Accordingly, they are considering adding two forums to the D&D Fundamentals section, which would bring the total to nine sections. However, four of those sections -- Character Optimization, Character Development, Rules Q&A and D&D General will exist in any future reorganization. That means reorganizing Character Building, Monsters and Equipment & Magic Items into five forums. Let's make proposals for what those five forums should be.
I will edit this post to add the proposals. There is no guarantee that Community Management will use these proposals. But I can guarantee they won't use a proposal they never get a chance to consider, so make you preference known!!
Here's my proposal:
- D&D Fundamentals
- Classes
- Powers, Skills & Feats
- Races
- Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
- Classes
Add your own proposals!!!
Dungeons & Dragons Insider
• Online Service - D&Di
D&D FAQ (intro to roleplaying games, D&D, D&Di) link
D&Di (premier service for online table top gaming) link to www.dndinsider.com
D&Di Online Tools (Character Creator, Game Table, DM Adventure Building Kit, Online Rules Compendium)
Computer Hardware & Software (technical discussion)
Dragon Articles
Dungeon Articles
D&Di General
Heroes & Monsters
• Core Books - Players Handbooks & Monster Manuals
Races & Monsters (racial powers & traits, monster powers)
Classes & Powers (class powers & features, paths & destinies, sources & roles)
Skills, Feats & Rituals (ability scores, skills, feats, rituals)
Equipment & Magic Items (weapons, armor, items, magic item powers, costs)
Character Optimization (strategies to design powerful characters, tactics to play them)
Character Development (pics, bios, motivations, personalities, building to express flavor, roleplay)
Astrids Parlor (gender considerations)
Player Advice (character sheets, power cards, resolving difficulties with DM or other players, &c.)
World
• Core Books - Dungeon Masters Guides
Points of Light World (cosmology, magicology, VIPs, religions, alignments, lands, towns, cultures, customs, history, guilds)
Adventures & Encounters (adventure building, encounter challenges, dungeon maps, official modules)
Rules Discussion (analysis, recommendations, houserules)
Official Rules Q&A (clarification of rules, rulings & errata)
Dungeon Master Advice (manage the table, set the mood, encourage roleplay, help players get along, &c.)
Other Worlds
• Accessory Books - Campaign Setting Trilogies (Campaign Guide, Players Guide, DMs Guide)
Forgotten Realms Heroes & Monsters (Races & Monsters, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c.)
Forgotten Realms World (World of Faerûn, magicology, VIPs, religions, lands, towns, cultures, customs, guilds, &c.)
Eberron Heroes & Monsters (Races & Monsters, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c.)
Eberron World (World of Eberron, magicology, VIPs, religions, lands, towns, cultures, customs, guilds, &c.)
Worlds Beyond (Greyhawk, Mystara, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, Homebrews, &c.)
Previous Editions
• D&D 3e Books
Races & Monsters
Classes
Skills & Feats, Equipment, Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures & Encounters
D&D Before 4e
D&D Community
Community Business (forum design & management) link
WotC Staff Blogs (D&D 4e designers, developers, managers) link
Future Releases (upcoming D&D products, previews, preorder discounts, hopes)
Reviews (reviews of D&D products, helpfulness, recommendations)
Game System License (GSL)
D&D General
Off-Topic Tavern
Related Links
Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures (D&D Minis, DDM) link
Dungeons & Dragons Novels (published by Wizards of the Coast) link
Dungeons & Dragons Fan Fiction (written by D&D Community) link to Gleemax Community Fiction
Other RPG Forums
Play-by-Post Forums (play RPGs online: D&D, Star Wars, D20 Modern, Mutants & Masterminds, Gurps, &c.) link
Gaming Culture (cool movies, scifi, music, events) link
For example, its impossible to discuss the Eladrin race without being able to discuss the racial power Feystep. Similarly for a classs power.
Powers need to be included as part of the Races and Classes forums.
- - - Character Building (stats & options to generate your character)
- - - • Races (racial powers & traits)
- - - • Classes (class powers & features, Paragon paths, Epic destinies)
- - - • Other Stats (ability scores, skills, feats, rituals, languages, alignments)
So I would just say combine the two community and fundamentals.
Here's my proposal:
- 4th edition
- Races
- Classes
- Powers, Skills & Feats
- Character Optimization (:yuck
- Equipment
- Character Development
- Monsters
- Rules Q&A
- House Rules
- Dungeon Master Advice
- Player Advice
- Home-brewed Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Published Campaign & Adventure Workshop
- Astrid's Parlor
- D&D General
- Off-Topic Tavern (
)
- Races
then the only real problem left is using "character" to mean two different thing.
CO, character means PC-what a player uses within the game.
CD, character means the actual persona of a PC rather than its collection of game mechanics.
Seperating Fundamentals and Community really just means seperating published from user-created content. But there will be user-created Monsters, items, etc anyway so blur the line and just have the sections devoted to the edition itself which brings all views of D&D together. Unless something in subscribing to a forum grouping limits the number of subforums allowed within the software.
If anyone would like reasoning behind my proposed exact order of the forums I will be glad to give it if it is needed.
- D&D Fundamentals
- D&D Community
- D&D Worlds
It would be better to combine these separate sections, then reorganize them into more coherent sections, so forum viewers can find wanted information more easily.
It is especially important, info relevant to Players be in one place, and info relevant to DMs be in one place.
Along these lines, the forum directory can use the structure of D&D books to organize the sections. For example:
- Core - Players Handbooks (PHs)
- Core - Dungeon Masters Guides (DMGs)
- Core - Monster Manuals (MMs)
- Core Accessories (Suppliments,Splatbooks)
- Campaign Settings
Note the Accessories and Campaign books should redirect certain topics to relevant Core sections. For example, the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting introduces the Swordmage class. However, discussions about the Swordmage should take place in the Classes forum in Players Handbooks section.
Here's my proposal:
- D&D Fundamentals
- Classes
- Powers, Skills & Feats
- Races
- Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
Add your own proposals!!!
This is generally sensible, and as you mentioned, the last four on the list are set in stone.
However, I'd go with something more like this:
- D&D Fundamentals
- Martial & Stealth Classes & Powers (Fighter, Rogue, etc.)
- Caster Classes & Powers (Wizard, Cleric, Warlock, etc.)
- General Skills & Feats
- Races & Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
- Martial & Stealth Classes & Powers (Fighter, Rogue, etc.)
Races and monsters belong together, IMHO, because almost anything can be a PC race, and even humans can count as monsters.
Splitting the class discussions along martial/spellcasting lines likewise makes sense, because most wizard players have no interest in talk about great cleaves and few fighter players have use for talk about spell selection. But when the Wizard, the Cleric, the Warlock and the Psionisist all have basically the same spell with just different handwavium to explain how they do it, you might as well just put them all in the same place.
- Martial & Stealth Classes & Powers (Fighter, Rogue, etc.)
- Caster Classes & Powers (Wizard, Cleric, Warlock, etc.)
- General Skills & Feats
I like that, except of the eight classes in the PHB, there are only three martial classes (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord) and five arcane/divine (Ranger, Paladin, Cleric, Wizard, Warlock).
Maybe if they split if up as...
- Arcane Classes, Feats and Spells
- Divine Classes, Feats and Prayers
- Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills
- Races and Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
...it could work, but that would commit CM to introducing new forums as new Power Sources get introduced and I'm not sure CM wants to commit to that.
I like that, except of the eight classes in the PHB, there are only three martial classes (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord) and five arcane/divine (Ranger, Paladin, Cleric, Wizard, Warlock).
Maybe if they split if up as...
- Arcane Classes, Feats and Spells
- Divine Classes, Feats and Prayers
- Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills
- Races and Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
...it could work, but that would commit CM to introducing new forums as new Power Sources get introduced and I'm not sure CM wants to commit to that.
Wait, about when Ki, Psionics, Primal (that is a power source) appear in a year for PHB 2?
Are we going to reorganize the forum another time?
Not that I'd have a problem with that, but these are things to consider.
I mean, Ki is similar to martiak, but it might fit the casting classes (if Spirit Shaman or Wu jen returns) as Arcane or Divine too.
We could make it instead:
Divine and Arcane Power
Martial and other power source Power
etc
etc
That would make second forum have the most discussion non-arcane/divine though. It would temporarily till we make room for Primal/Psionics/Ki a place for discussion.
Anyhoo, just thought I'd inject that point.
Wait, about when Ki, Psionics, Primal (that is a power source) appear in a year for PHB 2?
Are we going to reorganize the forum another time?
That is what I fear in that the forums will never reach a stable point.
I feel Races or Classes must also discuss the racial powers or class powers that constitute them.
For example, its impossible to discuss the Eladrin race without being able to discuss the racial power Feystep. Similarly for a classs power.
Powers need to be included as part of the Races and Classes forums.
However the forum gets divided, this really needs to be taken into account. You can't have powers without races and classes and feats, so powers don't really needs their own section.
KevinAM: Races & Monsters
Combining Races & Monsters is a reasonable organization, thematically. However, the Monsters forum is already pushing max traffic now. If it combined with any other forum, the traffic would become too much. Especially races, which always has
Moreover, in 4e, "Races" & "Monsters" now have very different templates. Theres reason to keep them separate. Discussing Humans as "monsters" doesnt belong in a forum for Player Character Building.
Propane: Too fine a line between.
Char Dev versus Char Op. One is highly "emotive" and synthetic, the other is highly "mathematical" and analytic. Its like the difference between a biography ... and a medical evaluation. Basically, the picture of your favorite character and ems narrative bio - along with roleplay advice - are irrelevant in the Char Op.
;) Plus, the "roleplay" community and the "rollplay" community have a history of conflict.
I know "Character Development" is the proper terminology, borrowed from fiction writing. But would it be clearer if Char Dev got renamed Character Personality or something like that? [Edit: What about: Character Biography (Char Bio)? Or Character Portraits (Char Port)?]
Wrecan:
- Arcane Classes, Feats and Spells
- Divine Classes, Feats and Prayers
- Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills
Dividing the Classes forums by power sources? I could live with that. In fact, I like the "plug&play" modularity it suggests.
My only concerns would be. Perhaps the Divine Classes forums wouldnt get enough traffic? Also, what about stats that arent source-coded: Where do "general" feats and skills go? Where do Epic Destinies fit in? But if these get addressed Im all for it.
I know phrasing it as "Spell Powers" is redundant, but I feel it helps make the concept of a "spell" or "exploit" clearer.
- Arcane Classes (Features, Spell Powers, Feats, Paragon Paths)
- Divine Classes & Paths (Features, Prayer Powers, Feats, Paragon Paths)
- Martial Classes & Paths (Features, Exploit Powers, Feats, Paragon Paths)
I like that, except of the eight classes in the PHB, there are only three martial classes (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord) and five arcane/divine (Ranger, Paladin, Cleric, Wizard, Warlock).
Maybe if they split if up as...
- Arcane Classes, Feats and Spells
- Divine Classes, Feats and Prayers
- Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills
- Races and Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
...it could work, but that would commit CM to introducing new forums as new Power Sources get introduced and I'm not sure CM wants to commit to that.
Splitting Arcane/Divine makes some sense from a thematic end, but when the mechanics has them continually poaching spells from each other's lists, it doesn't make as much sense.
Paladins would honestly be split between forums, but so would any multiclass characters. The question is whether the paladin is operating in fighter mode or in Cleric Jr. mode.
As for new forums for new power sources, I'd say lump everything in with the Arcane/Divine forum and spin them out if/when they get enough traffic to demand it. The only one I foresee getting enough popularity would be psionics, but honestly, there's no real difference between a divine Strength buff, an Arcane Strength buff, a Psionic Strength buff, and a Strength buff powered by Flavor-of-the-Month-Splatbook-Source which may or may not prove popular.
If you can afford another forum, try something like this:
- Casting Classes, Feats and Spells/Prayers/Invocations/etc. (Wizard, Cleric, Warlock)
- Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord)
- Hybrid Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills (Paladin, Ranger)
- Races and Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
Of course having a Divine forum does make sense if you want to deal with god issues, which is of course important for Clerics and Paladins, so I could see it with the arrangement you had. It depends on whether you're wanting to focus on the classes or the powers.
I think grouping things by similar powers makes the division a bit neater and makes for less multiple posting.
KevinAM: Of course having a Divine forum does make sense if you want to deal with god issues.
Good point. I generally thought of divinities going in the Campaign Setting forums, but it does belong with the Cleric class too. If there is a separate Divine Classes forum, it belongs there and helps keep its traffic up.
Casting Classes, Feats and Spells/Prayers/Invocations/etc. (Wizard, Cleric, Warlock)
Martial Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills (Fighter, Rogue, Warlord)
Hybrid Classes, Exploits, Feats and Skills (Paladin, Ranger)
It seems confusing to me if Wizards and Clerics get put in the same forum, but Fighters and Rangers get put in separate forums?
Splitting Arcane, Divine, and Martial makes more sense to me. It also provides a structure that can accommodate future PHs, if traffic makes it necessary.
Also, Id rather have the Paladin and Cleric in a separate forum with the Cleric, because that context would encourage people to think of the Paladin as a Divine class, and further distinguish it from the Fighter class.
- D&D Fundamentals
- Classes, Paths & Destinies
- Powers & Rituals
- Skills & Feats
- Races & Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
- Classes, Paths & Destinies
1) We need to explicitly tell people where to put rituals and combining Powers and Rituals will already make a pretty big forum.
2) Following 4e's design philosophy, races are monsters and combining the two will prevent a lot of cross posting as people put their race up for review in one forum and the monster versions in another.
3) Skills and Feats alone is a pretty dinky forum, but combining them with Powers and feats will drown out all discussion.
4) Unless we expressly note that the classes boards include paths and destinies, I foresee them being split into the powers and Classes boards.
- D&D Fundamentals
- Classes, Paths & Destinies
- Powers & Rituals <--- Ideally, Powers should go with classes. Don't know (or care) where rituals go (so long as it fits)
- Skills & Feats <--- I wonder if a skills forum is even necessary...
- Races & Monsters <--- I could stand for these being separate
- Equipment & Treasure
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A <---- In major need of FAQ stickies
- General Discussion
- Classes, Paths & Destinies
- Races (including racial powers)
- Classes (including class powers)
Subforum: Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies (and their powers) - Feats, Skills, and Rituals (and their powers)
- Monsters, Traps & Hazards (including their powers)
- Equipment (including magic item powers)
- ... (the other forums as is) ...
Powers will probably be one of the most talked-about elements of 4e, so throwing them all in one board would be bad. We'd end up with one huuuge board, with unrelated threads about the wizard's sleep, a hammer's ice-blast, the eladrin sock hop, and the beholder's petrifying eyeball. Not a pretty sight.
- Classes, Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Powers and Rituals (and whatever other things like Alchemy they come out with)
- Races (both PHB and MM)
- Feats and Skills
- Equipment and Treasure
- Monsters, Traps and Hazards
- Character Development
- Character Optimization
- Rule Q&A
- General Questions
- Players Advice
- Campaign & Adventures
- House Rules
- DM Advice
Again, it seems impossible to have Classes without Powers.
But not all powers are class powers, and it is very likely that most discussion will be about singular powers, or the creation thereof.
Vaalingrade: singular powers.
I dont understand what you mean. Theres Class Powers and Racial Powers. What are "singular powers"? Do you mean Wizard Class Spell Powers, Fighter Class Exploit Powers, and so on?
I know "Character Development" is the proper terminology, borrowed from fiction writing. But would it be clearer if Char Dev got renamed Character Personality or something like that? [Edit: What about: Character Biography (Char Bio)? Or Character Portraits (Char Port)?]
Leave the name alone. A character is neither just his personality, nor just his biography and portrait makes me think of just pictures instead of a whole character.
Vaalingrade: I mean like "New Fighter Power: Shootin' Lazers outta ma eyes". ... People are going to start threads about singular, specific powers.
Lets sort thru what is the most helpful way to organize the threads. I guess respondants can talk about a 'singular' power without the context of its class, but it seems less viable to talk about a class without the context of its powers. A 4e class design is little more than the sum of which class powers a player chooses.
For example, the 4e Wizard no longer has a sprawling list of interchangeable spells-per-day slots. Instead em picks two at-will powers. Generally, em wont have more than these two for ems lifetime. The at-will powers fundamentally define what the class is. Similarly, Encounter and Dailly powers. Seriously, without powers, the Wizard class is little more than an uninformative list of hitpoints and skills, without a clear sense of how it fulfills a "Controller" role. When discussing the Wizard class, its the powers that form it. When players pick different powers, they get very different kinds of Wizards. A cornucopia of specific power options, is part of the 4e class design.
Even when a thread discusses a specific power, the outcome is an entirely different Wizard class concept.
If discussions about general class design and specific class powers occur together, Wrecans suggestion seems helpful: to divide classes per their power sources. Thus Arcane classes and powers form a forum, Martial classes and powers a forum, etcetera. It gives a good sense of what each class is about. Its different from how 3e did things, but it deserves serious consideration.
Mysteria: A character is neither just ...
Aright. I guess a brief forum description is enough to clarify what kind of "Development" the forum discusses.
Again, it seems impossible to have Classes without Powers.
Next week I'll ping Chris Perkins and Chris Youngs and a couple other R&D folks to get their thoughts, but the real problem is that you can't really talk about classes in 4E without talking about powers.
Are there other ways we can split the forums? What about something like:
CB: Defenders
CB : Controllers
CB: Leaders
CB: Strikers
Are there other ways we can split the forums? What about something like:
CB: Defenders
CB : Controllers
CB: Leaders
CB: Strikers
You mean create a forum for combat and have it split at creation to discuss playing styles?
Gamer Zer0:
CB: Defenders
CB: Controllers
CB: Leaders
CB: Strikers
Huh. Dividing class forums by roles may work well.
Personally, what I dont want is the "class clone" syndrome, where every class fulfills the same role in the exact same way, regardless of power source. For example, I dont want all Defenders to be dumb brutes who hit things with weapons. I want different classes to fulfill the role in different ways. For example, a Psi Defender could lack physical weapons and instead have an aura of a telekinetic vortex, that pulls enemies toward em, while dealing more damage to all enemies as they get closer. Another kind of Martial class could be a Dex Defender perhaps resembling a flurrying Monk, who herds enemies together like sheepdogs ring around sheep. Or whatever. So, by putting classes that share the same role into the same forum, it could emphasize how each class fulfills the role in different ways, and encourage them to be different.
D&D Fundamentals:
- Classes, Roles, and Power Sources - A place to discuss class powers and abilities as well as their power sources and roles in combat.
- Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies
- Races - A place to discuss various PC races and racial powers and feats. Both official and homebrew.
- Monsters, Traps and Challenges - A place to talk about Monsters, Traps and Skill Challenges.
- Armory and Supply - A place to talk about all forms of equipment, be it mundane or magical.
- Skills, Feats and Rituals - A place to talk about skill use, general feats and rituals.
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
At the heart of it classes are built off their role and power source. So any talk about roles or power sources are going to have to involve classes. Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies need their own subforum for the same reason the 3.X boards had a prestige class subforum. If the main classes board seems to need it, Power Source based or Role based subforums could be spun off.
Races and Monsters need to be separated due to the way the mechanics for both work. While their maybe some cross posting between the two based on some posters wanting to use their new race as opponents and as PCs, this is necessary due to the different mentalities used to develop them.
Monsters Traps and Skill Challenges need to be grouped together because they are parts of various encounters and will be used together in adventures.
Lets sort thru what is the most helpful way to organize the threads. I guess respondants can talk about a 'singular' power without the context of its class, but it seems less viable to talk about a class without the context of its powers. A 4e class design is little more than the sum of which class powers a player chooses.
But not all powers are class powers. And it will just be a pain to search a handful of boards looking for just the right one. Classes have powers, yes, but they also have class features.
Are there other ways we can split the forums? What about something like:
CB: Defenders
CB : Controllers
CB: Leaders
CB: Strikers
We've already seen talk of multi-role classes and you can bet you bottom dollar someone will come up with a new role, so this and power sources are out, IMO. Unless you really want cross-postopuluzza around here.
But not all powers are class powers. And it will just be a pain to search a handful of boards looking for just the right one. Classes have powers, yes, but they also have class features.
Powers fall into four types:
- Class Powers (including Paragon Path and Epic Destiny powers)
- Racial Powers
- Item Powers
- Monster Powers
I think you're over thinking things Vaal.
Are there other ways we can split the forums? What about something like:
CB: Defenders
CB : Controllers
CB: Leaders
CB: Strikers
This may be useful for wargamers, but it's decidedly unsexy for roleplayers. I want to play a wizard, not a "controller," whatever that is (and yes, I know, but if I'm roleplaying well, my character doesn't). Moreover, all the discussion would get focused on min-maxing to best pimp your character out for that role.
I'm leaning more towards the suggestion about the Arcane, Divine and Martial forums, because while there will be some mechanics crossbleed between them, it will at least keep things focused on the roleplaying, not the wargaming.
Heroic Tier
Classes
Races
Skills/ Feats
ect.
Paragon Tier
Optimization
Diaries
ect.
Epic Tier
Gods
Worlds
ect.
Challenges
Monster
Traps
Skill Challenges
ect.
Powers Q&A could also take some pressure off of Char Building, as well.
I would split CB in general as Arcane / Martial / Divine, etc... it will have a similar effect as splitting it by role, except Power Source is a less meta- concept than role, and should ruffle far less feathers.
I would suggest rather than "D&D" forums with "older editions" lower down (which many many people appear to not ever see and so they post and look in the wrong forum), the older editions could be split off into a separate section or the current "main" boards could be labeled specifically as 4e, at least for awhile until the transition is actually more fully made.
The rule books aren't even released to the masses yet, so I think it is somewhat understandable if people still go by the assumption that "D&D" still means 3.5.
A scant few may not even be aware of 4e I suppose, and wouldn't think to look in "Previous Editions". EDIT: Honestly, I am fully aware of 4e and I still feel like it is premature to just call 4e forums "D&D" when almost nobody owns the books.
If powers are very split up, and classes are very split up, then traffic would be too low and the usefulness of the boards would be reduced for people looking for help. Often, people don't know exactly where their questions should go, and the people who can help them may not frequent every single subforum regularly enough for discussions.
I think one for powers and one for classes is best, no subdivisions by power source or role. Races may have powers associated, but nowhere near the amount that exist in general. In the core books, each race has just the one base power at creation.
However, there was something to be said for the psionics board having been separate -- that was a large departure from the core rules in a way, and had different fans. I don't think starting out there are that substantial of differences with power sources though, and while there are many taken overall, there really aren't that many options for any given class of what they could choose by level, so most questions would be limited to maybe a group of 4 powers total...
EDIT: I still feel like the DM advice should be further broken into a specific rules issues subforum, and the generally more common "How do I deal with this situation?" can go in the main forum. If there is a serious rule question from the DM side, then it is somewhat inappropriate to ask on the same forums with only players, who may not know the answers and who quite likely aren't interested in wading through "useless" posts.
- A forum with about 35 threads per day (34) can split into 2 forums.
- A forum with about 50 threads per day (51) can split into 3 forums.
- A forum with about 70 threads per day (68) can split into 4 forums.
Character Building (about 46) could split into 2, probably 3 separate forums.
Official Rules Q&A (about 43) could probably split into 2 separate forums.
Character Building:
• Races (racial powers & traits)
• Classes (class powers & features, paths & destinies, sources & roles)
• Other Stats (ability scores, skills, feats, rituals, alignments, languages)
Later, if the Classes thread traffic begins to overflow significantly, probably divide it according to roles or sources. Even separating out one popular role (like Striker) could help.
I'm not enamored with the idea of splitting things by party role. That's good for conceptualizing the game, but it doesn't reflect how forumgoers talk about things.
My current preference for D&D Fundamentals is:
- Classes and Powers
- Skills, Feats & Rituals
- Races & Monsters
- Gear, Mundane and Magical
- Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters (moved up from D&D Community)
- Rules Q&A
And then move Character Optimiation and Character Development into D&D Community as follows:
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- House Rules
- DM Advice
- Player Advice
- Astrid's Parlor
I also think we should add a forum called "Product Reviews and Commentary" to the D&D HQ section underneath "Future Releases". A lot of traffic right now is people who don't know where to discuss Keep on the Shadowfell. If you create a forum to discuss current releases, it 1) saves people who haven't yet bought it from seeing spoilers, and 2) consolidates all these threads into a single locale.
Wrecan:
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Skills, Feats & Rituals
Races & Monsters
Gear, Mundane and Magical
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters (moved up from D&D Community)
Rules Q&A
Community:
Character Optimization
Character Development
House Rules
DM Advice
Player Advice
Astrid's Parlor
Its better. With this, group the Players Advice forum with CharOp and CharDev.
[INDENT]Character Optimization
Character Development
Player Advice[/INDENT]
That way player-relevant info can conveniently group together.
Combining Races & Monsters will probably create a thread with too much traffic that would then need to split again. Each thread, of both Races and Monsters, sustains its own heavy traffic. Describing Humans (or Kobolds) as "races" belongs in the Races forum and is relevant to players and Character Building. Describing Kobolds (or Humans) as "monsters" belongs in the Monsters forums and is relevant to DMs and Adventure Building. Each catagory uses different formats.
But candidly, I feel the Community forum is a pointless catagory because the topics it contains cant be separated from the "Fundamentals". I feel a more sensical and user-friendly organization is topics relevant to players versus topics relevant to DMs.
Something like:
[INDENT]Players
Races
Classes & Powers
Skills, Feats & Rituals
Gear, Mundane & Magical
Character Optimization
Character Development
Player Advice
DMs
Campaigns, Adventures & Encounters
Monsters
Official Rules Q&A (clarification, rulings & errata)
Rules Discussion (analysis, recommendations, houserules)
DM Advice
Worlds
Forgotten Realms
Eberron
Other Worlds (Greyhawk, Mystara, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, Homebrews, &c.)
Community
Astrid's Parlor
D&D General
Off-Topic Tavern[/INDENT]
Haldrik:
Official Rules Q&A (clarification, rulings & errata)
Rules Discussion (analysis, recommendations, houserules)
The renaming should help alleviate traffic in Rules Q&A (to become "Official Rules Q&A"), and increase traffic in House Rules (to become "Rules Discussions").
Moreover, you cannot divide crunch into Player crunch and DM crunch. DMs use Classes, powers and races as much as players do. Many of the threads in a Monster forum would concentrate on turning monsters into playable races.
I know you really have a preference for dividing the forums between players and DMs but it's utterly impractical in my opinion and would only increase the confusion as to where people should post.
As for not combining Monsters and Races I note they are effectively combined right now. Of all the active threads in Character Building, only two relate to races. There are four in Monsters already. I don't think the combination will overwhelm the forum; rather, it will simply acknowledge what the forum has already done.
I understand grouping CharOp and CharDev with Player Advice. But I also think DM and Player Advice should go together.
Here's my suggestions:
D&D HQ:
Community Business
Future Releases
Current Releases
GSL
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
D&D Community:
DM Advice
Player Advice
Character Optimization
Character Development
Astrid's Parlor
Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Worlds:
Forgotten Realms Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Forgotten Realms Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Eberron Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Eberron Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Other Worlds
Related Topics: (links only)
Staff Blogs
D&D Fiction
d20 Design
General RPG & D20 Forums
Play By Post Forums
I hate the way D&D Community forum is currently. It disturbs the traffic flow and deters viewers from finding the correct forums. In my eyes the D&D Community organization is dead wrong.With each forum striving for about 17 thread renewals per day:
[LIST]
[*]A thread with about 35 threads per day (34) can split into 2 threads.
Huh?
Thread with threads?
D&D Insider
• D&D FAQ (link to website <-- this is excellent overview of RPGs, D&D, D&D 4e, & D&Di for newbies)
• D&Di (link to website)
D&Di Online Tools
Hardware & Software
Dragon Articles
Dungeon Articles
D&Di General
New!
Future Releases
Recent Releases
Players
Races
Classes & Powers
Skills, Feats & Rituals
Equipment & Magic Items
Character Optimization
Character Development
Player Advice
DMs
Campaigns, Adventures & Encounters
Monsters
Rules Discussion (analysis, recommendations, houserules)
Official Rules Q&A (clarification of rules, rulings & errata)
DM Advice
Worlds
• Discuss Races, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c. in forums above
• Discuss campaign setting, cosmology, lands, towns, cultures, customs, religions, guilds, whos who, &c. here
Points of Light Core Campaign Setting
Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting
Eberron Campaign Setting
Other Worlds
Community
Community Business
GSL
Astrid's Parlor
D&D General
Off-Topic Tavern
Related Links
Staff Blogs
D&D Novels
D&D Fan Fiction
Play By Post Forums
Other RPG Forums
Hellmute: Huh? Thread with threads?
Doh! That was pre-coffee. Now fixed.
Doh! That was pre-coffee. Now fixed.
NP. I know that feeling. ;)
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
I think this is useful in general, but if part of the point is to keep forums from getting bloated, the "Characters and Powers" section is going to be heavily overposted. I'd suggest adding in the following:
Religion, Metaphysics & Cosmology
That would give a place for all the "Will Pelor take my Paladinhood if I do X?" "Is it possible to be a good necromancer?" and "Can you own property in the Feywild?" threads that regularly crop up. (Well, at least the first two, but I bet the third will be common.)
KAM: Religion, Metaphysics & Cosmology
Alignment and personal religious devotion probably belongs in the Character Development forum, as part of personality, values, and bio.
Cosmology and Religion belong in the campaign setting forums, including Campaigns, Adventures, & Encounters (since this is where the Points of Light Core Setting currently defaults too).
For example:
Worlds
• Discuss Races, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c. in forums above
• Discuss campaign setting, cosmology, lands, towns, cultures, customs, religions, guilds, whos who, &c. here
Points of Light Core Campaign Setting (redirects to Campaigns, Adventures & Encounters)
Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting
Eberron Campaign Setting
Other Worlds
Here's my revised suggestions:
D&D HQ:
Community Business
Future Releases
Current Releases
GSL
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Alignment, Rituals and Skills
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
D&D Community:
DM Advice
Player Advice
Character Optimization
Character Development
Astrid's Parlor
Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Worlds:
Forgotten Realms Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Forgotten Realms Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Eberron Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Eberron Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Other Worlds
Related Topics: (links only)
D&D FAQ
D&D Insider
Staff Blogs
D&D Fiction
d20 Design
General RPG & D20 Forums
Play By Post Forums
Kevin Murphy is right, and I had forgotten to include a place for alignment, as well as other features. I also like some of Haldrik's proposed links, so I include them in my write-up
Here's my revised suggestions:
D&D HQ:
Community Business
Future Releases
Current Releases
GSL
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Alignment, Rituals and Skills
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
D&D Community:
DM Advice
Player Advice
Character Optimization
Character Development
Astrid's Parlor
Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Worlds:
Forgotten Realms Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Forgotten Realms Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Eberron Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Eberron Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Other Worlds
Related Topics: (links only)
D&D FAQ
D&D Insider
Staff Blogs
D&D Fiction
d20 Design
General RPG & D20 Forums
Play By Post Forums
The above seems fairly good. You might consider a small swap of "Skills" with "Magic Items," to make it like this:
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes and Powers
Alignment, Rituals and Magic Items
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Skills
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
That would put all the magical/metaphysical stuff together and all the mundane stuff together as well. That organization would also help to imply where questions about the Feywild, the Shadowfell and other related places should go.
Putting Equipment and Skills together would also make a spot for all the crafting and economics threads to drift to (especially since magic items as I understand it are off the gold standard and onto the residuum standard).
But overall, it looks good.
The other 1% deals with the endless reorganization.
Alignment, Rituals and Skills
;) Dont forget, Feats.
The thing about Alignment is, in 4e it appears to have no mechanical effect whatsoever. So its more a social status signifier for roleplaying, than a part of Character Building. Thats what I meant when suggesting it belongs in Char Dev, along with the character sketch and bio, that lists its motivations, agendas, values, religion, etc.
As an aside, I feel the concept of "Unaligned" doesnt mean neither Good nor Evil, but rather means both Good and Evil: mixed. An Unaligned Human sometimes does compassionate, sharing, loving actions, and sometimes does cruel, selfish, apathetical actions. Sometimes its a matter of meeting em on a good day, other times its a matter of happening to fit into a social catagory that em happens to relate to. Anyway, the both-and is important when describing Unaligned accurately.
Re the two forums, Points of Light World and Adventure & Encounters, at first, PoL Wld should be merely a placeholder that redirects to the Adv&Enc forum. It presence is to make clear where to talk about setting issues, like gods, economy, certain monarchs, ancient history, conflicts between races, how the cosmological planes interact with eachother, what "thin spots" between the planes are, how Feystep works, the nature of the universe, details of religious communities, thieves guilds, etc. etc. While these topics may not get as much discussion they are critical for gameplay for the DM to keep in mind when fleshing out a 'Point of Light' or 'Swath of Darkness'.
Dungeons & Dragons Insider
• Online Service - D&Di
D&D FAQ (intro to roleplaying games, D&D, D&Di) link
D&Di (premier service for online table top gaming) link to www.dndinsider.com
D&Di Online Tools (Character Creator, Game Table, DM Adventure Building Kit, Online Rules Compendium)
Computer Hardware & Software (technical discussion)
Dragon Articles
Dungeon Articles
D&Di General
Heroes & Monsters
• Core Books - Players Handbooks & Monster Manuals
Races & Monsters (racial powers & traits, monster powers)
Controller Classes (Wizard, &c., their powers, features, paths & destinies)
Defender Classes (Fighter, Paladin, &c., their powers, features, paths & destinies)
Leader Classes (Cleric, Warlord, &c., their powers, features, paths & destinies)
Striker Classes (Ranger, Rogue, Warlock, &c., thier powers, features, paths & destinies)
Classes General (Hybrid Roles, Power Sources, Skills, Feats, & Rituals)
Equipment & Magic Items (weapons, armor, items, magic item powers, costs)
Character Optimization (strategies to design powerful characters, tactics to play them)
Character Development (pics, bios, motivations, personalities, building to express flavor, roleplay)
Astrids Parlor (gender considerations)
Player Advice (character sheets, power cards, resolving difficulties with DM or other players, &c.)
World
• Core Books - Dungeon Masters Guides
Points of Light World (cosmology, alignments, magicology, VIPs, religions, lands, towns, cultures, customs, history, guilds)
Adventures & Encounters (adventure building, encounter challenges, dungeon maps, official modules)
Rules Commentary (analysis of rules, fixes, situations rules dont cover, alternative house rules, &c.)
Official Rules Q&A (clarify the meaning of official rules, rulings & errata)
Dungeon Master Advice (manage the table, set the mood, encourage roleplay, help players get along, &c.)
Other Worlds
• Accessory Books - Campaign Setting Trilogies (Campaign Guide, Players Guide, DMs Guide)
Forgotten Realms Heroes & Monsters (Races & Monsters, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c.)
Forgotten Realms World (World of Faerûn, magicology, VIPs, religions, lands, cultures, customs, guilds, &c.)
Eberron Heroes & Monsters (Races & Monsters, Classes & Powers, Equipment & Magic Items, &c.)
Eberron World (World of Eberron, magicology, VIPs, religions, lands, towns, cultures, customs, guilds, &c.)
Worlds Beyond (Greyhawk, Mystara, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, Homebrews, &c.)
Previous Editions
• D&D 3e Books
Races & Monsters
Classes
Skills & Feats, Equipment, Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures & Encounters
D&D Before 4e
D&D Community
Community Business (forum design & management) link
WotC Staff Blogs (D&D 4e designers, developers, managers) link
Future Releases (upcoming D&D products, previews, preorder discounts, hopes)
Reviews (reviews of D&D products, helpfulness, recommendations)
Game System License (GSL)
D&D General
Off-Topic Tavern
Related Links
Dungeons & Dragons Miniatures (D&D Minis, DDM) link
Dungeons & Dragons Novels (published by Wizards of the Coast) link
Dungeons & Dragons Fan Fiction (written by D&D Community) link to Gleemax Community Fiction
Other RPG Forums
Play-by-Post Forums (play RPGs online: D&D, Star Wars, D20 Modern, Mutants & Masterminds, Gurps, &c.) link
Gaming Culture (cool movies, scifi, music, events) link
Here's my revised suggestions:
D&D HQ:
Community Business
Future Releases
Current Releases
GSL
When does something cease being a "current release" and have threads moved to other forums? One month? One quarter?
I think a forum specific for reviews is a cool idea; so just call it that -- Product Reviews.
D&D HQ:
Community Business
Future Releases
Product Reviews
GSL
D&D Fundamentals:
Classes, Feats and Powers
Alignment, Rituals and Skills
Monsters and Races
Equipment and Magic Items
Campaigns, Adventures and Encounters
Rules Q&A
House Rules
D&D General
D&D Community:
DM Advice
Player Advice
Character Optimization
Character Development
Astrid's Parlor
Off-Topic Tavern
D&D Worlds:
Forgotten Realms Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Forgotten Realms Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Eberron Fundamentals (specific classes, monsters, spells, etc.)
Eberron Community (specific NPCs, kingdoms, organizations, etc.)
Other Worlds
Related Topics: (links only)
D&D FAQ
D&D Insider
Staff Blogs
D&D Fiction
d20 Design
General RPG & D20 Forums
Play By Post Forums
What do monsters have to do with "Heroes & Antiheroes"? Monsters are antagonists. Why does the Player's board combine "character sheets" and "power cards"?! That isn't a topic that is so popular that it even needs mentioning.
Why are the player and DM boards separated? Both of them deal primarily with issues at the gaming table, just from different perspectives.
Why does Points of Light get a forum? As far as I can tell there is no Points of Light campaign setting and pretty much no discussion threads on it anywhere on these forums. If they come out with a campaign setting, they can add a forum then, not now.
Why is Rules Discussion and Rules Q&A separate from the discussion of various categories of rules (Classes, Monsters, Equipment)?
Why is Astrid's Parlor grouped with Previous and Current Releases and the GSL?
None of this is intuitive. I would have absolutely no idea how to find a forum related to a topic I want.
Related Topics: (links only)
D&D FAQ
D&D Insider
Staff Blogs
D&D Fiction
d20 Design
General RPG & D20 Forums
Play By Post Forums
Blue: These two are the same forum section.
Other than that the links need to be moved to the top or close to the top. Right now they are buried near the bottom of the page, and most patrons do not scroll down that far when reading the forums. Thus the "helpful" links are all but invisible to those they are meant to help.
So in such a structure, where would I discuss skills and feats?
Heck where would you discuss races?
Heck where would you discuss races?
One could make an argument that the "Monsters" forum could be re-positioned easily enough to cover races as well.
But stuff like skills and feats don't really seem to go anywhere else. I don't know enough about rituals to know if they're also homeless now.
First off, I want to thank everyone for their feedback and comments, they are extremely valuable.
I took everyone's ideas, suggestions and concerns, and presented them to folks on the R&D team along with my own recommendations. We've come up with the following plan:
We split Character Building into 5 forums:
Character Building: Defenders
Character Building: Strikers
Character Building: Leaders
Character Building: Controllers
Character Building: Hybrids
We hope to have this put in place tomorrow.
Thanks,
-Mike
Mike I think your rushing to sell your own ideas to fast, and not taking into account what people are actually talking about in the Character Building Forum.
90% of the threads are talking about one of two things with about a 50/50 split:
- Races and their powers
- Classes and their powers
While dividing the board by roles does have merit, it is not the division the board currently needs, and may actually be harmful. Your division has the potential to generate several boards that could appear to be underused.
So I beseech you to reconsider your current stance, and ask you to hold off on the role subforums and split the board along the lines of classes and races.
PHB
Chapter 12 magic items forum. Now not only do you know where to look for magic items and which book is being discussed, but you know exaclty what things belong int he given forum.
Sorry, just noticed that R&D was the people asked about the forums rather than oh I don't know... the web team, and people that might actually know a bit about running a webstie and forums in general.
Guess Marketing department will be asked what the price for a Shaman's implement will be, and accounting will be asked how much damage this implement should increas X shaman power to or some such.
WTF? Why ask R&D about the forums?
I would also recommend that Skills be added to "Equipment & Magic Items" (thus making it "Skills, Equipment and Magic Items"), as that forum is fairly slow.
Feats are generally specific to a certain style of class, so, like Powers, you'd discuss them in the appropriate Character Building forum.
And from Mike's post, I get the feeling that "Character Building" will be its own forum group, like "D&D HQ" and "Previous Editions". Under Character Building would be five forums named, simply, "Controllers", "Defenders", "Hybrids", "Leaders", and "Strikers". Fundamentals would then be reduced to six forums, a manageable number.
Not just that, but what in the hell does R&D have to do with the forums?
They are designing the future direction of the game. It makes sense for CM to find out where the game is going when trying to determine what forum traffic should be anticipated.
There aren't a whole lot of threads discussing Races. I do think, however, that the name of the "Monsters" board should be changed to "Races & Monsters" to make it clear where race discussions go.
I would also recommend that Skills be added to "Equipment & Magic Items" (thus making it "Skills, Equipment and Magic Items"), as that forum is fairly slow.
Feats are generally specific to a certain style of class, so, like Powers, you'd discuss them in the appropriate Character Building forum.
And from Mike's post, I get the feeling that "Character Building" will be its own forum group, like "D&D HQ" and "Previous Editions". Under Character Building would be five forums named, simply, "Controllers", "Defenders", "Hybrids", "Leaders", and "Strikers". Fundamentals would then be reduced to six forums, a manageable number.
I second this idea.
If "Character Building" is made its own forum group, this makes sense. It sounds as if it would also take in "Character Optimization" while it's at it.
I think CharOp and CharDev need to stick together. I would leave Character Building with the five class roles and nothing else. I might consider moving CharOp and CharDev into Community and then moving Adventure & Campaign Workshop and House Rules into Fundamentals, though.
The way Fundamentals would have:
Person (Races & Monsters)
Places (Adventures & Campaigns)
Things (Equipment & Magic Items... and Skills)
You could rename is D&D Nouns! (I'm kidding!!!)
They are designing the future direction of the game. It makes sense for CM to find out where the game is going when trying to determine what forum traffic should be anticipated.
Well everyone already knows these Roles exist. How many thread exist in the current ofurm about these roles?
As with the split and merge concept where you are masochistically tracking every thread per forum per day. maybe it needs to be looked at what topics the users are actually discussing to dicide if these roles are even something they think about.
If the decision to create forums for specific roles is any indication of the futre of D&D prodcut,s then maybe the public should be informed of that from your idea of this decision. Otherwsie if the roles have no greater impact on the game through future product in the interest of keeping the "existing" classes in the upcoming PHB I balanced, it means that the users should decide what is important for them to discuss.
R&D could only be seen as trying to support this idea of roles, further when maybe the community at large does not care for it.... Thus the "R" portion could kick in and take responses form the users based on existing trends of the forums and what the people who play the game and buy the books want to really discuss rather than forcing an issue or topic that R&D may prefer to discuss....
Make any sense? The direction of any game will have no impact on any forum. So what would happen for splitting and merging the new Role-based forums when they all end up dead, and the existing race/class/etc threads are abandoned and further discussion of those things moves to the General Discussion forum? Would you issue bans and thread moves because the users don't want or feel the threads belong in those fourms? has any of this been thought of in the decision to only base character discussion around the "roles"?
I aplogize for always bringing up many things at once in regards to these issues, but they just jump right out at me when looking at these things, and should probably slow down the thinking about it a bit to allow for parts of the ideas to sink in or be evaluated. But as with D&Dm the larger picture just jumps right out at me, and I like to get the ideas out there while fresh so that others can take a look at them.
Hopefully something will come from it that will be helpful to someone else.
So in regards to R&D and the future direction of D&D, I see it to have no real bearing on the forums, as the users should be the ones deciding what they feel they want fto discuss more.
I would propose taking the planned forums, and creating them as well as one for races, classes, etc, and see which generates enough traffic within the split/merge ideal set forth in that thread to see if the new concept of the forums even work for the community at large.
Again, not blaming you, just more ideas, and you seem more willing to answer, so responding to your answers be they right/wrong/or indifferent.
Thanks, Kevin!
I think CharOp and CharDev need to stick together. I would leave Character Building with the five class roles and nothing else. I might consider moving CharOp and CharDev into Community and then moving Adventure & Campaign Workshop and House Rules into Fundamentals, though.
The way Fundamentals would have:
Person (Races & Monsters)
Places (Adventures & Campaigns)
Things (Equipment & Magic Items... and Skills)
You could rename is D&D Nouns! (I'm kidding!!!)
Will there be an Abstract Nouns forum, for things like Alignment, Cosmology and Metaphysics? Again, where do you put the "Good Necromancer?" threads and "Feystep?" threads?
Well everyone already knows these Roles exist. How many thread exist in the current ofurm about these roles?
Every one that isn't about races or shoudl be in another forum. If it's about Wizards, it goes in Controllers. About clerics? Leaders. About warlocks? Strikers.
roles are even something they think about.
It doesn't matter if they "think about the roles". As long as the roles are listed in the PHB people will know where to post their questions.
If the decision to create forums for specific roles is any indication of the futre of D&D prodcut,s
It was one of the first teasers when Fourth Edition was first announced! The public should be aware!
Make any sense?
No. I really don't understand how you can think "The direction of any game will have no impact on any forum" about that game. Sorry. It makes zero sense to me.
Will there be an Abstract Nouns forum, for things like Alignment, Cosmology and Metaphysics?
Ooh! I like that!
Again, where do you put the "Good Necromancer?" threads and "Feystep?" threads?
Well, until necromancer is an actual class, that should go into House Rules.
And Feystep goes in Monsters, since it's a racial ability (I think).
It doesn't matter what "role" you want to call them, people will want to discuss the class. The role is nothing more than older edition class groups anyway, just organized in some non-sense fashion like the forums are heading.
Ever been to a grocery store lately? Funny how cleaning chemicals and soft drinks are on the same aisle now isn't it? Some punk with a brand new degre in something decided a design change was needed to spice things up. Nota that that isn't rampant through 4th edition.... The point remains. People will be more interested in speaking about the classes rather than roles. The way it is suggested there is not even a place to talk about races. Not everyone wanting to talk about a playable race, or just one from the PHB meant to be used as a PC as opposed to OPCs from whatever "as Characters" section the MM has to allow for gnomes to be played, will care about wading through all the threads about the monsters to discuss them, nor will they care about the "roles" to try to put them into character sections.
The game even now, no matter what they intended to change for the "future" is still based on race/class combinations. These are the things that people discuss for their charaters. Not some imaginary role that will go mostly unnoticed.
UserA: So, what do you think of my town full of strikers?
UserB: Yeah, that is cool, how can I make one full of Controllers?
Granted that would belong in Adventure Workshop, but in the interest of a PC backgorund it makes no sense to discuss things based on the class when wanting to talk about the race.
2- PHB means nothing. Again this is just a class group named a role. If that is the case, then there is still no place for discussion of the races. If the races are meaningless to discus, then they are meaningless in the game, and should be rmoved. At lesat then you wouldn't have threads mourning the loos of gnome and addition of dragonboobs.
3- You miss my point. Yes these roles exist, but what do they mean? Do they mean anything to the players? i am reminded of the movie Down Periscope when the XO repremands the galley officer for improper stocking of the pantry.
"Why is there so much lard? Do you think everyone will wake up in the morning and want a nice big cup of steaming pig fat?!" (vs coffee which was missing from the pantry or in extremely limited supply)
I see this idea and the importance of roles to be a big cup of steaming pig fat, when what people will want is the coffee, the discussion of classes and race, now some role.
Again IF these roles do not play some extreme part in the game, then having forums based on them is meaningless. Are there specific things that these roles mean within the game other than some sort of class group names? Do they give bonuses to anything for being a striker? Is there anything really to discuss about the "roles" themselves?
There is more than ample to discus about the individual classes, and the races. As it has always been, and as long as they exist always shall be.
4- As I have just explained, hopefully you can further understand. These roles mean nothing to people wishing to discuss things on the forum. The races and classes themselves do.
As proof, and since you are so well equipped and knowledgeable about this very forum softare, I propose looking at the forums themselves, and see how many topic are about these roles (class-groups) vs how many are about the races or classes. I would bet you find the majority of topic are about classes and not roles. This is what the users think about when posting. This is what the users think about when looking for topics to view or participate in. This is what the forums should offer the users. A place to discus what the users want to discuss.
If R&D or CM wants an area to discus the "roles" then that can be added also, but should NOT be done at the expense of what the users actually want, and how the users view the forums.
That is the problem with the re-organization in the first place. R&D or marketing doesn't udnerstand forums and made some decision based on no knowledge of them. What needs to be done is someone with knowledge of the forums or of ANY forum actually pay attention to them to see how they are working, rather than trying to change them into their image (often attributed to someone with a God complex).
So what the forums need is what makes them funciton based on what the users want, not what R&D wants.
Otherwise you are trying to change the entire foundation of the internet that was created with BBSs, that is bulletin board services, aka vBulletin Board, aka forums, were from the start.
It doesn't matter if they "think about the roles". As long as the roles are listed in the PHB people will know where to post their questions.
It would still be useful if the new lingo was followed by parenthetical listings of the old classes.
And using the new lingo as headings does strike me as too wargames metagamey and a turn-off to roleplayers.
It was one of the first teasers when Fourth Edition was first announced! The public should be aware!
The public generally reserves the right to be oblivious. I know a number of gamers who may purchase the new edition but are only familiar with the old editions, and if they come online, some of the new lingo is going to confuse them.
I can understand wanting to familiarize players with the new lingo, but it should definitely be put alongside the familiar old lingo. Otherwise "Controller" sounds like either a personality disorder or else something you use to run your entertainment equipment. Which may also describe a wizard, come to think of it, but not in the usual way.
While I assume you know more about the roles conneciton to classes than me as I have not seen the books.
Well, then I suggest we table this discussion until you do read the books. My understanding from the previews is that "class roles" is a fundamental premise to the design of a character class, and that everybody will know what class role any given class will occupy and that all classes within a role will have similar qualities.
people will want to discuss the class.
And they will. People who want to discuss "gnolls" know to go to Monsters. They don't need a specific Gnoll forum.
Similarly, people who want to discuss Warlords will know to go to Leaders.
The role is nothing more than older edition class groups anyway, just organized in some non-sense fashion like the forums are heading.
How can you claim that it's nonsense when you admit you haven't the foggiest idea what class roles are.
The rest of your post is a ramble base don the same flawed premise.
Class Roles are a subcategory of Class based on the actual Fourth Edition rules. I don't understand why you feel that having subcategories is a bad thing.
Most important part is in uppercase. ;)
People who want to discuss "gnolls" know to go to Monsters. They don't need a specific Gnoll forum.
Then why have a forum for a subcategory of each class? Why not just have one forum dedicated to discusing ALL classes?
Salt or ketchup? Which condiment would you prefer with your foot?
Go count the topics int he forum itself and see how many topics there are on each subkect, and tell me what percentage of the topics talk about roles.
Nobody cares about roles, what they care about is classes. You yourself said the thing about the Gnolls forum. So whay split a forum up into class-groups? Are you then going to split monsters by type or whatever the recycled 3rd edition or new 4th edition term is?
I have read each article about 4th, and commented on quite a lot of them. If you have also, then tell me exactly how much of the articles deal with the roles of the PCs and what impact those roles have on the game from those articles?
Two articles mention them, one pretty much saying they are another descriptor for classes. With monsters they ARE the classes if I recall that article PDF about zombies or whichever one it was.
I have address these roles in another thread if you care to search that instead of pigeonholing the cleric into a walking band-aid dispenser thus requiring every party to have a cleric, now the game assumes every party must have one of each of these roles. No difference. Just a fancy new name for classes.
Role should not even mean the "job" the character does in battle as the names only imply. Role in roleplaying should be the assumption of the persona of the fictional character you are guiding through the fictional world.
Stop trying to redesign everything and look at what works.
If it ain't broke don't fix it. If you don't understand it, don't try to fix it or you might hurt yourself. So keep those pennies away from the light sockets. ;)
Malcolm: Okay, with quite a bit of searching, I found the House Rules Forum. Please, could we make it easier for others to locate. ...
@Wrecan
The current forum organization needs to become much better. Relevant info must be in one place.
I know many would appreciate just reading about character building and not class design
I dont follow. Do you mean, designing a new class? If so, personally, I do want to see people create new classes in the Class Building forums.
Do your thing and prove my theory wrong.
Don't ask someone to prove a negative. Don't ask someone to cure your ignorance, after they explained to you how you can cure your own ignorance.
Okay, with quite a bit of searching, I found the House Rules Forum.
What made it difficult to find? What would have made it easier to find?
@Haldrik
You haven't addressed the linear issue. What forums do you want to be difficult to find? House Rules is only the 14th forum on the list, out of 38! If malclom_n is typical, a majority of forums are going to end up down by House Rules or below and those forums will be unseen by people. Of the 43 links and forums you propose, which 27 would you like people like malcolm_n to never see?
Your houserules forum, unhelpfully labeled "Rules Analysis" is the 17th forum on your list, farther down than it is currently! What makes you think malcolm_n would have ever scrolled down past Classes & Powers, the eighth forum on your list?
If you're going to criticize the current reorganization, make sure your own proposal doesn't actually sufer the same flaw (or worse).
Wrecan: You haven't addressed the linear issue.
Actually, I did address the linear issue (and other issues). At length. Unhappily, the forums lockdown went into effect at the exact same time I posted it, and it ate it.
I like GUIs. I think the homepage of Gleemax is great.
But after mulling a GUI for the D&D forum - at this level of nesting - I feel it may not be as helpful.
The D&D forum needs a description for each dedicated forum that it links to, in order to direct traffic to the correct topic. If a GUI limits the amount of space for these descriptions, it would be unhelpful, and if it required an additional level of nesting for these descriptions it would be unhelpful.
Anyway, the problem isnt, information gets listed in a column. The problem is having necessary information somewhere else.
Things are better now, but previously, having CharBld data in the "Fundamentals" forum, but the CharOp forum way out in the otherwise unrelated D20 RPGs forums, and CharDev forum (I didnt even know there was one until recently) there too somewhere else. Unhelpful. But thats not all. The 4e Rules was in the Fundamentals forum but the Houserules was somewhere else in the Community forum. Unfriendly, difficult to discover, and inconvenient even if its existence is known.
Its extremely unhelpful to Character Building in one forum with raw data, but Character Optimization and Character Development somewhere else in another forum with how to assess and use this data. Needed information needs to be in the same place. It must organize into utilitarian clusters of info.
The question is, What is the best way to organize D&D information?
The answer is, To divide it between information that is necessary for players and information that is necessary for DMs. D&D always divides its information this way.
The information of D&D is complex, sprawling, technical, and intimidating. It must organize in a way that makes it as friendly and coherent as possible, especially for newbies, but also for experienced players. That necessarily means, putting commentary about the raw data in the same place as the raw data itself.
The D&D forum needs a description for each dedicated forum that it links to, in order to direct traffic to the correct topic. If a GUI limits the amount of space for these descriptions, it would be unhelpful, and if it required an additional level of nesting for these descriptions it would be unhelpful.
We have a thread here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1034760
If we can get folks to do another pass or two, I'll take the feedback, talk to some folks internally about it, and make a decision on what the final descriptions will be.
But after mulling a GUI for the D&D forum - at this level of nesting - I feel it may not be as helpful.
I agree 100% for exactly the reasons you stated.
But I disagree that the problem is not the linear nature of the forum index. The fact is that most people scan an index for the first thing that looks pertinent and then stop looking. Thats' why D&D General can't be the first forum. People wouldn't post anywhere else.
That's the base dilemma with the position of the House Rules forum. if you put it up top, people will put all their questions there. If you put it below the substantive rules discussions about Classes, Powers, Monsters, etc., people won't scan far enough to see it.
It's a problem in the current configuration, my configuration and your configuration and I don't see a really good way around it.
The answer is, To divide it between information that is necessary for players and information that is necessary for DMs.
That's not the answer because you forget that DMs use the PHB. The DMG is just a place for things the Players don't need. but DMs need everything.
A better name for the PHB would simply be the D&D Rulebook. The DMG is really just a supplement for DMs to run better games.
D&D always divides its information this way.
No, it doesn't. Most of the supplements for a game are neither DM nor player specific. All the environment series (Frostburn, Sandstorm etc.), all the campaign guides, all the "Heroes of..." books contained information for DMs and for players intermixed. Only the initial "Core" books could be divided between players and DMs (though the third core -- the Monster Manual -- contains information for both; monsters as encounters and monsters a splayable races). Your dualism is not a natural division for D&D.
- D&D Character Building
- Controllers (Wizards and their Powers)
- Defenders (Fighter, Paladins and their Powers)
- Leaders (Clerics, Warlords and their Powers)
- Strikers (Rangers, Rogues, Warlocks and their Powers)
- Character Building General (Hybrid Classes, Races, Skills, Feats, Rituals and Alignment)
- Controllers (Wizards and their Powers)
By making the fifth forum a general forum, you have a place for feats, skills, races, as well as hybrids.
Wrecan: The fact is that most people scan an index for the first thing that looks pertinent and then stop looking.
Exactly. People stop scanning as soon as they find something that seems vaguely pertinent. ... Thats why inherently related forums must be together.
CharDev and CharOp must be together with CharBld.
Thats' why D&D General can't be the first forum. People wouldn't post anywhere else.
I agree. I put D&D General near the very end of the whole D&D forum, in the "D&D Community" section, which I interpret as the wider D&D community - ie, D&D culture (wider than the people at a particular game table, who as players are part of the talks about the game itself).
That's the dilemma with the position of the House Rules forum. If top, people will put all their questions there. If below the substantive rules discussions about Classes, Powers, Monsters, etc., people won't scan far enough to see it. It's a problem in my configuration and your configuration, and I don't see a really good way around it.
Actually, I feel my organization works well.
I prefer to rename House Rules, "Rules Commentary"
- Official Rules Q&A (clarify the meanings of official rules, rulings & errata)
- Rules Commentary (evaluate rules, suggest fixes, adjudicate situations not covered, create alternative house rules, &c.)
When people invent new classes or races, I prefer to see them in the CharBld forums. I only want to see alternative general rules (grid movement, called shots, &c.) in the Rules Commentary, so Official Rules Q&A and Rules Commentary are at the near the end of the "Core" Sections, after other forums have been ruled out by the viewer.
Haldrik: The answer is, divide information between players and DMs.
Wrecan: That's not the answer because you forget that DMs use the PHB. The DMG is just a place for things the Players don't need. but DMs need everything.
Yes, if the DM needs to create a character, then the DM knows exactly where to find this information - in the player section.
All other info that is less pertinent to players belongs in a separate section - the DM section.
No, it doesn't. Most of the supplements for a game are neither DM nor player specific.
Rather, D&D 4e divides everything according to whether its pertinent to players or DMs.
For example: the source Core Accessory books (Martial, etc.) are for players, the Forgotten Realms books (FR Players Guide, FR Campaign [Setting] Guide, FR DMs Guide) are explicitly tagged according to whether the info is pertinent to players or DMs.
This dualism between players and DMs is a natural division. The division is utilitarian, inherent, deep, robust, and enduring. The D&D forum organization is best when it coheres.
Don't ask someone to prove a negative. Don't ask someone to cure your ignorance, after they explained to you how you can cure your own ignorance.
Either way you want to try to wipe it away. Users discuss classes not these artificial roles.
Strikers (Rangers, Rogues, Warlocks and their Powers)
So all these classes are strikers, and they all have the same powers to choose from and perform the same tasks?
Either way you want to try to wipe it away. Users discuss classes not these artificial roles.
I'm not "trying to wipe away" anything. What does that even mean?
I don't get why you can't understand that the class roles are simply categories. You don't discuss the category itself. You discuss the components of the category.
Defender is a category that includes Fighters and Paladins. People discussing Paladins would go to the Defender forum because anybody with a 4th edition rulebook would know paladins are defenders.
Just like people who post to forums in the "D&D Community" aren't discussing community generally. They discuss the specific subset of community with which they identify: DMs, Players, etc.
So all these classes are strikers, and they all have the same powers to choose from and perform the same tasks?
Why should they? They perform the same role (thus the name "class role) within a party.
The 3E Races Monsters forum includes aberrations, oozes, monstrous humanoids and fey, as well as playable races. They don't all have the same powers and perform the same role, yet people seem to be able to handle it just fine.
CharDev and CharOp must be together with CharBld.
I don't see why. They were on entirely different pages in 3E and seemed to work just fine.
I feel my organization works well.
Of course you do. And I think it doesn't. I think my organization works well and you think it doesn't. I really don't think it's necessary to state the obvious.
I prefer to rename House Rules, "Rules Commentary"
That's not what a House RUle is, though, which is why it's an unhelpful name. If someone proposes a new rule for the game, he isn't commenting on the rule -- he's house ruling. Someone who wants to discuss house rules is not going to read "Rules Commentary" and think his query is appropriate there.
All other info that is less pertinent to players belongs in a separate section - the DM section.
"Less pertinent" shows how porous and counter-intuitive these categories are. Everything is pertinent to everyone. The range of things that are specific to DMs is tiny, and almost none of it has to do with game mechanics.
D&D 4e divides everything according to whether its pertinent to players or DMs.
I don't know where you got this idea. Please disabuse yourself of the notion. We know almost nothing of what is to be released for 4E, but what we do know does not fit that pattern.
Tomes of Treasures is for DMs (treasure) and Players (gear). Monster Manuals contain rules for encountering (DM) and playing (player) monsters. The FR Campaign Setting Guide is for both players (Developing backgrounds) and DMs (developing adventures). Environment books are for both players and DMs. Heroes of... books are for players and DMs. Hack, the PHB is for both players and DMs.
Only the DMG is for DMs only. That's the paradigm of 4th -- to make every book as useful to both players and DMs as possible.
You are forcing square blocks into round holes.
In fact, looking at your organization, you have eight forums in the "players" section, including the forum for Monsters! You have five in the DM section, of which only two really should exist there:
First, there is no justification for a "Points of Light World" forum. There is no traffic to justify it at this time. And if there were, it would logically go into "D&D Worlds" along with the other campaign settings, like FR and Eberron. Second, there is no reason for "Rules Discussion" to be in the DM section. Most of the "rules" are to be found in the Players Handbook, and therefor would logically be expected to be discussed in the Players' section. The 4E DMG is mostly going to have guides to game management and adventure and campaign building. That's it. The rules are in the PHB. Third, for the same reason, the "Official Rules Q&A" should also be in the players' section.
That leaves only two forums in the DM section: Adventure and Campaign development and DM Advice. Two forums does not justify a separate section, which means your attempt to divide the forums into Player-specific and DM-specific categories fails. To make it appear reasonable, you are shoving forums inappropriately into the DM section that should be -- under your own criteria -- in the Players' section.
FR DMs Guide
Um... there's no 4E FR DMs Guide planned.
[CharOp and CharDev] were on entirely different pages in 3E and seemed to work just fine.
The old 3e forum organization didnt work fine. For the longest time, I didnt even know the CharOp forum existed! I didnt even know the CharDev forum existed until about two or three weeks ago!!!
The old 3e forum organization sucked. Sucked. Please, get this.
The Character Development forum can embrace class roles as they can synergize other aspects of a characters life.
On the internet, using allcaps is often understood to indicate screaming and is considered rude.
The CharOp and CharDev forums did work fine as indicated by the level of forum traffic. They were robust and vibrant forums throughout Third Edition.
The fact that you didn't know about these forums doesn't mean they didn't work fine as much as it means that you had a problem.
The old 3e forum organization sucked. Sucked. Please, get this.
Obviously, I disagree. Now, you get this: The fact that you had troubles navigating the forum is as likely to indicate a problem with you as it is to indicate a problem with forum organization.
The fact that your proposals are self-contradictory, poorly named and ultimately self-defeating indicates to me that the problem lies more in the former than in the latter.
Question: Are "paths" more-or-less hybrids? Or do they generally stay true to their classs role?
From what we've seen most paragon paths and epic destinies are linked directly to a base class. For another class to access it, they must use a multiclass feat to gain access to the powers of the new class, including access to related Paths and Destinies.
Therefore most paragon paths and epic destinies should be discussed in the forum in which the related base class would be discussed. (I.e, discussions of the Archmage Epic Destiny would occur in the Controller Forum alongside discussions of Wizards.) The few "hybrid" paths and destinies that might be created could be discussed in the Hybrid Forum.
Hellmute, the class roles imply flavor. A character who stands and defends (Defender) will often have a different personality from a person who leaps in-and-out of confrontations (Striker), or snipes from behind (Ranged Striker), or orchestrates the battle (Controller), or reinforces allies (Leader).
The Character Development forum can embrace class roles as they can synergize other aspects of a characters life.
2 L's please. ;)
So if these role-based forums are for flavor, then where does the mechanical discussion of the classes and races belong?
I can understand how the game and R&D WANTS people to discuss these roles, and play the classes in this fashion, but what about those people that do not want to?
You have the cleric=band-aid all over again, but in a new way.
What if someone want to play a wizard as a leader? Oh sorry that is not your role.
People will read leader and not think class position in battle, but group leader. What do you do if your wizard player is the leader type? Just because the class roles do not include him as a leader role, then the group must choose someone else?
These roles are only battle dependant anyway. There is more to D&D than combat. Another problem with these "roles".
Leaders do more than just combat generals.
I don't mind some flavor forums, and as you say the roles may fit in with Character Development, but there still needs to be a place to discuss the classes and races themselves without worry about what role the are.
How does one discuss a wizard as a leader? Put it in the hybrid forum?
Like your (was it yours?) idea about spliting crunch from fluff for Eberron, I think the roles are fluff for classes and there should be a place to discuss the crunch away from the fluff as well for classes, as well as races....
I could discuss the mechanics of elves all day long, but don't need to here about everyon else's fanfic about them in the process. Replace elf with wizard and the same applies. but I could not replace then wizard with controller, because I do not wish to discuss controllers.
On that subject then you have a forum JUST for the wizard. While another forum holds 3 classes.
Seems a bit odd to me.
Thanks for replying to my posts, as your make more sense that wrecan's.
Wrecan:
D&D Character Building
Controllers (Wizards and their Powers)
Defenders (Fighter, Paladins and their Powers)
Leaders (Clerics, Warlords and their Powers)
Strikers (Rangers, Rogues, Warlocks and their Powers)
Character Building General (Hybrid Classes, Races, Skills, Feats, Rituals and Alignment)
Structurely, I like the block. Description topics may need finetuning.
I feel Alignment has no mechanical meaning now, and it belongs in the same catagory as the cosmology, magicology, and religions in the campaign setting. Clerics and Paladins are special in that they devote themselves to a religion, but religions too should be discussed in the campaign setting, not in the character building.
I just noticed you put Races in the same catagory as Skills etc. It surprised me, but I like it.
I think Epic destinies definitely belong in the General catagory too, as they dont conform (necessarily) to roles, AFAICT. I assume Paragon paths do conform to roles, but Im not sure about this.
Im revamping my organization with some of your suggestions in mind. ...
Controllers (Wizard, &c., class powers, features, & paths)
Defenders (Fighter, Paladin, &c., class powers, features, & paths)
Leaders (Cleric, Warlord, &c., class powers, features, & paths)
Strikers (Ranger, Rogue, Warlock, &c., class powers, features, & paths)
Character Building General (hybrid roles, power sources, races, ability scores, skills, feats, rituals, Epic destinies)
This isnt 3e anymore.
Wrecan: The fact that your proposals are self-contradictory, poorly named and ultimately self-defeating.
Right back atcha!
I remind, many viewers continue to complain about not knowing related forums exist.
Having D&D-specific information in RPG Gleemax (which otherwise branches away from D&D and Star Wars) is unhelpful. I dont see how such an organization is defensible.
2 L's please. ;)
So if these role-based forums are for flavor, then where does the mechanical discussion of the classes and races belong?
Haldrik is wrong. The class roles are not flavor. They are game design approaches used when determining what role a specific character class should have in combat. Think of it as the genus to the class's species.
I.e., a wolf's scientific name is "canis lupus". A scientific forum discussing biology might have a bunch of forums to discuss different types of animals. "Canis" would be the forum to discuss wolves and dogs, while "Felis" would be used to discuss housecats, lions, tigers, etc.
"Controller" is simply the genus categorizing the classes.
R&D WANTS people to discuss these roles
No, they are merely classifications. You can discuss dogs without referring to them as canines. You can discuss wizards without referring to them as controllers. That doesn't mean you don't understand that discussions of wolves take place in the canine forum and discussions of wizards occurs in the controller forum.
What if someone want to play a wizard as a leader?
Discuss it in the controller forum. Just like if you wanted to discuss a pack of wolves who hunted with behavior normally attributed to lions, you'd still discuss it in the canine forum.
On that subject then you have a forum JUST for the wizard. While another forum holds 3 classes.
Other classes will be introduced later. The wizard forum would still discuss the Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies affiliated with wizards. Most forums only have two classes associated with them and no more than three. The variation between one and three isn't really so great as to be deemed "odd".
your make more sense that wrecan's.
Was the gratuitous insult productive?
I remind many respondants continue to complain about not knowing related forums exist.
And they will under any new organization because a linear index necessariyl results in people not seeing the forums under the first handful.
It's an intractable problem without going to a GUI model. And the GUI model itself has problems (which you accurately identified) that outweigh its benefits.
I dont see how such an organization is defensible.
And I don't see how your suggestion is an improvement to that organization.
People are already beginning to talk about "Party Builds" rather than character builds, because 4e was designed from the ground up to have party members in certain roles with a lot of synergy across the classes.
Also, both the modular nature of the system and the way multiclassing is implemented make the choice of role more important than class when coming up with a character concept. Rangers are no longer "woodsy guys" - they can focus on Dungeoneering instead of Nature, and 2-weapon fighting over archery. A Rogue with Nature and a high Perception makes just as valid a "Scout" character concept now as the Ranger, and Aragorn would likely be built using Warlord instead of Ranger as a base class because his role was Leader.
Paradigm shifts are always challenging times, but I can see why WotC is pushing the forums to support the new ways of thinking rather than the old. The main focus of the forums is the current edition of D&D (i.e. 4e) and they want people to start thinking in 4e terms (not the 3e terms that people are more comfortable with, but are now outdated). During the initial adoption period, people might struggle with the new terms and ways of thinking, but they don't want to have to reorganize the forums again in 6 months or a year when the new paradigm is more accepted.
Wrecan: Because a linear index ...
Your statement wrongly implies that all outline organizations are necessarily equally bad.
Obviously, some outline organizations are more ergonomic than others.
And I don't see how your suggestion is an improvement.
Ummm... Dont put D&D stuff in a non-D&D place. Its a pretty obvious suggestion.
Anyway, Id like to move toward more constructive criticism. Comments my forum descriptions above? Are you sure that Epic destinies are tied to class? I was under the impression that a player "chose" their destinity, and if there are only four options currently available (from what I understand), it would seem they dont require a specific class.
If destinies arent class specific they should probably go into general.
Haldrik is wrong.
By the Nine Hells he is!
I was asking a question based on his previous opinion, and he has every right to his own opinion, and you are nobody to say otherwsie.
I can be insulting if you want, but the point to the last thing I said was a simple one. You make no sense, and Haldrik's idea make sense to me.
So sense I asked him, about his opinion and idea, I would like for you to let him tell me about it since you are not in his mind....
I was asking a question based on his previous opinion
His opinion isn't wrong. His statement of fact that class roles are about flavor was wrong. Class roles aren't about flavor. A character in the "leader" role doesn't have to actually lead the party. He doesn't have to be charismatic. Heck, he could be anti-social. The class just has to be have the attributes of the class role, which centers on improving the performance of your teammates.
I would like for you to let him tell me about it since you are not in his mind....
Last I checked I don't have the power to prevent people from making posts.
Your statement wrongly implies that all outline organizations are necessarily equally bad.
I didn't say that. I said that your specific organization was not better than the current one and was likely worse.
Dont put D&D stuff in a non-D&D place. Its a pretty obvious suggestion.
The prior CharOps were for all games, not just D&D. The reason was that optimization was a new phenomenon when the idea came about. Now the idea of optimization is eight years old, so it has enough traffic to warrant being divided into D&D and non-D&D.
Over on the general forums, for example, there's a forum called "d20 Apocalypse". Doesn't get much traffic now. What if suddenly in 2010, apocalypse stories are all the rage and suddenly that board shoots through the roof and, moreover, lots of people discuss translating apocalypse stories to 4th edition. By the time the boards are ready to be organized again, the popularity of Apocalypse stories may merit giving the D&D boards their own D&D Apocalypse forum.
Does that mean that we should put an Apocalypse forum into D&D right now in the off-chance the subject becomes popular? Of course not. For that reason, there was no reason to give D&D its own Optimization forum until Optimization proved its viability.
Anyway, Id like to move toward more constructive criticism. Comments my forum descriptions above?
My comment is that you're discussing this in the wrong thread. Gamer_Zer0 directed you to the right thread. You should discuss it there.
Are you sure that Epic destinies are tied to class?
The previews had one Epic Destiny and it was Archmage, tied directly to Wizards. Other than that, we know virtually nothing about Destinies.
For example, I probably identify most with a hybrid archetype, Controller-Leader, something like a Thaumaturge. The "Controller-Wizard" side of me likes an orderly world where everything continues to become as optimal as possible. By personality, I am deeply aware of systems, structures, and pattern recognition - especially conceptual systems. The "Leader-Cleric" side of me likes to encourage and assist others to make the world a better place. I find teaching an extremely rewarding profession.
My brother probably identifies most with another hybrid archetype, Striker-Leader, something like a Charismatic Artful Dodger Trickster Rogue and a Cleric with an extraordinary ideal for sincerity and compassion. My brother is especially aware of emotional interaction, and has an "Insight" skill with all kinds of crazy bonuses. My brother will go out of his way to torment bullies in true trickster fashion, especially to defend strangers who the bully is picking on. My brother has done extraordinary acts of compassion for people in need of help, financially, emotionally, and otherwise.
Somehow these personality patterns tend to show up at different levels of life. ;) They seem to cohere with how my brother and I behaved in a bar fight we once got dragged into in real life.
Helmute: So if these role-based forums are for flavor, then where does the mechanical discussion of the classes and races belong?
Most of the flavor discussions about a role will probably take place in the CharDev forum, to describe how it relates to a specific character. The each role can be fulfilled in different ways, and it seems different personalities will fulfill a role in different ways.
Class roles arent an impediment to roleplaying, but a medium for roleplaying. Thinking about what motivates a character to behave a certain way on the battlefield can greatly enrich a character concept.
The prior CharOps were for all games, not just D&D. The reason was that optimization was a new phenomenon when the idea came about. Now the idea of optimization is eight years old, so it has enough traffic to warrant being divided into D&D and non-D&D.
Just pointing out that the Char Opt boards were for D&D, there was a separate one beneath it in the d20 Design area for non-D&D.
Now there are 4e Char Opt and the old Char Opt are going to become more system neutral, but this was not the case prior to the forum reorg.
Anything but the role based split, please. It really is a very messy way to do things. And until next year, it means we have just a 'wizard' forum for no good reason.
We tried that. "Classes" is way too crowded and that was before the rulebooks were even released.
No, we didn't. We tried a "Character Building" forum that included everything - classes, races, skills, feats, powers, rituals, everything.
I still think Races needs its own forum, but all Classes in one forum is not going to work, at least not until traffic dies down considerably.
I like the idea of splitting it up by tier, rather than class role, though. That seems more intuitive.
If you went with a more thematic roleplaying-oriented approach, you'd have something like this:
Arcane Arts: Wizards & Warlocks
Defenders of the Faith: Clerics & Paladins
Sword & Shield: Fighters & Warlords
Stealthy Tactics: Rogues & Rangers
You might have to shuffle things around more later as new classes get added later and, more to the point, become popular, but you can generally put things into that sort of structure without too much shoehorning in regards to power source. A psionicist when you come down to it is basically just an enchantress with a crystal tiara and an anime hairstyle. Throwing them in with the wizards and warlocks isn't that much of a stretch.
Also, drop the 'Character building:' prefix?
Still, I do not see a reason for a full Q&A forum. That seems to be covered by the individual forums. Just a quick sticky more specific to each forum addressing the FAQs would be sufficient.
Obviously the Character Hybrid gets the most attention right now, but the individual classes are being ignored largely. Combine those four, and I doubt we'll need much more tweaking. Also, character development works great in the general forum.
It might look like this:
Classes (Powers, Feats, Skills, Rituals, Races)
Hybrid Classes (or Multi-classing)
Equipment
Monsters
Character Optimization
General Discussion
I believe that the demographics of these forums will change as more people buy the books. Right now, it's a lot of rules questions. The Q&A FAQs in individual forums will prevent a lot of this, especially as it's updated.
In order to know how to suggest changes to organization, perhaps a quick rundown on what the max per day posts in a forum would be (ideally). I really have no idea, nor do I have the stats.
-See THIS thread.
Can't we at least hide the ugly, ugly role based segmenting by subforuming them into Classes and then having Classes itself act as a catch all for general class based stuff that would otherwise by crossposted half a dozen times across the role boards?
Mike doesn't like subforums. So while this would be a very good way to do it, it ain't gonna happen.
Honestly, lately, I have no idea what's going on with this place. It's just so... corporate right now.
It's like that Dilbert strip where they take away all the chairs because that was the last boss's idea and no matter how good an idea it was, you have to trash everything the last guy did.
Every time I suggest something that's worked elsewhere, I learn the CM or CS or whoever is in charge this week has a mad-on hate for it for no good reason. So yeah, I'm done. Let's just make one HUGE board for everything WotC does and add tags. Then disable login and viewing while logged out.
D&D Fundamentals then can keep CharOp, CharDev, Monsters, Equipment and D&D General.
Arcane Arts: Wizards & Warlocks
Defenders of the Faith: Clerics & Paladins
Sword & Shield: Fighters & Warlords
Stealthy Tactics: Rogues & Rangers
-I like that. A lot, actually.
-The only thing, though, is that certain more popular classes, such as the Wizards and Warlocks, might get lopsided traffic, as opposed to...Rogues and Rangers. Or, that, in the future, there might be 5 new classes like Wizard/Warlocks that get added in that section, and only 1 new class like Fighters/Warlords, making traffic, again, lopsided. But, that's something to worry about in the future, some other time.
It's like that Dilbert strip where they take away all the chairs because that was the last boss's idea and no matter how good an idea it was, you have to trash everything the last guy did.
-I love Dilbert...And, you know what? It is very applicable, at points...
It's not just Mike. It's the whole of Community Management.
Why is CM even running forums that specifically are chosen over others because of the ability to have subforums if they do not intend to make use of the funciton of the forums themselves?
I think people need to look back, yes go backwards NOT forward....and figure out WHO decide to use this forums software and why. If those reasons are no longer valid, then maybe they need to dump this paid for software and gete a free version, or at least some forum software that does what they intend or want the forums to do, since the forums are for the management team and R&D rather than for the users.
This is why
So If management is going to treat the forums like a business endeavor and all the users as employees I better start seeing a paycheck in the mail for being present!
Or someone needs to get on the fast track to learning what forums are about!
We probably dont need to subdivide CO because of its tightly interdependent calculations. However, if in the future we need to subdivide it because of heavier traffic, heres a reality check for the topics that CO tends to cover. About 2/3 of threads are discussing one or more classes. About 1/3 of threads are discussing various other statistics separately.
Breakdown of CO topics
Total Striker role = 48 (23%)
Total Defender role = 27 (13%)
Total Controller role = 23 (11%)
Total Leader role = 15 (7%)
Total comparison of cross-role classes: 26 (13%)
Total Other Character Stats (non-class, non-role) = 61 (30%)
General (mentions various overall aspects of D&D): 5 (2%)
Total Striker role = 48 (23%)
- Role Striker: 2
- Role Striker (Wrk): 16
- Role Striker (Wrk Gishy): 3
- Role Striker (Rgr): 14
- Role Striker (Rog): 13
Total Defender role = 27 (13%)
- Role Defender (Ftr): 13
- Role Defender (Ftr Gishy): 2
- Role Defender (Pal): 8
- Role Defender (Pal Gishy): 4
Total Controller role = 23 (11%)
- Role Controller (Wiz): 21
- Role Controller (Wiz Gishy): 2
Total Leader role = 15 (7%)
- Role Leader (Clr): 11
- Role Leader (Wrd): 5
Total comparison of cross-role classes: 26 (13%)
- Classes (mentions various cross-role class comparisons): 24
- Classes (best base for Gish): 2
Total Other Character Stats (non-class, non-role) = 61 (30%)
- Race: 11 (5%)
- Combat statistics (attack, dmg, OA, defs, hp, &c): 11 (5%)
- Equipment: 10 (5%)
- Feats:6
- Paragon (comparisons at Paragon): 3
- Epic (comparisons at Epic): 3
- Ability Scores: 3
- Skills: 3
- Social Encounters: 2
- Char Building General (mentions various character stats) : 9
General (mentions various overall aspects of D&D): 5 (2%)
As such, it might be necessary to just bite the bullet and actually divide the forums according to how the topics are divided in the books. If people talking about classes need to also talk about powers, cross reference! But at least people will know where to go to talk about Classes or Races, rather than the guesswork needed currently.
*Fundamentals
~Race Resources
~Class Compendium
~Skill and Feat Field
~Power Pavilion
~Item and Equipment Emporium
~Monster Mill
~Homebrew Haven (though this might need to be at the top to help siphon off homebrew content before posters even see the other categories).
And if absolutely required/necessary:
~Character Development Depot
~Character Optimization Arena
~Official Rule Reliquary
~General Discussion Depository
Or without the alliteration, why not.
Skills and Feats probably have to go to gether just because of lack of activity otherwise. And the Homebrew forum might need to be put at the top (or near it), just to help siphon off potential posters before they clutter other forums.
While combining all the classes would increase the activity of that forum, removing powers and homebrewers should significantly decrease the respective activity as well.
Additionally, a stickied post in each forum describing what should and shouldn't go in that forum would be incredibly helpful. As it is, posters are left to guess at what forum they should be posting in. Example: someone who is new has no idea where a thread about Bards would go; House Rules forum over in D&D community? Character Building: Hybrids? Controllers, Leaders, Development, or general discussion? Indeed, quite a few people who aren't new have no idea where that should ideally go.
Here's my proposal:
- D&D Fundamentals
- Classes
- Powers, Skills & Feats
- Races
- Monsters
- Equipment, Mundane & Magical
- Character Optimization
- Character Development
- Rules Q&A
- D&D General
QUOTE]
I agree with this, its plain and simple and would work much better then what is up on the boards now. Thanks for starting this thread.
Also (and perhaps this will get better as I gain familiarity with the system) I am not crazy about having the Classes broken down by roles. I know this is one of the big banner items of 4e, but so far I am finding it counter-intuitive to have 4 class sections.
Sorry if it has already been mentioned...