Post/Author/DateTime	Post
18DELTA 04-16-08, 02:29 AM	4th Edition Tiers Excerpts:Tiers of Play (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080416a) Only a scant few weeks remain until 4th Edition finally hits the shelves! We here at Wizards of the Coast couldn’t be more excited for June 6th to finally arrive (and then to participate with everyone at June 7th’s Worldwide D&D Game Day). For the past several months, we’ve introduced you to many of the concepts, philosophies, and details of 4th Edition, via D&D Insider’s columns and articles. So in the short time we have remaining, we wanted to share with you a little more, publishing excerpts from the three core rulebooks every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, leading up to 4th Edition’s release. The thirty levels of your career are divided into three tiers: the heroic tier (1st level through 10th level), the paragon tier (11th level through 20th level), and the epic tier (21st level through 30th level). When you leave one tier and cross the threshold into a new one, you experience some major increases in power. At the same time, the threats you face in a higher tier are much more lethal. In today’s previews, we look at information in the Player’s Handbook and the Dungeon Master’s Guide in regards to gameplay across the three tiers, as well as a look at starting your character at a higher level. We hope you enjoy, and be sure to return this Friday for a look inside the DMG regarding customizing monsters—plus a new monster from the Monster Manual! The Heroic Tier From the PH: In the heroic tier, your character is already a hero, set apart from the common people by your natural talents, learned skills, and some hint of a greater destiny that lies before you. Your capabilities are largely determined by your choice of character class and to a lesser extent by your race. You move around on foot or on a relatively mundane mount such as a horse. In combat, you might make mighty leaps or incredible climbs, but you’re still basically earthbound. The fate of a village might hang on the success or failure of your adventures, to say nothing of the risk to your own life. From the DMG: Even 1st-level characters are heroes, set apart from the common people by natural characteristics, learned skills, and some hint of a greater destiny that lies before them. At the start of their careers, characters rely on their own abilities and powers, and they wield mundane gear. They acquire magic items quickly, though, and might even fill their available item slots by 10th level. In combat, they can make mighty leaps or climb incredibly fast, but they’re still basically earthbound and generally remain visible. Since they rely on healing surges to regain lost hit points, heroic tier characters are likely to take an extended rest when surges get dangerously low. However, toward the upper end of the tier, even death is a surmountable obstacle because of the Raise Dead ritual. Adventures: The fate of a village might hang on the success or failure of heroic tier adventurers, to say nothing of the characters’ own lives. Heroic characters navigate dangerous terrain and explore haunted crypts, where they can expect to fight savage orcs, ferocious wolves, giant spiders, evil cultists, bloodthirsty ghouls, and shadarkai assassins. If they face a dragon, it’s a young one that might still be searching for a lair and has not yet found its place in the world—in other words, much like themselves. The Paragon Tier From the PH: In the paragon tier, your character is a shining example of heroism, set well apart from the masses. Your class still largely determines your capabilities. In addition, you gain extra abilities in your specialty: your paragon path. When you reach 11th level, you choose a path of specialization, a course that defines who you are within a certain narrow range of criteria. You are able to travel more quickly from place to place, perhaps on a hippogriff mount or using a spell to grant your party flight. In combat, you might fly or even teleport short distances. Death becomes a surmountable obstacle, and the fate of a nation or even the world might hang in the balance as you undertake momentous quests. From the DMG: By 11th level, characters are shining examples of courage and determination—true paragons in the world, set well apart from the masses. Paragon tier adventurers are a lot more versatile than they were at lower levels, and they can find just the right tool for a given challenge. They can spend action points to gain additional effects, are able to use magic rings, and can sometimes regain limited powers they’ve expended. In combat, they exploit short-range flight and teleportation, making difficult terrain less important, and might be able to turn invisible or resist specific damage types. They also have ways to regain hit points beyond healing surges, including regeneration, so they can complete more encounters between extended rests. On the other hand, monsters at the paragon tier have more ways to thwart these new capabilities, including their own flight, damage resistance, and blindsight. Rituals at the paragon tier begin to give characters magical ways to gather information and overcome obstacles. Divination rituals such as Consult Oracle grant access to knowledge they might otherwise not have, while View Object can make some kinds of mysteries obsolete. Exploration rituals such as Passwall and Shadow Walk let a party bypass solid barriers and quickly travel long distances. Adventures: The fate of a nation or even the world might depend on momentous quests that such characters undertake. Paragon-level adventurers explore uncharted regions and delve long-forgotten dungeons, where they confront savage giants, ferocious hydras, fearless golems, evil yuan-ti, bloodthirsty vampires, crafty mind flayers, and drow assassins. They might face a powerful adult dragon that has established a lair and a role in the world. The Epic Tier From the PH: In the epic tier, your character’s capabilities are truly superheroic. Your class still determines most of your abilities, but your most dramatic powers come from your choice of epic destiny, which you select at 21st level. You travel across nations in the blink of an eye, and your whole party might take to the air in combat. The success or failure of your adventures has far-reaching consequences, possibly determining the fate of millions in this world and even planes beyond. From the DMG: By 21st level, characters have truly superheroic capabilities, and their deeds and adventures are the stuff of legend. Ordinary people can hardly dream of such heights of power. Epic adventurers have even more ways to recover expended powers, more ways to heal damage without relying on healing surges, and more powers overall from magic items and epic destinies. In combat, flight and teleportation are routine, as well as extraordinary feats of climbing and jumping. Terrain in general is less important, unless it blocks extraordinary forms of travel. Invisibility is common. Such characters can last through many encounters before resting and can even return from death in the middle of a fight. Furthermore, epic destinies break the rules in dramatic ways. At the epic tier, rituals include more and better kinds of divination, including the ability to spy on distant beings with Observe Creature. Epic characters can use True Portal to transport themselves instantly anywhere in the world. Adventures: Epic adventures have far-reaching consequences, possibly determining the fate of millions—in the natural world and even places beyond. Epic characters traverse otherworldly realms and explore never-before-seen caverns of wonder, where they fight savage balor demons, abominations such as the ferocious tarrasque, mind flayer masterminds, terrible archdevils, bloodthirsty lich archmages, and even the gods themselves. The dragons they encounter are ancient wyrms of truly earth-shaking power, whose sleep troubles kingdoms and whose waking threatens existence. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Starting at Higher Level Sometimes you don’t want to start characters at 1st level. A paragon- or epic-tier game might be more to your taste. Maybe your DM wants to run a published adventure that requires higher-level characters, or you want to try a one-shot that pits 30th-level characters against Orcus. Whatever the reason, at some point you’ll need to create higher-level characters. This process isn’t much harder than making a 1st-level character. The steps for creating a D&D character above 1st level are almost the same as those ones outlined in Chapter 2 of the Player’s Handbook for a new character. 1. Choose Race. Remember that some racial traits improve at higher levels. 2. Choose Class. If your level is 11th or higher, choose a paragon path appropriate to your class. At 21st level or higher, you’ll also need to choose an epic destiny. 3. Determine Ability Scores. Generate scores as for a 1st-level character, applying racial modifiers. Then increase those scores as shown on the Character Advancement table in the Player’s Handbook, with increases at 4th level, 8th level, 11th, 14th, and so on. (You can also use the NPC Ability Scores table on page 187 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide.) 4. Choose Skills. Make sure you meet skill prerequisites for a paragon path or epic destiny, if applicable. 5. Select Feats. You generally don’t have to worry about the level at which you gained a particular feat, since retraining allows you to have the feats you want at any given level. Do watch out for paragon and epic feats, though. For example, a 14th-level character can’t have more than seven paragon feats (those gained at 11th, 12th, and 14th level, as well as up to four retrained feats). 6. Choose Powers. You know two at-will powers from your class; remember to increase damage if your level is 21st or higher. The Powers by Class Level table summarizes the number and levels of powers you have in the other categories. These totals are not cumulative. The table assumes that you replace your lowest-level powers with those at higher levels, but you can keep lower-level ones if you wish. Powers by Class Level Class Level Encounter Powers Daily Powers Utility Powers 1st 1 1 — 2nd 1 1 2 3rd 3, 1 1 2 4th 3, 1 1 2 5th 3, 1 5, 1 2 6th 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 7th 7, 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 8th 7, 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 9th 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 6, 2 10th 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 10, 6, 2 11th P, 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 10, 6, 2 12th P, 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 13th P, 13, 7, 3 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 14th P, 13, 7, 3 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 15th P, 13, 7, 3 15, 9, 5 P, 10, 6, 2 16th P, 13, 7, 3 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 17th P, 17, 13, 7 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 18th P, 17, 13, 7 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 19th P, 17, 13, 7 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 20th P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 21st P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 22nd P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 23rd P, 23, 17, 13 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 24th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 25th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 25, 19, 15 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 26th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 27th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 28th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 29th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 29, 25, 19 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 30th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 29, 25, 19 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 P: Power from your paragon path. E: Power from your epic destiny. 7. Choose Equipment and Magic Items. Mundane equipment is much less important for higher level characters than it is when you’re starting out. Choose whatever standard adventuring gear you want from the tables in the Player’s Handbook. For magic items, choose one item of your level +1, one item of your level, and one item of your level –1. In addition, you have gold pieces equal to the value of one magic item of your level –1. You can spend this money on rituals, potions, or other magic items, or save it for later. 8. Fill in the Numbers. After noting the bonuses you gain from feats and magic items (as well as your increased level), calculate your hit points, Armor Class, defenses, initiative, base attack bonuses and damage bonuses, and skill modifiers. The Quick Hit Points table provides a formula for hit points by class. Quick Hit Points Class Hit Points Cleric (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Fighter (level × 6) + 9 + Constitution score Paladin (level × 6) + 9 + Constitution score Ranger (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Rogue (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Warlock (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Warlord (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Wizard (level × 4) + 6 + Constitution score 9. Roleplaying Character Details. Flesh out your character, using the suggestions in Chapter 2 of the Player’s Handbook or your own ideas. -Thats something else. I guess thats why they HAD to cut down all the high-level NPC's:rolleyes: Cant have some NPC's over shadowing my 25th level MUNCHKIN, now can we.:( I just realized I have a sick Love Hate relationship with 4E. On one hand I dig it, on the other I hate it(What they did to the Realms) Why couldn't Chosen Of Mystra be an Epic Destiny? 18DELTA:whatsthis
Valgard 04-16-08, 03:39 AM	I was waiting to you to post it here. :D The thing that caught up my attention most was this: When you reach 11th level, you choose a path of specialization, a course that defines who you are within a certain narrow range of criteria. Your class still determines most of your abilities, but your most dramatic powers come from your choice of epic destiny, which you select at 21st level. You are FORCED to take a paragon path and epic destiny! That tells me that these aren't as prestige classes were. I'm beginning to view it as "variant talent trees" of the core classes. I don't see it, a priori, as a bad thing, but I have some feeling that somehow they are forcing you to take a PrC. 1. Choose Race. Remember that some racial traits improve at higher levels. Something we already knew. 2. Choose Class. If your level is 11th or higher, choose a paragon path appropriate to your class. At 21st level or higher, you’ll also need to choose an epic destiny. As I said above. My brother used to prefer not to take PrCs... let's see how well will he take this. 3. Determine Ability Scores. Generate scores as for a 1st-level character, applying racial modifiers. Then increase those scores as shown on the Character Advancement table in the Player’s Handbook, with increases at 4th level, 8th level, 11th, 14th, and so on. (You can also use the NPC Ability Scores table on page 187 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide.) Alright... 4th, 8th... 11th?? 14th? Ability advancement is now as this? Heroic: 1st (integrated in character creation), 4th, 8th. Paragon: 11th, 14th, 18th. Epic: 21st, 24th, 28th. 4. Choose Skills. Make sure you meet skill prerequisites for a paragon path or epic destiny, if applicable. Nothing new... even for 3E. 5. Select Feats. You generally don’t have to worry about the level at which you gained a particular feat, since retraining allows you to have the feats you want at any given level. Do watch out for paragon and epic feats, though. For example, a 14th-level character can’t have more than seven paragon feats (those gained at 11th, 12th, and 14th level, as well as up to four retrained feats). We already knew of epic feats in 3E but... paragon feats? if they are more powerful than general (heroic) feats, they are welcome. :D 6. Choose Powers. You know two at-will powers from your class; remember to increase damage if your level is 21st or higher. The Powers by Class Level table summarizes the number and levels of powers you have in the other categories. These totals are not cumulative. The table assumes that you replace your lowest-level powers with those at higher levels, but you can keep lower-level ones if you wish. Powers by Class Level Class Level Encounter Powers Daily Powers Utility Powers 1st 1 1 — 2nd 1 1 2 3rd 3, 1 1 2 4th 3, 1 1 2 5th 3, 1 5, 1 2 6th 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 7th 7, 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 8th 7, 3, 1 5, 1 6, 2 9th 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 6, 2 10th 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 10, 6, 2 11th P, 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 10, 6, 2 12th P, 7, 3, 1 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 13th P, 13, 7, 3 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 14th P, 13, 7, 3 9, 5, 1 P, 10, 6, 2 15th P, 13, 7, 3 15, 9, 5 P, 10, 6, 2 16th P, 13, 7, 3 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 17th P, 17, 13, 7 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 18th P, 17, 13, 7 15, 9, 5 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 19th P, 17, 13, 7 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 20th P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 21st P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 16, 10, 6, 2 22nd P, 17, 13, 7 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 23rd P, 23, 17, 13 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 24th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 19, 15, 9 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 25th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 25, 19, 15 P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 26th P, 23, 17, 13 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 27th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 28th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 25, 19, 15 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 29th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 29, 25, 19 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 30th P, 27, 23, 17 P, 29, 25, 19 E, P, 22, 16, 10, 6, 2 P: Power from your paragon path. E: Power from your epic destiny. Only two at-will powers? I prefer two than anyone, and two additional options with no cost are probably more than enough, but sure? 3E warlocks had more at-will powers... well, it's true that they only had basically at-will powers, but I thing that you should get the option to get more. Ah! I like that table. :D 7. Choose Equipment and Magic Items. Mundane equipment is much less important for higher level characters than it is when you’re starting out. Choose whatever standard adventuring gear you want from the tables in the Player’s Handbook. For magic items, choose one item of your level +1, one item of your level, and one item of your level –1. In addition, you have gold pieces equal to the value of one magic item of your level –1. You can spend this money on rituals, potions, or other magic items, or save it for later. Simple and efficient way to do it... at first glance, of course. 8. Fill in the Numbers. After noting the bonuses you gain from feats and magic items (as well as your increased level), calculate your hit points, Armor Class, defenses, initiative, base attack bonuses and damage bonuses, and skill modifiers. The Quick Hit Points table provides a formula for hit points by class. Quick Hit Points Class Hit Points Cleric (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Fighter (level × 6) + 9 + Constitution score Paladin (level × 6) + 9 + Constitution score Ranger (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Rogue (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Warlock (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Warlord (level × 5) + 7 + Constitution score Wizard (level × 4) + 6 + Constitution score With no random hp generation, that would be quite fast! 9. Roleplaying Character Details. Flesh out your character, using the suggestions in Chapter 2 of the Player’s Handbook or your own ideas.Nothing new here. I still have the same optimistic view about 4E rules system... it would be nice to sneak around a little more.
Alediran 04-16-08, 08:57 AM	Blech, more of that: only PCs matter attitude that rubs me the wrong way. In my table there is no thing as PC or NPC.
Rauric 04-16-08, 09:13 AM	I think you level up in your class and the paragon class, kinda like gestalting.
Rauric 04-16-08, 09:35 AM	Double Post
MarkusTay63 04-16-08, 10:08 AM	So it IS all about power-gaming, then. Wading through a sea of foes may be very Drizzt, Conan, and Elric, but it is FAR from realistic. It sounds to me, as a DM, that it will become VERY hard to challenge characters now. But I guess thats the point, eh? In this new 'Politically Correct' world of ours, everyone's a winner. Now you can just shovel treasure and Exp at your PCs. :( The thirty levels of your career are divided into three tiers: the heroic tier (1st level through 10th level), the paragon tier (11th level through 20th level), and the epic tier (21st level through 30th level).So, WotC has finally found a way of turning D&D into Pokémon - we now get first evolvers, second evolvers, and third evolvers. :P I wonder... do the players actually appear in the game now, and throw their Dukeyballs at the monsters and say "PC Warlock! I choose YOU!!!" "Peak-at-You, Thunderbolt Feat!" :D
Stigger 04-16-08, 10:20 AM	Some things are kinda cool... other things I'd just as soon push out an airlock. Gonna be doing some late nights when it comes out figuring out how I can scavenge it for use at home. One thing I'm pretty sure about is it not being useable (by me) out of the box, as it were.
MerrikCale 04-16-08, 10:24 AM	So it IS all about power-gaming, then. Wading through a sea of foes may be very Drizzt, Conan, and Elric, but it is FAR from realistic. It sounds to me, as a DM, that it will become VERY hard to challenge characters now. But I guess thats the point, eh? In this new 'Politically Correct' world of ours, everyone's a winner. Now you can just shovel treasure and Exp at your PCs. :( A lot of people played that before, unfortunately
MarkusTay63 04-16-08, 10:51 AM	Some things are kinda cool... other things I'd just as soon push out an airlock. Gonna be doing some late nights when it comes out figuring out how I can scavenge it for use at home. One thing I'm pretty sure about is it not being useable (by me) out of the box, as it were.Agreed. I like most of what I'm seeing, but its looking a little over-powered. And I'll have to figure out how NOT to force Players to multi/PrC, as it now appears that that is built into the game. Some people LIKE playing a fighter or Wizard for twenty levels.
kelcimer 04-16-08, 11:17 AM	I do not understand why they have to have Tiers of Play with these names and philosophies. In the heroic tier, your character is already a hero, set apart from the common people by your natural talents, learned skills, and some hint of a greater destiny that lies before you. This may be true for some people's games but not everyone's. At first level you die easily...because you're first level. My city guards are usually 3rd or 4th level. And not everyone is a hero. Just because a character has levels does not make a character a hero. Things like this do nothing to disuade me that they are WOWing the game.
MarkusTay63 04-16-08, 12:04 PM	Because it makes it easier for THEM to design adventures around. Read some of the complaints in the two "3e flaws" and "3e products" threads - The levels of various beasties and NPCs varied widely, depending upon each writer's perception of what was 'Epic'. I think they are making this easier, because WotC has had so many problems developing worth-while adventures in recent years. This used to be a staple of TSR, and yet, WotC has been surpassed by several 3rd party developers in this one area. They are trying their hardest to copy Paizo's 'Adventure path' style, and just don't seem to be able to duplicate it. This 'Tier thing' will allow designers to have a more focused 'target audience', and also allow DMs to find modules more suited to their parties abilites. I personally think thats all hog-wash, because I've never had a problem scaling stuff, but their new encounter-heavy methodology lends itself to this more simplistic approach. In other words, kids and designers won't have to think in terms of "30 levels" anymore, but rather their 'tier' of play. Its a concept borrowed from MORPGs, once again. I'm not saying that it's bad, just more easy to design for (and play).
Stigger 04-16-08, 12:25 PM	I seem to recall reading somewhere that adventures were the least lucrative branch of the RPG community and better left to 3rd party companies to produce so that WotC could concentrate on the more lucrative splats... might have misread that one though. Meh, brain won't work well enough to let me remember where I read that one.
kelcimer 04-16-08, 12:32 PM	MarkusTay63 I agree. Sounds like hog-wash. The problem with catering to the shortbus is that they wind up treating everyone else like they're on the shortbus too. Feh.
MarkusTay63 04-16-08, 12:56 PM	I seem to recall reading somewhere that adventures were the least lucrative branch of the RPG... <snip> Heres the real deal - THEY couldn't make money with them, yet Paizo built an entire campaign world around them. Iron Kingdoms (Privateer Press) is another prime example - they built an entire setting and miniatures line/game around their original adventure modules (Lock & Load). Back in the day, TSR/Gygax produced just three books (because thats all you REALLY need), and then TONS of adventures. If they were that unlucrative, how did the company grow as it did, and buy the Realms from Ed, and DL from Weiss? There's money to be made there... WotC is just trying to figure out how. Personally, I think they should have designed the 4e rules around their MtG setting - some of the fluff for that is awesome, and the artwork is mostly top-notch. They could have done the same thing to FR that they plan for Eberron (10 years and few changes), and created a new world around excellent material they already have. It just seems to me that the people in charge were MORE intersted in drastically altering FR to meet their own personal visions, then making money. MtG setting appears to be MUCH better suited to their goals for 4e, and the cosmology would have worked perfectly. Plus, they would have gotten the added bonus of game cross-pollination from the card-gamers, who are already interested in the setting and are fans of WotC. Thats something they hope to get with the computer-gamers, but thats far more unlikely then getting card-gamers to play P&P RPGs. This reminds of when Voodoo graphics - who were the #1 Graphics card company in the 90's - decided to opt for higher frame rates, rather then better quality. That one bad decision had both their competitors blow by them on the next rev, and the company went belly-up. From #1 to bankrupt within a year... thats how fast a single bad decision can turn on a company. :(
Alediran 04-16-08, 01:13 PM	I do not understand why they have to have Tiers of Play with these names and philosophies. This may be true for some people's games but not everyone's. At first level you die easily...because you're first level. My city guards are usually 3rd or 4th level. And not everyone is a hero. Just because a character has levels does not make a character a hero. Things like this do nothing to disuade me that they are WOWing the game. My thoughts exactly. MT: I had a 16MB Voodoo Banshee, my first 3D accelerator. After that it was GeForce for me.
Daenaan 04-16-08, 01:45 PM	Communism takes hold of D&D: "Everybody's Special". It isn't just Warcraft that's taken hold of their minds, it's the New Age soccer mom philosophy that everyone is unique and precious and yet must also be on equal footing with everyone else (at least, the people that matter, anyway, i.e. "heroes"). Why don't we just axe D&D and just go play the Munchkin game? Oh yeah... 3.5E is gone, replaced by this. While we're at it, let's axe competitive capitalism and just pay everyone the same wages: hippies and brain surgeons, here's your two loaves of bread. Gamers, here's a new monster manual, but don't worry... nothing in it will ever really challenge you. It's just filled with kewlness (and recycled art), and you'll always be my special boy - yes you will! Yeesh. At least with 3.5E, munchkinism and "everyone's a hero!" wasn't forced on DMs and players. Granted, you could powergame if you wanted to, but it wasn't built in and required. No more evil PC games, obviously... and nothing truly "gritty" either. Well done, WotC! The feel of it reminds me of the "hero" in Byers' Undead novel series. For some reason, the "hero" of the novel manages to fall into every trap, make every dumb move possible, and yet wins every save throw, escapes unbelievable odds, and hardly takes a scratch when fighting.
Thinblade 04-16-08, 01:50 PM	This is starting to look like Iron [Kingdoms? I can never remember. The d20 varient setting with classes like Armager and Weaponsmaster], with its obsession that the PC's are always incredibly ahead of NPC's (I think that book said that a 2nd or 3rd level PC could take out an entire town guard by himself), and Earthdawn, with the weird magic rules and healing surges. Now, I like Earthdawn. It was a coherent setting with its own lore, and the rules worked within that lore. 4e seems to be too many things slapped together, as though the designers went wandering through all the other gaming systems out there, going "Ooo! I want that one! And I want that one! And I want some of this as well!"
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-16-08, 03:02 PM	And not everyone is a hero. Just because a character has levels does not make a character a hero. Indeed, I've always said that being a hero is all about action, attitude and intent, not power.:) That being said, I think 4E rules might help faciliate a fun game...I'd be willing to try them out.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-16-08, 03:57 PM	OK, I have to admit, something about the following sentence makes me laugh: "In combat, they can make mighty leaps or climb incredibly fast, but they’re still basically earthbound and generally remain visible." :rofl: "Generally remain visible?" I don't know, I guess I figured that would be obvious?
18DELTA 04-16-08, 04:47 PM	MarkusTay63 I agree. Sounds like hog-wash. The problem with catering to the shortbus is that they wind up treating everyone else like they're on the shortbus too. Feh. -:eek: :OMG! :blink: :twitch: :thinks: :rofl: :bow: :rofl: I gotz to sig that!!!:D 18D;)
Lord Karsus 04-16-08, 04:50 PM	-Here's what caught my eye: Such characters can last through many encounters before resting and can even return from death in the middle of a fight. Furthermore, epic destinies break the rules in dramatic ways. -Whoa! People can return from death in the middle of battle!? And, they are encouraging people to break the rules!? -Anyway, I don't like the fact that there are now preconcieved notions and set examples of who is supposed to be important, a hero, and whatever else.
18DELTA 04-16-08, 04:56 PM	This is starting to look like Iron [Kingdoms? I can never remember. The d20 varient setting with classes like Armager and Weaponsmaster], with its obsession that the PC's are always incredibly ahead of NPC's (I think that book said that a 2nd or 3rd level PC could take out an entire town guard by himself), and Earthdawn, with the weird magic rules and healing surges. -Earthdawn I don't know anything about. Maybe you are thinking Iron Heroes(Mike Mearls game that Monte Cook Published) 4E sounds very Iron Heroish(Tokens, non-reliance on magic items, Skill tricks). Mike Mearls is a Key Designer in 4E. 18D:)
Thinblade 04-16-08, 05:32 PM	Iron Heroes, yep, that's it. and the fact that the guy who wrote that book is a key 4e designer suddenly makes a LOT of things make more sense. Earthdawn was a spin-off of Shadowrun, but went out of business while SR somehow managed to cling to life. As SR was a mix of high fantasy and cyberpunk, ED was a mix of high fantasy and horror (literally - the chief monsters, who had destroyed the world and only recently mostly retreated, were called Horrors). It had magic on an Eberron-wide kind of scale, though without much of the magical versions of tech (telegraph, railroad, etc). ALL of the heroes were magically active, either spellcasters or a variety of adepts (weaponsmith, thief, scout, archer, warrior), though that wasn't true of the entire population. Hmm. Now that I think about it, there are a LOT of similarities between ED and 4e. The mechanics are different, but much of the flavor is the same.
Daenaan 04-16-08, 06:21 PM	-Whoa! People can return from death in the middle of battle!? And, they are encouraging people to break the rules!? Just like the Warcraft "resurrection" spell castable by druids. Any why not break rules? Some are probably broken to start with.
Alediran 04-16-08, 06:38 PM	Having superpowers doesn't makes a person a hero. This is what a hero meants to be: True heroes are flawed. The superhuman paragon beloved of the Hollywood action movie is no hero. The true hero is human, and just as any other human being, he has limitations. A hero becomes a hero by transcending these limitations. A true superhuman can only become so by recognizing his flawed humanity.
Stigger 04-16-08, 07:26 PM	One definition of it anyway... heroism is ultimately in the eye of the beholder. Preferably poking it with a sword. :D
Lykor 04-16-08, 08:06 PM	Having superpowers doesn't makes a person a hero. This is what a hero meants to be: True heroes are flawed. The superhuman paragon beloved of the Hollywood action movie is no hero. The true hero is human, and just as any other human being, he has limitations. A hero becomes a hero by transcending these limitations. A true superhuman can only become so by recognizing his flawed humanity. QFT. Also, did you notice that they got rid of Raise Dead (expensive and using XP), etc, only to introduce Raise Dead (free and at will) during fights?
Thinblade 04-16-08, 08:52 PM	It keeps getting easier. In 2e, the spells used to age the caster.
Diffan 04-16-08, 09:00 PM	Also, did you notice that they got rid of Raise Dead (expensive and using XP), etc, only to introduce Raise Dead (free and at will) during fights? No where in the mentioned article does it say it's at will or even free. Or are you bringing this from another source? And I highly doubt it's going to be all the time/every time. If it is, i'm sure the same goes for monsters/BBEG's as well.
Lord Karsus 04-16-08, 11:10 PM	Just like the Warcraft "resurrection" spell castable by druids. -Never played that, so I don't know anything about that.
Rauric 04-16-08, 11:11 PM	People want to have fun. This sounds like fun to people, young and old that I talk to. We shall see what transpires afer June.
Iakhovas 04-16-08, 11:43 PM	This is not true. you notice that they got rid of Raise Dead (expensive and using XP), etc, only to introduce Raise Dead (free and at will) during fights?
Valgard 04-17-08, 03:33 AM	I think, people, you are making it bigger than it is. I have no particular admiration for WotC, but you're treating them as if they were manipulating the masses only to take personal profits. When 4E releases I will treat them as I treated 3E, I will look at the core books and, if they like me enough (most probably), I'm probably going to buy them, or someone in my gaming group, or maybe all together as a whole. They cannot force me to play any adventure arc they release and they also cannot force me to buy any sourcebooks they want me to buy. Of course, they will set any commercial strategies they think will work to get more benefits (as usual for any company) and if they indeed get them, better for them, but that's not really my problem. If those strategies make the game not worthy of play I will not buy it, and I will follow on with 3.5e, or maybe I will switch to Pathfinder, or whatever, but until it is released, I will try to figure out if that game they are releasing is good enough for me. PS: Only just to make it clear, I am talking all the time about the 4E rules, not the changes they are making to the Forgotten Realms and all the new lore around. I don't like the changes they are making but, as I said before, they cannot force me to play them. The saddest thing of all is that the Ol'Realms are dead and they are not releasing any new lore about them, and the new Realms do really suck, but this is not the topic of this thread. I think that we must give a chance to the rules so we can apply them to the Ol'Realms if we want to, for example.
Daenaan 04-17-08, 04:23 AM	...I have no particular admiration for WotC, but you're treating them as if they were manipulating the masses only to take personal profits. (...) Step 1: Manipulate the masses. Step 3: Profit! You make it sound so dirty... manipulating the masses for profit is the entire point of business.
Stigger 04-17-08, 04:30 AM	Well, there has been a certain amount of implication that in WotC's case, they're putting out a knowingly inferior product just for some nefarious purpose of ripping off the consumer. Baldurdash is what I say to that. I honestly believe they think the 4e rules and the 4e Realms are the way to go, and while I do suspect that the 4e Realms was motivated by massive amounts of ego (and other things I won't go into), I'm also of the mind that they think its the right thing to do. Whether or not they're correct is debateable, and not really proveable until it hits the shelves. And yes, I'd agree that the whole point of business is to make a profit through manipulating the public. Its just how you manipulate them that makes all the difference in the world. :D
capnvan 04-17-08, 06:07 AM	Step 1: Manipulate the masses. Step 3: Profit! Is that a reference to underpants and gnomes?
Valgard 04-17-08, 07:15 AM	Is that a reference to underpants and gnomes? What? :confused: Well, regarding gnomes, everything is possible. :D
Valgard 04-17-08, 07:20 AM	And yes, I'd agree that the whole point of business is to make a profit through manipulating the public. Its just how you manipulate them that makes all the difference in the world. :DI was implying in my earlier post precisely that they are not "manipulating" the masses, but for "manipulating" I'm referring to "pull the strings from behind". Of course every company manipulates its customers... that's called advertising and marketing. :D
Diffan 04-17-08, 07:53 AM	Your class still largely determines your capabilities. In addition, you gain extra abilities in your specialty: your paragon path. When you reach 11th level, you choose a path of specialization, a course that defines who you are within a certain narrow range of criteria. You are able to travel more quickly from place to place, perhaps on a hippogriff mount or using a spell to grant your party flight. In combat, you might fly or even teleport short distances. Death becomes a surmountable obstacle, and the fate of a nation or even the world might hang in the balance as you undertake momentous quests. I like this. It does resemble a PrC, but not. Who knows how many paths of specialization there are for each class? And I'm guessing there will be more paths to chose from in upcoming sources as well. Though I hate to admit it, it does resemble WoW in that aspect. For those of you who haven't played the game, "cough" LK "cough", when you advance your character in his class, he's given 3 different 'Talents'. For Paladins, they are Holy (spells and healing), Protection (auras and buffs), and Retribution (smiting and dmg). This is what it looks like= http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/info/classes/paladin/talents.html?tal=00000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000052300512003310530100 0 I do hope, if it is akin to this, they change at least the names to said "Paths"
Lord Karsus 04-17-08, 08:10 AM	Step 1: Manipulate the masses. Step 3: Profit! -Dare I ask what Step 2 is? For those of you who haven't played the game, "cough" LK "cough"... -Sir, are you judging me? :ahem: :P
Diffan 04-17-08, 08:59 AM	-Sir, are you judging me? :ahem: oh no! I'd be much too frightened to judge one of Lord Karsus's power. You might drop a cut off/inverted mountain on top of me. :P I was just illustrating how the tiers might look, compared to something that resembles the concept, to one whos never played the game. Furthermore, I forgot to mention that people in the game are not required to say in 1 talent, but may put ranks in two or all three if they so wish. Doing so (by spreading them all over) however, could diminish your character's potential. Also, I said that I liked the idea because it gives people focus. Many times i've played with people who's characters are just too poorly built to help out in our encounters. Reguardless how well they role play their character, we'll go farther and do better if everyone's character is (at least somewhat) geared towards combat. With the Paths concept, it'll help some people with direction for their character and, who knows, additional story plots or hooks maybe unforseen by a DM.
MarkusTay63 04-17-08, 10:38 AM	-Anyway, I don't like the fact that there are now preconcieved notions and set examples of who is supposed to be important, a hero, and whatever else. Having superpowers doesn't makes a person a hero... <snip> The best kinds of heroes are the kind that are MADE, by a 'baptism of fire'. They rise from the dredges of the common man - they did not ask to be heroes, or want fame or glory. They just wanted to do the 'right thing' when confronted by adversity. They are like Richard Cypher (SoT) and Rand Al'Thor (WoT) - simple men who rose to the occassion. They weren't 'born on Krypton' with a boatload of super-human powers. Frodo was perhaps the weakest member of the Fellowship, probably the weakest person at the Council of Rivendel... and yet, he took up his impossible task. Thats what made HIM great - it wasn't what he could do, it was what he was made of. Iron Heroes, yep, that's it. and the fact that the guy who wrote that book is a key 4e designer suddenly makes a LOT of things make more sense.I think the setting someone else thought was Iron Kingdoms was really Exalted - at least thats what it sounds like to me. Anyway, Mr. Mearls took quite a few ideas from Malhavoc when he left - I also frequent their boards as well. It appears that the 2nd module planned for 4e is a rip-off of Ptolus (Not my opinion - I don't know about either to judge). Any why not break rules? Some are probably broken to start with.Thats Sig worthy. :D This is not true.Thanks for the clarification. That bit sounded like there wasn't even a point in running encounters anymore. I honestly believe they think the 4e rules and the 4e Realms are the way to go, and while I do suspect that the 4e Realms was motivated by massive amounts of ego (and other things I won't go into), I'm also of the mind that they think its the right thing to do. Whether or not they're correct is debateable, and not really proveable until it hits the shelves.QFT Accent, mine. ;) oh no! I'd be much too frightened to judge one of Lord Karsus's power. You might drop a cut off/inverted mountain on top of me.Considering how badly he botched that last spell, I don't think you have much to worry about. :P
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-17-08, 12:17 PM	I think, people, you are making it bigger than it is. I have no particular admiration for WotC, but you're treating them as if they were manipulating the masses only to take personal profits. That is what they are doing...it's called marketing a product. Note that I didn't say there was anything wrong with that, though.
Jiggawha 04-17-08, 12:48 PM	I won't be using this PrC replacement system, the same way we don't use PrCs retraining feats is an improvement (not for us tough) it seems that levels of many old NPCs will be lowered
Stigger 04-17-08, 02:58 PM	I was implying in my earlier post precisely that they are not "manipulating" the masses, but for "manipulating" I'm referring to "pull the strings from behind". Of course every company manipulates its customers... that's called advertising and marketing. :D You've amazing abilities of self-delusion if you think they aren't manipulating you. Its not paranoia if they really are out to get you... :incog: :D
capnvan 04-17-08, 04:52 PM	Dare I ask what Step 2 is? One assumes: Visual Guide (http://www.flickr.com/photos/niallkennedy/13047656/) Wikipedia explanation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underpants_Gnomes#The_Gnomes)
Lord Karsus 04-17-08, 06:46 PM	One assumes: Visual Guide (http://www.flickr.com/photos/niallkennedy/13047656/) Wikipedia explanation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underpants_Gnomes#The_Gnomes) -Ah, that would do it. When South Park was in it's heyday of popularity, my parents didn't allow me to watch it. As a result, even though the show makes plenty of relevant pop culture in-jokes and all of that, I just never got into it enough to watch more than an episode here or there.
Daenaan 04-17-08, 06:51 PM	Is that a reference to underpants and gnomes? Possibly! :D But now that gnomes are monsters in 4E, it's difficult to ask them.
Khaelieth 04-17-08, 07:19 PM	-Ah, that would do it. When South Park was in it's heyday of popularity, my parents didn't allow me to watch it. As a result, even though the show makes plenty of relevant pop culture in-jokes and all of that, I just never got into it enough to watch more than an episode here or there. Huh, why? Went to see it with my mate and his mum when i was... 11, 12 or something.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-17-08, 09:10 PM	Huh, why? Went to see it with my mate and his mum when i was... 11, 12 or something. Different parents have different standards.:)
Ody_Saraph_of_Karsus 04-17-08, 09:24 PM	Considering how badly he botched that last spell, I don't think you have much to worry about. :P :gah: That was below the belt:doh:
MarkusTay63 04-17-08, 09:45 PM	But funny. ;) I think they'll be TONS of 4th edition Tears... just as soon as the FRCG hits the shelves. :smirk:
Lord Karsus 04-17-08, 11:04 PM	Huh, why? Went to see it with my mate and his mum when i was... 11, 12 or something. Different parents have different standards.:) -Yup.
GreenKnight 04-18-08, 03:59 AM	Amazing how people get up in arms over the use of the word 'hero'. :nonono: heˇro (hîr) n. pl. heˇroes 1. In mythology and legend, a man, often of divine ancestry, who is endowed with great courage and strength, celebrated for his bold exploits, and favored by the gods. 2. A person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life: soldiers and nurses who were heroes in an unpopular war. 3. A person noted for special achievement in a particular field: the heroes of medicine. See Synonyms at celebrity. 4. The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation. How many of those definitions do the PC's meet? They easily meet the fourth right from the start, being the principal characters. And the rest they'll quickly meet. So they went with 'hero' over 'player character'. That's hardly something worth quibbling about. There's a Daily Power (daily, as in "once per day") which also allows you to resurrect. It appears that you can choose it sometime in your mid-20's. Personally, I like it, because there are characters in literature who have done just that. I mean, just look at my user name! http://216.77.188.54/coDataImages/p/Groups/137/137974/folders/286020/2305196GreenKnight02.jpg The man got his head chopped off and walked away from that. Not like the risk is entirely gone with a power like that, though. You just gotta kill the guy twice. ;) So it IS all about power-gaming, then. Variety isn't power gaming. Wading through a sea of foes may be very Drizzt, Conan, and Elric, but it is FAR from realistic. It sounds to me, as a DM, that it will become VERY hard to challenge characters now. But I guess thats the point, eh? In this new 'Politically Correct' world of ours, everyone's a winner. Now you can just shovel treasure and Exp at your PCs. You're overreacting. The only "seas of foes" you'll be wading through are the Minions. They've got standard monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for one PC. They've got Elite monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for two PC's. And they've got Solo monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for five PC's. As for challenging characters, didn't you hear about DDXP and how many TPK's they scored in that? I playtested that, myself, at a game store and the party would've wiped if we didn't have... crap, how many of us were there? Cleric... Fighter... Paladin... Ranger... Rogue... Warlock... Wizard... seven of us (Might've been 8, I'm not sure. At least one character wasn't a pregen character, but rather, was written up with stuff found on the internet). And we had some pretty lucky rolls (I nearly rolled max damage on my Daily, for instance). From the looks of things, it'll be fairly easy for the DM to set the difficulty of the challenges presented to the PC's. And in all honesty, in what edition of D&D wasn't this true? It was easily possible for a DM in any previous edition to fail to challenge characters with certain monsters (God knows I ran plenty of 2E games where the monsters that I thought would give the PC's a hard time instead ended up going down like jailyard punks). Hell, that's one of the problems with the CR system, which 4E is attempting to fix. I remember reading a story by one DM about how he tried to come up with a BBEG in order to challenge them, but couldn't figure out quite how to do it. He didn't want the BBEG to be to tough, otherwise he'd kill them, but he didn't want him to weak, as the PC's would steamroll him. In the end he settled for making the guy six levels higher then them. Then came the fight and the players cast an Anti-Magic field over him, leaving him powerless. They then slaughtered him pretty effortlessly. 4E's looking to fix that sort of mess by making it so the DM knows pretty well what to expect with certain monsters. It all comes down to the DM. Challenges are as hard as the DM wants them to be, and 4E's not going to change that. If you want the PC's to have hard fights each time, then they'll have hard fights each time. I have yet to see any rule or mechanic that states that the PC's have an "I WIN" button which automatically wins them the fight. So yeah, I think your concerns are pretty well baseless.
Fabius Maximus 04-18-08, 04:58 AM	Considering that there are people wo finished the DDXP adventures without a PC dropping to the negatives (and slicing through the kobolds like scythes through hay), the lethal-ness of the new rules system may lie more into the hands of the PCs.
Khaelieth 04-18-08, 07:55 AM	Different parents have different standards.:) The swearing and dumbed-down non-PC humour? ;p But then again, my parents thought it healthier for me to get out and play football, get drunk, socialise and stuff instead of playing PC games when i was 16. Hmmm...
Lord Karsus 04-18-08, 08:26 AM	They've got standard monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for one PC. They've got Elite monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for two PC's. And they've got Solo monsters, which're designed to be a challenge for five PC's. -That's...weird...
Ody_Saraph_of_Karsus 04-18-08, 09:30 AM	I mean, just look at my user name! :thinks:I didn't know is was THAT GreenKnight, I was under the imprecion that it was THIS GreenKnight http://www.nbcuniversalstore.com/detail.php?p=5982
Lord Karsus 04-18-08, 09:32 AM	-Zing!
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 11:10 AM	Amazing how people get up in arms over the use of the word 'hero'. :nonono: How many of those definitions do the PC's meet? They easily meet the fourth right from the start, being the principal characters. Unless they're female.;) :P 4. "The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation." And yes, I just felt like busting your chops there. :) And the rest they'll quickly meet. So they went with 'hero' over 'player character'. That's hardly something worth quibbling about. You have a point, it's just that personally I like to use "hero" when referring to someone who best fits definition number 2.:) I also tend to get annoyed when people equate "heroic" with "powerful", even though a powerful person can be anything but heroic (and a person without much power can still be a hero).
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 11:17 AM	I have yet to see any rule or mechanic that states that the PC's have an "I WIN" button which automatically wins them the fight. Darn. That was exactly what I was hoping for.:(
Khaelieth 04-18-08, 01:31 PM	Unless they're female.;) :P 4. "The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation." And yes, I just felt like busting your chops there. :) interview with Conan, the Barbarian: interviewer: So, what do you think of all these people saying your outfit's a bit **** erotic? The whol loincloth thing and bristling with muscles? Conan: uuuhhhh... What am **** erotic? Edit: How the Hell did h0mo get censored!? That's not a swear word! H0mo sapiens!
MarkusTay63 04-18-08, 02:22 PM	They also censor out the slang term for urination, which also happens to mean 'Angry' in American vernacular, and 'Drunk' in English slang. Yet Crap is perfectly acceptable... go figure. I guess we can thank Roseanne for that. :rolleyes:
Khaelieth 04-18-08, 02:32 PM	Pi'ssed off means angry in British English too, being p1ssed means you're drunk. it's the off that makes the difference. Faen... Let's see if they censor Norwegian swear words. Edit: Nope, they didn't! Pikk! Kuk! Very childish... But funny=D
Lord Karsus 04-18-08, 02:45 PM	interview with Conan, the Barbarian: interviewer: So, what do you think of all these people saying your outfit's a bit **** erotic? The whol loincloth thing and bristling with muscles? Conan: uuuhhhh... What am **** erotic? -Is that the next 4e preview cartoon? Edit: How the Hell did h0mo get censored!? That's not a swear word! H0mo sapiens! -People use the derogatory term for people of a deviant sexual orientation in flaming threads. Thus... Yet Crap is perfectly acceptable... go figure. -So is the Autocard for dumbass.
Khaelieth 04-18-08, 02:49 PM	-People use the derogatory term for people of a deviant sexual orientation in flaming threads. Thus... Well, it's not derogatory really. i wouldn't say it is, as the full word in Latin is "Likes the same" or something like that. Add a few swear words, and yes, derogatory, but then it's the same for heterosexual.
Lord Karsus 04-18-08, 02:53 PM	Well, it's not derogatory really. i wouldn't say it is, as the full word in Latin is "Likes the same" or something like that. Add a few swear words, and yes, derogatory, but then it's the same for heterosexual. -In and of itself, it's not derogatory, no. But, the negative connotation has been given to that term. It's funny, too, 'cause I know that Dan has no real problem with the term. But, it is what it is.
GreenKnight 04-18-08, 03:52 PM	Considering that there are people wo finished the DDXP adventures without a PC dropping to the negatives (and slicing through the kobolds like scythes through hay), the lethal-ness of the new rules system may lie more into the hands of the PCs. Most of the groups got TPKed when they encountered the dragon. As for the Kobolds, has it ever not been true in D&D that PC's chop through Kobolds with little trouble? Especially considering that a lot of the Kobolds were Minions. The lethality of the encounters lies very much in the hands of the DM. And from all appearances, the DM will be able to far more accurately gauge just how much of a challenge any given encounter will be then was possible in prior editions. I didn't know is was THAT GreenKnight, I was under the imprecion that it was THIS GreenKnight http://www.nbcuniversalstore.com/detail.php?p=5982 That's my 'successor', actually. The little bastard assumed my mantle without my permission. Where the hell are my lawyers? :mad: Unless they're female. ;) :P 4. "The principal male character in a novel, poem, or dramatic presentation." And yes, I just felt like busting your chops there. :) You're an evil, evil woman. ;)
Ody_Saraph_of_Karsus 04-18-08, 04:11 PM	You're an evil, evil woman. ;) Isn't that why we LOVE her so? ;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 04:18 PM	You're an evil, evil woman. ;) So they say, so they say. :P Isn't that why we LOVE her so? ;) :embarrass
Daenaan 04-18-08, 06:21 PM	So they say, so they say. Like, the good kind of evil as in "devil with a blue dress" evil? :cool:
msatran 04-18-08, 06:22 PM	They can take their tiers of play and I'll happily shove them off, screaming, onto the spikes below. Go Pathfinder! No more One game to rule them all!
msatran 04-18-08, 06:33 PM	That is what they are doing...it's called marketing a product. Note that I didn't say there was anything wrong with that, though. Rino, though I love you to death, It's their strategy of marketing that I find deplorable. Instead of offering people clear cut differences, and showing people how things NEEDED to change from the get go, instead, they showed us a strategy that people in marketing refer to as "Engineering Consensus." This strategy relies on telling you that everything you previously bought sucked. Now, when you engineer consensus, and have a bunch of people pretend to be that consensus, most gamers are relatively smart. They KNOW it's hogwash when people use a marketing strategy like this.
MarkusTay63 04-18-08, 06:36 PM	So, by this time next year, who thinks the FR designers will be enjoying their "Tears of Pay" (or lack there-of). :P
msatran 04-18-08, 06:41 PM	I don't think they'll be lucky enough to receive a severance package.
capnvan 04-18-08, 07:02 PM	As for the Kobolds, has it ever not been true in D&D that PC's chop through Kobolds with little trouble? Shucks, I can't remember the particular issue, but I recall an editorial by Roger Moore detailing his first encounter with what I think he referred to as "Tucker's kobolds." The gist of which was that the party he had joined had already encountered the lil' $*!#$. And they were a lot more afraid of the kobolds than of the demons deeper in the dungeon. With good reason. It's all about the way that the DM utilizes tactics.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 07:18 PM	Like, the good kind of evil as in "devil with a blue dress" evil? :cool: Of course.:cool:
18DELTA 04-18-08, 07:21 PM	-They have put up some more articles. So instead of making numerous threads, I will put them here. Customizing Monsters 4th Edition DMG (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080418a) Only a scant few weeks remain until 4th Edition finally hits the shelves! We here at Wizards of the Coast couldn’t be more excited for June 6th to finally arrive (and then to participate with everyone at June 7th’s Worldwide D&D Game Day). For the past several months, we’ve introduced you to many of the concepts, philosophies, and details of 4th Edition, via D&D Insider’s columns and articles. So in the short time we have remaining, we wanted to share with you a little more, publishing excerpts from the three core rulebooks every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, leading up to 4th Edition’s release. The Monster Manual provides hundreds of enemies for your adventures, but they aren’t all that’s available. You can customize existing monsters to increase their utility, making them stronger, weaker, or just different. In today’s previews, we look at information in the Dungeon Master’s Guide dealing with customizing monsters, as well as two sample templates. We hope you enjoy, and be sure to return Monday for a look at one more class from the Player's Handbook: the warlord. Whether you want to bump an ogre up a few levels or turn it into an elite berserker, this section gives you the tools you need to tinker with monsters. You’ll also find rules for adding a class to a monster, mining the Player’s Handbook for combat powers. You can use several methods to adjust an existing monster: change its level, give it equipment, alter its appearance and behavior, and apply a template. Each of these approaches is discussed below. Increasing or Decreasing Level Boosting a monster’s level is easy. Just increase its attack rolls, defenses, and AC by 1 for every level you add. For every two levels, increase the damage it deals with its attacks by 1. The monster also gains extra hit points at each level, based on its role (see the “Monster Statistics by Role” table on page 184 of the Dungeon Master's Guide). Decreasing a monster’s level works like increasing it, but in reverse. For each level down, reduce the creature’s attack rolls, defenses, and AC by 1 and drop its hit points based on its role. For every two levels, also reduce its damage by 1. This process works best for adjusting a monster’s level up to five higher or lower. Beyond that, the monster changes so much that you’d do better to start with another creature of the desired role and level range. Adding Equipment You can add equipment to a monster to make it a little more challenging, or to put treasure into the characters’ hands. Equipment shouldn’t be random but should serve some purpose in the design of an encounter. Make sure to include any such items as part of the overall treasure you’re giving out for the adventure (see “Treasure” on page 124 of the Dungeon Master's Guide). Armor: When you add armor to a monster, you first need to determine if the armor is good enough to improve the monster’s AC. Start with the monster’s effective armor bonus—a measure of how much of the creature’s AC comes from its armor or from its thick hide. This number is equal to its AC minus 10 minus the higher of its Dexterity or Intelligence ability modifiers. Do not include the Dexterity or Intelligence modifier if the creature wears heavy armor. Subtract the effective armor bonus from the creature’s AC, and then add the bonus from its new armor. If the creature moved from heavy to light armor, you can also add the higher of its Dexterity or Intelligence ability modifier to its AC. If the creature’s statistics block does not mention any worn armor, use the higher of its original AC or its new AC after adding armor. Most creatures have naturally thick hides that provide an armor bonus to AC. If the armor a creature wears is not as good as its natural armor, it uses the AC bonus provided by its natural armor. Worn armor, such as a suit of chainmail, and natural armor, such as an insect’s carapace or a dragon’s thick scales, do not stack. For example, an ogre savage normally has an Armor Class of 19 (it’s assumed to be wearing crude hide armor). Its effective armor bonus is +5 (19 – 10 – 4 [Dex]). Giving the ogre chainmail instead would improve its AC by 1 to 20, since the armor’s +6 bonus is 1 higher than this number. Magic Items: A monster equipped with magic items can use the powers those items grant. Enhancement Bonuses: A monster benefits from an enhancement bonus to attack rolls, defenses, or AC only if that bonus is higher than its magic threshold, as shown on the table below. A monster’s magic threshold is an abstract representation of its equipment, power, and general effectiveness against characters of its level. If you give the monster a magic item that grants a bonus to attack rolls and damage rolls or to defenses, subtract the magic threshold from that bonus before you apply it. For example, if you give that 8th-level ogre savage a +2 magic greatclub, you add only a +1 bonus to its attack rolls and damage rolls, since its magic threshold is +1. Monster Level Magic Threshold 1st–5th +0 6th–10th +1 11th–15th +2 16th–20th +3 21st–25th +4 26th–30th +5 Remember that a monster’s game statistics are set to be appropriate for its level. Thus, altering a monster’s attack, defense, or damage values is a lot like changing its level (see above). Avoid the temptation simply to give all your monsters better armor and weapons. Giving all your ogre savages plate armor and +3 greatswords may seem like a reasonable change, but now they have the attack, damage, and defense numbers of a higher-level monster—which makes them a tougher challenge than other 8th-level brutes. If you want to give a monster equipment that changes its attack, defense, or damage values by more than a point or so, consider also making those alterations as part of changing its level. For example, those ogre savages in plate armor and wielding +3 greatswords have AC, attack rolls, and damage rolls three points higher than normal. That’s pretty close to what a monster three levels higher would have (+3 to all defenses, +3 to attack rolls, and +1 damage), so you might as well make those ogre savages into 11th-level monsters and give them the extra hit points to go along with their other benefits. Cosmetic Changes The characters are delving into the jungle-covered ruins of an ancient city now haunted by the yuan-ti. There they discover strange arboreal humanoids with long arms that swoop into battle on the backs of giant wasps. What are these mysterious beings? This technique is useful for keeping players on their toes even when they know the Monster Manual backward and forward. Use the statistics of a given monster but completely alter its appearance when you describe it to the players. You can make minor changes to its powers as well, altering damage types or changing details of weapons (lashing tentacles become a whipping tail, for example). Templates A template is like a recipe for changing a monster. Each template provides instructions for modifying hit points and defenses, and adds a number of powers and abilities. Simply pick a monster and a template, follow the directions, and you’re ready to go. This section provides more than a dozen templates for customizing monsters. Functional templates adapt a monster to a given purpose in an adventure. You can also add a functional template to a nonplayer character. See “Creating NPCs” on page 186 of the Dungeon Master's Guide for more information. Class templates allow you to add features of a specific character class to a monster. Multiple Templates: Each of these templates is intended for use by itself, making a monster into an elite opponent. However, you can turn a standard monster into a solo creature by adding two templates. Follow the process for adding each template, one at a time, but add just one template’s hit point bonus (your choice which). Then double the creature’s total hit points. Increase the monster’s saving throw bonus to +5. You can also advance an elite monster to a solo one by adding a template, then doubling its hit points and adjusting its saving throw as above. This method is quick and easy, but it carries some risks. For example, the adjusted monster’s hit points might be lower than those of a typical solo monster of its level and role. Once you’ve finished the process, be sure to “reality check” the monster by comparing its statistics and abilities to others of similar power. How to Read a Template A template lists changes to a monster’s statistics and grants it some new powers and abilities. In general, if a template does not alter a certain statistic, that entry does not appear in the list. Each template notes any prerequisites for adding it to a monster. Some can be added to any creature, while others work only with particular types or at certain adventuring tiers. The modified monster retains all its normal powers and abilities except those that overlap or conflict with those bestowed by the template. Every template begins with a brief descriptive passage that explains the essential nature of the template, followed by a paragraph that tells you what types of creatures or classes the template can be applied to. Prerequisite: This entry appears if the monster must meet certain requirements to gain the template, such as a specific type or a minimum level. The remaining information is presented in monster stat block form, for easy insertion into the monster’s existing statistics. Role: The monster’s combat role appears in the upper right corner of the stat block header. Type and Keyword: The left-hand entry of the second line of the stat block header states this information. If the template adds a keyword to the monster, such as undead, it is included here. The monster retains any previous keywords. Senses: Add the given abilities to the monster’s Senses entry. Defenses: Adjust the monster’s AC and other defenses as described in this entry. Immune/Resist/Vulnerable: Add the stated entries and values. If the monster already has one or more of these abilities, use the more beneficial value. Saving Throws +2: All elite monsters have a +2 bonus to saving throws. Action Point 1: All elite monsters have 1 action point. Hit Points: Add the stated number of hit points for the monster’s new role, and then also add its Constitution score to the new hit point total. Powers: Add the stated powers to the monster’s stat block, calculating attack and damage numbers. The level of an attack power usually depends on the monster’s level and is expressed as “Level + n,” where “Level” is the monster’s level and n is a number you add to that value. Damage is adjusted by the modifier for a given ability score, just as with characters’ attack powers. Here are two sample templates, the lich and the vampire lord: Lich Liches are evil arcane masterminds that pursue the path of undeath to achieve immortality. They are cold, scheming creatures who hunger for ever-greater power, long-forgotten knowledge, and the most terrible of arcane secrets. Some liches know a ritual that sustains them beyond destruction by tying their essence to a phylactery. When a lich who has performed this ritual is reduced to 0 hit points, its body and possessions crumble into dust, but it is not destroyed. It reappears (along with its possessions) in 1d10 days within 1 square of its phylactery, unless the phylactery is also found and destroyed. “Lich” is a template you can add to any intelligent creature of 11th level or higher. It best complements an arcane NPC, such as a wizard or warlock, or a monster with arcane powers, such as a beholder or oni. Other highly intelligent creatures might also become liches; for example, mind flayers, who draw on psionic power. Prerequisite: Level 11, Intelligence 13 Lich Elite Controller or Artillery (undead) XP Elite Senses Darkvision Defenses +2 AC; +4 Fortitude, +4 Will Immune disease, poison Resist 5 + 1/2 level necrotic Saving Throws +2 Action Point 1 Hit Points +8 per level + Constitution score (controller) or +6 per level + Constitution score (artillery) Regeneration 10. If the lich takes radiant damage, its regeneration doesn’t function on its next turn. POWERS Spellmaster (minor; recharge ) The lich regains the use of an expended encounter power. Necromantic Aura (Necrotic) aura 5 Any living creature that enters or starts its turn in the aura takes 5 necrotic damage. Necrotic Master The lich can convert any attack power it has to necrotic. Change a power’s energy keyword to necrotic, or add necrotic energy to an attack power that doesn’t normally deal energy damage. Vampire Lord Vampire lords are powerful and dangerous undead villains. Some are former spawn freed by their creators’ deaths, others mortals chosen to receive the “gift” of vampiric immortality. They can create armies of dominated vampire spawn or pass on their powers to chosen mortals. “Vampire lord” is a template you can apply to any humanoid creature of 11th level or higher. Vampire lords retain their living appearance, although they are paler and their canines somewhat more pronounced, and they are wholly evil. Prerequisites: Humanoid, level 11 Vampire Lord Elite Controller or Skirmisher Humanoid (undead) XP Elite Senses Darkvision Defenses +2 AC; +2 Fortitude, +2 Reflex, +2 Will Immune disease, poison Resist 5 necrotic at 1st level, 10 necrotic at 11th level, 15 necrotic at 21st level Vulnerable radiant 10 Saving Throws +2 Action Point 1 Hit Points +8 per level + Constitution score Regeneration 10 (regeneration does not function while the vampire lord is exposed to direct sunlight) POWERS Blood Drain (standard, encounter; recharges when an adjacent creature becomes bloodied) Healing Requires combat advantage. Level + 2 vs. Fortitude; 2d12 + Charisma modifier damage, and the target is weakened (save ends), and the vampire lord heals hit points equal to one-quarter of its normal total. Dominating Gaze (minor, recharge ) Charm Ranged 5; Level + 2 vs. Will; the target is dominated (save ends, with a –2 penalty to the saving throw). Aftereffect: The target is dazed (save ends). The vampire lord can dominate only one creature at a time. Mist Form (standard; encounter) Polymorph The vampire lord becomes insubstantial and gains a fly speed of 12, but cannot make attacks. The vampire lord can remain in mist form for up to 1 hour or end the effect as a minor action. 18D;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 07:23 PM	Rino, though I love you to death, Awww...:embarrass It's their strategy of marketing that I find deplorable. Instead of offering people clear cut differences, and showing people how things NEEDED to change from the get go, instead, they showed us a strategy that people in marketing refer to as "Engineering Consensus." This strategy relies on telling you that everything you previously bought sucked. Now, when you engineer consensus, and have a bunch of people pretend to be that consensus, most gamers are relatively smart. They KNOW it's hogwash when people use a marketing strategy like this. Oh yeah, of course the marketing about previous editions being "less functional" is BS, as that's all just a matter of opinion. However, apparently, that kind of marketing is effective (and it's used in all kinds of industries, but IMO WotC has been rather blatant about it). I'm willing to try 4E based on what I've read about it, not because I think the other editions suck.:) For me, the rules just serve the story, not the other way around.
Lykor 04-18-08, 07:27 PM	[QUOTE=GreenKnight;15649911]As for the Kobolds, has it ever not been true in D&D that PC's chop through Kobolds with little trouble? QUOTE] Most players regard kobolds as a fun "fodder" fight, which is pretty much what they were in previous editions. However, 4e seems to be making them much tougher. Plus, there's the whole "rag on 3.x" going around with the devs and pro-4e fanbois, which seems to make kobolds the #3 thread to low level parties after orc barbarians with keen vorpal greataxes and cats.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-18-08, 07:28 PM	-They have put up some more articles. So instead of making numerous threads, I will put them here. That excerpt was mostly boring for me, I have to admit--I'm not a rules junkie under the best circumstances, and all the 4E terminology is too new for me to understand much of what's being talked about. However, I thought the lich picture was cool.:)
18DELTA 04-18-08, 07:50 PM	That excerpt was mostly boring for me, I have to admit--I'm not a rules junkie under the best circumstances, and all the 4E terminology is too new for me to understand much of what's being talked about. However, I thought the lich picture was cool.:) -Yeah, I thought the Vampire was hot. But then again I am SICK that way.:dancin: 18D:)
Khaelieth 04-18-08, 08:04 PM	You know what scares PC's? Kobolds. 36 of them, armed with heavy crossbows. Never seen a paladin run that fast in my life!
MarkusTay63 04-18-08, 11:16 PM	I liked the Lich, even though it was a bit 'cartoony'. The Vampire, though... I don't picture them being quite so... buxom. :embarrass Or are those just mameries of her past life? :P
Stigger 04-19-08, 02:36 AM	Not that fond of the vampire myself... or the lich for that matter. Don't really care for the coloration of either. But, I tend to prefer more muted dark pastel or watercolor tones for undead, so it could be (and probably is) just me.
Fabius Maximus 04-19-08, 09:33 AM	Most of the groups got TPKed when they encountered the dragon. As for the Kobolds, has it ever not been true in D&D that PC's chop through Kobolds with little trouble? Especially considering that a lot of the Kobolds were Minions. The lethality of the encounters lies very much in the hands of the DM. And from all appearances, the DM will be able to far more accurately gauge just how much of a challenge any given encounter will be then was possible in prior editions. Ah, 'lethality' it was. ;) Well, I read quite a few reports where the group got nearly slaughtered by the kobolds. Maybe there are players who got used to the new system faster than others?
MarkusTay63 04-19-08, 09:59 AM	Maybe some of the players figured out you can eat the Kobolds to regain HP. :P Or maybe some of the DMs were just better at making them lethal. ;)
Fabius Maximus 04-19-08, 07:28 PM	Maybe some of the players figured out you can eat the Kobolds to regain HP. :P :D That's better than just pulling Healing Surges out or your behind.
Daenaan 04-19-08, 08:41 PM	:D That's better than just pulling Healing Surges out or your behind. Let's not have any jokes about "someone's booty has a second wind"... it wouldn't be right. ;)
Mula 04-20-08, 12:42 AM	The best kinds of heroes are the kind that are MADE, by a 'baptism of fire'. They rise from the dredges of the common man - they did not ask to be heroes, or want fame or glory. They just wanted to do the 'right thing' when confronted by adversity. They are like Richard Cypher (SoT) and Rand Al'Thor (WoT) - simple men who rose to the occassion. They weren't 'born on Krypton' with a boatload of super-human powers.I think that bolded example is a really bad one. You know, being "The Chosen" and all. In general, the 4e stuff looks pretty neat. Then again, in my games the PCs never die unless they want to, and I'm more into the story and character interaction coupled with cinematic battles. And ease of play.
msatran 04-20-08, 03:42 AM	I absolutely agree with Markus. The best heroes are the ones who walk away from the smoldering evil fortress, carrying their dead companion out, and can't decide whether it was worth it or not. Plus, not being able to use magic rings until level X is stupid. Not being able to use Ioun Stones until level Y is stupid. That crap may work in movies, but in an RPG, let's look at how this really plays out. Especially if your players are HIGHLY COMPETENT! Players: All right, Mr. DM. We managed to figure out a way around the villain's plan and kill him. What do we get? DM: You get this Sword +2, a Ring of Monkeyhump Frogstar, which he used against you, and The Warbling Armor of Gohundast, which was in the background of Sir Khellidor over here. Players: Cool. DM: Unfortunately, because you were clever, the only thing you can use is the Sword +2. The ring of Monkeyhump Frogstar isn't usable until level 15, and the Warbling Armor, which he was supposed to have sold later in the game, isn't usable until level 20. Sorry guys. Players: Screw you! I'm going home! THIS is the problem I really have with 4th edition. It punishes the excessively competent and rewards people who blindly follow the DM's plot.
Iakhovas 04-20-08, 09:58 AM	What you may be missing Msatran (since you likely don't yet have the rules) is that a "well designed" villain would never be carrying around equipment or treasure the PCs cannot use. Unless you're describing a scenario where the villain is significantly higher level than the PCs. But then your scenario still doesn't hold up, because it doesn't matter how "highly competent" your PCs are, they're statistically never going to defeat said villain. And finally, if by some miracle the impossible does happen? You, as a competent DM would quickly swap out the treasure the PCs cannot use for something that is.
Lord Karsus 04-20-08, 11:57 AM	In general, the 4e stuff looks pretty neat. Then again, in my games the PCs never die unless they want to, and I'm more into the story and character interaction coupled with cinematic battles. And ease of play. -As a DM, I've never killed a PC before, even though there were a few times when they really should have died in battle. Killing PCs causes campaigns to unravel, especially when storylines are specifically tailored to specific characters- quests looking for things, revenge, and so on... But then your scenario still doesn't hold up, because it doesn't matter how "highly competent" your PCs are, they're statistically never going to defeat said villain. -Three weeks ago, my character, and the four other PCs of level 8-10 killed the CR 19 Mindflayer Sorcerer. So, it happens.
Daenaan 04-20-08, 01:43 PM	What you may be missing Msatran (since you likely don't yet have the rules) is that a "well designed" villain would never be carrying around equipment or treasure the PCs cannot use. Unless you're describing a scenario where the villain is significantly higher level than the PCs. But then your scenario still doesn't hold up, because it doesn't matter how "highly competent" your PCs are, they're statistically never going to defeat said villain. And finally, if by some miracle the impossible does happen? You, as a competent DM would quickly swap out the treasure the PCs cannot use for something that is. Well, that describes World of Warcraft pretty well. I have to go with Msatran on this one. Level restrictions on items, as presented so far, break the foundation of roleplaying and destroy any semblance of realism one might have. It's just not a good idea.
18DELTA 04-20-08, 05:16 PM	-Its Champions of Norrath The RPG.:rolleyes: 18D:rolleyes:
capnvan 04-20-08, 05:21 PM	Then again, in my games the PCs never die unless they want to, and I'm more into the story and character interaction coupled with cinematic battles. And ease of play. An interesting sidenote: a recent study found that players derive more enjoyment from "losing" than from "winning" a game. Now, admittedly, that was specifically in a first-person shooter, but I wonder whether it remains true in all games. Playing a game in "God" mode can help work out aggression, but it's not terribly satisfying. I don't understand the point of playing a game in which you can't "lose." If you're never under the threat of death, what's the incentive to become a better player? YMMV.
Lord Karsus 04-20-08, 06:27 PM	-Its Champions of Norrath The RPG.:rolleyes: 18D:rolleyes: -What's that? An interesting sidenote: a recent study found that players derive more enjoyment from "losing" than from "winning" a game. Now, admittedly, that was specifically in a first-person shooter, but I wonder whether it remains true in all games. -What study was that!? If you're never under the threat of death, what's the incentive to become a better player? -See, that's the problem. I recently came to a crossroads in my campaign where I either had to kill a PC, or do something very horrible to him (the character brought it on himself, "barking up the wrong tree", if you know what I mean...). If I killed him, as I stated before, it'd cause some plots and stories to unravel, as the character central to them is gone. But, at the same time, if I didn't kill the character, he'd begin to feel immortal, as if he couldn't die, and would take bigger and bigger risks, knowing that death isn't necessarily imminent.
18DELTA 04-20-08, 06:42 PM	-www.championsofnorrath.com. Magic Items have a minimum level that the character can be to use it. I will play through the first part, save, start over, load(import) that character, and start all over again. Its called farming the game for xp and items!!!:D 18D;)
Khaelieth 04-20-08, 07:16 PM	i personally hate "beating" a game, because i love challenges and i love winning against all odds. That's why strategy games are horribly boring unless playing against other humans. Normally play an Avalon Hill game called Axis & Allies with my brother and dad, and i always go as the Axis in one of the versions, where it's really heavily stacked against them, because when i then win, it's even sweeter. it's why i've got no interest in FPS campaign games, such as Halo, because it's too easy. i've killed off several players, usually for doing very chivalrous stuff, like charging archers that outnumber you. But why are you level basing things?! imagine this: Player 1: Hey, i'm really needing some help against these monsters, pick up that weapon! Player 2: Uhhmm... i'd love to, but i don't know how to wield it... Player 1: THE HELL!? it's a sword! You put the pointy part in enemies!
Lord Karsus 04-20-08, 09:02 PM	-www.championsofnorrath.com. Magic Items have a minimum level that the character can be to use it. I will play through the first part, save, start over, load(import) that character, and start all over again. Its called farming the game for xp and items!!!:D 18D;) -Ohhh....
msatran 04-21-08, 12:33 AM	What you may be missing Msatran (since you likely don't yet have the rules) is that a "well designed" villain would never be carrying around equipment or treasure the PCs cannot use. Unless you're describing a scenario where the villain is significantly higher level than the PCs. But then your scenario still doesn't hold up, because it doesn't matter how "highly competent" your PCs are, they're statistically never going to defeat said villain. And finally, if by some miracle the impossible does happen? You, as a competent DM would quickly swap out the treasure the PCs cannot use for something that is. That's the difference between a simulationist and a storyteller. A simulationist designs his plot around what the NPCs have, not what the needs of the story demand. A well designed villain should ALWAYS have treasure the PC's can't use, because his strengths SHOULD specifically be tailored, especially if he knows who his enemies are, to THEIR weaknesses. If I know that Captain Crimson is vulnerable to fire, I hire his old enemy the Immolationist to beat him up! :) If I know that my opponent is a master duellist, I don't hire another master duellist to fight him. I make my weapon undisarmable, let him think he's won, and then, surprise, Halberd in the face. If I know that my opponent uses a longsword, I had better train in the use of a different weapon, so that I'm not forced into a contest of strength, unless I'm the best longsword user in the entire world. I choose my new weapon for my strengths versus the strengths of my opponent. If I know that my enemy is a wizard who likes turning people into goats, I make sure my base is a goat farm so that I have an easy means of escape! If I know that my enemy is a cleric who loves children, I have my evil allies take children hostage fifty miles away, and then tell the heroes that they can save the children or kill me. Choose. That's ROLEPLAYING. The desire of making choices. Otherwise, you're just being railroaded onto the tracks. It's a question of DMing styles. And clearly, mine is different from the way that Wizards thinks a good game should be run.
Valgard 04-21-08, 04:41 AM	Personally, this new excerpt didn't influenced me very much (Remember that episode of The Simpsons <:o) when Homer worked as a clown). It's still as always, there are some rules to advance monsters and, terminology apart, it is more crap (not in a bad sense) of rules necessary to make wider the enemy range of possibilities. :bored: I also agree with Msatran. You, as a DM, have the tools out of the ruleset to avoid that PCs get powerful magic items before it is intended to. I would agree with the text if it would say "Ioun stones are recommended to use at level Y" in opposition to "Ioun stones are restricted until level Y". Personally, I think I'm going to transcribe the sentences that are as the latter in the DMG as the sentences that are as the former (sorry for this inexpressive message... I'm not accustomed to such elaborate sentences in English). :uh-huh: And as with that... many other similar restrictive matters. :gift:
Diffan 04-21-08, 08:02 AM	I really don't see level restrictions on items being a big problem. As Iakhovas said, you can easily swap them out for something they can use. When it comes to itmes such as swords and armor, things certain classes are proficient with I'd let them use the weapon or armor, but maybe not gain the full effectiveness of the magical abilities until said level. They maybe able to use it, but not know that it shoots searing rays of flaming death until they discover the right word to activate the ability, at said required level. Also, items such as wands, staffs, amulets, rings, and other magical equipment that have higher level prereqs can be described as too intricate or complex for the PC's to figure out, but with proper research the item can be figured out how to be operated, at the required level. Heck, you can even make it into mini quests for your PC's which opens up more and more avenues for adventure. I wouldn't think of it as a restriction, but as a way to further the character's drive to gain power and knowledge, as well opening up plot hooks. Or if all that is too much, the PC's can simply sell it when they get to town and hope they get a good deal for such items.
capnvan 04-21-08, 08:16 AM	An interesting sidenote: a recent study found that players derive more enjoyment from "losing" than from "winning" a game. Now, admittedly, that was specifically in a first-person shooter, but I wonder whether it remains true in all games. -What study was that!? That would be here (http://www.gamecritics.com/fps-players-feel-better-after-dying-than-after-killing-others-say-researchers) although the link to the actual article requires a log-in, I believe. It made the Yahoo! frontpage back in February or March, I think. I just thought it was interesting. One potential conclusion was that the player enjoyed the release from the stress of playing, IIRC. -See, that's the problem. I recently came to a crossroads in my campaign where I either had to kill a PC, or do something very horrible to him (the character brought it on himself, "barking up the wrong tree", if you know what I mean...). If I killed him, as I stated before, it'd cause some plots and stories to unravel, as the character central to them is gone. But, at the same time, if I didn't kill the character, he'd begin to feel immortal, as if he couldn't die, and would take bigger and bigger risks, knowing that death isn't necessarily imminent. As I said, YMMV. Obviously, if you need a character, you need him/her. Personally, I try to keep my campaigns less focused on overarching character arcs, but again, it's your campaign, not mine!
Rauric 04-21-08, 08:17 AM	In my game the players may find a powerful item early on and if it takes them to 10th to use it I will figure out a way to put that into my game. Maybe the player has to "study" it for a while or something to that extent.
capnvan 04-21-08, 08:25 AM	I really don't see level restrictions on items being a big problem. *snip* They maybe able to use it, but not know that it shoots searing rays of flaming death until they discover the right word to activate the ability, at said required level. Also, items such as wands, staffs, amulets, rings, and other magical equipment that have higher level prereqs can be described as too intricate or complex for the PC's to figure out, but with proper research the item can be figured out how to be operated, at the required level. Not having seen the rules, this may be how the effect of level restrictions is actually worked out, which might make a certain degree of sense. However, my concern is that it will really be left pretty much up to the DM, in which case, it will be a case of, "Well, you got those last five experience points, so now that you've sqooshed that giant rat, you can use this Rod of Lordly Might, even though you couldn't all of 2 minutes ago." Which is something that might work in a MUD or a MMORPG (haven't really played the latter, but ISTR similar restrictions back from my mudding days) for game balance, but doesn't make much sense in a more story-driven world.
Diffan 04-21-08, 08:56 AM	Not having seen the rules, this may be how the effect of level restrictions is actually worked out, which might make a certain degree of sense. However, my concern is that it will really be left pretty much up to the DM, in which case, it will be a case of, "Well, you got those last five experience points, so now that you've sqooshed that giant rat, you can use this Rod of Lordly Might, even though you couldn't all of 2 minutes ago." Which is something that might work in a MUD or a MMORPG (haven't really played the latter, but ISTR similar restrictions back from my mudding days) for game balance, but doesn't make much sense in a more story-driven world. Very true. Though I always hated that about MMORPG and if someone does that in a pnp game, shame on them. As I see it, a level restriction is more of a suggestion as to what level your character should be able to use this item, NOT ding! yay I can now use ALL magical items of that level. NO, no, no, no and :nonono:. Just because you've gained the desired prereq level, added info may be required to gain the use of said weapon, item, armor, etc. That's how I'd play it and when he does gain the info/ritual/strange substance/whatever to make the item work, it would probably happen before he leveled up again and thus, making everything legit :D
Stigger 04-21-08, 09:50 AM	I'd just ignore the whole level limit thing myself. Of course, by the same token, I'd have the item do some very unpredicatable things since the wearer didn't have the 'force of will' to control it fully yet either... a DM could have a lot of fun with it really, if you think about it... or be really, really evil too. As for PC death, I do my best not to put them into too much danger until the cleric can cast Raise Dead. Once that happens, the kid gloves are off... oddly enough, my players seem to have learned to always screen and protect the cleric. :D
Valgard 04-21-08, 10:00 AM	I really don't see level restrictions on items being a big problem. As Iakhovas said, you can easily swap them out for something they can use. When it comes to itmes such as swords and armor, things certain classes are proficient with I'd let them use the weapon or armor, but maybe not gain the full effectiveness of the magical abilities until said level. They maybe able to use it, but not know that it shoots searing rays of flaming death until they discover the right word to activate the ability, at said required level. Also, items such as wands, staffs, amulets, rings, and other magical equipment that have higher level prereqs can be described as too intricate or complex for the PC's to figure out, but with proper research the item can be figured out how to be operated, at the required level. Heck, you can even make it into mini quests for your PC's which opens up more and more avenues for adventure. I wouldn't think of it as a restriction, but as a way to further the character's drive to gain power and knowledge, as well opening up plot hooks. Or if all that is too much, the PC's can simply sell it when they get to town and hope they get a good deal for such items. I see your point... If you, as a DM, are going to make adventure arcs to let your players use such items, then you are doing what I also think to offer: to judge appropriately when to let your players use such item. My method is not as different as yours.
msatran 04-21-08, 11:09 AM	I really don't see level restrictions on items being a big problem. As Iakhovas said, you can easily swap them out for something they can use. When it comes to itmes such as swords and armor, things certain classes are proficient with I'd let them use the weapon or armor, but maybe not gain the full effectiveness of the magical abilities until said level. They maybe able to use it, but not know that it shoots searing rays of flaming death until they discover the right word to activate the ability, at said required level. Also, items such as wands, staffs, amulets, rings, and other magical equipment that have higher level prereqs can be described as too intricate or complex for the PC's to figure out, but with proper research the item can be figured out how to be operated, at the required level. Heck, you can even make it into mini quests for your PC's which opens up more and more avenues for adventure. I wouldn't think of it as a restriction, but as a way to further the character's drive to gain power and knowledge, as well opening up plot hooks. Or if all that is too much, the PC's can simply sell it when they get to town and hope they get a good deal for such items. The point is not that you easily can. The point is that the DM SHOULDN'T. This creates what I like to call CGI puppet men. Everything is narcissistic and only exists insofar as the PC's are concerned. If the players know that no matter what, the PC's are always going to get stuff that they can use from their enemies, they're being coddled. If your characters live in a living, breathing world, however, you're not going to be able to use every single magic item. The DM does not have an OBLIGATION to his players to give them treasure they can use. That's Customer Service D+D. If that's all you play D+D for, you're not really roleplaying. It is PLAYERS who have the responsibility and require the CHOICE of deciding whether treasure is useful or not. The DM DOES have an obligation to give the PC's treasure. The difference is that if the DM DOES give the PC's an item that they can't use, he SHOULDN'T be swapping it out for an item that they can. In the old days, we used to call this "Cheating." because it unfairly increased the power level of one character who COULD use the item over another who couldn't. Now, I guess it's just creatively reinterpeting the English Language.
Daenaan 04-21-08, 12:00 PM	The point is not that you easily can. The point is that the DM SHOULDN'T. This creates what I like to call CGI puppet men. Everything is narcissistic and only exists insofar as the PC's are concerned. If the players know that no matter what, the PC's are always going to get stuff that they can use from their enemies, they're being coddled. If your characters live in a living, breathing world, however, you're not going to be able to use every single magic item.... Bingo! QFT.
Lord Karsus 04-21-08, 12:01 PM	The DM DOES have an obligation to give the PC's treasure. The difference is that if the DM DOES give the PC's an item that they can't use, he SHOULDN'T be swapping it out for an item that they can. -My PCs (well, truthfully, just one of them) gets angry because, instead of tailoring magical item treasure to characters like he does in his campaigns, I instead give "miscellaneous magical treasure". For instance, one of the characters in my campaign uses two pistols, and a trident when that is not a viable option. I don't purposely have characters find magical tridents and guns. Every so often, maybe.
MerrikCale 04-21-08, 12:26 PM	-My PCs (well, truthfully, just one of them) gets angry because, instead of tailoring magical item treasure to characters like he does in his campaigns, I instead give "miscellaneous magical treasure". For instance, one of the characters in my campaign uses two pistols, and a trident when that is not a viable option. I don't purposely have characters find magical tridents and guns. Every so often, maybe. where is your campaign set?
Lord Karsus 04-21-08, 01:27 PM	where is your campaign set? -In my own setting. I call it 'Okarth', which is a shortened version of the Draconic word for 'Home', 'Okarthel'.
msatran 04-21-08, 01:56 PM	Well, this is a fine how do you do. It seems someone completely misread the intent of my argument and tried to use it against me. Yes. The DM is under no obligation to provide the PC's with treasure they can use. (True) That does not mean that the PC's should be punished for being smart. If you beat someone, you should be able to either (A) use what you take, or (B) get something for it that you can use. I hate the idea that rings are "Tied" to the eleventh level of magic use, and that Ioun Stones are "Tied" to the epic level of play. This is not consistent with thirty years of Dungeons and Dragons. It doesn't make sense. There are no Potions. There are no Scrolls. Everything they've done says to me that they just don't give a crap about D+D, and that they've effectively put out a contract on all the old school gamers. My issue is that a stupid player of D+D and a smart player of D+D are now the same, because the moron is on the same railroad tracks as the genius, and if the genius manages to outsmart the villain, defeat him by using wits and strategy, he gains magical items he can't use, instead of magical items he can. The point is that the possibility of beating that opponent should exist and that if you do beat that opponent, then you get his stuff. But if you can't use his stuff because the NPC was effectively smart and loaded himself up with items the PC's couldn't use because of level breaks, then the whole game breaks down. This version of D+D assumes that levelling is an out of game mechanic, and I've NEVER been inclined to assume that. The reason why this is dumb is because in the old system, you still got magic items you can't use. But tying them to level specificity makes levelling an out of game mechanic, and turns the PC's into CGI supermen with no sense of who the farmer down the road is. And Ed Greenwood has repeatedly said that this is bad, among other people. There should be no difference between a PC and an NPC, and that's why this system doesn't work, cannot function, and shouldn't function, because good roleplaying requires that you not know the difference between a PC and an NPC.
Rauric 04-21-08, 05:19 PM	The game is about the PCs. In most games they are the stars. It is not narcisistic, it is a RPG fundamental truth. Again that does not mean NPC are unimportant, it is just that the spotlight is on the PCs more often than anyone else. If you run it another way that is your perogitive. I wouldn't even bash ya for it. I am just saying most groups that I know were happy in the games where they had the spotlight. It is a game, not real life. In real life the players are just another lump of flesh in a big world. In a game in which they decided to devote their precious time to they should have the spotlight IMO. The new rules make it that you can use an item, just not right off the bat. If you dislike it ignore the rule. It is that simple. Really.
msatran 04-21-08, 05:49 PM	Rauric, there's a big difference between "The PC's are the stars" and "The PC's walk over everything with no challenge." I've played the playtests. I was not challenged. Only tactical and die rolling incompetence on the part of my fellow players kept us from annihilating everything. A bad roll is still a bad roll, but other than that, I was not challenged by anything except the dragon, and even then, if we could have had a better die roll distribution, we would have beaten that too. (Combat called on acct of time)
Diffan 04-22-08, 03:22 AM	Well, this is a fine how do you do. It seems someone completely misread the intent of my argument and tried to use it against me. Yes. The DM is under no obligation to provide the PC's with treasure they can use. (True) That does not mean that the PC's should be punished for being smart. If you beat someone, you should be able to either (A) use what you take, or (B) get something for it that you can use. Getting something for it that you can use would be selling the item and receiving some money to put towards useful stuff you can use. OR, you can wait and hold onto the item until you can use it. Still don't see a problem. There are no Potions. There are no Scrolls. Everything they've done says to me that they just don't give a crap about D+D, and that they've effectively put out a contract on all the old school gamers. Where exactly is there mention of no more scrolls or potions? Even video games have those! My issue is that a stupid player of D+D and a smart player of D+D are now the same, because the moron is on the same railroad tracks as the genius, and if the genius manages to outsmart the villain, defeat him by using wits and strategy, he gains magical items he can't use, instead of magical items he can. The point is that the possibility of beating that opponent should exist and that if you do beat that opponent, then you get his stuff. But if you can't use his stuff because the NPC was effectively smart and loaded himself up with items the PC's couldn't use because of level breaks, then the whole game breaks down. This is another case of poor DM'ing. First, I usually don't let my PC's fight things that are impossible to beat, or if they do, the PC's usually don't win and the bad guy gets away. Either bashing through their enemies defenses and strong-arming the scene or finding some quick but intellegent way to infiltrate the NPC's designes shouldn't determine the outcome of the stuff used by the NPC reguardless of how it's accomplished. There should be no difference between a PC and an NPC, and that's why this system doesn't work, cannot function, and shouldn't function, because good roleplaying requires that you not know the difference between a PC and an NPC. Seriously, what? There's a HUGE difference between PC and NPC. PC's run the story that IS the campaign. An NPC's job is to either help along the story line or provide a more interactive backround for the PC's to enjoy. If certain NPC's cause a problem, that's advancing the story. I think of NPC's as Extra's in a movie. Without them, it doesn't seem real, but with them being as important as the main role, what's the point for the main role??
msatran 04-22-08, 03:40 AM	Getting something for it that you can use would be selling the item and receiving some money to put towards useful stuff you can use. OR, you can wait and hold onto the item until you can use it. Still don't see a problem. Where exactly is there mention of no more scrolls or potions? Even video games have those! This is another case of poor DM'ing. First, I usually don't let my PC's fight things that are impossible to beat, or if they do, the PC's usually don't win and the bad guy gets away. Either bashing through their enemies defenses and strong-arming the scene or finding some quick but intellegent way to infiltrate the NPC's designes shouldn't determine the outcome of the stuff used by the NPC reguardless of how it's accomplished. Seriously, what? There's a HUGE difference between PC and NPC. PC's run the story that IS the campaign. An NPC's job is to either help along the story line or provide a more interactive backround for the PC's to enjoy. If certain NPC's cause a problem, that's advancing the story. I think of NPC's as Extra's in a movie. Without them, it doesn't seem real, but with them being as important as the main role, what's the point for the main role?? There SHOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PC AND AN NPC, DIFFAN! That's the entire point of the argument! If I treated you as an NPC, you'd be inferior to me in every way, but clearly, that's okay, because I'm a player character, and you're not. :) THAT'S the argument that you're using, and I've never been comfortable with it. I hate games where people say "So what? Fred's an NPC!" It destroys my faith in the "Experience' of roleplaying in a gameworld, and my ability to suspend my disbelief immediately ceases. So when I run D+D, there's no such thing as an NPC! And guess what? People don't do crazy things like try and rob the Wizards guild, kill the king for his money, or knock over random innkeepers, because you never know when that guy is gonna turn out to be level 15 or 20, and suddenly, the shoe is on the other foot, and he's killing YOU, and taking YOUR stuff. That's why I don't like that idea, because it promotes the idea that everything doesn't have to use the same rules. The reason why you can't have a difference between a PC and an NPC in roleplaying is that it opens the door to sufficient amounts of metagaming that the game is no longer fun. We call that "gaming the system" instead of roleplaying your character. A "Non Player Character" should be a Character, using the same rules, that is not played by a "Player." That is the simplest, easiest, and clearest definition of the words involved. Now, let's get to your definition of poor DMing. That sounds pretty railroady to me. If my players want to tackle a Great Wyrm dragon at 5th level, they can TRY. A good DM always lets the players TRY. If they FAIL, in a situation that extreme, they should DIE. The reward of stupidity should be DEATH, or some other equally non-alluring punishment. As for your comment about what happens if the PCs are smart enough to defeat the bad guy, it is the PC's to whom the responsibility of the division of treasure falls, not the DM. That's another metagamey result I find utterly despicable. I REWARD players for outsmarting me, because you know, the villain can't always keep the most optimal spell list memorized at all times, unless he has foreknowledge (See above posts) about who his enemies are. Clearly, you're not a simulationist, so you see no reason to listen to a word I'm saying, but being the main character in a story means you're the main character in a story. It doesn't mean that every other character in the game is somehow less than you, or that the power curve for NPC's needs to be adjusted in order to ensure that the story is told in the right way. In fact, sometimes, the main character in a story is...gasp...WEAKER than everyone else. Main characters are the main characters because they're roleplayed by the players, not because the mechanics are different for them than they are for everyone else. The thing I hate most about 3.5 was the NPC gear chart, where an NPC fighter had 1/4 the gear of PC. It was insane. These guys couldn't hold a candle to a PC of equal level. But realistically, if these guys are adventurers too, they should have the same kinds of gear. So I changed it. And guess what? It didn't affect a thing. But I can't stand it when someone tells me I'm a bad DM because everyone in my game is treated the same, PC or NPC. That just burns me up, because the game has lasted for 20 years, and still acquires new players from time to time.
Diffan 04-22-08, 04:38 AM	There SHOULD BE NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PC AND AN NPC, DIFFAN! That's the entire point of the argument! If I treated you as an NPC, you'd be inferior to me in every way, but clearly, that's okay, because I'm a player character, and you're not. :) THAT'S the argument that you're using, and I've never been comfortable with it. I hate games where people say "So what? Fred's an NPC!" It destroys my faith in the "Experience' of roleplaying in a gameworld, and my ability to suspend my disbelief immediately ceases. So when I run D+D, there's no such thing as an NPC! And guess what? People don't do crazy things like try and rob the Wizards guild, kill the king for his money, or knock over random innkeepers, because you never know when that guy is gonna turn out to be level 15 or 20, and suddenly, the shoe is on the other foot, and he's killing YOU, and taking YOUR stuff. That's why I don't like that idea, because it promotes the idea that everything doesn't have to use the same rules. This, i have no problem with. NPC's i was refering to were of the classes Warrior, Aristocrat, Commoner, and Adept (mechanically). Ususally people in my campaigns don't do the above mentioned things either, usually from fear of the local law, but there is the case of coming across High NPC's with standard class levels and kicking their a$$. The reason why you can't have a difference between a PC and an NPC in roleplaying is that it opens the door to sufficient amounts of metagaming that the game is no longer fun. We call that "gaming the system" instead of roleplaying your character. A "Non Player Character" should be a Character, using the same rules, that is not played by a "Player." That is the simplest, easiest, and clearest definition of the words involved. In my games, the NPCs usually abide by the same rules as the PCs (mechanics wise) but are usually only good backdrop for our stories. They don't steal the show even though they have PC levels. Now, let's get to your definition of poor DMing. That sounds pretty railroady to me. If my players want to tackle a Great Wyrm dragon at 5th level, they can TRY. A good DM always lets the players TRY. If they FAIL, in a situation that extreme, they should DIE. The reward of stupidity should be DEATH, or some other equally non-alluring punishment. Heh, my player's usually aren't that dumb, so i've never really come across that situation. When faced with certain death, they usually run the other way. If they do however come across a Great Wyrm, they will most certainly die! I'm pretty sure i used the word usually, so that mean that events could happen that might lead to their certain deaths. As for your comment about what happens if the PCs are smart enough to defeat the bad guy, it is the PC's to whom the responsibility of the division of treasure falls, not the DM. That's another metagamey result I find utterly despicable. I REWARD players for outsmarting me, because you know, the villain can't always keep the most optimal spell list memorized at all times, unless he has foreknowledge (See above posts) about who his enemies are. And the decision doesn't fall to the DM. Though the equipment should be the same requardless how it was obtained. If someone blunders into the bad guys designs "as per story line" and wins out anyways, his treasure should be geared the same as if a group who went around the story hook and obtained it another way. It's the reward in defeating the guy itself, not how you've done it. For me, one way is as good as another as long as the same agenda is accomplished. Clearly, you're not a simulationist, so you see no reason to listen to a word I'm saying, but being the main character in a story means you're the main character in a story. It doesn't mean that every other character in the game is somehow less than you, or that the power curve for NPC's needs to be adjusted in order to ensure that the story is told in the right way. In fact, sometimes, the main character in a story is...gasp...WEAKER than everyone else. Where did i say that the PC's can't be weaker than anyone else? All I remember saying is that they're the main focus of the story or it might not be fun for people to play. If say, Joe the Baker was the main focus of the story and plot, what point is there for PC's if they're not DIRECTLY involved with Joe? If i'm a cleric who's only met Joe once, well then there doesn't seem to be a connection and therfore making my gaming experience boring if i'm not directly involved. It's the DM's job to make people involved even if the PCs go off in different directions. Main characters are the main characters because they're roleplayed by the players, not because the mechanics are different for them than they are for everyone else. The thing I hate most about 3.5 was the NPC gear chart, where an NPC fighter had 1/4 the gear of PC. It was insane. These guys couldn't hold a candle to a PC of equal level. But realistically, if these guys are adventurers too, they should have the same kinds of gear. So I changed it. And guess what? It didn't affect a thing. If you read my NPC generator, I usually give them FULL PC money to buy stuff with. I hate that chart too and use it rarely, if ever. If they had the same resources as the PC's then equipement isn't the problem, but character build design. 4 PCs taking one 3 or 4 NPCs of the same level and equipment should be a real knock-out brawl with at leat a few PC deaths and/or close calls. But I can't stand it when someone tells me I'm a bad DM because everyone in my game is treated the same, PC or NPC. That just burns me up, because the game has lasted for 20 years, and still acquires new players from time to time. I'm not saying your a bad DM. But when the question of Item restriction comes up, there are LOTS of way of describing why a PC can't use said item, as I've mentioned (above). For our group, it would be all in the role playing as to why a certain member couldn't use ALL of the magical properties of a sword or know the correct phrase of activation for this magical wand. For us, it comes down to role playing.
capnvan 04-22-08, 04:56 AM	Now, let's get to your definition of poor DMing. That sounds pretty railroady to me. If my players want to tackle a Great Wyrm dragon at 5th level, they can TRY. A good DM always lets the players TRY. If they FAIL, in a situation that extreme, they should DIE. The reward of stupidity should be DEATH, or some other equally non-alluring punishment. I agree with you - if nothing else, imminent death tends to focus the mind. I recall a recent post (elsewhere, I think) about a character using a fireball underground and frying 40 civilians. Apparently, this was not the first time this player's spell choices had led to NPC casualties. My interior question was: how is a PC this stupid still alive? He's a clear candidate for the D&D version of the Darwin Awards. Players who play their PCs in stupid ways should, in my opinion, suffer for it - from experience penalties for poor role-playing, to serious and potentially life-threatening in-game repercussions. On the other hand, msatran, I try (not that I always succeed, but I try) not to tell others how they ought to play the game. I think it's fine to explain that we've find a way that we've found to be particularly rewarding. I'm not sure you're going that far, but telling people that "you're playing wrong," tends to be counter-productive.
Rauric 04-22-08, 08:32 AM	I had 3 lvl10 gestalt pcs go up against a prepared Red dragon last night (two players failed to show up). They were suprised and could not escape and knew that the dragon dwelled in the chasm earlier that day. The one pc was dwon to 20 hps and they were surrounded by magma. They outsmarted it and beat it without real combat (no details since it would take forever). What they needed to get could be gotten by going through her lair or going a longer way. This was as close to death as they had come and if they went toe to toe with it they may have all died. With players like this I can throw crazy scenarios at them and they can survive it. (The Pcs went on and beat down two other higher cr encounters later as well. Those were done with combat and charm monster.) If I had players that were not as crafty I might not have placed that encounter there at all. A DM should craft a game to the players skills and game style. If a DM cannot do that he should find another group and if a group does not like a DM they should do the same.
Iakhovas 04-22-08, 09:34 AM	Ummm, why do you believe potions and scrolls don't exist in 4E? My copy has them. And that last statement is a little harsh don't you think? There are no Potions. There are no Scrolls. Everything they've done says to me that they just don't give a crap about D+D, and that they've effectively put out a contract on all the old school gamers.
Rauric 04-22-08, 11:02 AM	The owner of my game store played the game since the 80's at least and he is looking foward to the new game. He said he was thinking of scrapping his latest 3.5 game and just running Feng Shui again just to have actual fun again. He is open minded though and likes several different games and welcomes different game styles. My old DM of 3E stopped running the game right after 3.5. He thought the new stuff was better than 2E but he still couldn't run the game like he wanted to for some reason. He also played 1E. Last night at my game session I heard "I can't wait for 4E" or "4E better get rid of this crap" at least 5 times. I also just habd waved one or two things just to expedite the game a bit and stop it from getting bogged down in places. In the end this doesn't mean we will not say the same thing in 8 years, but for now to many gamers it is time for a change.
Lord Karsus 04-22-08, 11:26 AM	Now, let's get to your definition of poor DMing. That sounds pretty railroady to me. If my players want to tackle a Great Wyrm dragon at 5th level, they can TRY. A good DM always lets the players TRY. If they FAIL, in a situation that extreme, they should DIE. The reward of stupidity should be DEATH, or some other equally non-alluring punishment. -I wouldn't call that railroading. Far from it. As a DM, asides for the adjudicating the rules part, my prime concern is making sure that the story continues to perpetuate itself. I'm sure I don't need to tell you. Attempting to preserve this, by giving PCs subtle and blatent hints that something horrible is going to happen should they go down a particular route is perfectly fine. Case in point, my troublesome PC, in the past, wanted to kill a gangster who he simply doesn't like, although the gangster has never actually wronged him. After a few sessions, I thought he forgot, as a lot of story stuff happened. But, last night, he brought it up again, and actually went to find the gangster. I had the PC roll a Sense Motive check, and he rolled something stupid, like an '8', or something. Even though the PC didn't deserve to know, based on that roll, I gave away the information that he was completely outclasses by the gangster anyway, for the sake of not allowing the game to unravel itself.
msatran 04-22-08, 11:28 AM	My players are exactly the opposite, Rauric. "My concept won't exist in 4e." "I'm a druid. This character is (bleep)ed." "I don't want a six foot tail, or to use weapons which I can't sheathe, scabbard, or wield..." "I can't play a mounted combatant." "My backstory will be completely destroyed." That's what I get every time I pick up the dice to DM these days. My players are worldbuilders. All the leadership stuff, politics, and intrigue is what's going out the window as far as the eye can see from published documents so far, and this doesn't look like it's going to be so positive from my perspective. Plus, that hundred year timejump? That's a game ruiner right there.
Lord Karsus 04-22-08, 11:37 AM	Plus, that hundred year timejump? That's a game ruiner right there. -104, to be exact. :P
Stigger 04-22-08, 12:59 PM	Can't say anyone I know, either players or just acquaintances down at the LGS is even remotely happy with the 4e Realms stuff. I'd estimate a third of them were excited about 4e rules, a third very down on 4e rules, and the rest have a relatively ambivalent view of them. No idea what the case is anywhere else though, so I'll avoid even attempting any speculation on it.
Mula 04-22-08, 01:09 PM	An interesting sidenote: a recent study found that players derive more enjoyment from "losing" than from "winning" a game. Now, admittedly, that was specifically in a first-person shooter, but I wonder whether it remains true in all games. Playing a game in "God" mode can help work out aggression, but it's not terribly satisfying. I don't understand the point of playing a game in which you can't "lose." If you're never under the threat of death, what's the incentive to become a better player? YMMV.People like different kinds of games. The idea behind "immortal" PCs is not God-mode but keeping the character (and by character I mean more than just the stats on your character sheet) in the story. If the story becomes cooler because of a PC death, then the player can decide that his character doesn't survive. Also, it's not as much about winning or losing battles as it is about creating a fun adventure or a story.
Mula 04-22-08, 01:12 PM	Msatran, 4e D&D probably isn't for you. Maybe you should just ignore it?
Rauric 04-22-08, 01:48 PM	The great thing is...I don't care about other stores or players. I know I will always be able to play in a 4E game in my local area and that is fantastic for me. My one group has a psy war, and druid in the group so I am delaying that game till PH 2 perhaps and until I am comfortable with the rules to run a 10th level game. They said they would be happy trying out new 1st level PCs becuase they like what they hear. Like I said, I'm set. I am sorry you and your group arn't going to like it but thankfully you still have your 3E books and all seem to like that system. Good times overall I guess.
msatran 04-22-08, 04:06 PM	The thing is, D+D used to TEACH a whole bunch of things it doesn't teach anymore. It used to teach teamwork. It used to teach planning. It used to teach money management. But the most important things that I think 4e has eliminated is this: How do I overcome my weaknesses? Those penalties were there to challenge people's minds and force them to think. Now they're gone, so the rest of it is gone. But even more important is this: D+D taught sportsmanship, and how to lose gracefully. Without it, I don't think I ever would have.
Lord Karsus 04-22-08, 04:09 PM	But even more important is this: D+D taught sportsmanship, and how to lose gracefully. Without it, I don't think I ever would have. -That, I don't think it ever did. People learned these qualities, but I don't think any ruleset or lore really went out of it's way to teach these things.
MerrikCale 04-22-08, 10:10 PM	-In my own setting. I call it 'Okarth', which is a shortened version of the Draconic word for 'Home', 'Okarthel'. sounds cool. At least a lot better than the new Realms.
Lord Karsus 04-22-08, 10:13 PM	sounds cool. At least a lot better than the new Realms. -Well, of course it's cool. I mean, look who created it. -I find it a little funny that, knowing nothing about it, save the name of the planet, you say it sounds cooler than the 4e Forgotten Realms. I mean, I'm not going to argue, and in fact, I agree, but, I am the creator, after all. ;)
Rauric 04-22-08, 10:19 PM	I don't believe it can eve be gone. Rules don't make adventures dificult, it is the DM and players that determine how tough a game sesion will be. The sky is not falling. People like these changes and I think the new edition will be a lot of fun. When I think of old school gaming (from conversations from older gamers) I realize many DMs used to love screwing the players over. The adventure with the Sphere of Anihalation (sp?) in the demonc doorway was just lame. Rust monsters were just another means to take away PCs stuff as were disenchanting beasts or whatever the hell they were called. Through the years the game has become less elitist and TSR Hard and become more "user friendly". I never played 2e except one time. I hated the rules. 3e was a godsend for me, I could totally understand everything that was laid out for me. Later on I realized there were problems with it but at least it was easier than past editions and that probably let more noobs into the D&D world. I did not say hobby because I bet there were people playing other games but would not touch D&D and THACO. I want more people to play RPGs and D&D in general. If making it more fun and easier to learn helps this then good times!
MerrikCale 04-22-08, 10:32 PM	-Well, of course it's cool. I mean, look who created it. -I find it a little funny that, knowing nothing about it, save the name of the planet, you say it sounds cooler than the 4e Forgotten Realms. I mean, I'm not going to argue, and in fact, I agree, but, I am the creator, after all. ;) well. Considering that we're pretty sure 4e FR will suck, I'm fairly confident you have beat. Some day you will have to share some of the specifics
Lord Karsus 04-23-08, 12:38 AM	Rust monsters were just another means to take away PCs stuff as were disenchanting beasts or whatever the hell they were called. -Pfft, hardly. -It's called strategy. A challenge. well. Considering that we're pretty sure 4e FR will suck, I'm fairly confident you have beat. Some day you will have to share some of the specifics -Yeah, sure.
18DELTA 04-23-08, 03:16 AM	-Well here is the article on Paragon Paths (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080423a). While we continue to present excerpts and previews from the core rulebooks every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday leading up to 4th Edition’s release, we’ve also asked members of R&D to help introduce these previews—to explain in brief what these materials bring to the game. For today’s excerpts, we asked R&D’s Julia Martin to introduce the concept of paragon paths: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Your paragon path is college after high school, the second job you take after you leave the first one, the worthy cause you volunteer your time to help with while you are working full time. If you’re coming to Dungeons & Dragons from the 3rd edition/v3.5 edition, paragon paths are somewhat similar to prestige classes. In 4th edition terms, paragon paths let you further tweak and refine your character within the more general concep-tual space of class, even as you continue to gain features from your class. To think of them another way, paragon paths are like snack-size packets of character concept—just enough, but not so much you’ve ruined your dinner with either bloat or an unhappy mixture of class concepts for your taste. Dip into one flavor by selecting your path for 11th to 20th, and then select another course again from 21st to 30th with an epic destiny. (Alternatively if you wish, you can also select powers from a second class in place of a paragon path. That’s described in the information on multiclassing, and something we’ll cover in a future preview article.) The Player’s Handbook supplies many paragon paths (you’ll find one for each class, previewed below), plus upcoming products and Dragon Magazine features will include even more paths as time goes on. That gives you lots of snack-size packets to choose from in order to craft the perfect character and differentiate your par-ticular class build from the many others in the Dungeons & Dragons game. Here are the fundamentals: You select a paragon path at 11th level. You gain access to two or more paragon path features at 11th level, including a paragon path feature that let’s you broaden the use of an action point with an additional benefit. You also gain another paragon path feature at 16th level. In addition, selecting a paragon path gives you access to one encounter power at 11th, one utility power at 12th, and a daily power at 20th. All of which looks like this: 11th: Paragon path feature 11th: Paragon path action point feature 11th: Paragon path encounter power 12th: Paragon path utility power 16th: Paragon path feature 20th: Paragon path daily power --Julia Martin You have survived and thrived through ten levels of adventure. You’ve explored dank dungeons, defeated vile monsters, and learned priceless secrets. You’ve started making a name for yourself. Now you’re ready to take the next step: you’re ready to choose a paragon path. As your class describes your basic role in the party, your paragon path represents a particular area of expertise within that role. It’s a form of specialization beyond even what a build choice represents. You might be a battle cleric and specialize in melee powers, but starting at 11th level you can be a warpriest and specialize in battle prayers. As shown on the Character Advancement table on page 29 of the Player's Handbook, your paragon path gives you new capabilities from 11th level through 20th level. But adopting a paragon path doesn’t mean you stop advancing in your class. All the powers and features you gain from your paragon path come in addition to your class powers and features, not instead of them. You don’t stop being a cleric when you become a radiant servant. Instead, you gain new capabilities that extend, enhance, and complement the abilities of your class. Paragon paths also broaden the use of action points in different ways. Each paragon path features a different, extra capability that characters can unlock by spending action points. So, once you pick your paragon path, you can still spend an action point to take an extra action. But you’ll also have a new capability for action points that is unique to your path. Some of these capabilities come in addition to the extra action you get for spending an action point, some are used instead of getting an extra action. When you reach 11th level, choose a paragon path. All paths have prerequisites, conditions you have to fulfill before you can adopt that path. Paragon Tier Feats Any feat in the following section is available to a character of 11th level or higher who meets the prerequisites. A sampling of paragon tier feats: Name Prerequisites Benefit Armor Specialization (Chainmail) Dex 15, training with chainmail +1 to AC with chainmail, reduce check penalty by 1 Danger Sense — Roll twice for initiative, use the higher result Deadly Axe Str 17, Con 13 Treat all axes as high crit weapons Devastating Critical — Deal additional 1d10 damage on a critical hit Empowered Dragon Breath Dragonborn, dragon breath racial power Dragon breath uses d10s Lasting Frost — Target hit with cold power gains vulnerable cold 5 Scimitar Dance Str 15, Dex 17 Deal Dex modifier damage on miss Second Implement Wizard, Arcane Implement Mastery class feature Gain mastery with second arcane implement Seize the Moment Dex 17 Gain combat advantage over foe with lower initiative Sly Hunter Wis 15 +3 damage with bow against isolated target Spear Push Str 15, Dex 13 Add 1 square to distance pushed with spear or polearm Steady Shooter Con 15 +3 damage with crossbow if you don’t move Twofold Curse Warlock, Warlock’s Curse class feature Curse the two nearest enemies Underfoot Halfling, trained in Acrobatics Move through spaces of Large or larger creatures -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cleric: Warpriest “Let loose the gift of battle!” Prerequisite: Cleric class Your god demands battle to accomplish the tenets of your faith, and you are the chosen priest at the forefront of the war. When you call upon your divine powers, your weapons glow with holy light. Warpriest Path Features Extra Damage Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also add one-half your level to the damage dealt by any of your standard action attacks this turn. Warpriest’s Strategy (11th level): Once per encounter, if you or an adjacent ally rolls a 1 when making a melee attack or a close attack, you can call for a reroll. Warpriest’s Training (11th level): You receive a +1 bonus to AC when wearing heavy armor. Warpriest’s Challenge (16th level): When you hit an enemy with an at-will melee attack, you can choose to mark that enemy for the rest of the encounter. The next time that enemy shifts or attacks a creature other than you, you can make an opportunity attack against that enemy. If you mark a new enemy with this feature, any previous marks you have made with this feature end. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fighter: Kensei “My weapon and I are as one.” Prerequisite: Fighter class You study an ancient form of martial training that makes you one with your chosen weapon, creating a combination of destruction that few foes can long stand against. Kensei Path Features Kensei Control Action (11th level): You can spend an action point to reroll one attack roll, damage roll, skill check, or ability check, instead of taking an extra action. Kensei Focus (11th level): You gain a +1 bonus to attack rolls with a melee weapon of your choice. Kensei Mastery (16th level): You gain a +4 bonus to damage rolls with the same weapon you selected for Kensei Focus. If you ever use a different type of weapon, you lose this benefit, and the benefit for Kensei Focus, until you take a short rest, during which time you reattune yourself to your chosen weapon with a short meditation. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paladin: Justiciar “I fight for justice, my faith and my strong arm defending those in need.” Prerequisite: Paladin class You become the embodiment of justice, a champion of righteousness and fairness—at least as viewed from the perspective of your particular faith. You are granted the ability to shelter and protect your allies and others in need, while also receiving powers that help you do the right thing according to the faith you have embraced. Justiciar Path Features Just Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, each enemy adjacent to you is weakened until the end of its next turn. Just Spirit (11th level): Each ally adjacent to you can reroll one saving throw at the end of his or her turn. Just Shelter (16th level): Allies adjacent to you are immune to fear and charm effects and receive a +1 bonus to saving throws. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ranger: Stormwarden “I have accepted the burden of the stormwardens of the Feywild, and this region is under my protection.” Prerequisite: Ranger class, two-blade fighting style Your role as a warden and defender of the wild takes on new heights as you learn the ancient ways of the stormwardens of the Feywild. These techniques turn your whirling blades into a storm of destruction that rains down punishing blows on your enemies. With each slash of your weapon, the wind howls in anticipation of the coming storm. Stormwarden Path Features Blade Storm (11th level): As long as you are armed with a melee weapon and are capable of making an opportunity attack, one adjacent enemy (your choice) takes damage equal to your Dexterity modifier at the end of your turn. Stormstep Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you can teleport 3 squares either before or after you use the extra action. Twin-Blade Storm (16th level): As long as you are armed with a melee weapon and are capable of making an opportunity attack, two adjacent enemies (your choice) take lightning damage equal to your Dexterity modifier at the end of your turn. Stormwarden Exploits Clearing the Ground Stormwarden Attack 11 You sweep your blades in mighty arcs around you, cutting foes that get too close and thrusting them back. EncounterMartial,Weapon Standard Action Close burst 1 Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons. Target: Each enemy in burst you can see Attack: Strength vs. AC Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage, and you push the target 1 square. Throw Caution to the Wind Stormwarden Utility 12 Aw, what the hell. You only live once. EncounterMartial, Stance Minor Action Personal Effect: You take a –2 penalty to all defenses and gain a +2 bonus to attack rolls. Cold Steel Hurricane Stormwarden Attack 20 You rush into the midst of your enemies and, like a freezing wind, flay them alive. DailyMartial, Weapon Standard Action Close burst 1 Requirement: You must be wielding two melee weapons. Special: Before you attack, shift a number of squares equal to your Wisdom modifier. Target: Each enemy in burst you can see Attack: Strength vs. AC (main weapon and off-hand weapon), two attacks per target Hit: 1[W] + Strength modifier damage per attack. Effect: You regain your second wind if you have already used it during this encounter. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rogue: Shadow Assassin “When you need something dead, you’ll be hard pressed to find someone better at the job than me.” Prerequisite: Rogue class You become a killing machine, striking from the shadows with deadly and bloody efficiency, and turning attacks against you into pain and suffering for your enemies. You believe in doing unto others before they can do unto you, and you know how to deliver punishment as only a striker can. Shadow Assassin Path Features Shadow Assassin’s Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also gain a +4 bonus to attack rolls until the start of your next turn. Shadow Assassin’s Riposte (11th level): Any adjacent enemy that misses you with a melee attack takes damage equal to your Dexterity modifier. Bloody Evisceration (16th level): Gain an extra 1d6 Sneak Attack damage when attacking a bloodied enemy. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Warlock: Doomsayer “I speak for the cold darkness beyond the stars. I see the myriad ways that doom comes upon you.” Prerequisite: Warlock class, star pact You wrap yourself in the fear of the darkness beyond the stars and use it as a shield against your enemies. In addition, you examine the strands of fate to issue proclamations of doom to all who stand against you. Doomsayer Path Features Doomsayer’s Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also deal the extra damage of your Warlock’s Curse to all of your enemies currently affected by it. Doomsayer’s Proclamation (11th level): Enemies within 10 squares of you must roll two dice when rolling saving throws against fear effects. They must use the lower of the two rolls. Doomsayer’s Oath (16th level): When you are bloodied, you gain a +2 power bonus to attack rolls when you use a power that has the fear keyword. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Warlord: Sword Marshal “This weapon is my symbol of office, and it shines over the field of battle as I wield it against our enemies.” Prerequisite: Warlord class, proficiency with heavy blade You have extensively studied the use of light blades and heavy blades, and your weapon of choice has become a symbol of your power and leadership. You never enter a battle without your blade in hand, and your allies know to look for the gleaming weapon when they need help or inspiration. Sword Marshal Path Features Disciplined Blade (11th level): When you miss with a melee attack when using a heavy blade, you gain a +2 bonus to your next attack roll against the same enemy. Sword Marshal’s Action (11th level): You can spend an action point to regain one warlord encounter power you have already used, instead of taking an extra action. Skewer the Weak (16th level): When you score a critical hit using a heavy blade, you and all your allies gain combat advantage against the enemy you struck until the end of your next turn. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Wizard: Battle Mage “You think I’m just a simple scholar, my head buried amid my scrolls and books? Think again!” Prerequisite: Wizard class You didn’t leave behind the thrill of battle when you took up the mantle of wizard, so why should you stand back and let the fighters have all the fun? You have developed skills and techniques that have turned you into a true battle mage, ready to deal damage up close and personal or from afar, depending on the situation and how the mood strikes you. You have even learned of a technique for using arcane energy to temporarily stave off death—and you can’t wait to try it out in battle! Battle Mage Path Features Arcane Riposte (11th level): Imbued with magical might, your hands bristle with arcane energy in the heat of battle. When a creature provokes an opportunity attack from you, make an opportunity attack with one of your hands (Dexterity vs. AC). Choose cold, fire, force, or lightning. You deal 1d8 + Intelligence modifier damage of that type with this attack. Battle Mage Action (11th level): When you spend an action point to take an extra action, you also gain a +4 bonus to attack rolls until the start of your next turn. Battle Edge (16th level): When you first become bloodied in an encounter, you can use any at-will power you know as an immediate reaction. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Be sure to return Friday for a look at power cards! 18;)
Valgard 04-23-08, 03:36 AM	Don't you think that paragon paths give too many few benefits? They look more like extra talent trees. And about the fact that you are forced to take one, I think there should be a 'generic [enter class name here] paragon path'... why should I specialize if I don't want to (without losing the extra features you get)?
GreenKnight 04-23-08, 05:03 AM	Was it necessary to bold the whole thing, Delta? :P Anyway, on the subject of having to take Paragon Paths, that's not entirely true. (Alternatively if you wish, you can also select powers from a second class in place of a paragon path. That’s described in the information on multiclassing, and something we’ll cover in a future preview article.) Although it does appear that you can either choose to take a Paragon Path, or multiclass, but you must do one or the other. I don't much mind, though, as you still gain class abilities. It's not like a Prestige Class, where you stop being a Paladin for five levels while you become a Purple Dragon Knight, for instance. You're still a Paladin, and you gain Purple Dragon Knight abilities in addition. Besides, the presented Paragon Paths, for the most part, look to be just extensions of the base class. That's probably to do with the fact, though, that they only allow one class to take that Paragon Path (there're apparently Paragon Paths that allow for more then one class to qualify in them. They're likely more open-ended in their abilities). So no big deal, IMO. Some interesting possibilities, though. Especially when it comes to multiclassing. We know you can multiclass starting from level 1, so switching out a Paragon Path for multiclassing allows you to invest more heavily into a class which you've been multiclassing into (or maybe take multiclass into a third class). Can't wait til mondays article. I'm dying to find out how multiclassing works in 4E.
Rauric 04-23-08, 09:25 AM	-Pfft, hardly. -It's called strategy. A challenge. -Yeah, sure. No, it really was for DMs to try and take away gear that they acquired. Just like the Death traps of old were meant to kill the first set of PCs that the players rolled up. There are better ways to challenge players and good DMs didn't need those lame creatures to do it. KODT isn't that off the mark when it portrays certain "old school" moments. Many gamers (DMs and players) evolved past that delve, DM vs Player mentality but in the beginning the game was run like Gauntlet.
Valgard 04-23-08, 10:05 AM	Was it necessary to bold the whole thing, Delta? :PLuckily, he used the spoiler tag. :D Can't wait til mondays article. I'm dying to find out how multiclassing works in 4E.Honestly, it's time to be getting that right now.
Alediran 04-23-08, 10:19 AM	No, it really was for DMs to try and take away gear that they acquired. Just like the Death traps of old were meant to kill the first set of PCs that the players rolled up. There are better ways to challenge players and good DMs didn't need those lame creatures to do it. KODT isn't that off the mark when it portrays certain "old school" moments. Many gamers (DMs and players) evolved past that delve, DM vs Player mentality but in the beginning the game was run like Gauntlet. Not at all Rauric, they can be used to teach a character to avoid acting in a way that can be detrimental to the party. One of my campaign characters always charges to the enemy without evaluating first who the enemy is. So I put in fron of him two Black Puddings, expecting the character to charge to them without knowing that Black Puddings are deadly in close combat with their disolving acid. He not only charged but tried to directly slash the Puddings, and after that he got grappled big time by them (nat 1 on his roll, nat 20 on the pudding's roll) and failed almost all the reflex saves to avoid loosing equipement. He has never attacked somebody without that precious knowledge again.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-23-08, 11:25 AM	When I think of old school gaming (from conversations from older gamers) I realize many DMs used to love screwing the players over. That, IMO, has nothing to do with "old school gaming." Some DM's are good, some like to screw people over. A DM who likes to screw people over will find a way to do so regardless of what rules are being used.
Thinblade 04-23-08, 11:27 AM	Agreed. Nothing teaches caution like the burned hand. I had a player come out of a battle with rust monsters essentially naked because she was over-confident. Not only did the character (and player) learn a valuable lesson, but it launched the party into a new quest to get her replacement gear.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-23-08, 11:29 AM	-Well here is the article on Paragon Paths (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080423a). Now, this was a fun article.:) I think I like the way "prestige classes" are being done this time around.
MarkusTay63 04-23-08, 11:37 AM	Very True. A DM controls the whole world, so one that imagines himself as the PC's enemy is a BAD DM, IMHO. Turn 1: PCs: "Okay, we just spent the last two hours rolling up characters, and we're ready for some action." DM: "You guys are sitting in an Inn, and have just met..." PCs: "We look around... do we see anything interesting, or suspicious?" DM: "Suddenly, you hear a roaring sound that gets loader and loader - before any of you can do anything, a meteor the size of a schoolbus hits the Inn, instantly vaporizing EVERYTHING within." PCs: "Ummmm..." DM: "You're all dead!!! Wasn't that fun? Okay, roll up some more characters and we'll do this again..." It is totally impossible to avoid being tortured when you're DM has a 'hardon' for PKing. The DM is not supposed to be the players adversary, the NPCs are, which are part of the environment, which is what the DM IS in charge of. The villains are merely one aspect of that environment. Now, with the lack of RP rules (skills and what-not) in the 4e rules, they seem primarily aimed at encounters. This means that the DM will find himself more and more 'at odds' with his players, and begin assuming the 'adversariel role', which is bad form, I think. A DM should be neutral at all times, and let the PCs interact with the world as it comes. I'm not saying encounters are a bad thing - thats the 'meat and potatoes' of D&D. Its just that the game has evolved over the years as so much more then that, and it seems a shame to just get rid of 30 years of goodness and go back to 'Hack 'N' Slash'.
Valgard 04-23-08, 11:41 AM	Now, this was a fun article.:) I think I like the way "prestige classes" are being done this time around.I have to admit that what you say is true. I prefer this than 'Wait! I could take more levels in arcane archer but I would never do it because I do not advance in spellcasting!', but it is possible that this lowering of prestige classes will result in a loss of flavor. Imagine how they will reduce the aforementioned arcane archer to just 4 abilities in 10 levels... I hope the powers of its generic classes (ranger? wizard? warlock?) will help to make that build.
Lord Karsus 04-23-08, 12:23 PM	No, it really was for DMs to try and take away gear that they acquired. Just like the Death traps of old were meant to kill the first set of PCs that the players rolled up. There are better ways to challenge players and good DMs didn't need those lame creatures to do it. -So, I just used Rust Monsters in my own campaign because I am a bad DM, and I just wanted to take away the metallic equipment of my characters? -As I said before, it's called strategy. This time, "you're" not running in and hacking things to death. Now what? Time to use that brain. KODT isn't that off the mark when it portrays certain "old school" moments. -I'm fairly sure that this isn't an "old school" phenomina. I'm sure that plenty of new DMs use said monsters, or said spells in an equally destructive manner.
Therise 04-23-08, 01:23 PM	-So, I just used Rust Monsters in my own campaign because I am a bad DM, and I just wanted to take away the metallic equipment of my characters? -As I said before, it's called strategy. This time, "you're" not running in and hacking things to death. Now what? Time to use that brain. -I'm fairly sure that this isn't an "old school" phenomina. I'm sure that plenty of new DMs use said monsters, or said spells in an equally destructive manner. Did you play D&D before there was a 1st edition AD&D? The game really was quite different back then, and the concepts of "good" and "bad" DMing really weren't as we know them today. We have the benefit of hindsight over 3 editions, not to mention a lot of tools for DMing that were simply not in existence when D&D first came out. Back then, to be a good DM meant to challenge players with death and item loss all the time. Otherwise one ran the risk of being called soft or a "Monty Haul" DM. It was rather like running a computer game on "insanely hard" level, with no extra lives. It was fun, but in a completely different way. Roleplaying wasn't what it is (or can be) today, either, as people didn't import a lot of story or background and didn't get as attached to their characters. It was mostly strategy, tables to roll on, and the luck of the dice. Sometime around the middle of 1st edition AD&D, we started pulling in story, consistency, and arguments to pull things like the rust monster out of games as an item-killer. But arguments weighed in on the other side as well, so it stayed. So did spheres of annihilation, and a multitude of other ham-handed DM tools (given our modern perspective). What's funny, the concept of item-breaking, or item durability, transferred easily enough to mmo's, as did coin sinks (not to mention building a castle, then having it destroyed in seige combat; it was fun, but very costly). I'm not sure I have a strong point, other than to say that many old school game concepts survived. Some use them as originally intended, others don't. It's probably better not to judge one as being bad and the other good, since you don't know what style of play a person likes until they try something out.
Lord Karsus 04-23-08, 03:10 PM	Did you play D&D before there was a 1st edition AD&D? -No, I am not an old fogey. :P I'm not sure I have a strong point, other than to say that many old school game concepts survived. Some use them as originally intended, others don't. It's probably better not to judge one as being bad and the other good, since you don't know what style of play a person likes until they try something out. -Rauric, as I understood him, was citing how such DMing practices are an "Old School" phenomina, meaning that those of the "Old School" camp use such practices, such as using the Rust Monster as a way to spoil players' fun. I asserted that this is not contained only the "Old School" camp, but in all camps. No matter what style of DMing a group uses, no matter what edition they play, no matter when they began playing, and so on, there exists members who use the aforementioned monster in the aforementioned way. That's all I said on the matter, there.
msatran 04-23-08, 03:21 PM	That, IMO, has nothing to do with "old school gaming." Some DM's are good, some like to screw people over. A DM who likes to screw people over will find a way to do so regardless of what rules are being used. I think this is probably the most insightful comment anyone's made in a while. Yes, I run a tough game. BUT, Rino agreed to play in it anyway, because I TOLD her that up front. :) Do I screw the players? If they do something tactically insurmountable, I might. It really depends on the personality of the opposition. But, I have heard the comment before that "After I play D+D with you, it's hard to play D+D with anyone else." so I must be doing SOMETHING right.
MerrikCale 04-23-08, 03:23 PM	-No, I am not an old fogey. :P Ouch. Now I feel old
msatran 04-23-08, 03:29 PM	Heh. I AM old.
Stigger 04-23-08, 03:29 PM	Not an old fogey perhaps, but referring to LK as a callow youth seems appropriate enough in response... :P :D
MerrikCale 04-23-08, 03:32 PM	Heh. I AM old. Join the club
Lord Karsus 04-23-08, 03:38 PM	Not an old fogey perhaps, but referring to LK as a callow youth seems appropriate enough in response... :P :D -Sir, are you calling me a "recently hatched worker ant"? Pheh, how rude! :P
Stigger 04-23-08, 03:43 PM	Pipe down youngin', we're trying to take our naps here. :P
Therise 04-23-08, 03:48 PM	-No, I am not an old fogey. :P Gosh, I suppose that implies that I am, at least in your eyes. :P Insults aside, however: -Rauric, as I understood him, was citing how such DMing practices are an "Old School" phenomina, meaning that those of the "Old School" camp use such practices, such as using the Rust Monster as a way to spoil players' fun. I asserted that this is not contained only the "Old School" camp, but in all camps. No matter what style of DMing a group uses, no matter what edition they play, no matter when they began playing, and so on, there exists members who use the aforementioned monster in the aforementioned way. That's all I said on the matter, there. Technically, the "old school" way of using rust monsters and the like wasn't considered bad form as a DM. It was pretty much expected. I'm just trying to say that it's not nearly as simple as saying that it's "poor DMing" to use a rust monster for it's original purpose. For an old school DM, there wasn't necessarily any feeling of animosity toward players, such that it was intentionally being mean to deprive them of goods. Nowadays, there are DMs who intentionally beat their players about the ears and treat it like a contest between players and the arbiter. Those two DMs look the same on the surface, but the intent and the feel of their games are different. For us old fogeys, that is. :P
msatran 04-23-08, 06:21 PM	Yeah. I mean, really what we're talking about here is the difference between simulationism and storytelling, and I'm a simulationist and not a storyteller. I try to combine the best of both styles, but that doesn't mean that the right thing to do is necessarily always to accommodate the players. D+D is not customer service. Your characters should be in DANGER when they go into dangerous places, and they should stand a real chance of being killed, especially if they do something stupid.
Diffan 04-23-08, 06:45 PM	Rust monsters aren't really that bad. A CR 3 with 27 hp....pfft. Also, some people don't realize that you use your own saving throw to beat the DC 17 reflex. When going up against it at lvl 3, ya you might lose a non-magical item or two, but at that low a level, your probably getting magical items soon regardless. Besides, everyone knows you use ranged weapons and spells from afar before engaging in melee. As for 'old-school' DMing, i've never found it fun to play with a DM whole solely went out to kill his PCs off. If he happend in the campaign, ya that happens, but to create instances that are insurmountable just to watch us die isn't fun.
Lord Karsus 04-23-08, 09:10 PM	As for 'old-school' DMing, i've never found it fun to play with a DM whole solely went out to kill his PCs off. If he happend in the campaign, ya that happens, but to create instances that are insurmountable just to watch us die isn't fun. -What's the point of running a campaign? I've pulled my players' fat out of the fires so many times, by fudging rolls, or lowering HP/AC mid-battle, or not using a creature's full potential, just so that the story continues. Dead players are no use to me.
Therise 04-23-08, 09:30 PM	-What's the point of running a campaign? I've pulled my players' fat out of the fires so many times, by fudging rolls, or lowering HP/AC mid-battle, or not using a creature's full potential, just so that the story continues. Dead players are no use to me. No offense, but that seems to be swinging the pendulum too far the other way, where it's not really a realistic game. The DM becomes an author of a somewhat romantic tale, not just the game arbiter. If a campaign's storyline is too rigid such that death must be avoided, then it's more of a DM's movie-of-the-week rather than a game. The threat of death needs to be real, imo.
Alediran 04-23-08, 09:39 PM	No offense, but that seems to be swinging the pendulum too far the other way, where it's not really a realistic game. The DM becomes an author of a somewhat romantic tale, not just the game arbiter. If a campaign's storyline is too rigid such that death must be avoided, then it's more of a DM's movie-of-the-week rather than a game. The threat of death needs to be real, imo. I have another approach for that, something that is middle ground. I'll abuse their characters when they get too confident with something that exploits the character's weaknesses. One character of my campaign has already a Devil's pact on his head and lost his equipement to a Black Pudding. Another one was left with only 1 point in CON.
MarkusTay63 04-24-08, 10:25 AM	I don't think LK would avoid killing a character that did something stupid, but I do a lot of what he is talking about too. In the last game I ran, I rolled 3 Crits for the monsters in a row, and the player rolled two natural ones in a row... the rest of the party was several miles away, and he was dieing because of EXTRAODINARY bad luck. So... I compressed the distance between them, and the rest of the group broke through the trees and saved his butt at the last possible second. They didn't even realize I did that (they were unaware of the exact location of the 'lost' character). Thats not 'railroading' IMHO, thats keeping the game interesting. I had absolutely NO problem killing a character in another game, who REFUSED to surface while underwater, even after I told him he was getting light-headed. He claimed I cheated - it doesn't say anywhere in the rules that his character needs to breath. :bored: There's a difference between a player thats just having a run of crappy luck, and an idiot.
Rauric 04-24-08, 10:46 AM	Those are pretty decent examples of good DMing in my book.
Green Elven Vampire 04-24-08, 10:54 AM	What a joke! :rolleyes:
msatran 04-24-08, 03:39 PM	I don't think LK would avoid killing a character that did something stupid, but I do a lot of what he is talking about too. In the last game I ran, I rolled 3 Crits for the monsters in a row, and the player rolled two natural ones in a row... the rest of the party was several miles away, and he was dieing because of EXTRAODINARY bad luck. So... I compressed the distance between them, and the rest of the group broke through the trees and saved his butt at the last possible second. They didn't even realize I did that (they were unaware of the exact location of the 'lost' character). Thats not 'railroading' IMHO, thats keeping the game interesting. I had absolutely NO problem killing a character in another game, who REFUSED to surface while underwater, even after I told him he was getting light-headed. He claimed I cheated - it doesn't say anywhere in the rules that his character needs to breath. :bored: There's a difference between a player thats just having a run of crappy luck, and an idiot. Well, actually it does. :) So he's hosed.
Lord Karsus 04-24-08, 04:39 PM	I don't think LK would avoid killing a character that did something stupid, but I do a lot of what he is talking about too. -If a character does something blatently stupid- a character of mine wanted to single-handedly challenge a local mafioso Halfling, in the Halfling's own bar, and had it in his mind that he'd kill him and leave without a hitch (8th Level)- he/she's on his/her own. Those are pretty decent examples of good DMing in my book. -So, am I being a bad, unfair, mean DM using my Rust Monster, then?
Stigger 04-24-08, 05:11 PM	I wouldn't say so... but I use them as pets occassionally for NPCs, and looked on in horror as a PC walked up to it in metal armor to give it a pet. His character did things like that, the player knew better, but he did it anyway because his characters an idiot. Was really quite funny actually... I fail to see why a rust monster is a big deal if it screws the players over a little... there's a ton of dead adventurers out there for a reason.
Lord Karsus 04-24-08, 10:37 PM	His character did things like that, the player knew better, but he did it anyway because his characters an idiot. -See, that's good. That's playing in character. My player just genuinely is..."like that" for a lack of better, nicer terms. I say this because, without fail, all of his characters are like that.
Rauric 04-24-08, 11:52 PM	I am saying that those creatures were made to take things from the player. Therise may be right in say "That's just how it was done" but it still stinks to me. I personally would never use them because I can find better ways to challenge my players. Plus I can use cooler monsters to challenge them with. The ruster is just lame IMO. There was a DM vs Player feel in many old school stories I hear about. That is just how it was at one point. Then things got better. Games progressed. Use a rusty all ya want. Just saying it's orignial use was to "challenge" the pcs by wrecking their gear. Good times :rolleyes: .
Alediran 04-25-08, 08:52 AM	I am saying that those creatures were made to take things from the player. Therise may be right in say "That's just how it was done" but it still stinks to me. I personally would never use them because I can find better ways to challenge my players. Plus I can use cooler monsters to challenge them with. The ruster is just lame IMO. There was a DM vs Player feel in many old school stories I hear about. That is just how it was at one point. Then things got better. Games progressed. Use a rusty all ya want. Just saying it's orignial use was to "challenge" the pcs by wrecking their gear. Good times :rolleyes: . Wow, feeling a lot of hate here, did some DM used a Rust Monster on one of your characters? If the player is smart and makes a Knowledge check to learn that Rust Monsters destroy metal equipement then the character has won already and the Rust Monster becomes a nuisance. A party without good investments in Knowledge skills deserves what they get, those are probably the most important skills in D&D.
Rauric 04-25-08, 09:06 AM	Heh nope. My previous DM played in the 80's and never tried to use some of the things he felt were corny. As a DM I never had the urge to use a rustmonster or disenchanter beast. I use an ooze if the story called for it but I always had a rule that magic items were much more durable than ordinary items. By the time the pcs went up agaisnt oozes in my FR game they had at least one magic item so they were not runing away from the encounter itemless. Like I said before, I never ran a game that needed a rustmonster. It is just a screw-over monster in my opinion.
Stigger 04-25-08, 09:34 AM	Consider the idea of a group of elves who live in their nice happy little forest, who are having problems with... say duergar or drow, and who keep them as pets for defense. They can add a lot of color and flavor to a story if used properly really... you might even end up with a PC druid who keeps one as a friend when they retire.
Alediran 04-25-08, 09:56 AM	Heh nope. My previous DM played in the 80's and never tried to use some of the things he felt were corny. As a DM I never had the urge to use a rustmonster or disenchanter beast. I use an ooze if the story called for it but I always had a rule that magic items were much more durable than ordinary items. By the time the pcs went up agaisnt oozes in my FR game they had at least one magic item so they were not runing away from the encounter itemless. Like I said before, I never ran a game that needed a rustmonster. It is just a screw-over monster in my opinion. The rust monster for me is a monster in the category: "Make players think before acting rashly." Smart players don't need to fear from Rust Monsters because they aren't going to approach them, they are going to blast them with magic and ranged attacks.
MarkusTay63 04-25-08, 10:14 AM	Thats why you introduce the magical 'Anti-Rust' Monster somewhere. :D The creatures has the ability to slowy turn old and corroding items into shiney new ones. :P
Khaelieth 04-25-08, 10:26 AM	-If a character does something blatently stupid- a character of mine wanted to single-handedly challenge a local mafioso Halfling, in the Halfling's own bar, and had it in his mind that he'd kill him and leave without a hitch (8th Level)- he/she's on his/her own. -So, am I being a bad, unfair, mean DM using my Rust Monster, then? Rust Monsters were invented to make paladins soil their plate - ergo the name rust monster.
Alediran 04-25-08, 10:28 AM	Rust Monsters were invented to make paladins soil their plate - ergo the name rust monster. :rofl:
Lord Karsus 04-25-08, 11:49 AM	I am saying that those creatures were made to take things from the player. -And they've evolved into curveballs. The rust monster for me is a monster in the category: "Make players think before acting rashly." Smart players don't need to fear from Rust Monsters because they aren't going to approach them, they are going to blast them with magic and ranged attacks. -Exactly. If the players rush into a situation with swords drawn before thinking, they are going to pay for it. If the players take a moment to assess the situation, they'll easily overcome that...CR 4(?) monsters with ease.
Ody_Saraph_of_Karsus 04-25-08, 12:24 PM	The rust monster for me is a monster in the category: "Make players think before acting rashly." Smart players don't need to fear from Rust Monsters because they aren't going to approach them, they are going to blast them with magic and ranged attacks. Unless you're a raging Barbarian with Power Attack with with a Great Axe rolling a 20... :nonono:
Alediran 04-25-08, 12:30 PM	Unless you're a raging Barbarian with Power Attack with with a Great Axe rolling a 20... :nonono: I never play stupid characters because I can't roleplay the stupid part :D
Ody_Saraph_of_Karsus 04-25-08, 12:33 PM	I never play stupid characters because I can't roleplay the stupid part :D He wasn't stupid (Int 14-15 ish at the time), just ...impulsive (he was goig for Rage Mage)
Therise 04-25-08, 12:47 PM	I am saying that those creatures were made to take things from the player. Therise may be right in say "That's just how it was done" but it still stinks to me. I personally would never use them because I can find better ways to challenge my players. Plus I can use cooler monsters to challenge them with. The ruster is just lame IMO. There was a DM vs Player feel in many old school stories I hear about. That is just how it was at one point. Then things got better. Games progressed. Use a rusty all ya want. Just saying it's orignial use was to "challenge" the pcs by wrecking their gear. Good times :rolleyes: . Challenging players in ways to make them think outside the box is important, though. With a rust monster, wizards, druids, and rogues shift their traditional space with metal-clad warriors. Or at the very least, it teaches players to use wooden weapons against some monsters. It's meant to encourage players to learn "different tactics for different foes". All too often, combat roles in RPGs are static, and players don't shift what they need to do in order to win. So they might lose a few metal weapons. If metal weapons are all they've brought with them into a dungeon, or if the fighter becomes "useless" without armor, shame on them!
Khaelieth 04-25-08, 12:49 PM	-Exactly. If the players rush into a situation with swords drawn before thinking, they are going to pay for it. If the players take a moment to assess the situation, they'll easily overcome that...CR 4(?) monsters with ease. But what if the players have no in character knowledge of the Rust Monster? That's what i didn't like about Libris Mortis - it presumed that the characters knew such things like resistances, which is a Knowledge (Religion) check with a DC over 10, so unless they're priests, they don't know until they encounter them.
MarkusTay63 04-25-08, 12:53 PM	Challenging players in ways to make them think outside the box is important, though. QFT - sounds exactly like something I would say. :D Thats why I like to present 'monsters' somewhat differently then the stereotypes, as well. I never play stupid characters because I can't roleplay the stupid part :DYou're missing out! :P Stupid can be fun to play - I knew a guy who used to play 'idiots' all the time (it started with a Paladin he had with an Int of 3!). I've done it once or twce, and it's good for 'comic relief', and affords lots of interesting RP situations. Did you know that "Striking a Fool" was a crime in medieval times? Since the campaign we played in with that Pally was set in a fantasy version of Europe, it basically meant no-one could 'slap some sense' into the moronic Paladin (not to mention a commoner hitting a Knight was an executable offence). Good Times.... :dancin:
Alediran 04-25-08, 01:22 PM	I could never think that being stupid is funny. I'm an Elven Archmage after all, for Corellon's sake.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-25-08, 01:57 PM	I think this is probably the most insightful comment anyone's made in a while. Thanks.:embarrass :) Yes, I run a tough game. BUT, Rino agreed to play in it anyway, because I TOLD her that up front. :) And I'm having lots of fun!:D
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-25-08, 02:00 PM	I'm just trying to say that it's not nearly as simple as saying that it's "poor DMing" to use a rust monster for it's original purpose. LK did not assert that it was, though.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 04-25-08, 02:05 PM	Consider the idea of a group of elves who live in their nice happy little forest, who are having problems with... say duergar or drow, and who keep them as pets for defense. They can add a lot of color and flavor to a story if used properly really... you might even end up with a PC druid who keeps one as a friend when they retire. I figured I'd mention that I recently read a novel that had a really great rust monster scene in it (Crypt of the Moaning Diamond, if anyone's interested). That scene added to the story, so I can say the story might have been poorer for not having a rust monster involved.
Therise 04-25-08, 02:12 PM	LK did not assert that it was, though. I didn't say that he did.
Lord Karsus 04-25-08, 02:38 PM	But what if the players have no in character knowledge of the Rust Monster? -Everyone has the ability to roll a d20, and add their INT bonus to the total roll. ;) -Of course, what kinds of information that yields depends on what the players roll- something bad being, "Stories come to mind of creatures that match this description that adventurers fear", to something good, being, well, pinning exactly what the Rust Monster is, and what it can do.
MarkusTay63 04-25-08, 04:06 PM	So, no one liked my 'Anti-Rust' Monster? :confused: How about a creature that looks exactly like a Rust Monster, but instead of causing things to rust, it periodically vomits up diamonds? Lots and lots of ways to f__k with players perceptions. :D
Stigger 04-25-08, 04:45 PM	So... yeah. One wonders how the Rust Ray spell and its ilk are viewed then, if they could potentially screw over PCs. Maybe I'm just a prick, but I see no problem with screwing over players who bite off more than they can chew if you're so inclined to do so.
msatran 04-25-08, 06:26 PM	My personal favorite Rust Monster Encounter was for high level characters. Stone Giant Fighter 4/Master Thrower 5/Hulking Hurler 3. He threw trained rust monsters. The party HATED it, but it was a great encounter.
Lord Karsus 04-25-08, 07:13 PM	Lots and lots of ways to f__k with players perceptions. :D -Yeah, I recently did that. My last game, the players went into Limbo, and encountered a Blue Slaad with wings and four arms and was the color red. So, yes, it was a red Blue Slaad. :cool: -The players promptly left Limbo back through the portal, which made me sad, because I couldn't use the Wild Magic rules...I will some day! But, I digress... Stone Giant Fighter 4/Master Thrower 5/Hulking Hurler 3. He threw trained rust monsters. -Where do you find these? I've never even heard of the Master Thrower PrC, or the Hulking Hurler PrC!
msatran 04-25-08, 07:36 PM	I think they're both in Complete Warrior.
Lord Karsus 04-25-08, 07:54 PM	I think they're both in Complete Warrior. -Oh, okay...I don't really use those 'Complete' books too much. Someone I know gave me his digital, scanned copy of most of the 'Complete' books, but since they are computer files, I don't think to look there very often, concerning D&D stuff.
Khaelieth 04-26-08, 07:53 AM	-Everyone has the ability to roll a d20, and add their INT bonus to the total roll. ;) Knowledge (Dungeoneering) is a trained skill, afaik. Over 10 results aren't possible.
MarkusTay63 04-26-08, 10:44 AM	Throw Order of the Bow PrC on that, and you have one dangerous Giant! That PrC doesn't say that the bonuses given must be applied to a bow - it only states they are used for Ranged Attacks. :devil: You might want to change the prerequisites up a bit for that, though. I call it the Expert Marksman PrC, and allow it to be applied to any ranged weapon (as the bonuses already do). You basically have a Stone Giant that can place his shots precisely - like through castle/tower windows. Rust Monsters are fun, but I think throwing Beholders might prove more intersting. :P
Stigger 04-26-08, 11:19 AM	I thought any knowledge roll could be made unskilled with what amounted essentially to an intelligence check... ah, wait, the DC thing. Right... good point.
Lord Karsus 04-26-08, 12:44 PM	Knowledge (Dungeoneering) is a trained skill, afaik. Over 10 results aren't possible. -I don't use the trained/untrained skill rules.
Stigger 04-26-08, 01:09 PM	*gasp* Say its not so... :( Not that I do either really. Had to look it up actually... slinking off now...
MarkusTay63 04-26-08, 01:23 PM	I don't use them either - I just assume at 1st level, ALL adventurers have Dungeoneering 0, and go from there. Why would adventurers NEED to take it? Its what they DO. Survival works the same way - and as you level, you get better at it (+1 every 4 levels or so). You can take also take levels, if you desire to level the skill faster, but you can't just say that an 18th level adventurer has NO Dungeoneering or Survival skills, despite his lengthy career - thats ludicrous. In fact, long before we had skills (in 1st edition, for you Young'uns), I had adapted a system similar to Runequest's for my games, just so D&D characters could have skills. Later, I changed over to Character Law system, until the 2e Skills system came out, which I didn't like as much, but it was part of the rules so I accepted it. Now, I have tons of notes and adaptions over the years, on how to 'paste' skill systems over a rules system that doesn't have one, so I suppose I'm all ready for 4e. :D I think the very first project I may handle for the Realms Vault is adapting GOOD 3e systems to the 4e ruleset. I just can't see using a system without skills, and 3e's was pretty good (with a few personal tweaks). I'd also like to adapt spell schools back in, and Domains (I think we lost those as well - not sure though).
Khaelieth 04-26-08, 04:34 PM	-I don't use the trained/untrained skill rules. well, then you can't correct me if you've houseruled it;p
Mula 04-26-08, 10:39 PM	You can take also take levels, if you desire to level the skill faster, but you can't just say that an 18th level adventurer has NO Dungeoneering or Survival skills, despite his lengthy career - thats ludicrous. And 4e gives everyone a bonus to all untrained skills equal to half your character level, right? Yay, problem fixed! But wait... I remember reading that 4e D&D is a video game and communist to boot! Darned!
MarkusTay63 04-27-08, 12:01 AM	The designers also eat unbaptised babies. :P And D&D helps you do real witchcraft, and commune with Satan. I thought EVERYONE knew that. :devil: Never said I had a problem with 4e rules - its just 4e FR that blows chunks. ;)
Rauric 04-27-08, 09:51 AM	The designers also eat unbaptised babies. :P And D&D helps you do real witchcraft, and commune with Satan. I thought EVERYONE knew that. :devil: Never said I had a problem with 4e rules - its just 4e FR that blows chunks. ;) Actually you did make a comment about how it was geared to 12 year olds. Unless ya meant the setting. Which of course is not 100% because it is geared to gamers looking for fun. Anyway I too have said foolish things on these forums that I now regret. I was agaisnt a 100 year jump if you look at my post from Aug and Sept. I have accepted it now though. Oh well.
MarkusTay63 04-27-08, 10:40 AM	Yes, the new rules ARE geared to 12-yr-olds, or rather, younger players who don't want to be bothered with 'fat' rules. In my current game, I have four players, and only the oldest (my 19 yr old) bothered to read the rulebooks. The other three (17, 16, and 16) couldn't be bothered, and only read the parts of the players manual that pertained to their character (race, class, and equipment). Looking back, I suppose 12 was a bit harsh, considering everyone under 18 that I DM for can't be bothered with the 'complicated rules'. All four of them are WoW players though, and could tell you the best build for every combination of race and class in that game. So, I will retract my '12 year old' statement (sorry), and instead just refer to them as 'younger players'. Since I am all about teaching the game to new players, and the new rules will probably appeal to them more, I support them. Strange, huh? You thought I was insulting something I like (the rules), when in actuality I was just making a statement about the new game's target audience. 4e FR is definately geared to 'younger players' - just two sourcebooks, 'dragon people' (How many cartoons currently feature anthropomorphic dragons?), and 'demon people' (Tieflings). Just look at the 4e cartoons - I'm not saying they are awful, but its pretty apparent that 'fart jokes' are aimed at the kiddies. My 6 and 10 year olds love the last one, my 16 year old found it amusing, and my 19 year old thought it was stupid. I have a very nice demographic within my own home, so I know first hand what attracts kids and what doesn't. In this regard, WotC and I are on the same page. The only hope for D&D's survival is to attract new, younger players - something I've spent a good portion of my life doing, and many of the people I taught the game to still run games of their own (something I'm extremely proud of). I also think making the miniatures more intinsic to the game is a good decision - I have always played with minis, and I know for a fact that kids can't get enough of them. I have hundreds of D&D ones, and about 5000 metal ones, and I let my kids play with all the plastic ones - even the 16 year old still finds them fun. I don't know about girls, but little boys love playing with 'little guys' (action figures, toy soldiers), and that would be the BEST way to get more kids playing D&D - a set of fast rules to go with something akin to Heroscape (I have two copies of that game), that point them in the direction of the 'more advanced' rules (D&D). Kids these days need visuals for gaming, and the ONLY way D&D is going to compete with MORPGs is to give them something a MORPG can't - all the action in 3D miniature. Todays youth do not want to be told the game "takes place in their minds". That might have worked for us, but now-a-days companies need to step up their game (pun intended). Sorry for ging on so long, But I didn't want people to think I'm contradicting myself (not that I don't do that from day to day anyway). My opinions of 4e rules and 4e FR are very different - one may prove to be a godsend, while the other, IMHO, is destroying one of the best things that ever came from D&D.
Stigger 04-27-08, 11:07 AM	I can agree with that in spirit Markus... although I don't much like mini's, just not my style. Nothing wrong with them per se, its just a personal taste thing. I have no problem with streamlined, easy rules either, as they generally make telling a story much simpler. My problem with some of the stuff I've seen thus far is not emphasizing the story of the campaign enough, and giving it the appearance of being a tactical simulator. Certainly that's more up to the DM, but it seems like DMs aren't getting a lot of love when it comes to giving us guidance on how to make the campaign a story that people will remember. Not that I really need that sort of advice, but its a concern for me when it comes to DMs who are new to the game. I really don't want to see things devolve into a state of being a series of encounters strung together by periods of rest and travel.
MarkusTay63 04-27-08, 11:43 AM	Thats why I look at the new rules as a 'Hybrid' - something between a tactical simulation akin to Squad Leader/Mordheim, and a true RPG. I figure, if Hasbro/WotC can entice tens of thousands of parents to 'buy-into' the new mini game, from that 1-5% will want to go on to the 'advanced rules' (D&D). Then, from there, they can learn all about other PnP RPGs, or old-school TSR/WotC rules. The new rules are a starting point, and when I look at them that way, I can accept them. I plan to use them as the basic building blocks of my own system, which will also use parts of 3e, and things from the Book of Experimental Might and Paizo's Pathfinder rules. As much as I loved the 3e rules, they became bloated, and anyone trying to get into the game now would have a hard time getting past that. If you offer new players fast and simple rules, and then slowly build upon them, then you can get people into D&D much easier from the get-go. Young People need to learn to walk, before they can run. ;)
Lord Karsus 04-27-08, 12:01 PM	well, then you can't correct me if you've houseruled it;p -I didn't even know that was how the actual rules worked.
Mula 04-27-08, 12:59 PM	Yes, the new rules ARE geared to 12-yr-olds, or rather, younger players who don't want to be bothered with 'fat' rules.:rofl: Simpler or smoother rules doesn't mean an RPG is geared to young players. Complicated doesn't mean more mature. Ever heard of ease of use?
MarkusTay63 04-27-08, 02:05 PM	True. There are plenty of adult idiots too. :P <just kidding there> Anyhow, I don't think its the 'adult kids' that WotC is aiming for - the current set of gamers is aging, and older gamers only have a 'limited shelf-life' (to use a business term). They definately want 12 year olds that will buy products for the next 40 years, as opposed to 30 year olds who may only buy products for the next 20 years. Perhaps 'Aging Customer-base' would be more accurate - I don't like sounding like I have an 'expiration date'. But yeah, if they can simplify the rules and still keep it D&D, then I'm all for that.
Alter_Boy 04-27-08, 10:02 PM	Now you can just shovel treasure and Exp at your PCs. :( Giving treasure and XP to PCs? Not in my D&D! It's all rusty nails and long-winded stories that never go anywhere. Like the time I took the ferry to Albany. We wore buckles on our belt, because it was the fashion at the time. Course, back then, we didn't call them buckles, we called them "hats". Anyways... :zzz:
Stigger 04-28-08, 02:42 AM	Could you take that any more out of context I wonder...
Keryth 05-05-08, 01:47 PM	Just like the Warcraft "resurrection" spell castable by druids. Any why not break rules? Some are probably broken to start with. Well, I LOATHE and HATE 4e FR and wjile I continue to try to keep an open mind about 4e, the more i read and hear, the more I begin to feel the same way out 4e. HOWEVER, just to point out something. In WoW, only ONE class, the druid, can raise people in combat, and it's a one shot deal with a LONG cool down, meaning you horde it for an emergency and use it once. The only other class with something similar, is the Shaman, and that only works on themselves. I remember the days of 2nd ed with people casting resurrection in a fight, and such, my killer GM days and Muchkin times. However, my group has outgrown that. 4e is beginning to look very...childish, to me.
GreenKnight 05-05-08, 02:07 PM	Remember that that's a power you get from an Epic Destiny (there're several Epic Destinies) at 25th-level level, and it's once per day.
Keryth 05-05-08, 02:18 PM	-As a DM, I've never killed a PC before, even though there were a few times when they really should have died in battle. Killing PCs causes campaigns to unravel, especially when storylines are specifically tailored to specific characters- quests looking for things, revenge, and so on... PC death is supposed to be a real consequence of the campaign. A contingency GM's must plan for. I've had campaigns where no one died, and campaigns that ended with everyone playing different characters form the ones they began with. You make it work. The consequences for player actions must always be enforced.
Lord Karsus 05-05-08, 04:05 PM	PC death is supposed to be a real consequence of the campaign. A contingency GM's must plan for. I've had campaigns where no one died, and campaigns that ended with everyone playing different characters form the ones they began with. You make it work. The consequences for player actions must always be enforced. -And, when this happens, what's the point of playing? I start off DMing with a particular "picture" in mind. I tailor that picture to inherently involve my PCs. When they are not, parts of the "picture" are torn asunder. Allowing that picture to be torn because a random bugbear rolled a 20 and then a 19, instead of a 4, or a 16, or a 7, or whatever other numer is applicable would be asinine.
Stigger 05-05-08, 04:27 PM	Different styles of DMing, none inherently better or worse than the others so long as everyone is enjoying themselves...
Keryth 05-05-08, 04:50 PM	-And, when this happens, what's the point of playing? I start off DMing with a particular "picture" in mind. I tailor that picture to inherently involve my PCs. When they are not, parts of the "picture" are torn asunder. Allowing that picture to be torn because a random bugbear rolled a 20 and then a 19, instead of a 4, or a 16, or a 7, or whatever other numer is applicable would be asinine. I can understand your point LK, and I certainly do not want to start an argument here. However, where is the risk for your characters? What is the challenge? And, what do you do if someone decides they want to change characters? Or if the group does not want to adhere to your 'picture'? I mean, your picture could involve the group saving Waterdeep from the vile cult that worships Mongrelmen and is trying to steal control of the Walking Statues, and your players decide they do not like Waterdeep, nor do they care about it, and they want to hire a boat and go explore the Moonshaes? Also, waht if your players are fighting one of your major villains and on the 1st round one of your players rolls a 20 and then a 19 and kills him before you got to the point of the fight where they were supposed to learn something from said villain, do you tell the players they didn't kill him? I understand there are different styles of GMing. And, believe me, mine are involved stories that interweave the backgrounds of the characters that my players design, as well as weaving the characters into the story itself, however, I honestly cannot picture a game where there is no risk. Where the players know their characters cannot die. I just noticed I never answered your question though, rhetorical it may have been :) When a character dies, you can weave the replacement into the story. Yes, some threads get left behind, but new ones get added and you still get a picture similar to the one you began with. Sometimes it even ends up being superiro to the picture you began with
Rauric 05-05-08, 04:59 PM	Yup, fun is the main thing. Some people like the luck of the die approach and some like it but only at the "big boss" fights.
GreenKnight 05-05-08, 05:11 PM	I'm just looking forward to that resurrect once per day ability, so I can finally stat out the Green Knight. It'll be great. I'll wander into royal courts all over the map on holidays and challenge people to decapitation contests, and give them the first shot. Now that's holiday spirit! :D
Lord Karsus 05-05-08, 05:57 PM	I can understand your point LK, and I certainly do not want to start an argument here. -Your talking to the wrong person, then, buddy. I can make an argument out of toast, G-d knows. I've literally ostrosized myself from one of my classes for fervently "debating"/arguing about a specific issue in one of my classes (a woman's right to smoke/drink alcohol while pregnant). However, where is the risk for your characters? What is the challenge? -Who said all of that is gone? The randomness of death is gone, but death and challenge are still a factor. And, what do you do if someone decides they want to change characters? -One cannot randomly change characters, without a good reason, and without informing the DM. Houserule for years in my DM/Player circle. Or if the group does not want to adhere to your 'picture'? I mean, your picture could involve the group saving Waterdeep from the vile cult that worships Mongrelmen and is trying to steal control of the Walking Statues, and your players decide they do not like Waterdeep, nor do they care about it, and they want to hire a boat and go explore the Moonshaes? -I adapt. I've already done this before. This is almost exactly what happened, actually, sans the Forgotten Realms stuff. A bit more complicated and stupid, however. Also, waht if your players are fighting one of your major villains and on the 1st round one of your players rolls a 20 and then a 19 and kills him before you got to the point of the fight where they were supposed to learn something from said villain, do you tell the players they didn't kill him? -This has already happened before. Contingencies. The BBEG Blackguard, who was down into negatives, had his hand lopped off, instead of being killed, and activated a magical device to Dimension Door himself the hell outta there. The same BBEG has since been killed by the PCs, and will be making a return, via the same abandoned hand, that has since been recovered and kept as a contingency by said BBEG. ...I honestly cannot picture a game where there is no risk. Where the players know their characters cannot die. -And, again, I ask you: Who said that players cannot die? I'm just looking forward to that resurrect once per day ability, so I can finally stat out the Green Knight. It'll be great. -That's the thing that I like about the 4e ruleset the least, I think. I've come to grow to grow to accept those "Healing Winds" as not too bad, and those were the things I liked the least about the ruleset.
GreenKnight 05-05-08, 06:18 PM	-That's the thing that I like about the 4e ruleset the least, I think. I've come to grow to grow to accept those "Healing Winds" as not too bad, and those were the things I liked the least about the ruleset. You only say that cause you've never been involved in a decapitation contest. You don't know what fun is until you've done that. :D
Lord Karsus 05-05-08, 09:10 PM	You only say that cause you've never been involved in a decapitation contest. You don't know what fun is until you've done that. :D -I have, I have. With you, in fact. We settled our differences before it got too bad when I extended the proverbial olive branch and gave you El Paso, Texas.
GreenKnight 05-06-08, 06:31 AM	Oh yeah. I keep forgetting that El Paso is part of my demesne. Probably because it's utterly worthless and lacklustre. We may need to revise that arrangement, soon.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 10:33 AM	-You agreed because of the salsa...
Keryth 05-06-08, 10:41 AM	--Who said all of that is gone? The randomness of death is gone, but death and challenge are still a factor. -And, again, I ask you: Who said that players cannot die? I misunderstood you then. I thought your original statement meant just that. Random deaths, well, I've ogtten rid of them form time to time myself, and other times, kept them in to keep the players on their toes.
GreenKnight 05-06-08, 11:07 AM	-You agreed because of the salsa... My tastes have matured since then. I'm all about jalapeno's, now.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 11:31 AM	I misunderstood you then. I thought your original statement meant just that. Random deaths, well, I've ogtten rid of them form time to time myself, and other times, kept them in to keep the players on their toes. -No. As I've said, if a player crawls into the mouth of a Dragon, to see what's in there, there's about a 100% possibility the Dragon's mouth clamps shut, and the character is as good as dead, barring an amazing roll of the dice. But, there's no reason to end a campaign because a random and unnamed Bugbear that was quickly added in as a random encounter to build the dramatic suspense and pass some time rolled a little bit high on it's To Hit and Damage rolls. My tastes have matured since then. I'm all about jalapeno's, now. -Ah, excellent. Are you aware of this (http://www.thedailyplate.com/nutrition-calories/food/old-el-paso/pickled-jalapeno-slices-12-oz)El Paso product? Perhaps you should browse all (http://www.thedailyplate.com/nutrition/search.php?q=&b=Old%20El%20Paso&page=1&so=)of their products?
Stigger 05-06-08, 11:56 AM	I recall one of my earliest DMs had percentile rolls every hour to see if we got killed in some natural disaster... think I lost three characters to rockslides before we even got to the damned dungeon. Went downhill from there, so crap like that was something I resolved never, ever, ever to do in any of the games I ran. Though I suppose I should be thanking him for showing how not to do things... That's what I'm mostly against, random deaths that serve no purpose other than gratifying some bizarre sense of realism (that's more to do with a DMs sadistic tendencies) rather than something to move the story along.
Rauric 05-06-08, 12:09 PM	I started DMing D&D because I felt like of other DMs I played with were not giving our group what it wanted. After 2 years of playing we had finally hit lvl 6 and everyone was frustrated deep down they just were not sure why. I think the DM was afraid of higher levels. Plus he was afraid of giving us items of magic. We were playing a Planscape FR 3E game so fighting planar creatures with out all melee team with 0 to +1 magic items kinda blew. Plus we met Elminster. The game wasn't horrible it was just lacking some things. When I took over I tried adding some political stuff as well as interesting magic items that had some fun backstories to them. They got the items at early levels and kept them the whole time since they "leveled" along with the wielder. Plus we never worried about survival much. That was more for Darksun or Deadlands not D&D. Anyway I am with the same group and they keep wanting me to continue running D&D. If you can learn from past games and make your current one more fun that is what it is all about.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 12:14 PM	I recall one of my earliest DMs had percentile rolls every hour to see if we got killed in some natural disaster... think I lost three characters to rockslides before we even got to the damned dungeon. -Eww...
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 12:56 PM	The Chivalry & Sorcery rules from FGU was the realist simulation game I ever played, and it was the second set of rules I ever used (before D&D! T&T was my first). Way back in 1977, you had to make rolls at character creation for mental illness and phobias, and you had to make daily health checks - having a toothache that day gave you a -1 to all your concentration rolls! :eek: Anyhow, I greatly enjoyed it, despite the fact that many considered it unplayable (the rules were like ALL the 3e books combined, and then some). I only met one man that could GM it correctly, but he was exceptional (and my mentor). There were 21 DIFFERENT Magic classes, and each and every one had its own set of rules!!! It also had different stats for male and female characters - it was 1977, after all. ;)
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 01:16 PM	There were 21 DIFFERENT Magic classes, and each and every one had its own set of rules!!! -Sounds interesting. What were the selections, and differences, if you remember any?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 05-06-08, 01:33 PM	I recall one of my earliest DMs had percentile rolls every hour to see if we got killed in some natural disaster... think I lost three characters to rockslides before we even got to the damned dungeon. That's annoying. And dumb. It brings to mind two words: Why bother?
GreenKnight 05-06-08, 01:35 PM	I knew a guy who once took two hoof attacks to the face from a startled horse. The horse scored two crits and killed him. :rofl:
Alediran 05-06-08, 01:37 PM	I knew a guy who once took two hoof attacks to the face from a startled horse. The horse scored two crits and killed him. :rofl: Wow, that's tough luck. During our last session one of the characters is almost killed in one strike by a Balor with his Vorpal Sword. You wouldn't belive how much experience the Balor gave to a 14th level party :D. That and two encounters of 16 level gave like 13000 XP for each member.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 05-06-08, 01:46 PM	Stuff like that (being killed by a startled horse, or some other instance of bad luck) happens often enough in life. I personally don't think a game, which is meant to be fun, should emulate real life that closely.
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 02:31 PM	Just looking back through the rules, and it seems you also rolled for social class, which was a major part of the rules (it was primarily a feudal recreation with fantasy elements). Only certain classes could pick certain 'Classes', like a noble couldn't be a thief (unless he was Robin Hood), and a peasant couldn't be a Knight. The Yeoman Class was where fighters typically came from. -Sounds interesting. What were the selections, and differences, if you remember any?The entire Magic System was derived from the book Authentic Theumaturgy, and based around the Rule of Three. You combined three elements to form a single spell result. In D&D, that would translate (to me) as having to use Somantic, Verbal, and Material components (three things to create a spell). A spell using a "Word of Power" only has a Verbal component, so I assume under D&D rules (IMG) that three seperate words are required for the effect. I made up a chart years ago, refelcting the various C&S classes to their D&D 'components'. The Magic Classes were divided into four categories - Natural magick, Minor Arcane, Major Arcane, and Mysticism. Natural Classes: Primitive Talents (Wisewoman, Hedgewizard) Wood Elves (both a class and a race) High Elves (Again, both a class and a race, and the only way to do both magic and melee) Drug-Trance (Shaman) Dance/Chant (another Shaman) Mediums (Dealing with spirits) Shamen (the Shaman archtype, for primitive cultures) All of these (except the Elves) were pretty similar, and were not really different classes so much as 'flavor'. Also, they were more like D&D's Multiclassing, in that they did magic along with stuff from another class. The rest were the true 'Magic Classes', and divided up into three main groups, with several sub-groups - Minor Arcane: Alchemy (Alchemist) Artificers ...Weaponsmith ...Jewelesmith ...Mechanician (Constructs) Astrology (Astrologist) Divination (Diviner) Witchcraft (Hex Masters) ...Covens (Demonology) ...Solitary Hex Masters (Curse-heavy class) Major Arcane: Conjuration (Potion Maker, but totally different then the Alchemist) Enchanters (charms) Necromancy Thaumaturgy (Illusionist in D&D) Mysticism Cabbalism (Rune Magic) Magick Square Mysticism (Numerology) Power Word Magick (True Wizards; my favorite class to be in the basic rules, and relying heavily on "True Name" magic) There was a standard list of spells, but different classes learned them at different levels, and cast them differently, and they got different bonuses as to their effects. Each had its own small section in the rulebook (like Conjurors having to enchant a magic 'Brewpot' to make their potions, that sort of thing), and each had their own 'focus' to empower their spells. For example, the Cabbalist had his specially prepared ink as his focus. The most extensive class was the Alchemist, which was taken as reliably from actual Alchemy texts as I have ever seen, with each process described in full detail and the results of said process. I converted quite a bit of that into 1e/2e D&D some time ago, and I'll see if I can dig it up. Basically, all I did was have a list with the Class name from C&S, and what three components they put together to create their magic. For instance, Artificers would require three material compnents for their magic (NO somantic or verbal), whereas a Cabbalist would require two material (Ink and Paper) and one Verbal (a word to release the effect from the Rune). It was the easiest way to recreate the flavor, without having to rebuild the entire D&D magic system from scratch (which I have done numerous times, but almost always came back to the basic one).
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 03:02 PM	Just looking back through the rules, and it seems you also rolled for social class, which was a major part of the rules (it was primarily a feudal recreation with fantasy elements). Only certain classes could pick certain 'Classes', like a noble couldn't be a thief (unless he was Robin Hood), and a peasant couldn't be a Knight. The Yeoman Class was where fighters typically came from. -I like that. Kinda reminds me of The Game of LIFE, where the good jobs are only availible to those who spend the extra time and money going to college. The entire Magic System was derived from the book Authentic Theumaturgy, and based around the Rule of Three. -Hmm...No, I only know the Rule of Two...:emp: :P -Overall, having read all that, I don't particularly like a lot of it.
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 03:22 PM	The point was that each MU class was written up seperately, with different spell lists (all drawn from a common list, though). Although you may not like the system as written, the concept of having completely different classes is still cool, with them getting totally different class abilities at each level (besides spells, which is the only real thing that differentiates spellcasters in D&D). I think if they had created a seperate specialist class/PrC for each school, it could of beeen so much better. As it was, the differences between even the Sorceror and Wizard were negligible, fluff-wise. Except for a mechanical distinction, not much else was ever done with the concept. Unfortunetly, come 4e I think all the fluff will be written as core in the splatbooks, and we will need Eytan-style article to adapt them to our campaigns. I don't want a repeat of 3e's prolific PrCs - I want just a smattering of great ones with TONS of lore wrapped around them. Too bad I don't see that happening with the new direction, especially with only two setting books coming out (and an adventure). :(
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 04:05 PM	I don't want a repeat of 3e's prolific PrCs - I want just a smattering of great ones with TONS of lore wrapped around them. -No way, Jose. I want PrCs with little lore, that way, I can add them into a campaign and create the lore for them without "disturbing" anything.
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 04:17 PM	See, thats where we differ - I can adapt the lore to my campaign without too may snags - the mechanics are nothing more then a bunch of tables, numbers, and often ill-thought out class abilities. I guess thats why WotC finds it so hard to come up with sourcebooks that please everybody. I understand where you are coming from with 3e PrCs, since the fluff usually didn't 'sync up' with FR lore. However, what I'm talking about is mechanics wrapped around setting-fluff, not the other way around. I don't see them doing that much in 4e rules, because what appears in one book - even a setting-specific one - has to be general enough to be usable in all of WotC's worlds. I'm not sure how that will pan out, because it sounds to me like everything will be very 'wishy-washy' and homogenized. How can you have a REAL FR Bladesinger, if the class works in every setting? What I'm doing in the other thread, where I'm using FR fans as a sounding board for ideas, is putting together the basics for a campaign, but I won't fully flesh it out until I see what 4e has to offer (as far as fluff). Who knows? I may want to USE the Warlock Knights of Vassa somewhere. :) I really can't nail anything down until I read the core fluff though, because I want it compatible. Thats why I'm using some of the Dragonborn material (but certainly not all of it, and MOST certainly NOT the FR version), even though I don't care for the Dragonborn. I want my world to be what a 4e world COULD have been like, if built from scratch.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 04:44 PM	-Red Wizard as a PrC in the DMG is all I am going to say about that...:rolleyes:
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 04:46 PM	Yes, and we also got a few from GH as well, like the Knight of the Great Kingdom. I notice no Eberron PrCs ever made it into the core books. :( Oh yeah... they got a logo. :allalone:
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 04:59 PM	-Never even heard of Knight of the Great Kingdom. Doesn't sound like anything that would intererest me, though. I generally avoid "knightly" Fighters. Closest I ply would be LG Clerics, but those are an entirely seperate boat.
MarkusTay63 05-06-08, 05:17 PM	My Bad. :embarrass I thought it was in the DMG - it turns out that and the Fist of Hextor were both in 3.0 Sword & Fist. Are those early PrCs still valid anymore, if they haven't been 're-done' in a later book? :confused: I know Swashbuckler went from a PrC in that book, to a full-blown core-class later on, but what about others that were never updated?
Alediran 05-06-08, 05:32 PM	If they've been redone then they are obsolete. Elemental Savant from Tome & Blood has been remade in Complete Arcane.
Thinblade 05-06-08, 06:39 PM	On the other hand, if they haven't been republished, then the old material still stands. That would include, IIRC, the ghostwalker, and the master of chains. Oddly enough, both of them got their own novel, but they didn't get updated in 3.5 books.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 08:27 PM	-Does it really matter? That 3e materials need 3.5e updates is a farce. :P
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 05-06-08, 08:40 PM	-Does it really matter? That 3e materials need 3.5e updates is a farce. :P I could never help but think the 3.5 update was quite the handy-dandy way to get people to spend $90 on the same core rule books all over again.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 08:59 PM	I could never help but think the 3.5 update was quite the handy-dandy way to get people to spend $90 on the same core rule books all over again. -I agree. Nothing was changed in the "transition" that couldn't have been handled in someone's houserules. For example, one of the things I remember being changed was giving Gnomes automatic proficiency with the Gnome Hammer. Duh. Did I really need to spend $29.99 for that? -I got the 3.5 PHB, but that was only because my old one was in bad condition (and written in. My stepfather always writes in D&D books. Unacceptable!!).
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 05-06-08, 09:11 PM	-I got the 3.5 PHB, but that was only because my old one was in bad condition (and written in. My stepfather always writes in D&D books. Unacceptable!!). Especially since he wrote in a book that didn't even belong to him.
Lord Karsus 05-06-08, 11:55 PM	Especially since he wrote in a book that didn't even belong to him. -They were everybody's. "Back in the day", we were all fairly communistic with our generic D&D stuff. What's yours is mine is his is hers. Not my Forgotten Realms stuff, though. Always to the shelf.
GreenKnight 05-07-08, 07:32 AM	-They were everybody's. "Back in the day", we were all fairly communistic with our generic D&D stuff. What's yours is mine is his is hers. Not my Forgotten Realms stuff, though. Always to the shelf. We used to lend our gaming books back and forth in my old group. Unfortunately, one player saw no problem whatsoever in inflicting physical damage on other players books. You know how some gamebooks had character sheets in the back so you could photocopy them (Complete Handbooks, Palladium books, White Wolf RPG's, etc)? Well, this idiot would rip them out and use them. It took a while for us to notice, as none of us ever flipped to the back of the book. That is until one guy was flipping through one of his White Wolf books (Vampire, Werewolf, or Wraith, not sure which) and saw that the character sheet page was gone. His reaction was something along the lines of "WHAT THE :censored: HAPPENED TO THE CHARACTER SHEET?!?". Thank God I was the one jerk who held on to his game books like they were made of gold. ;) If I ever lended books, it was to the DM and that's it. Should've stuck to that, though. I eventually ended up lending that idiot my Planescape Boxed Set and by the time I got it back it was missing a lid. Zuh? How'd he lose the lid? :banghead:
Valgard 05-07-08, 10:09 AM	We used to lend our gaming books back and forth in my old group. Unfortunately, one player saw no problem whatsoever in inflicting physical damage on other players books. You know how some gamebooks had character sheets in the back so you could photocopy them (Complete Handbooks, Palladium books, White Wolf RPG's, etc)? Well, this idiot would rip them out and use them. It took a while for us to notice, as none of us ever flipped to the back of the book. That is until one guy was flipping through one of his White Wolf books (Vampire, Werewolf, or Wraith, not sure which) and saw that the character sheet page was gone. His reaction was something along the lines of "WHAT THE :censored: HAPPENED TO THE CHARACTER SHEET?!?". Thank God I was the one jerk who held on to his game books like they were made of gold. ;) If I ever lended books, it was to the DM and that's it. Should've stuck to that, though. I eventually ended up lending that idiot my Planescape Boxed Set and by the time I got it back it was missing a lid. Zuh? How'd he lose the lid? :banghead: That, LK... THAT is Unacceptable!!! :mymy: :uh-huh: :rant: :headexplo
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 05-07-08, 10:30 AM	Even if books belong to everyone, I think that kind of mistreatment is unfair.:) If they belong to everyone, that means you can't act like they are yours.
Khaelieth 05-07-08, 10:40 AM	-I agree. Nothing was changed in the "transition" that couldn't have been handled in someone's houserules. For example, one of the things I remember being changed was giving Gnomes automatic proficiency with the Gnome Hammer. Duh. Did I really need to spend $29.99 for that? -I got the 3.5 PHB, but that was only because my old one was in bad condition (and written in. My stepfather always writes in D&D books. Unacceptable!!). Never minded the 3.5 update. Fixed a lot of issues, imo. it did cost a bit, but i actually thought you got value for money there.
Lord Karsus 05-07-08, 01:38 PM	That, LK... THAT is Unacceptable!!! :mymy: :uh-huh: :rant: :headexplo -That is unacceptable...:nonono: Never minded the 3.5 update. Fixed a lot of issues, imo. it did cost a bit, but i actually thought you got value for money there. -Oh, there's no doubt that 3.5 smoothed things out. I said as much that I think it did. But, it's not worth $29.99 per book for a bunch of "smoothings" that can easily be done on one's own (ie, racial weapons).
Khaelieth 05-07-08, 02:37 PM	-That is unacceptable...:nonono: -Oh, there's no doubt that 3.5 smoothed things out. I said as much that I think it did. But, it's not worth $29.99 per book for a bunch of "smoothings" that can easily be done on one's own (ie, racial weapons). Rangers and Bards being redone, spell lists revised, CR fixed (though Worgs still need fixing)... But DMG was a bit useless. Nothing really changed there.
Lord Karsus 05-07-08, 06:08 PM	Rangers and Bards being redone, spell lists revised, CR fixed (though Worgs still need fixing)... But DMG was a bit useless. Nothing really changed there. -That's what I mean. It was nothing that was: A) Really, need-to-be-done, necessary. B) Couldn't have been done by yourself C) Worth another $29.99 per book. I mean, there could have simply been an errata, and that's that.* *The 3.5 Monster Manual is probably the best of the three. It has a bunch of new monsters not in the original, and a lot of new illustrations.