in the least? The constant refrain to anyone who dares question the 'obvious greatness' of 4E seems to be 'sod off and die'.
If I see a weakness in 4E, my impulse is to fix and overcome it, which is why I'm here. I want to find ways to enjoy the new game, which is going to be - like it or not - the primary tool for bringing in new players.
Granted, while the GSL makes this harder to do, it's not impossible. Why is it irrational to want to shape the game to my desires, as gamers have done with Dungeons and Dragons, all editions, for nearly 30 years now. Why is 4E held up as a platinum standard, unmutable and absolute?
I don't think that is the issue. I am well aware of the issues with 4.0. I am using it as a newbie recruitment vehicle and as a quick play platform. 3.P is for my "serious" game.
Whether you realize it or not, your posts often come across as hyper-critical and disgusted with the very existence of 4.0. Also, your style of argumentation draws out very aggressive responses. This may not be your intention, but it is your result.
I try not to treat this space like a forum, but rather as a resource. My suggestion would be to avoid direct responses to people who you have had thow downs with and just focus on supporting the OP. Otherwise, youa re going to find yourself on the short side of tavern brawl waaaaaay too often.
This is the internet. You'll never win. You'll just get angrier. Be smurfy, not mad.
::assumes the lotus position:: OOOOOOOM!
Be smurfy, not mad.
::assumes the lotus position:: OOOOOOOM!
That's a pretty mad looking avatar. It kinda messes up your smurfy message.
<edit>I have a nice red cap!
This is the internet. You'll never win. You'll just get angrier. Be smurfy, not mad.
::assumes the lotus position:: OOOOOOOM!
Yeah?! Well smurf you and the smurf you smurfed in on, smurfy! :P
You've made no effort to discuss. You complain about the game, and when people try to show you how we (and apparently WotC) understand the game you argue. There's been no discussion with you yet.
But that's provably not true. I've put up a new race for discussion, I've put up the Dings font. I've talked about modelling commoners, etc... I've offered suggestions for people to affordibly (and legally) get started into the game, etc.. all without conflict.
It's more that some choose to see the conflict, sometimes even where there isn't any. A few people here have decided that I, and others with my viewpoint, are the 'enemy' and must be crushed. That's also easily provable.
I think the problem has been that your responces vary greatly based upon which thread you are posting in Vance.
You have provided several useful tools for those who wish to play 4th edition. (The font is especially useful, thank you for that.) You've had some intresting ideas and good dicussions since joining the 4th edition boards, and some threads here are a testament to that.
But you've also had some flaming rows with people here, myself included, and those threads have quickly devolved into personal attacks. You see anyone who likes 4th edition as actively attacking you, especially if they do not agree with your postion on something.
You have made contributions here Vance, quite good ones, but you are also a source of the continued strife on these boards. Not the only source, certainly, but a source.
You'll just get angrier.
Vance is defined by his anger. Why would you take that away from him?
But... I'm not normally angry, even when posting here...
Though, granted, that poodle pic REALLY disturbs me.
But look at his wide, even manic, grin. Surely he is the Poodle of Happiness, not the Poodle of Disturbance. ;)
OT - is it just me, or are there posts disappearing, or failing to show, etc, an AWFUL lot lately?
It is bad today, but this is a bug that has been plaguing the boards here for quite a while. I've found a solution for when the most recent post is failing to show up is to simply post to the thread (I generally use just a post saying "test").
Posting will fix the problem, and you can just delete your meaningless post afterwards to keep from crowding the threads with crap.
Vance is defined by his anger. Why would you take that away from him?But... I'm not normally angry, even when posting here...
Though, granted, that poodle pic REALLY disturbs me.
Well, even if you are not angry, you often sound that way Vance. Your posts are often very confrontational, and you come across as ranting angrily at people once the thread has gone south.
It's good to know that you aren't actually angry, but you sound that way. That is the difficulty of communicating in a context-less medium. None of us can tell what mood our fellow posters are in.
Court Fool for instance makes it very hard to tell how serious he is being, as he often posts deeply sarcasitc responces that could be taken as completely serious. I'm never quite sure if he's joking when he posts. (I've often thought his poodle is part of this. It's a clever psycologcial weapon.)
Let me use an example to demonstrate my point:
Writing down "Angus is the best smith in town" and trying to get my girlfriend's shirt off takes the same amount of time as statting up a 3.5 NPC, totaling skill ranks, applying ability modifiers, and calculating final modifiers.
And when my game needs an NPC who knows how to make armor, I write "Angus knows how to make armor, too" and break out the Barry White, whereas you're adding a level to Angus, giving him more skill ranks, picking a feat, adding one to his STR score, and recalculating all his bonuses.
And at the end of the day, we both have Angus the smith who does exactly what our game needs him to do, they're both exactly as internally consistent, they look exactly the same to the players, and I was done in 8 seconds.
It's definitely a matter of priorities. I'll take a fun weekend with my girlfriend over statting up NPCs and monsters ten times out of ten and I have a rule system that lets me.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Court Fool for instance makes it very hard to tell how serious he is being, as he often posts deeply sarcasitc responces that could be taken as completely serious.
Feel free to just skip over my mindless drivel.
But, most of the time, I'm all right, and enjoying being here.
Glad to hear it. Of course this completely ruins my mental image of you though.
I'm good-looking too... so, that's another layer peeled away from the myth. :)
No wonder you are so jovial.
Every character has a profession(or just a job)which pays their bills while they are not adventuring.
That's why I decided to treat it as a power.
Here's an example.
Profession Sailor. The character counts as a sailor for the purposes of manning a ship. They can climb the rigging, cook, operate the rudder, the ships wheel, or the bilge pumps, or batten down hatches. Being an oarsman or swabbing the deck require no special skills. Each ship has a minumum number of crew to function.
At 11th level or above they can specialize by becoming a navigator, gunner, purser, first mate, Captain, ect.
That could work too, but you'll need custom character sheets for character's and NPCs.
I thought professions could be digital, either there or not.
The profession could be listed among the powers.
All NPCs could be listed en mass, like in the Monster manual.
I will work up a listing for Sailors.
Currently I'm thinking Level 1 Workers.
Hits 10, Bloodied 5.
Oarsmen and Swabbies would be minions.
That could work too, but you'll need custom character sheets for character's and NPCs.
I thought professions could be digital, either there or not.
The profession could be listed among the powers.All NPCs could be listed en mass, like in the Monster manual.
I will work up a listing for Sailors.
Currently I'm thinking Level 1 Workers.
Hits 10, Bloodied 5.Oarsmen and Swabbies would be minions.
That seems kind of weak. Kobolds have 20+ hit points.
I as DM housed rulled them...I did not added proffesions per say but made skill challenges like the ones in the DM guide!
Like I have done with many situations...
So far I have made a drinking contest, a game of cards, a farming, hunting, and crafting of armour, weapons, traps, alcemicals items and etc! Only stuff I let out of crafting is the pure magical items!
Also as it seems now it is all into making fun skill challenges.
I try too keep the general lines of them in like a small seperate notebook.
Gennerally...I do not know what u have done but I took a very different road in 4th edition! I litterally changed the whole way we played!
|
|
This is not an attempt to begin a flame war.
Looking through the 4E books I noticed Craft and Profession skills are absent. I thought that surely the DMG would mention those types of skills for NPCs, but nothing more than the core classes are represented. Am I missing something? Does no one in 4E make anything or retire to run an inn? The only way to make GP in 4E apparently is to steal it. But since no one MAKES anything, no one has any money. Help?
We are back to the ever popular Intelligence check to see if you bring in the crop.
DRAGONS MAKE WEALTH:"Rumor has it the dragon in that cave above our village has caverns full of gold it boiled out of the rock..."
PEASANTS MAKE CANNONFODDER:"Oh God. The Humanity!"
I've run games where the social skills were FAR more important than the combat abilities, and have had entire CAMPAIGNS which didn't have a single attack-roll in them. To me, personally, combat is a relatively minor part of a campaign - and, quite often, I find the more minor it is, the more I enjoy both playing and running.
Then why do you play D&D? Regardless of the edition, 90% of the D&D rules are combat related. It sounds like you're wasting your money.
House Rule: Craft/Profession/(specialized skill) checks are only available if the skill training feat is taken for the specialized skill set. You must be trained in the basic skill or you can't use the specialized use via the feat. The +5 bonus from being trained in the basic skills applies to any of the specialized skill uses.
In the examples I combined skill sets, because I'm not sure what special uses to assign to each skill.
Example 1:
Acrobatics/Athletics: Perform a stunt. High jump, long jump, stop the horse fast, etc.
Endurance: You can ride your horse longer than normal.
History/Insight: Understand the different breeds of horses and how to use them to your advantage.
Someone with a better understanding of horsemanship or mountmanship as I remember it mentioned could flesh these out more.
Example 2:
Acrobatics/Athletics: Create a weapon. The higher the check, the better the quality.
Diplomacy/Perception: You know how to read a person and convince them of the best weapon for them.
History/Insight: You know how to run a weapon smithy business and sell the items for the best price.
The next spoiler comes from another idea of giving the adventurer's investments as rewards and a another version of the craft/profession checks above.
We could mimic 3.5 rules to a point to achieve this goal. In 3.5 the craft and profession skills allowed PCs and NPCs to earn coin on a weekly basis dependent on the results. These same checks can be done with the DMG p.42 rules plus errata (haven't read yet). If the PC beats the easy challenge, then they receive 1/5 (perhaps 1/10 or 1/20 since there isn't the risk of death unless it's a merchant caravan or such) of a parcel of treasure for their level for the week or month of work. The type of treasure is dependent upon the craft/profession, but coinage is always a safe bet. I haven't done the math, so please pick these numbers apart.
The idea is that the investment opportunity upgrades or levels up by adding more workers, adding more land, or using better materials in the craft at the same rate as the PCs level up. Other investments would be one time deals like a merchant caravan that returns a full parcel as if it was another minor quest. The PCs could also micro-manage the business by working at the investment directly instead of relying upon just the employees.
To simulate the craft and profession rules, I suggest that the PCs take a skill training feat for craft/profession based on the most appropriate ability for the skill. I think both craft and profession should be in the same feat. With training, say in weaponsmithing, the PC can create simple weapons with the easy check, military weapons with the medium check, and uncommon weapons known to the PC/NPC with the hard check. If the check failed, then the difference between the DC and the roll is how many additional hours/days the weapon took to be created at the quality of the PCs level. The DM should definitely impose that a craft and profession check is trained only.
Wizards already come with the ritual casting feat by default to create magic items. I could easily see a magecraft feat available that works as noted above that allows the PC/NPC to sell magic items that they created at PHB rates + 10%. Maybe that's how low level wizards did it in past civilizations like artificers or that NPC class in Eberron. I would remind the PC not to make too many based on concept that the supply and demand of these items are not great. I'm sure this idea can be tweaked more too.
The investment idea could require no checks and involve a simple recharge roll. A missed roll represents the investment paying its bills and investing in an upgrade to the investment to bring in greater returns. The PC sees a return in investment via roleplaying with it such as a guild that produces new quests, a shop with employees, a keep and its guard, increased farm land or better quality crops such as potatoes to vineyard, or simply a base of operations called home.
The reasons for these boons could also lead into adventures. Your smithy is doing great, because the weapons were all destroyed by rust maybe sabotage.
Easy investments (recharge 4, 5, 6) per week or whatever: 1/5 parcel of treasure. Examples: Smithy (local guard resupply, rumors of war), Inn (fair or convention), Farm (harvest time).
Medium investments (recharge 5, 6) per week or whatever: 1/2 parcel of treasure. Examples: Keep (gold mine discovered, taxes), Merchant (rare commodity sold)
Hard investments (recharge 6) per week or whatever: 1 parcel of treasure. Examples: Adventurer's guild (successful adventure)
Please help me develop these ideas further. Thanks!