"D&D Next"

Black Vulmea · March 28, 2012, 07:09:29 PM

Quote from: Marleycat;524546Boy, that article just showed how far out in left field that whole group was. It just solidifies my opinion that 4e was a overreaction to 3e but I didn't know for sure until reading that pile of steaming crap that it was really a generational backlash against classic Dnd in general.

This is the money quote for me: 'Pulling from so many different sources, especially videogames, may have worked against the reception of 4th edition D&D. "I think the mistake people sometimes make is to think that we can attract more players if we ape the experience of videogames. I think a better approach is to emphasize what makes pen and paper RPGs unique and fun," said Pramas.'

B.T. · March 28, 2012, 07:12:12 PM

Noonan was also the cunt who whined about archers shooting too far in 3e (totally unrealistic!) and then gave us healing surges.

Marleycat · March 28, 2012, 07:26:24 PM

Quote from: Black Vulmea;524563This is the money quote for me: 'Pulling from so many different sources, especially videogames, may have worked against the reception of 4th edition D&D. "I think the mistake people sometimes make is to think that we can attract more players if we ape the experience of videogames. I think a better approach is to emphasize what makes pen and paper RPGs unique and fun," said Pramas.'

Seems pretty spot on to me.

@BT, I actually like Warlords and how they implemented Clerics but surges weren't needed, way too gamist to me. I know it was done along with creating the Warlord, to offload the healbot function from the Cleric but surges suck.

Reckall · March 29, 2012, 02:58:57 PM

Quote from: Windjammer;524173Even so, we gotta be fair. It seems that the roles-codification wasn't the creation of Mearls, or Heinsoo, but of Dave Noonan, who wrote the earliest 4e playtest document, and blooged about roles extensively. Within the design team, next to Wyatt, Noonan was the person most adamant about bringing WoW into 4th edition. He's very explicit that roles come from WoW in his blog run, while he also tries to make a case (rather unpersuasively) that roles can be read back into pre-WoW D&D.

It is worth mentioning how Noonan wrote 3.5 "Player's Handbook II". In this manual there is both the Knight class (a "Defender", with the power of making enemies attack him instead of other party members, and the capability to take enormous punishment) and a detailed argument for "character roles in a party" in the chapter devoted to the adventuring group.

I remember reading PHII and noticing how many parts of it were "WoW-inspired". Of course, like with a fever that actually is the first sign of the Black Death, I had no clue that PHII actually was the harbinger of the Horrors to Come.

(Which is a pity, because other parts of that book are indeed very good).

Justin Alexander · March 29, 2012, 06:15:03 PM

Quote from: Reckall;524684It is worth mentioning how Noonan wrote 3.5 "Player's Handbook II".

That's one of the most disappointing books I've ever bought.

When I first heard about the PHB2, I thought it was a great idea: Here's an opportunity to produce an alternative PHB. Instead of focusing on dungeoncrawling and combat, though, this book could focus on completely different mechanical systems: Maybe a fully developed system for social conflict. Or really explore hexcrawling. Or any number of things.

And, instead, we got a mediocre mish-mash of what was essentially random splat-book material.

It was a missed opportunity that continued to be a missed opportunity with 4E's PHB2.

Windjammer · March 29, 2012, 06:51:26 PM

Quote from: Reckall;524684It is worth mentioning how Noonan wrote 3.5 "Player's Handbook II". In this manual there is both the Knight class (a "Defender", with the power of making enemies attack him instead of other party members, and the capability to take enormous punishment) and a detailed argument for "character roles in a party" in the chapter devoted to the adventuring group.

I remember reading PHII and noticing how many parts of it were "WoW-inspired". Of course, like with a fever that actually is the first sign of the Black Death, I had no clue that PHII actually was the harbinger of the Horrors to Come.

(Which is a pity, because other parts of that book are indeed very good).

And here we have my money quote of the day. The knight class is Mike Mearls' design. "I don't like roles" my ass.

One Horse Town · March 29, 2012, 08:16:04 PM

Quote from: Windjammer;524724And here we have my money quote of the day. The knight class is Mike Mearls' design. "I don't like roles" my ass.

Yeah, he's simply trying to assert that he's always liked the new black - ie old school principles.

While that might be true, it wasn't something that shone through in 4e.

It's the new song.

B.T. · March 30, 2012, 12:36:18 AM

When is this shitty edition playtest being released to the public? I'm getting antsy waiting for it. I'm a busy man, WotC--I've got bitches to fuck and hos to pimp.

B.T. · March 30, 2012, 12:40:35 AM

Don't know if this has been posted yet:

QuoteOne of the things we're exploring in the game is what we refer to as a bounded accuracy system. Effectively, we're looking into whether or not we can strip out the assumption of accuracy and defense scaling by level, and let progression rest largely within the scaling damage, hit points, and capabilities of both characters and monsters. When you have this, any monster whose hit points are less than the damage you deal is, effectively, a minion. Thus, we might not need a specific minion rule, because we would simply design monsters with hit points that rest below average damage for certain levels and let that take care of it (in other words, we do want monsters in the game that do what minions do for us). At the same time, since as the player characters gain levels their damage numbers are going up, monsters that previously were not "minions" become "minions" by virtue of player damage outstripping their hit points. Since AC and attack bonuses aren't automatically scaling up, the orc that you fight at 1st level that took three hits to kill may only take 1 hit to kill at 6th level, making it a "minion" for heroes of that level.

YES YOU IDIOTS THIS IS WHAT WE WANTED ALL ALONG, DID YOU FINALLY GET THE FUCKING MEMO OR DID IT TAKE LOSING HALF YOUR STAFF TO CHRISTMAS LAYOFFS TO REALIZE THAT YOUR IDEAS WERE SHITTIER THAN BARNEY FRANK'S SHRIVELED DICK AFTER A ONE NIGHT STAND ON CASTRO STREET

Marleycat · March 30, 2012, 12:42:19 AM

Quote from: B.T.;524754When is this shitty edition playtest being released to the public? I'm getting antsy waiting for it. I'm a busy man, WotC--I've got bitches to fuck and hos to pimp.

Well I have men to screw over and man-ho's to pimp out. So I get ya BT.

*Your second post is old news.

RPGPundit · March 30, 2012, 03:32:57 AM

Quote from: Black Vulmea;524563This is the money quote for me: 'Pulling from so many different sources, especially videogames, may have worked against the reception of 4th edition D&D. "I think the mistake people sometimes make is to think that we can attract more players if we ape the experience of videogames. I think a better approach is to emphasize what makes pen and paper RPGs unique and fun," said Pramas.'

Pramas is saying that in 2011. I was saying that in 2008.

RPGPundit

Marleycat · March 30, 2012, 03:42:17 AM

So maybe if both of you can get together you might help them split the difference between 3 years and get it right...say in the summer of 2013.

Black Vulmea · March 30, 2012, 04:23:00 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;524788Pramas is saying that in 2011. I was saying that in 2008.

I've heard it from gamers since I picked up 3e around 2002.

Novastar · March 30, 2012, 06:50:56 PM

I consider it one of the central "pulls" of TTRPG.

Black Vulmea · March 30, 2012, 06:58:31 PM

Quote from: Novastar;524889I consider it one of the central "pulls" of TTRPG.

Yeah, I like roleplaying games because they're not videogames or conch-passing or fanwank.