+ Log in or register to post
Results 91 to 100 of 154
Thread: D&D Next Blog: Tone and Edition
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:17 PM #91
Magsman (Lvl 14)
I think it's great!
Not because it's brilliant, or that I'm going to agree with what rarity each race is, or even that I think Common, Uncommon and Rare are good terms to use.
Why is it great? Because it's a reminder, right there in the race section that not all campaigns are the same. The player is reminded to talk to his GM and thus find out that No, there are no Elves in his Hyborean Age game or conversely that there are no Dragonborn in this Middle-Earth 4th age game. And the GM is reminded that it's his setting and his campaign and yes, he can say no.*
(* - Insert standard GM advice about talking with your played and embracing new ideas yadda, yadda, yadda - But in the end I firmly believe in a GMs right to say "No, that just doesn't fit into my world.")-Andor, Grognard
- EN World
- has no influence
- on adverts that
- are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:20 PM #92
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:21 PM #93
Enchanter (Lvl 12)
I'm all for giving many different options for races so that each group cha chose what to include in their campaign, but I utterly fail to see any usefulness at all in the common/uncommon/rare tagging. What's the point, really? Maybe my world has dwarves and gnomes, but no halflings and elves...
'Can a magician kill a man by magic?' Lord Wellington asked Strange. Strange frowned. He seemed to dislike the question. 'I suppose a magician might,' he admitted, 'but a gentleman never could.'
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:22 PM #94
Hydra (Lvl 25)
But I don't really care that much about terminology at this point. Terminology is easily changed, and a blog post about a concept doesn't mean "We have writtena chapter and this is the exact text we're using" - it just means "I've had some thoughts on a concept".
They haven't started writing the rulebooks yet. The entire rulebook, its layout, its terminology, that sort of thing - that's all to come, and it's a year or more away. Maybe it'll be a chapter, or a sidebar; maybe it'll use those words or something else; maybe it'll be a pop-up leaflet; Robert Scwalb doesn't know at this point, and neither does anyone else.
Like I mentioned above, at the point where they haven't settled on a name for the game, they definitely haven't settled on what words they'll use or what sidebar will appear on what page. I bet they haven't even fully settled on "PHB/DMG/MM" yet (though I'll be surprised if they don't go that way in the end).
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:24 PM #95
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:26 PM #96
The only problem I can see is a player thinking: ooh, I want to play a rare race, so I'm special.
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 03:44 PM #97
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
I hope that terminology is one of the things the open playtest will fix for them. Becuse as much as WotC is not my fav system publishers, I do think they made great games, I think they need help in Invoking the right feel.that terminology is of vital importance, and that sharing terminology with CCGs is probably something best avoided in order to avoid the inevitable "comparisons with X" stuff that will come after.
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 04:02 PM #98
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 04:09 PM #99
Superhero (Lvl 15)
Saturday, 28th April, 2012, 04:22 PM #100
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
Something that just occurred to me. Isn't this differentiation exactly what Pathfinder tries to get across by the distinction between 'core' classes and 'base' classes?
I find that terminology a little confusing, but as I understand it, 'core' classes are considered available by default unless the GM says otherwise, while 'base' classes are considered only suitable to some campaigns and you should seek GM approval for playing one.
That's pretty much what they're saying in this post about races, isn't it? Though again, the terminology is a little odd.
I mean, the 'common' races are in 4e too, along with every other edition. So one can indeed say, "You can assume these races are available in any D&D game, unless specifically told otherwise. While these other races, though cool, aren't suitable to every D&D game, so ask first."
I'm not sure what's supposed to be 'uncommon' about half-elves or half-orcs or gnomes, except they weren't in the 4e PH1. So the tripartite list is throwing a bone to 4e players as well as players of earlier editions.
"All right, I am not the Shadow. You have nothing at all to worry about. Except, oh, wait, I'm pointing a gun at you."