Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 mudbunny Oct 15, 2010 11:52:57	See it here: wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg... World Serpent's Grasp
#2 ranadiel Oct 15, 2010 12:15:23	Wow that is a feat that I imagine some of my fellow party members will be taking once I get Keep them Close. While I do hate the class design and rarity system in Essentials. The feats are really good...although that is probably they are heavily overpowered(power run rather than power creep). But who cares, I like making my DM cry(and he knows it). :D
#3 salla Oct 15, 2010 12:45:26	Ugh.  Still wasting paper on fluff text for feats?
#4 ranadiel Oct 15, 2010 12:53:33	Ugh.  Still wasting paper on fluff text for feats? Considering this is part of Essentials, that was sort of a given.
#5 mercaius Oct 15, 2010 13:19:11	Aye, it's rather odd to complain about "too much fluff" for books deliberately aimed at new players. Surely you can imagine a new roleplayer wondering what a feat "means" to his or her character's backstory and history, if all the feat does is provide a passive bonus of some kind.
#6 salla Oct 15, 2010 13:22:19	Aye, it's rather odd to complain about "too much fluff" for books deliberately aimed at new players. Surely you can imagine a new roleplayer wondering what a feat "means" to his or her character's backstory and history, if all the feat does is provide a passive bonus of some kind. They could spend two or three paragraphs explaining to the new player that he can (and should) fluff the feat according to his own character concept.  It could just be, y'know, a fighting style that makes it easy to knock over a hindered opponent than 'blah blah spirits blah'.
#7 mellored Oct 15, 2010 13:29:00	Ugh.  Still wasting paper on fluff text for feats? Considering this is part of Essentials, that was sort of a given. Actually that seems to be the "new direction going forward".  Feats, features, and powers get fluff paragraphs. Mechanicly i strongly approve.  Balanced (generally requires 2 hits), and different (not +2 to racial power).  I'd gladly take more fluff if they come with impoved feat quality like this.
#8 ranadiel Oct 15, 2010 14:19:52	Actually that seems to be the "new direction going forward".  Feats, features, and powers get fluff paragraphs. Mechanicly i strongly approve.  Balanced (generally requires 2 hits), and different (not +2 to racial power).  I'd gladly take more fluff if they come with impoved feat quality like this. Yeah I know it is the new direction going forward, but enough whining and the direction might change before the next product with feats in it....okay that might be too soon so the second to next product with feats in it. Kind of a pipe dream, but eh. And I disagree with the balanced bit. Maybe at low levels it is balanced, but at least with the build for my current character(swordmage aegis+malac-keth janissary+intentionally frequently bloodied+keep them close+new feat=all enemies within a 5x5 close burst being knocked prone every time I hit them or everytime a fellow party member with the feat hits them). Basically if used efficiently this could make it so that enemies are pretty much permenantly prone.
#9 inarai Oct 15, 2010 14:21:40	Aye, it's rather odd to complain about "too much fluff" for books deliberately aimed at new players. Surely you can imagine a new roleplayer wondering what a feat "means" to his or her character's backstory and history, if all the feat does is provide a passive bonus of some kind. They could spend two or three paragraphs explaining to the new player that he can (and should) fluff the feat according to his own character concept.  It could just be, y'know, a fighting style that makes it easy to knock over a hindered opponent than 'blah blah spirits blah'. Or spend two or three on "the flavour presennted here is by no means the only possible flavour for these options, blah blah blah", and then have defaults to get people started if they don't have a better idea?
#10 mellored Oct 15, 2010 14:37:28	And I disagree with the balanced bit. Maybe at low levels it is balanced, but at least with the build for my current character(swordmage aegis+malac-keth janissary+intentionally frequently bloodied+keep them close+new feat=all enemies within a 5x5 close burst being knocked prone every time I hit them or everytime a fellow party member with the feat hits them). Basically if used efficiently this could make it so that enemies are pretty much permenantly prone. I've got a at-will close burst 3 prones attack (swordburst + arcane admixture (thunder) + resounding thunder + weapon of summer + master of flame + mark of storms + rushing cleats + polearm momentum), and a close blast 5 (thunderwave + above).  I also have arcane reach. There are numerous other ways to get proning on a hit as well, especially by epic.
#11 salla Oct 15, 2010 15:54:51	Or spend two or three on "the flavour presennted here is by no means the only possible flavour for these options, blah blah blah", and then have defaults to get people started if they don't have a better idea? Then you have that *and* the feat fluff, which takes up more space.
#12 mboss77 Oct 15, 2010 15:55:13	See it here: wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg... World Serpent's Grasp mudbunny, your avatar seriously freaks me out!
#13 mercaius Oct 15, 2010 19:11:44	Such complaints miss the objectives of the fluff. The goal isn't just a "cheat sheet" for new players -- it's supposed to get them interested and excited about the roleplay. Even giving the players a default list turns feats into little more than mechanical adjustments to a new player, which are not as exciting or fun to read when you're still figuring out the rules of the game. Fluff encourages a new player to read what would otherwise be a dry manual or chapter.
#14 mellored Oct 15, 2010 20:51:06	Such complaints miss the objectives of the fluff. The goal isn't just a "cheat sheet" for new players -- it's supposed to get them interested and excited about the roleplay. Even giving the players a default list turns feats into little more than mechanical adjustments to a new player, which are not as exciting or fun to read when you're still figuring out the rules of the game. Fluff encourages a new player to read what would otherwise be a dry manual or chapter. Very true. But i, and many others, make our own fluff, and we'd rather have more feats to play with then examples of how to play. It's sort of like legos.  You can buy kits, and follow the instuctions on how to build a bunch of things, or you can buy a bucket, and have more pieces to invent your own stuff.
#15 mercaius Oct 16, 2010 0:20:17	And you, and many others, are not the primary target of these books. You don't need the fluff. You also don't need the introduction, or the rules of combat. Even I skipped over most of the fluff; particularly for the feats and class features, which felt redundant to me. We know the game, we know how we like to roleplay. These books are stoked with fluff to help new roleplayers get into the mindset, and to see if they can glean back any gamers who preferred the older, fluff-heavy styles. Unless the books sell much better than the core rulebooks of old, it's unlikely that every title from here on out is going to follow the same format. Complaining that the book is too fluff-heavy, in this one case, is like complaining that the book doesn't offer enough support for Dungeon Masters.
#16 Janx_14 Oct 16, 2010 2:33:48	Did pre-3e editions have this much crazy fluff too?  I started in 3rd, and feats were not very fluffy from what I remember. Nor did I need an explanation of what power attack was, or whirlwind attack, or cleave, or the metamagic ones, or whatever. D&D archetypes are usually pretty clear cut. The Assassin class in 3.x was not 11 pages along, yet the level 1 of the Executioner takes 11 pages apparently of fluff to get across that you kill people stealthily (and oh yeah, you have shadow powers cause your tied to an older class). Most people i've seen look at even the current paragraphs of text in the book shut down because they think they're expected to know all of it and are worried they wont remember it. They think they have to abide by them. Then when you try to bring them into a non-PoL setting, they keep clinging to what they remember from that. Most people who've come in I usualy have to summarize for them the classes gist. And these are not dumb people. You speak as if this is an age where paladins, warriors, wizards, and archers arent common sights in video games and fantasy movies. I mean, when you speek of a ranger do you need 11 pages? or do you just go "yeah, its like Legolas" and the person undertsands, cause odds are if he/she has any interest in a fantasy RPG, they've seen or read LoTR, there's also a fairly good chance they've played WoW, or been exposed to any other RPG. I am not the primary target of these books, but many in my group of 8 would have been. I have the range from 2e Grognard to didn't even play games with dice a year ago.
#17 nb_nmare Oct 16, 2010 6:18:47	The Assassin class in 3.x was not 11 pages along, yet the level 1 of the Executioner takes 11 pages apparently of fluff to get across that you kill people stealthily (and oh yeah, you have shadow powers cause your tied to an older class). Well, first of all there was no assassin class in 3.x; at least, not one designed by WotC. The assassin was a prestige class. The distinction is important; prestige classes only lasted for a maximum of 10 levels (often less), and generally weren't intended to be the main concept for your character. By then you would have already gone through several levels of at least one base class, and those base classes DID include a considerable amount of fluff. A much better comparison between the 3.x assassin would be between it and a 4E paragon class... and since most paragon paths are only 1 page, the 3.x assassin actually fails here. (You might argue that an essentials paragon path is longer than this; however, having done so myself, I can tell you that if you extract all the features relating to say, the mythic slayer, from amongst the class features that all slayers gain at paragon, it's still the equivalent of one A4 page at most). Second, and this might seem silly, but there was a lot less wasted page space back in the 3.x days. Text was much closer to the edge of the page, it was usually shaped around images, and the borders between columns and gaps between lines were smaller. At a casual glance, the text appears to be smaller, too. If the 3.x assassin were reformatted to the current layout, I suspect it would take up at least one more page. Third, the lack of fluff in the Dungeon Master's Guide prestige classes was one of the major complaints many people had about that book. Prestige classes in later books tended to be at least one or two pages longer, with the extra page count taken up by, yes, fluff; things like how to roleplay that class, adapting the prestige class to your setting, what NPCs think of that prestige class, etc. As for the executioner... Level 1 of the build begins at the very end of the 4th page of the article, and finishes on the 11th page. A good 50% of what's on those pages is crunch. So there is something like 4 pages of fluff, not 11. Okay, so admittedly there are 4 pages before you even get to the class features. However, I wouldn't really call most of that fluff, since a lot of it isn't roleplaying or background info, the main exception being several paragraphs of racial fluff. It's really more a guide to effectively setting up your class, talking about optimal skills, ability scores, feats, etc. You have to remember that experienced players are not the target of most of this text; it's intended for new/casual players. Also, lets not forget the original 4E assassin. The article for that didn't get to level 2 until page 6, and of course that barely included any information aimed at new/casual players.
#18 Janx_14 Oct 16, 2010 12:32:18	Ok then, do the fighter and rogue in 3.x take up 11 pages each? Or even 7? I don't have my books on me, Im running from memory. The 3.x ones also included starting skill tables and example characters and gear. The amount of fluff was far less than essentials from what I recall. And yes, I know 11 pages of the executioner are not pure fluff, however, there is also alot of it inserted everywhere. Perhaps I did word it badly, but I know level 1 ended at page 11. However, the reason why it takes so long to get to get level 1 across is that they insert extra fluff text before everything. The original Assassin also had alot of fluff attached to its early pages, but as you stated, its smaller, and once its done the fluff beyond the lines on power are gone. The old assassin fluff was also more stylized and interesting, while the new one covers similar grounds without the flair and alot more text. Quantity does not equal quality. I quite clearly remember that experienced players are not the target of the text. I also quitely clearly remember having to summarize existing text for new players because they want to PLAY not read walls of text. I understand making simpler classes. I understand the text that summarizes "this is the class to play if you want to do X". I do not understand adding paragraphs upon paragraphs of text that tell you how you hit with your sword, and other stuff that may or may not apply to your setting.
#19 lord_rock Oct 16, 2010 15:29:26	Still, with feats like headsman chop and grounding shot a lot of controllers just got more powerful.  I do find it odd that this wasn't just primal though... I know essentials is going away from pre-req's but really... my avenger devoted to the raven queen has spent years studying the world serpent?
#20 The_Crimson_Dawn Oct 16, 2010 15:48:05	At the start of 3.5 fluff was not very present (though they did have some fluff in the intro paragraph for a class).  At the end fluff became more prominant especially in the prestige classes.  Compare the DMG or complete warrior to Tome of Magic and Tome of Battle.  4th is in a similar boat.  Having more fluff plesaes people that like fluff, takes up more space, and I am sure the writers love to add that sort of stuff as well.
#21 Haldrik Oct 17, 2010 12:10:38	Or spend two or three on "the flavour presennted here is by no means the only possible flavour for these options, blah blah blah", and then have defaults to get people started if they don't have a better idea?  Agreed. Provide a decent brief default flavor text for each feat to inspire those who customize their own flavor text. The space allocation is useful because its the same space that customizers put their own reflavor.
#22 Haldrik Oct 17, 2010 12:16:08	But i, and many others, make our own fluff, and we'd rather have more feats to play with then examples of how to play. It's sort of like legos.  You can buy kits, and follow the instuctions on how to build a bunch of things, or you can buy a bucket, and have more pieces to invent your own stuff. Same here. I always write my own flavor text (and rename powers and feats) to resonate the character concept. I still think default flavor is a good idea as an example of how to use mechanics to express certain flavors.
#23 Janx_14 Oct 17, 2010 12:20:05	Still, with feats like headsman chop and grounding shot a lot of controllers just got more powerful.  I do find it odd that this wasn't just primal though... I know essentials is going away from pre-req's but really... my avenger devoted to the raven queen has spent years studying the world serpent? Its only fluffed to be the world serpent because it is primal though. The feat's ability doesn't really enhance one's primal abilities thematicly, except they fluffed it as such. Its like if they took Toughness and made it Primal only because they called it Bear's Endurance and its about having a bear spirit. Also, about 3.5 and fluff in later books. Yes, I remember that, however, classes in later books also started getting more 'out there' thematicly, they weren't the very common archetypes you see everywhere. They were explaining a whole new 'powersource' of sorts some times, and had to explain their classes more because they weren't common in other fantasy games/stories/movies. Those are the classes people need to actually read alot of fluff about. I'm still kind of saddened i never got to play the Binder, the current warlock just doesn't cut it.
#24 The_Crimson_Dawn Oct 17, 2010 16:16:51	I would agree with you about the "out there" classes but first they did it with everything and not everything was out there.  Most of complete divine, scoundral, and mage (other books as well) did not have particuraly out there classes but they still managed to take lots of room for them.  Duskblades did not "need" a fluff chapter but they got one anyway.  It was all about the new direction in chapter design not so much about "out there" concepts (though it does help those "out there" concepts especially the binder think if they made fluff that good in dragon now).
#25 GMforPowergamers Oct 17, 2010 20:50:42	Still, with feats like headsman chop and grounding shot a lot of controllers just got more powerful.  I do find it odd that this wasn't just primal though... I know essentials is going away from pre-req's but really... my avenger devoted to the raven queen has spent years studying the world serpent? I guess it comes down to choice... maybe one avenger of the RQ did, and another did not. (AKA one took the feat the other took a diffrent feat)
#26 alien270 Oct 23, 2010 9:14:04	This feat is crazy powerful.  A Druid could take this at 1st level and spam Grasping Claws, never getting hit by any enemy without reach.  Between using Wild Shape to shift 1 square and using your move action to shift, you can consistently hit and run 1 square away and be relatively safe (again, from melee enemies without reach).  Your allies are safe too, provided they're out of range of a charge from a slowed enemy.  It's great vs ranged enemies, too, because it pretty much locks them down next to you.  Makes polearm builds less attractive, too.
#27 munchmausen1 Oct 27, 2010 9:54:32	I might take this for my Earthstrength Warden.