| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pathfinder/D&D3.x are systems where the characters become dependent upon their equipment. D&D always has been that way, at leat partially.
While this is true now, I don't believe for a second it has always been that way. Magic items existed, of course, and were a part of the game, but they were never the focus of it. You "needed them" in that you needed a magic weapon at all to hurt certain enemies, but you didn't need a specific plus or a specific enchantment.
Only if they are going for one of those OhMyGawdThisIsASoOverPoweredOneTrickPony Build.
Try checking on Mazes & Minotaurs.
It is nearly identical to my experiences with AD&D or similar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I am really, really sick of the constant WoW bashing. As I said, I've played D&D in all its versions plus other RPGs for virtually my whole life, going back over 30 years now and I have been a video gamer since Pong. I was a raiding guild member in Everquest and World of Warcraft, as have been most of the people I game with.
WoW does not "ruin" players any more than they've been ruined by "Doom" or "Halo."
If you've got a problem with WoW, take it to a WoW forum.
Where did this come from? Only one person mentioned WoW, and it certainly wasn't to bash it.
I don't have a problem with people preplanning their PCs, I rarely do it. I do have a problem with people that feel their PC is broken because their preplanning doesn't take into account what happens in the game. The idea that because the game is running 10% short of WBL (one of the sillier concepts in the game) and the PC can't afford his +3 Sword of Silliness, that character is now a crippled wreck and will never succeed, is the sign of poor thinking.
Dump stats are the same way, if you are lowering a stat for roleplaying purposes good. If you are lowering a stat to be a power gamer, find another game. I've played characters with dump stats, a Druid with an Int of 6, at times it was annoying. A couple of occasions the party was stuck on a solution to a problem. I thought up a solution, but "Stump" as we called him wouldn't have come up it, so I stayed silent.
As for rolling dice to create characters, the group I play with was using a 9,8,7,6,5,4d6 take the top three, and I still ended up with a 17, 15, 14, 14, and two below 10. At that point, they never let me roll for stats again. We ended up choosing between two sets of numbers that had been rolled.
To the OP:
I've been playing DnD since about '82, and I long for the old days as well. I don't do Society Play, and I use a lot of home rules to make it more old school. I'm going to be featuring some of them in BadWrongFun, an article series I'm doing in the new Open Gaming Monthly magazine. The first article is about Gestalt/Multiclassing, but one (or more) of an upcoming one will be about bringing back some old school feeling.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A. Magic items available as a means of filling missing roles in a party always existed, even back in 1st Edition. I know. I've been playing since 1981, and I typically loaded my character up with whatever he could use, and multiclassed like hell.
2. Multiclassing and (in the old days) dual-classing are both examples of a player planning out how and what he was going to do with his character ahead-of-time. So were all the other bits that went into gaming back in 1981, like deciding you were one day going to build a castle, dungeon, whatever. Though in many ways, character choice was limited, the notion that it is a new thing that players plan out ahead of time, is crazy. Somebody always was.
Tres. On that subject, I say "somebody always was planning," not "everybody." Why do I say that? Because I have to wonder who you people are playing with, that you encounter SO MANY players who are planning their characters out to 20th level? I play with a good ten to twelve people right now. I consider myself lucky to get through skill selection without them zoning out.
Planning to 20th is rare, has always been rare, continues to be rare, and will always be rare. Either this thread just so happens to have cosmically attracted the entirety of GMs who have players who exhibit this behavior and bother at all to think that far ahead, or some weird Pontypool word virus has gotten into all your heads and caused you to just start agreeing with everything the nutball next to you says.
Try checking on Mazes & Minotaurs.
It is nearly identical to my experiences with AD&D or similar.
That's crappy. What those guys are doing is really crappy.
Not creating a retro game. That's fine. But by creating a phony history for it, to make it seem like it was the first RPG. That's... something I can't type here. I had to pore though five pages of reviews and commentaries on the Internet to find out what was really going on... that the creators of Mazes & Minotaurs created an "alternate history" in the pages of their own books to make it seem like it dates to before D&D.
I am usually the first guy in line to scream for creativity, and I love alt history in fantasy tales. But alt history AS HISTORY?! Shame on those creeps.
This world is already full of misinformation. We live in a time when some tabletop wargamers think that Games Workshop invented wargames and that everything else, D&D included, is a rip-off of them. We live in a time when kids devour video games and live in complete cluelessness that tabletop games even exist. We live in a time that is teetering on the edge of total ignorance of where it even comes from.
And these jackasses want to complicate this by fabricating RPG history? I'd punch them in the mouth if I could get in the room with them.
Why can't an item be an integral part of a PC's vision?
Why must it be wrought from some "statistical optimization urge"?
Imagine a PC who has a concept in mind, that revolves around a Thor-like PC.
Getting that Throwing/Returning Hammer is pretty key.
What if one of your PC's life goals is to wear the frightening armor of the Hellknights?
That was my thought in my post. I had a paladin that just wanted some cool armor. I made up some unique armor for the female PC and tied it to a defunct old group of elves (she was an elf). Once she had the armor though, her concept changed and she wanted the longsword I'd described in the fluff of the group. The campaign unfortunately died, but she had a quest log and "Duskblade Sword" was on it.
If the character has a vision of their character that involves a magic item, how is that different from centering it on getting a certain spell at a level, or a certain feat? The only thing that is different that I can see is that feats and spells are written into the game that you get to pick what you want; magic items aren't a given.
But there it is, isn't it: Entitlement.
This is where many GMs, even a friend of mine, tell me players today are spoiled. Now while this may be true for some, I don't find this to be a fault of the game, nor the prevailing thought of ALL modern players.
Most players I've worked with that put an item into their concept/build are willing to work for it. Their characters network or research the item themselves, to find out how to get it; they take feats to create it; they specifically hoard their own gold foregoing other delights for the potential of this single item.
Now consider the Prestige Class. Many developers over the years have stated that these options were meant originally as a way to mechanically stat out story-driven unique elements in a gameworld: that elite soldier unit or the uber-mystical cabal of wizards. That thought continues into how these same developers intended PrCs to be accessed: you don't just hit a certain level and then next level you just GET to be in the PrC. You have to have been working toward it, networking with the group to join, finding out about them and taking the appropriate skills/feats to get involved.
Is this SO much different than the player striving toward a singular magic item?
|
A suggestion for those who hate the "magic mart" thing, as they call it, I suggest implementing factions.
The idea of earning prestige, and using contacts to acquire items usually sits better with DMs.
That's a very interesting idea. I'd already been thinking about borrowing reputation systems from Eclipse Phase, but applying it specifically to an alternative WBL/magic item policy is a possible next step.
Eclipse Phase is a sci-fi RPG where nanofabrication has created post-scarcity economies in the colonies at the edge of the solar system. That means that money isn't really relevant anymore. You can't use - don't need - money to buy stuff. You need access to a nanofabrication machine, some (cheap) raw materials and blueprints, and you can make any gear you want.
So the real hurdle is blueprints and a machine, and fabrication time. You can get those, or finished items, as a favor.
To get those favors, you need to have a good reputation with someone with the things you want. There's eight or so factions (scientists, corporate, anarchists, explorers, a few conspiracies), and you can have a separate reputation score with each of them.
After asking for a favor, there's a cooldown time before you can ask another favor. The better your reputation, the nicer the things you can ask for and more often.
I think the pre-planning ahead in PF is fueled by a couple of things.
1) The game system encourages it. If you want Whirlwind, you better have the four prerequisite feats. That means planning your next 4-8 levels. If you want to take a prestige class, that tends to take 2+ feats and more than one level's worth of skill ranks. Again, pre-planning.
2) Internet builds. People look at build guides and try to emulate them. (There are many reasons why internet builds aren't quite as good in practice as they seem in theory, but that's beside the point.)
3) People tend to think mostly of their own character when planning, rather than planning as a group. Like point 2, this is actually pretty suboptimal behavior, but gamers aren't immune to being short-sighted.
Now, I think that's all sad. In practice during a game, you'll discover that some things are more important than you thought ("wow, we face a LOT of flying archers!") and other things are less useful than a build guide suggested ("gosh, there's a LOT of mind-affecting-immune critters in this AP..."). There can also be RP-related reasons why you may want to take a PC in an entirely different direction; maybe he got religion and wants to start taking cleric levels, or the fighter discovered he wants to explore stealthiness to undermine a powerful oppressive regime.
Mostly because of point 1, the way the game encourages long-term planning, it's hard to change course without making huge sacrifices. That's why I'm looking forward to retraining rules.
---
As for magic item availability... the more I think about it, I think WBL should be used as "by that level you can expect to have something about that powerful; but no guarantees on precisely what it'll be". Combine that with generous rules that allow retraining, so that the scimitar fighter who finds an awesome artifact spear can retrain those scimitar feats towards spear feats (over some time/levels).
At Bruun: woah there big guy. I don't think anyone needs to start throwing elbows...or pseudopods.
But I do agree w/your sentiment that misinformation is cruel. Also to your point in your other post: misinformation about the amount of players playing in the manner of the OP's suggestion.
I currently play with 12 players scattered across 3 groups. Several are self-proclaimed "power gamers." It has been rare in my experience, if ever, that they plan out 1-20 or add an item to their build. The one PC I mentioned upthread added a sword to her build b/cause I included it in the fluff around her armor and she thought it sounded cool.
Lookit: this game started in a bunch of pamflets as a way to make wargaming center on individual characters instead of war units. Since then consider:
- St Cuthbert was invented b/cause Gary's players wanted an actual deity instead of a nebulous force to get spells from, showing that players have been driving the development of the game since the 70's.
- Magic itmes and castles have existed as prizes for the characters who lasted long enough to get there since the beginning of the game. Some players specifically strove toward those.
- In the 80's there was a flood of "micro-games" meant to fill niches for gamers; a SURE sign that long before MMORPGs or other "influences" to the supposed modern gamers suggested by this thread, that the gaming industry was hearing the frustrations of players wanting a variety of options in their play options and were responding in kind.
The reality is Bruunwald is right - players who play in the manner decried by this thread have ALWAYS existed, to the core of D&D, but have ALWAYS been in the minority. Grognards as far back as Uncle Gary have always been at odds with such gamers, as evidenced by St Cuthbert's perscribed magic ritual for his followers being a thump on the skull of folks who aren't common sensical enough and modules like The Tomb of Horrors to humble such players.
But y'know what? Grognards are ALSO a minority. Most players I've had the pleasure of GMing have been 50% story/50% crunch types who fall somewhere in the middle of the purists and the 1-20 planners.
But again I would strongly urge: COMMUNICATE with your players and then play the game you WANT; PF is built for that.
That's crappy. What those guys are doing is really crappy.
Not creating a retro game. That's fine. But by creating a phony history for it, to make it seem like it was the first RPG. That's... something I can't type here. I had to pore though five pages of reviews and commentaries on the Internet to find out what was really going on... that the creators of Mazes & Minotaurs created an "alternate history" in the pages of their own books to make it seem like it dates to before D&D.
In their defense, they straight out say so in the FAQ on their website. Which isn't hidden or hard to find. It's an inside joke referring to a specific thread in a specific forum and one may resent set but they are obviously not trying to pass of their joke as actual history.
This world is already full of misinformation. We live in a time when some tabletop wargamers think that Games Workshop invented wargames and that everything else, D&D included, is a rip-off of them. We live in a time when kids devour video games and live in complete cluelessness that tabletop games even exist. We live in a time that is teetering on the edge of total ignorance of where it even comes from.
When it comes to things that being ignorant about is bad, the history of gaming is really low on the list of priorities.
I'd punch them in the mouth if I could get in the room with them.
That in particular is a highly unwarranted response.
The game would encourage planning far less if
a) the differences in power between high level characters and low level characters where less pronounced, relative to the challenges. Right now, the idea is that you level up and meet more powerful enemies. If you set it up so characters developed more horizontally than vertically with the challenge difficulties between enemies less pronounced and requiring less power and more tactics (in a broad sense).
b) the differences in power between optimized (playing to your strengths as defined by class) and unoptimized builds where less wide. The fault here lies with classes. Despite feats and other customization, classes still define how you can become powerful and exclude other ways. There are some feats e.g. that lack a class to make them good and some classes, that lack feats to make them good.
c) classes were more self contained and offered less customization or only class specific customization tailored to the classes and comparatively minor in impact.
Hence, I think that the combination of restraints by class and customization options unequal in that framework on the one hand and the "bigger bad guys" syndrome on the other encourage optimization and planning.
Not that feat trees don't play a part either, but compared to the way a class restricts character development and defines what is a powerful choice and what isn't, feat trees are a minor aspect of the game, in particular because more often than not, feat taxes are not worth the boon of the feat trees final element.
It's also got to do with the Internet.
Now that we can communicate with a world of gamers, it's easy to have a conversation about "how do I make McClimberson, world's greatest climber?"
And that conversation HAS an answer, even if this won't be a great character to play.
"how should I build my character?" does NOT have an answer, because it depends on you other players, your DM, your adventure, etc. Since we can't really talk about that easily, there are a lot of threads about McClimberson instead.
But talking about does not = playing those characters
@Bruunwald: DnD wasn't the first RPG. It was the first RPG that didn't also include Wargaming rules.
What is Palladium's System?
@ AF: this
Thanks you two. But I found some of their Books here.
Haha! Well Done Flower of Fidelity! I guess Paizo won't mind then...
Yes there is a difference for sure between games who grew up with WoW like so called RPG´s and first or second edition D&D and most probably such people also expect different things from the gaming experience.
Sigh, I see this all the time too. "WoW runed the game, all teh spoylsd MMORPG dudz...."
I've been playing this game since the end of the Carter administration.
I think the game as it is today is every bit as fun and magical as it was back then. My first character was a 1 hit point wizard who failed his "learn" roll on "magic missile". That character had to scrape and claw for every little thing he ever got.
And now I have PF characters that can buy a magic sword in a much-maligned "magic shop" and yet my current dryad/elf druid archer is one of the most fun and interesting characters I've ever played, and my flamboyant voodoo priest witch is right up there with any character I've ever played.
MMORPGs did not ruin the game. Every single aspect of the game that "purists" whine incessantly about on these boards existed as far back as I can remember. My second campaign as a player was one overflowing with magic shops because the GM just thought it "made sense" in a magical world that you'd be able to buy magic stuff.
In the end it is hard to come to any conclusion other than "people gonna complain, no matter what you do."
Excuse me? This is highly assuming, you know that.
I did in no aspect say MMORPGS ruined anything or whatever you are whining about there. What i say is that there are different generations that are used to different things they are or were growing up with and because of this have a different approach to a game and different expectations. I use WoW as a generation description and a time mark there and i am in no way judging anyone.
Well I dunno if palladium describes a system where there isnt a power climb from 1-15?
I wouldnt want to be a first level veritech pilot up against Max Sterling.
or a first level mutant trying to fight one of the turtles?
I think there is quite a bit of not as much difference in power levels from game to game.
Higher levels in palladium get ALOT more attacks.
From what I can tell a 1st Level can beat a 15th Level but will have a hard fight.
Excuse me? This is highly assuming, you know that.
I did in no aspect say MMORPGS ruined anything or whatever you are whining about there. What i say is that there are different generations that are used to different things they are or were growing up with and because of this have a different approach to a game and different expectations. I use WoW as a generation description and a time mark there and i am in no way judging anyone.
If you don't want people to think you are "judging" a certain kind of player, it might help if you don't use terms like "Wow-like so-called RPGs." Perhaps you meant that innocently enough, but for most people when they see "so-called" that is immediately recognized as a negative comment.
From what I can tell a 1st Level can beat a 15th Level but will have a hard fight.
Well there is a big difference between say Robotech/rifts vs. their fantasy RPG.
But you need to understand the SDC/HP system better I think. There is also a large desparity in fighting styles. So for example 1st level with H2H martial arts vs. 10th level with H2H basic could be a possible fight.
However if the same character were to fight himself at 15th level, like a "me from the future" the 1st level version would last maybe a round or two. Not a contest.
Where does this "player entitlement" hate come from?
I believe all involved, DM and PCs, have a sense of entitlement.
They are putting their time and effort in for a mutual goal.
It is a sort of social contract put forth that all will work towards the goal of having all involved have fun.
somebody up above said something about books and sales that was interesting.
The game 'sorta' started out with really only DM's owning books and maybe some players having a players handbook or two.
Information was 'secret' (does anyone use DMs screens anymore?)
I think however, as the game evolved and publishing companies were more interested in selling books rather than keeping the 'mystique' about the 'grandfathers system' that direction did change.
The result is players having more information about the mechanics of the game (and yes basic/AD&D had a lot less custom choices) and the DM having less sinister secrets, which has fundamentally changed the way the game has been traditionally played.
The concept of "player entitlement" comes from the idea of seeing something in print, in a source book, for example, a weapon with the agile enhancement, and assuming that your character concept can be built around having access to that gear.
The existence of that magic weapon, however is player and not character knowledge.
The DM hasn't even had a chance to place it the world, or make it available, or decide if it exists, the player has made a character that "requires" the item to 'function'.
One wonders, what would this guy do, in life, if this item didnt exist? Would he be a florist instead?
AD feelings are that it's a magic world, everyone knows the magic exists, so this would be like a modern person wanting to buy say.... a house with central air conditioning, he knows it exists and someday he is going to get one. Or Indiana Jones aspiring to have a whip and a webley pistol when he grows up.
Applause to Pendagast, great comment.
but for most people when they see "so-called" that is immediately recognized as a negative comment.
That´s assuming again. If somebody has some issues and is misinterpreting people, then it´s his problem and not that of other people. If the person makes it other people´s problems, this person is an offender. If there are doubts or something that someone does not understand, there is always the freedom to ask about it.
As i said, this was a paraphrase and strangely a lot of people understand that paraphrase. I could have used Diablo too.
Computergames have had a big impact on roleplaying and tabletop roleplaying too. And people who grew up with such computer games have different ideas than people who grew up only reading Lord of the rings.
The rest was just said by Pendagast, very precisely.
Oh and i and every GM i know here still use GM screens.
Oh and i and every GM i know here still use GM screens.
I don't. :)
Neither do either of my two GMs.
I don't use a GM Screen. Though... My groups tend to set on couches and such and only roll in a small Dice Dish...
I am typically in the center with stacks of Paper and Notebooks all around me.
I wish I had 4 Arms. Life would be so very much easier.
Ah yes I also have my Laptop at all times during a game.
I am usually the GM or Co-GM. If I am not one of those I am typically the one who tends to play the Martials who serve as a Tank for our group and also act as the "Rules Keeper". I look up the Spells and any rules we need referenced.
Sonnova! I rolled a 1 on my Crit Confirm Check!