Discussion - LEW 4th Edition

Wik · Sep 5, 2007

Bront said:
He actualy said shortly after the final book, not before

It's an important difference, and one I fully support.

With the PHB, you can build a very vague basis. The DMG can help you design the initial starting area (an important but medium sized trade city is a good start, much like Orussus). And once the Monster Manual is out, you can flesh out some finishing touches and start her up.

A good reason to wait that long is to allow PHB circulation. Especialy if there's a delay in getting them out (like the Mutants and Masterminds 2.0 books, which sold out so fast many weren't able to get them till 4 months later). With WotC, it's less likely to happen, but I know I might not get a book myself the first week it's out.

Ha. I meant to actually say "after". Read it right, wrote it wrong. Not a big deal.

What I *would* like to see, within a month of the final book being released, is a more or less usable world, with the mechanics loosely in place.

ON THE CORE CITY & SOME META ASPECTS:

Y'know, I don't like the idea of teleportation gates, for the reasons RA described - they kill travel adventures. And thus get rid of GM control. (I know, I mentioned them, but I was just giving out some ideas).

I know I said I wanted a mechanic for getting the travel out of the game, but that being said, I'd like there to be a way to keep travel in if the GM wants it there. As a loose example, my Eidolon adventure would not work if Sharn was a place with a lot of teleportation gates - the PCs could travel to their destination, and then set up an ambush ahead of the guys they're chasing. And where's the fun in that?

I have some thoughts on how to fix this aspect of the game, below. For now, though, I think the main city should have the following aspects:

1) Political Intrigue situation (perhaps it's the capital, or it's the head of "Free Cities")
2) Docks, as well as a hub for land-based caravans (for travel adventures)
3) Thieves' Guild (perhaps as a local source of baddies)
4) A few organizations that PCs can belong to (more on that later)
5) A bazaar (again, more on this)

ON TRAVEL (META)

I think Creamsteak has a good idea, with limiting the RDI to RP, and allowing GMs to rectruit for adventures OUTSIDE of the RDI. I think that can help to get rid of unnecessary travel.

A GM who *wants* to have travel in his game can recruit PCs inside the RDI (or equivalent). That GM who just wants to run DOOMGATES OF DOOM can instead just say in an OOC thread "Hey, I'm running this module" and when he gets his group, start them off in the town of Doomsguarde, and run the adventure proper (as opposed to right now, where he'd have to move the PCs from Orussus to Doomsguarde, which could literally take MONTHS of real time play... Galwynn's current adventure pretty much dissolved before we ever reached the 'dungeon', for example).

Now, I like the idea of multiple RDIs, but I think we should cap it at two, and only introduce one to begin with. Each one would be in a different city, so as the campaign progressed, we could showcase more of it.

However, with adventures beginning outside of hte core city, the core city becomes far less "Core". Which, I think, would be a good thing.

ORGANIZATIONS

There should be organizations in the world that PCs can belong to. Guilds and the like, that may or may not have special benefits to offer to PCs. I'm not saying we write up huge lists of houserules to simulate this, or even crazy feats (although feats may be a good idea, and LEW already has a few that are similar).

The main idea here would be to ground PCs into the game world, and to also use these organizations as a way to get PCs into adventures. While we could make them class specific (so there'd be a bardic college, a wizardly school, and a warrior school, to use 3E classes as an example), I think it'd be neater to have each school represent a broad category of classes, and make them each interesting enough that choosing a school would be a tough choice for every character.

So the school of exploration would offer a bunch of discounts on adventuring gear, and would interest rangers and other woodsy characters. It also has maps and other sources of information that could come in handy.

Meanwhile, the Order of Light could offer free healing, and other nice happy benefits (such as having low-level knights help you out at times).

If I'm a LG Warrior, I could be torn between either choice, and I think that makes for more interesting play.

NON-GAME THREADS

So, right now, we have a few "shop" threads, and the RDI thread. I think we should have a few more OOC threads:

1) The Bazaar. Essentially, this would be where PCs sell their wares. However, instead of long threads, it would all be updated on the first page, with individual PCs mentioning their purchases and sales. A judge would in charge of monitoring this. I think this would encourage inter-PC sales and bargaining.

2) RDI Threads - in multiple cities (two at any one time). I think having one thread set in the main city, and another rotating from city to city could be kind of neat.

3) The Arena - I like the idea of a PvP arena, but it's too early to discuss right now. Just mentioning it right now.

4) The Library - This is an idea that I think could help keep the game running smoothly. Essentially, every player would have one thread, where they could record what they've encountered in the world. As gameplay progressed, all those little details could come up, and become clearer. Whether or not these details are actually true remains to be seen, but it could easily be good reading.

OTHER META STUFF

Just some rough ideas:

1) I like Creamsteak's Character's Subforum; it definately seems like a good idea. However, I'd say that each PLAYER has his one thread, and then we have a stickied index at the top. But it's a beautiful way to keep things running smoothly.

2) To encourage GM's running adventures - we could simply limit maximum number of PCs you can run, based on the number of adventures you're running, although that's a bit draconian. Still, it seems to me that if you play 3 PCs, you should be "giving something back" to the community.

We could also up the relative power of GM credits, which I think wouldn't hurt too much.

3) I wholly agree that all PCs should start at 1st level.

4) One thing I think might help newbies and GMs alike is to have a "Player's Guide" PDF or something. Basically, a dummy's intro to the world - detailing the religions in brief, main areas, and whatnot. Keep it under six or seven pages, and provide a map.

Then, each year or so, we could release an "update" that provided any "open" areas that GMs have added to the world, as well as progress the date of our campaign world by one year (and provide a "recent events" section in the update). I think that'd be really cool, and help with campaign continuity.

Someone · Sep 5, 2007

About time, travel and inconsistent travel times, I'll drop an idea that I used once in a short Simbad-esque campaing. Take whatever you like from it.

Lands in that campaing were islands of various sizes, from tiny to continental. However, the sea among them wasn't a normal ocean - it was a transitive plane. So you sailed out of town, and as soon you lost sight of land, you were in that plane. Sailing through the ocean was more an art that science, and undoing the way didn't guarantee to carry you back to where you came. However, well travelled routes were easier to sail, and most ships stuck to them.

If you don't like ships because of the lack of rules, you can substitute the Sea with the Wilderness or the Forest.

The advantage of this setting are:

- Inconsistent time travel is incorporated to the setting. One ship or caravan may need one month to reach B from A, and other just two days, and that won't matter because a) The second ship's captain is more skilled (or the second caravan's guide more experienced) or b) The strange nature of the transitive plane.

- You don't worry about some new place you wanted to place your adventure don't fitting the stablished map, because there's no map. You can't map the Sea (or the Wilderness)

- When you find a new place it doesn't have to be the normal Material plane; they can work as demiplanes. Most places where people live follow the Material plane rules, but others can be wholly different. You don't need to be high level to go "plane jumping".

- You can place a Tarrasque (a herd of Tarrasques, in fact) two days from Main City and don't worry about it eating the city.

- Strange beings and races are easy to include. they come from their own strange land.

- Drawback: We don't know the rules and there's a chance the setting may not fit well within 4e rules; my version forbid for example Teleporting between islands (you needed Island/Plane shift for that) so if this idea is adopted we may need some adjusting or house ruling. Also, the setting may be too open for some tastes.

Phoenix8008 · Sep 5, 2007

-The character subforum sounds interesting, although I agree that it could be one thread for each player.

-I also like the idea of having multiple RDI type areas for RPing in other cities. At least after the setting grows out a little past the initial city.

-Depending on how closely L4W follows the apparent 'Points of Light' model, we will see about the travel and outlying areas away from the main city.

-I also agree that all characters should start at first level, at least until someone gets high enough level to do the 'trade-in' thing for something else or something with a level adjusment (if they have those in 4E).

-I like the idea of a bazzaar for PC's to sell their stuff at. You could have all the crafters post their own link to their shops or just keep it updated at the top of the thread. But if someone is left in charge of all that maybe they could get some kind of credits like DM credits but for judges? Heck, maybe character and adventure judges could get something like that anyway (if they don't already)?

-The Library sounds interesting, but possibly messy. If maps and stories were all posted and kept well organized, it could be a great source of info for finding out about the world. Heck, the 'Player's Guide' that was mentioned could be the first entry in the library detailing the initial starting point of the world and it's known area/history!

-I also very much like the idea of having organizations that the characters can choose to belong to. Especially if they were similar to the factions (I know this isn't the right name for them, but I can't think of it right now) that were shown off in the DMGII. Not those exact organizations in the DMGII mind you, but something with that kind of meta-structure where you gain points and rank in the guild or affiliation (is that the right word? Maybe) and maybe gain some useable bonus or help from the organization. I know they used these alot in Paizo's last Dungeon adventure path, the Savage Tide, and I liked the idea and the execution.

Here's an idea that I've had for awhile for a campaign I've been writing up for years and never started yet. It concerns the judicial system of a group of countries and creates interesting effects on the gameplay in a fantasy RPG. I thought I'd throw it out here for people to chew on and if it winds up as part of L4W, then all the better!

Arena Justice System
~~Under this system, all main cities have an arena and fights that happen there regularly. The justice system interfaces with the arenas in the following manners:~~ (Edited to avoid confusion about multiple cities. The system is just as applicable to a single city.)
*Any crime commited is punishable by serving time at the arena in one form or another. Minor crimes incur a short sentance of working to clean stalls of the gladitorial beasts or as a menial worker of some other sort beneath the arena (sharpening weapons, repairing armor, cleaning up bloody messes, dragging the dead bodies back beneath the sands, etc). Medium crimes incur a sentance of non-lethal fighting in the arena for a pre-determined amount of time (number of matches, number of days, something depending on severity of crime). Major crimes are sentanced to long or lifetime sentances of fighting in the arena. Or some combination of the above depending on the type/severity of the crime. Maybe a lifetime sentance of menial labor for an old or infirm person for instance.

*Due to this, any bounties offered by local officials, magistrates, etc. all specify that the target of the bounty is to be returned ALIVE in order to recieve the bounty award. If returned dead, the bounty is either not paid or cost of ressurection is taken out of amount paid for bounty(if L4W is 'high-magic' enough to have raising magic this common, but you get the idea). So if there is a band of bugbears attacking villages, the party needs to return with the leader of the bugbears to deliver him to justice.

*The arena is therefore an important part of the local economy and tax structure because the citizens pay for the entertainment, the arena houses and imprisons all criminals and serves justice to them for all to see, and a cut of all wagers and addmission fees is kept by the local government.

*It also stops or at least limits the idea of PVP in the arena. (Sorry to those who love the idea, and I'm not entirely against it. But I do see where it could get unbalanced.) After all, are you gonna go break the law and get thrown in jail just to go do some PVP? It doesn't prevent DM's from running an adventure where the PC's need to go undercover and get thrown into the arena jail system for some reason though.

*This also provides good reason for why a town would have access to all sorts of weapons and armors, even exotics, because they are commonly used in the arena.

*And yes, spellcasters can get the same treatment, though they may have different events or duties based on their abilities. Maybe wizard duels or jobs providing fireworks?

*For DM's, this means an easy way to have hated villains return to plague the PC's who put them in jail in the first place. (I know, kind of an Arkham Asylum thing if it has too much of a revolving door, but corruption can run deep in any government and how hard is it for some bad guys to get a pardon in the real world?) Or for another villain to stage a jailbreak...

orsal · Sep 5, 2007

Phoenix8008 said:
Arena Justice System
Under this system, all main cities have an arena and fights that happen there regularly. The justice system interfaces with the arenas in the following manners:

I like the idea of a city where this system is used. But why does it need to be the same in *every* major city?

Phoenix8008 · Sep 5, 2007

orsal said:
I like the idea of a city where this system is used. But why does it need to be the same in *every* major city?

It doesn't. Feel free to use it only in one or any cities you wish!

That was more flavor from the campaign I originally wrote the idea up for. It was based around very far future of real earth. Some structures still survuved in some fasion (ruins of the Eifel tower, pyramids, and Rome's Colliseum(among others) which the people ended up using as their excuse/reason for having their justice system in an arena...

Edit- An addendum: I suppose the arena's could also have just plain entertainment at times. Perhaps even some willing volunteer gladiator's that are not criminals. (Of course, this re-opens the PVP can of worms...)

Ashardalon · Sep 5, 2007

I feel gates might work as a supplement to travel rather than a substitute, if the destinations of the gates are far away enough, and gate cities rare enough. Say one of the main cities has three gates, and is one of the rare few cities that has this many gates, and the gates lead either to the frozen north, the deep equatorial jungles, or the far archipelagoes somewhere in the ocean. Perhaps add a plane or two in the mix.
The Wilderness as a plane/several planes idea sounds interesting.

Creamsteak said:
Do we do like LEW and have everyone start at 1st level? Or do we do like LEB and have multiple starting levels?

First level, for now. Everyone needs to get acquainted to the rules before we can get fancy.

Creamsteak said:
Do we want to drop the idea of a Red Dragon Inn mechanic? Change it? Keep it?

Keep a RDI as a roleplaying "hub," without mandating it as a plot hook hub.

Creamsteak said:
How do we want to treat people that propose running a published module? This has a lot of sub questions. I expect the first published module to be something everyone wants to "Try out."

Using published modules is probably essential to get Living 4 up and running early. So, yes, allow them, but certainly not multiple times.

Creamsteak said:
Do we need to look into how we deal with proposals? I certainly think restricting "crunch" proposals at first would help, since we won't really intimately "know" the mechanics until we've played them fairly well.

Yep, crunch proposals shouldn't be for a few months, I estimate. Otherwise, I think the basic system should work. Details, such as number of approvals and approval time, can be worked out.

Creamsteak said:
Are there any changes to the character records and methods we use? I'm fairly satisfied with this, but we might be able to make some improvements or tweaks to how we list/update characters. One idea I have is to add a Sub-forum to the L4W, and record each character in a thread rather than a post. Then one sticky thread that acts as the "list of characters" with links. Then have the DMs of games post to the characters threads with their recieved rewards. Thus keeping all updates visible to everyone. This has advantages and disadvantages obviously. I'm not sure which is best.

I always wanted to ask in the mod forum if it might be possible to get some kind of semi-automated system for character approvals similar to the current review system. You post a character using a specialized form, the character judges get notified and leave their comments, and may mark a character as approved. A character database is generated from those forms for ease of use of DMs. Editing some forms would reset the approvals, and if necessary notify the judges again. Not sure how viable it is, but it could have been useful in a few instances in the past. Never got around to ask about that, though.

Bront · Sep 6, 2007

Creamsteak said:
Do we do like LEW and have everyone start at 1st level? Or do we do like LEB and have multiple starting levels?

I would HIGHLY suggest 1st, especialy since we're likely to start with 1 character per person till things get moving (it's easier to ease into things that way)

Creamsteak said:
Do we want to drop the idea of a Red Dragon Inn mechanic? Change it? Keep it?

I like keeping it. It's easy enough to bypass if a GM wants, but including it gives people a place to talk in between adventures, and RP a bit while waiting.

Creamsteak said:
How do we want to treat people that propose running a published module? This has a lot of sub questions. I expect the first published module to be something everyone wants to "Try out."

Only let it be run once, and ask that people playing in it or running it/have read it elsewhere not participate, much like we do normaly.

Creamsteak said:
Do we need to look into how we deal with proposals? I certainly think restricting "crunch" proposals at first would help, since we won't really intimately "know" the mechanics until we've played them fairly well.

Restricting Crunch proposals isn't a bad idea, and probably a good one for the first 6 months.

Creamsteak said:
Do we want to make a stronger mechanic for grounding DM concepts to the game world? I know that the Interface and Tracking thread was originally intended to be the place to reference for "Oh, so there's a city over there, and a swamp over there" from a previous adventures.

Idealy, DMs should have a spot where they can share public information about world areas they make, either durring or after an adventure. Idealy, important NPCs should be mentioned too.

Creamsteak said:
Are there any changes to the character records and methods we use? I'm fairly satisfied with this, but we might be able to make some improvements or tweaks to how we list/update characters. One idea I have is to add a Sub-forum to the L4W, and record each character in a thread rather than a post. Then one sticky thread that acts as the "list of characters" with links. Then have the DMs of games post to the characters threads with their recieved rewards. Thus keeping all updates visible to everyone. This has advantages and disadvantages obviously. I'm not sure which is best.

A single thread has the advantage of being easy to find things in, but the disadvantage of potentialy loosing info in it (Find character X in 8 pages of posts without a direct link or Search) and individual characters becoming very long in single-post forumat.

We could probably do either one, or better yet, have a post per player, with every character they have in it.

Bront · Sep 6, 2007

Rystil Arden said:
Not that I know of. I certainly hope not, and if so, I haven't heard of it and have been ignoring it.

Yes you do, it's the character tracking thread that you're supposed to keep up to date.

Wik · Sep 6, 2007

Phoenix8008 said:
It doesn't. Feel free to use it only in one or any cities you wish! That was more flavor from the campaign I originally wrote the idea up for. It was based around very far future of real earth. Some structures still survuved in some fasion (ruins of the Eifel tower, pyramids, and Rome's Colliseum(among others) which the people ended up using as their excuse/reason for having their justice system in an arena...

Edit- An addendum: I suppose the arena's could also have just plain entertainment at times. Perhaps even some willing volunteer gladiator's that are not criminals. (Of course, this re-opens the PVP can of worms...)

the more I think about it, the more I think this could really be viable, although it would be difficult.

One meta aspect i've been thinking about is having each Judge have their own purview, an area of expertise. Performing in this area would provide GM credits (I really think judges should get them, although maybe not as powerful as GM credits... but that's a whole other argument).

If we had five judges, they could each have different areas that they are responsible for.

Each judge would be responsible for adventure approvals, rule approvals, and moderating threads (as well as judging specific threads).

The Bazaar thread would be maintained by a specific judge (and I have a bunch of ideas on how this would be done) - that would be his "area".

Another two judges (at least) would deal with Character Approvals and Updates.

We could have a particularly rules-savvy judge running the arena thread. And I have some ideas there, as well.

I'm leaving the fifth judge open right now, since I'm sure we'll come up with some new stuff, as well.

About time, travel and inconsistent travel times, I'll drop an idea that I used once in a short Simbad-esque campaing. Take whatever you like from it.

Lands in that campaing were islands of various sizes, from tiny to continental. However, the sea among them wasn't a normal ocean - it was a transitive plane. So you sailed out of town, and as soon you lost sight of land, you were in that plane. Sailing through the ocean was more an art that science, and undoing the way didn't guarantee to carry you back to where you came. However, well travelled routes were easier to sail, and most ships stuck to them.

That is a great idea, and it really does fit with a "Simbad" or "greek" style game. Since I wanted to run something based on an archipelego, I think that could work really well.

A few points:

1) Perhaps this plane could be mobile, so that it would pick up ships randomly and shift their movements, so that ships COULD move from point a to point b via regular sailing, while another ship, leaving a day later, could catch this plane, and make it to point b a week ahead of ship a.

2) Keeping the well-traveled routes "plane free" would be fairly smart, I think, sine we could really just post a list in the player's guide saying roughly how long it takes to get from point a to point b.

***

Speaking of which, I'm curious about what everyone thinks of the idea of a Player's Guide (a basic intro the world, preferably in PDF format), along with yearly updates that take into account the expanding world.

Wik · Sep 6, 2007

The Bazaar

Here's how I believe "The Bazaar" should be organized, and some rules that would go with it:

1) The first thread would simply be a list of what's in the bazaar, along with price, and who is selling it.
2) Posters to the thread would announce what they wish to sell (or maybe even purchase), and a price (as well as if they are willing to trade, or negotiate). So, I could say something like: "Galwynn wants to sell his Masterwork Greatsword, for 200 GP. Not interested in trades, but I will negotiate". This should all be done in red Color (and red is reserved for catching the eye of the monitor; PCs don't use it for text boxes, for example)

3) The thread monitor, once every couple of days, would update these posts onto the main thread, along with when the object was put on the list (so that items don't stay on the list for years and years). If a player pays the price for an object, than he simply says (in red) "Galwynn is paying the 200 GP for the item".

4) The monitor would make a post that more or less verifies that this exchange has been made, so that the player can link to this thread to make things easier for the approval judges.

5) If players wish to negotiate trades or bargain for prices, this can be done, until a final decision is made. Both Players need to write down their APPROVAL of the exchange (using the same terms) in red.

For example: Galwynn agrees to trade his greatsword to Elthic for 150 GP and a potion of Cure Light Wounds. and "Elthic APPROVES Galwynn's Trade - Longsword for 150 GP and my potion of CLW"

This, of course, would be accompanied by a post that reaffirms that a trade has taken place.

6) Players shouldn't mark money off their character sheets until they've had a trade approved.

**

Some notes:

1) While we don't know much about crafting rules, I think it's safe to assume they'll still be there. And I'm not a huge fan of a PC being able to craft 2 GP longswords, for example. I think the rule should be something like "only masterwork or magical items can be sold or traded", just to prevent this sort of "bargain store trading". Again, we don't know the rules, and the situation might not come up.

2) Every month or so, the list should be scanned, and items that aren't selling after six months or so should be cleared off, with a moderator's post saying so.

3) Again, while we don't know the rules, I assume there will be a magical item generator in the DMG. I think it might be neat if, using IC, the moderator adds a few NPC magic item/masterwork sales to the list, using regular prices (or even at a slight discount, if it turns out that magical items are still relatively common in 4e), to reflect the realities of the market in the game world.

4) If we wind up using affiliations in the game, we could also have lists that are available only to members of a certain affiliation (for example, members of the Holy Church of Light might be able to purchase healing potions at 80% of the regular cost). These lists would be fairly specific, and would update monthly (those Holy Church people will be competing for the 10 healing potions that are sold cheap each month!)