His first article is here.
I think this "passive perception" sounds like an amazingly innovative concept which should immediately be written into 4th edition. Smurf.
|
His first article is here.
I think this "passive perception" sounds like an amazingly innovative concept which should immediately be written into 4th edition. Smurf.
Uh-oh, skill system that's all about the DM telling you what you can and what you can't. Welcome back, 1E? Player Advocacy Movement is going to LOVE this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monte Cook, let me tell you about my idea.
It's a new class based around heavy armor and the usage of multiple weapons. This is a guy that's good with multiple fighting styles that utilize those multiple weapons I talked about. He'd be a martial class, low magic but extra-normal. I call him the fighter. You can use this, if you want.
This is merely the tip of the iceberg
@Bluenose and ProfessorCirno:
Monte talks about the CONCEPT of passive perception not the skill in 4th edition call passive perception.
The latter is only the application of the former in 4th edition.
Well yes...but those inhabiting that forum should know what passive perception is. Its hard to be blown away by Monte's first article when he reiterates what we all already have and are used too.
Now I suppose there was a slight hint that he was still thinking about the (crappy) skill system Mike Mearls introduced for him but it was nothing but a slight allusion to even that at best.
The article just did not really say anything at all when we consider that most 4E DMs have been using this skill in pretty much this manner since day one.
In fact there is some possibilty of some interesting descussion on the topic. Passive Perception has some serious weak points to go along with its strengths that could have been explored but not even this was done. The strengths where mentioned and it was done is such a way that the idea that there where weak points was not even considered.
A dud article at best IMO. Hope this gets a little more informative.
In other news on this topic. Rule of Three spends two questions talking about Monte. We now know that he is not working on Planescape (though they do call for submissions by the rest of teh fan base for articles or adventures for Planescape so the setting itself is on their mind).
We alsp learn that he is mainly in Research - so rule recomendations etc. On the other hand it seems unlikely that he is about to become lead designer for 5E or anything - at least not at this moment. He remains based in Milwaukee and its pretty inconceivable that he could do any kind of lead design for such a project remotely from the WotC offices. Possibly he would relocate should such development become more of a WotC focus or maybe he'll act as more of an adviser - if such a project is even in development at this time of course.
|
As far as I can tell, what he is proposing is that all perception becomes passive - which is to say, the player never gets to roll the dice. They just have a perception rank, period. If they search in the right spot, they get counted as a higher rank, and perhaps they find something.
It might make for a decent system... somewhere. But I can't see the appeal of deliberately taking dice rolling out of D&D, nor what it brings to the table.
Not a promising start for his columns, unfortunately.
I'm not sure what he was driving at. He pretty much described existing rules and then asked, "What do you think?" Well, perhaps a question back might be "What are you driving at?"
The article was a bit too short and should have been more in-depth, but I'm thinking that he wants to know if people like passive perception as it is in 4E, or if they'd prefer a different approach.
And the worst thing: he forgot to mention he was involved in MERP production (ah, how I miss those huge Critical tables and the tables that were needed to roll at other tables) :p
Why? For one thing, this wasn't a resume. He mentioned some highlights of what he's done in the last decade. Few people will care that he once worked for ICE. He wasn't a designer for Rolemaster, so you can't really infer much from that. Other than the fact that he's been a fan of RPGs for a very long time.
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a lot of people currently designing games at WotC feel exactly the same way Monte does about how the department was mismanaged for so long. It's telling that once that management changed, many of Monte's frustrations with D&D and Wizards of the Coast evaporated.
And the worst thing: he forgot to mention he was involved in MERP production (ah, how I miss those huge Critical tables and the tables that were needed to roll at other tables) :pWhy? For one thing, this wasn't a resume. He mentioned some highlights of what he's done in the last decade. Few people will care that he once worked for ICE. He wasn't a designer for Rolemaster, so you can't really infer much from that. Other than the fact that he's been a fan of RPGs for a very long time.:p = j/k
I mention it because we sometimes forget that Monte was involved in game design many years before d20, aside from beign a fan.
It's all good. ;)
Well, my point was that he was an editor for ICE, not a designer. His job was to make certain projects used the rules correctly, not design new ones. What I meant by saying that he's a fan is that he jumped at any job to work for an RPG company when he got the chance. It was just luck and fate that got him the job at ICE.
Over the years he's gotten a lot more experience and refined his skills. He's always been an ideas guy. If you look at Arcana Evolved and the Books of Experimental Might, you can see that he's always tinkering with the system he uses. Even one he helped write in the first place.
Anyone really curious about his ICE days, he still has a good essay about it on his blog.
I think a lot of people currently designing games at WotC feel exactly the same way Monte does about how the department was mismanaged for so long. It's telling that once that management changed, many of Monte's frustrations with D&D and Wizards of the Coast evaporated.
Maybe so, but those were certainly some strong words he put out there and some warm beds he is now sleeping in.
Oh well. It's a tough world and tough words get said (and unsaid) by people every day though. I'm glad a dedicated professional now gets a paycheck for doing something he loves at least. We all must break eggs to make our own little omelets, I guess.
I dunno about all that; Erik has the right of it. Mike Mearls and Monte have worked together and been friends for a long time, and Bruce Cordell is Monte's best friend. So why would he not take the job when those two are essentially in charge?
I dunno about all that; Erik has the right of it. Mike Mearls and Monte have worked together and been friends for a long time, and Bruce Cordell is Monte's best friend. So why would he not take the job when those two are essentially in charge?
Simple. People love the drama. SO people want to construct a possible conflict.
I see no problem with Monte taking the job, even if Mike and Bruce were not his friends. He is a game designer. The biggest company offers him a job. He should take it.
He made a passionate criticism about WOTC laying off his friends. He did not comment at all about the people there. Jst the management.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the worst thing: he forgot to mention he was involved in MERP production (ah, how I miss those huge Critical tables and the tables that were needed to roll at other tables) :pWhy? For one thing, this wasn't a resume. He mentioned some highlights of what he's done in the last decade. Few people will care that he once worked for ICE. He wasn't a designer for Rolemaster, so you can't really infer much from that. Other than the fact that he's been a fan of RPGs for a very long time.:p = j/k
I mention it because we sometimes forget that Monte was involved in game design many years before d20, aside from beign a fan.
It's all good. ;)
Well, my point was that he was an editor for ICE, not a designer. His job was to make certain projects used the rules correctly, not design new ones. What I meant by saying that he's a fan is that he jumped at any job to work for an RPG company when he got the chance. It was just luck and fate that got him the job at ICE.
Over the years he's gotten a lot more experience and refined his skills. He's always been an ideas guy. If you look at Arcana Evolved and the Books of Experimental Might, you can see that he's always tinkering with the system he uses. Even one he helped write in the first place.
Anyone really curious about his ICE days, he still has a good essay about it on his blog.
I care that he worked at ICE - the RM and MERP games were complex but so rewarding. If you have never played and ever get the chance give the game a go.
The game front loads all the hard work thus actions and combat are surprisingly fast once you learn how.
I care that he worked at ICE - the RM and MERP games were complex but so rewarding. If you have never played and ever get the chance give the game a go.
The game front loads all the hard work thus actions and combat are surprisingly fast once you learn how.
I agree and I also didnt realise he was involved with ICE in its heyday. Our group was following a similar path to him as gamers in that period - we also left D&D for Rolemaster when (or just before) 2nd edition came out.
I've never really known much about him until the last few weeks, but I've really been enjoying the snippets I've read from him since taking an interest.
|
|
I think a lot of people currently designing games at WotC feel exactly the same way Monte does about how the department was mismanaged for so long. It's telling that once that management changed, many of Monte's frustrations with D&D and Wizards of the Coast evaporated.
4E's greatest enemy is the company that produces and sells it.
|
4E's greatest enemy is the company that produces and sells it.I think a lot of people currently designing games at WotC feel exactly the same way Monte does about how the department was mismanaged for so long. It's telling that once that management changed, many of Monte's frustrations with D&D and Wizards of the Coast evaporated.
If it was someone else gamers would stuill have been unhappy. Hell if Paizo produced 4E and promoted and advertised it exactly like Wotc gamers would still be unhappy. So one way or the other some people would and will never be satisifed imo.
Too bad one of the best in the business (Mr. Cook) isn't an employee of the best company in the business (Paizo). Oh well, we'll just have to settle for all the other All-Stars at Paizo.
The article was a bit too short and should have been more in-depth, but I'm thinking that he wants to know if people like passive perception as it is in 4E, or if they'd prefer a different approach.
How's this different from taking 10 or 20?
I may be reading too much into the article, but I think he is talking about introducing a concept called 'Expert'. An Expert has an Expert Passive Perception somewhere between his Passive Perception and an Active Perception check, but only in a special area.
So a Rogue who is a 'Trap Expert' might have a Trap Passive Perception that is higher than the usual Passive Perception. A Elf might be an Expert at Secret Doors and a Dwarf might be an Expert in Stonecraft.
To make up numbers, if you have Perception Skill of 5 your Passive Check is 15 and you have a high of 25 with an active check. So maybe an Trap Expert, has a Passive Check of 20 vs. Traps only. (This is a educated guess and is not specifically from the article). This way a Trap expert has a good chance of seeing the trap, but you do not need to make trap checks every five feet.
Maybe training in a skill gives you the usual bonus, but maybe an 'Expert Feat' has an additional 5 bonus in their passive check in that area.
If I am right, I like it. However, I am reading allot into his twice use of the word 'Expert'.
I may be reading too much into the article, but I think he is talking about introducing a concept called 'Expert'. An Expert has an Expert Passive Perception somewhere between his Passive Perception and an Active Perception check, but only in a special area.
So a Rogue who is a 'Trap Expert' might have a Trap Passive Perception that is higher than the usual Passive Perception. A Elf might be an Expert at Secret Doors and a Dwarf might be an Expert in Stonecraft.
To make up numbers, if you have Perception Skill of 5 your Passive Check is 15 and you have a high of 25 with an active check. So maybe an Trap Expert, has a Passive Check of 20 vs. Traps only. (This is a educated guess and is not specifically from the article). This way a Trap expert has a good chance of seeing the trap, but you do not need to make trap checks every five feet.
Maybe training in a skill gives you the usual bonus, but maybe an 'Expert Feat' has an additional 5 bonus in their passive check in that area.
If I am right, I like it. However, I am reading allot into his twice use of the word 'Expert'.
This is a pretty charitable reading, in my view - something I intend as a compliment. My first though was that it looks like he's jumped in to write the column without a huge amount of experience actually playing the game. I like your interpretation better.
The trouble is, this seems analogous to me to multiplying the number of skills - there'd effectively be a locate secret doors skill and a detect traps skill (for example) or at least it would be necessary to track one's 'expert rank' in each of these subspecialties. I'm not really averse to that in the world of online character builders, but it does seem to buck one of the well-received trends of 4th edition design.
I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Claims about the industry aren't baseless when he makes them.
|
|
Claims about the industry aren't baseless when he makes them.I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Of course. But folks were known to challenge Lisa before, I'm curious if somebody will have the guts.
Of course. But folks were known to challenge Lisa before, I'm curious if somebody will have the guts.Claims about the industry aren't baseless when he makes them.I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Really? The usuals? That's peculiar.
|
|
What's Polish for troll? You trying to start something? ;-)I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Meh, it's troll :/ So many tongue-breaking words and we missed a chance to make another one...
|
|
Meh, it's troll :/ So many tongue-breaking words and we missed a chance to make another one...What's Polish for troll? You trying to start something? ;-)I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Not even trollski?
Anyway, I was in Warsaw on business a couple of months ago. Whereabouts are you?
|
|
Meh, it's troll :/ So many tongue-breaking words and we missed a chance to make another one...What's Polish for troll? You trying to start something? ;-)I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Not even trollski?
Anyway, I was in Warsaw on business a couple of months ago. Whereabouts are you?
I am located in Poznan, some 300km west of Warsaw. If any Paizonian ever manages, by some unlucky accident, to find himself in my town, drop me a line - I'll come to the rescue, scaring the polar bears and drunken locals away.
No, that the "4th Edition is not in development" bit was a pretty severe misrepresentation of what the WotC rep said, and has unfortunately been repeated as truth so many times by internet people that it's now just accepted. I'm almost certain that someone in this thread can point us in the right direction.I seem to recall this being a myth that was debunked. Anyone have any better information on this?That there was a 4E? No, that turned out to be true a couple of years later.
:-)
Busy week away from a computer, so I'm about a week late replying to this.
Scott, I have nothing in the way of proof other than my word, which accounts for jack-squat on the internet, I know this. This was a thread I read, first hand, and from what I recall, not an April Fool's joke. Someone had leaked info about 4e in development and ran into the forums like Paul Revere hollering about the red coats. Everyone flamed him as a troll, and WotC damage control came in saying the 4e wasn't even being developed.
I don't blame the WotC forum mod that said it one bit; there were still many new 3.5e products making their way to the shelves, and if they did confirm a new edition being worked on, people would've flipped out. Heck, we all saw how people flipped out less than a year later when it was officially announced.
This is not second hand, heard from a friend, knew a guy, etc etc; this was what I saw on the forums with my own eyes. Believe what you want. I'm simply telling of something I saw, I'm not here bashing 4th edition(I'm rolling up characters for 2 campaigns as soon as my schedule frees up). I'll see if I can maybe find that old thread, but this was one thread in a busy forum from 5 years ago, and my search-fu is only an Orange Belt.
I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
Nice
No, that the "4th Edition is not in development" bit was a pretty severe misrepresentation of what the WotC rep said, and has unfortunately been repeated as truth so many times by internet people that it's now just accepted. I'm almost certain that someone in this thread can point us in the right direction.I seem to recall this being a myth that was debunked. Anyone have any better information on this?That there was a 4E? No, that turned out to be true a couple of years later.
:-)
Busy week away from a computer, so I'm about a week late replying to this.
Scott, I have nothing in the way of proof other than my word, which accounts for jack-squat on the internet, I know this. This was a thread I read, first hand, and from what I recall, not an April Fool's joke. Someone had leaked info about 4e in development and ran into the forums like Paul Revere hollering about the red coats. Everyone flamed him as a troll, and WotC damage control came in saying the 4e wasn't even being developed.
I don't blame the WotC forum mod that said it one bit; there were still many new 3.5e products making their way to the shelves, and if they did confirm a new edition being worked on, people would've flipped out. Heck, we all saw how people flipped out less than a year later when it was officially announced.
This is not second hand, heard from a friend, knew a guy, etc etc; this was what I saw on the forums with my own eyes. Believe what you want. I'm simply telling of something I saw, I'm not here bashing 4th edition(I'm rolling up characters for 2 campaigns as soon as my schedule frees up). I'll see if I can maybe find that old thread, but this was one thread in a busy forum from 5 years ago, and my search-fu is only an Orange Belt.
I was just wondering would the forum mod even have known? Not questioning if it happened at all as that seems like something that could happen.
I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
You caught me. People who come up to my shoulder scare me. ;-)
As far as I can tell, what he is proposing is that all perception becomes passive - which is to say, the player never gets to roll the dice. They just have a perception rank, period. If they search in the right spot, they get counted as a higher rank, and perhaps they find something.
It might make for a decent system... somewhere. But I can't see the appeal of deliberately taking dice rolling out of D&D, nor what it brings to the table.
I think it's the most elegant solution to a problem I've always had as a DM.
In the past spot/search/perception was a maddening conundrum. Does the DM give verbal cues to prompt players to search in appropriate places? What's the point if you're just giving the information away? Or do you force the players to specify when and where they are being alert? That always seems to end with rogues searching every five-foot square of the dungeon.
The change to passive perception in 4E was a nice step, but it still seemed like giving away something for nothing. Passive perception with a nice bonus for specificity looks just right to me. I like it.
In fact, if the bonus were variable, that would be perfect. What do you think of this idea?
Each character has a passive perception rank equal to their perception skill + 20. Similar to a knowledge check, when a character enters an area the DM reveals noticable features, hidden creatures or items, or traps commensurate with the character's passive perceoption score. If a player identifies a specific object or area they'd like to search more thoroughly, they roll 1d8 and add it to their passive perception score. The DM reveals any information revealed by the new, higher score.
It alleviates the pressure to actively search everywhere, and the bonus isn't large enough to encourage that type of behavior. However, it still behooves a player to be alert and search when appropriate, because 1d8 could be the difference between finding a trap the easy way or the hard way.
I think a lot of people currently designing games at WotC feel exactly the same way Monte does about how the department was mismanaged for so long. It's telling that once that management changed, many of Monte's frustrations with D&D and Wizards of the Coast evaporated.
Is there a specific manager you're refering to? I understand if you'd rather not name that individual, if indeed it was one person; but I always got the impression that Bill Slavicsek was the problem, and I'd like to know if I'm on the right track or way off base.
I was just wondering would the forum mod even have known? Not questioning if it happened at all as that seems like something that could happen.
I used to be a moderator on the MtG-side of the WotC-forums. We had no insider information whatsoever; we knew nothing the general public didn't also know regarding what WotC were or were not doing.
I think there was one time we were told "tomorrow there might be a flame-fest on the forums" in regards to an announcement they were about to make, but that was it in terms of insider info.
I'd assume it was the same way for the D&D-moderators. Most likely, if a moderator said "4E isn't in development" it was an attempt to try to stem the tide of inflammatory posts/threads, rather than any attempt to mislead the posters.
I was just wondering would the forum mod even have known? Not questioning if it happened at all as that seems like something that could happen.I used to be a moderator on the MtG-side of the WotC-forums. We had no insider information whatsoever; we knew nothing the general public didn't also know regarding what WotC were or were not doing.
I think there was one time we were told "tomorrow there might be a flame-fest on the forums" in regards to an announcement they were about to make, but that was it in terms of insider info.
I'd assume it was the same way for the D&D-moderators. Most likely, if a moderator said "4E isn't in development" it was an attempt to try to stem the tide of inflammatory posts/threads, rather than any attempt to mislead the posters.
That was what I would have thought.
Of course. But folks were known to challenge Lisa before, I'm curious if somebody will have the guts.Claims about the industry aren't baseless when he makes them.I'm still shocked that none of the ... usual players ... jumped Erik for baseless claims about the management of 4E's R&D. After all, he didn't provide any links, quotes, or anything.
Are you guys afraid, or something? :P
This is not helping.
As far as I can tell, what he is proposing is that all perception becomes passive - which is to say, the player never gets to roll the dice. They just have a perception rank, period. If they search in the right spot, they get counted as a higher rank, and perhaps they find something.
It might make for a decent system... somewhere. But I can't see the appeal of deliberately taking dice rolling out of D&D, nor what it brings to the table.
I think it's the most elegant solution to a problem I've always had as a DM.
In the past spot/search/perception was a maddening conundrum. Does the DM give verbal cues to prompt players to search in appropriate places? What's the point if you're just giving the information away? Or do you force the players to specify when and where they are being alert? That always seems to end with rogues searching every five-foot square of the dungeon.
The change to passive perception in 4E was a nice step, but it still seemed like giving away something for nothing. Passive perception with a nice bonus for specificity looks just right to me. I like it.
In fact, if the bonus were variable, that would be perfect. What do you think of this idea?
Each character has a passive perception rank equal to their perception skill + 20. Similar to a knowledge check, when a character enters an area the DM reveals noticable features, hidden creatures or items, or traps commensurate with the character's passive perceoption score. If a player identifies a specific object or area they'd like to search more thoroughly, they roll 1d8 and add it to their passive perception score. The DM reveals any information revealed by the new, higher score.
It alleviates the pressure to actively search everywhere, and the bonus isn't large enough to encourage that type of behavior. However, it still behooves a player to be alert and search when appropriate, because 1d8 could be the difference between finding a trap the easy way or the hard way.
I dunno. This sort of just encourages the players to say 'I look here I look there I look everywhere'. I'm not really sure its necessary since we can assume passive perception means things that one can reasonably see. If the wall has a secret door then one can reasonably see the wall when they go by but if there is a hidden compartment in the drawer of the desk the players still need to say they search the desk. I'm not really sure what is gained by giving out another +1d8 bonus and I'm a little worried that it might throw off some balance somewhere.
Anyway if your interested in what Monte means by expert go back over the last 4 or so Legend Lore Articles. Mike Mearls introduces the system in those articles....oh and did I mention that its not a very good system? Oh I did repeatedly you say...
I was just wondering would the forum mod even have known? Not questioning if it happened at all as that seems like something that could happen.
That's a very good question. I'm guessing since there had been no official announcement at that point, the mod was just assuming that it wasn't being worked on. That, or maybe they got a memo saying not to feed into conversations like that. Who knows? I'm not citing some crazy conspiracy or anything.
We all knew a new version of D&D was coming. This was simply a case of "I told you so/called it" that actually came true. Creating a new edition of D&D from scratch is a pretty time consuming process, so we could've simply guessed it was being worked on as it was.
I was just wondering would the forum mod even have known? Not questioning if it happened at all as that seems like something that could happen.That's a very good question. I'm guessing since there had been no official announcement at that point, the mod was just assuming that it wasn't being worked on. That, or maybe they got a memo saying not to feed into conversations like that. Who knows? I'm not citing some crazy conspiracy or anything.
We all knew a new version of D&D was coming. This was simply a case of "I told you so/called it" that actually came true. Creating a new edition of D&D from scratch is a pretty time consuming process, so we could've simply guessed it was being worked on as it was.
What you are remembering is Eric Noah, the founder of EN World, reporting that he had heard substantive rumors about 4E, and that it was going to be made in such a way that you would need to buy multiple products to have a "complete set" (i.e., not all the "core classes" would be in one book etc.). And he did, indeed, receive a lot of flack for it, though i do not think there were official or specific denials from WOTC, though i do recall some slick wordplay when enquries were made at Gencon.