+ Log in or register to post
Results 111 to 120 of 929
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 12:56 PM #111
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 01:07 PM #112
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
2. One player and one main character is done simply. First reduce the encounter level/numbers (the transparent monster blocks are extremely easy to level down); second give the player one or two henchmen/servants/hirelings/eternal companions/butlers/squires/squaddies. The hybrid and multiclass rules are quite efficient for covering all the roles required. This actually allows you to roleplay situations which run counter to the normal group[ dynamic. In most groups everyone is an individual. the mediaeval concept of honourable service as a loyal squire or manservant would not fly in most groups of players.
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 01:09 PM #113
Magsman (Lvl 14)
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 01:25 PM #114
Spellbinder (Lvl 16)
Or, actually, now that I think about it, if the written rules don't really represent the game mechanisms in use. If the written rules really only represent a fallback set of guidelines for an area of the game that the group is really not that invested or interested in, and the GM or the group is adopting or making up mechanisms (improv acting rules, social dominance game rules - all manner of things are possible) to handle the parts they actually are interested and invested in, then the composition of the written "rules" really isn't that important, other than that they should be simple and unobtrusive, and they should be easy to manipulate to suit the needs of the group (being, for instance, much better if they use "rulings" rather than "rules").
Maybe some of the OSR "swell" is caused by the desire for, and absence of, such a "ruleset". I can't help thinking that, if it is, then it would be more productive to focus more on the other mechanisms - improv rules or whatever - that are desired and include them in the bdoy of the game. Maybe part of the allure is based on some sort of "mystery" or deliberate ignorance and/or non-questioning of what it is that is actually being used as a "system"? I don't know; there seems to be a very strong swell of emotion about it, but I have never seen it clearly expressed just what it is that many "old school" gamers really want.
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 01:31 PM #115
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
That is why I posted (some time ago), that the core basic system MUST NOT be "balanced".
The simple core system would please the old schoolers as their imbalance style of play would be preserved while further add-on tactics/power modules would balance the classes out pleasing the Fourthers.
It is also easier to start from an imbalanced system.
It appears no one has been reading my posts!
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 01:39 PM #116
Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)
To me the only way this edition would work is:
The core is organic and no effort is made to ensure balances or decent characters. Then a module in each book fixes balance and makes the game DM Neutral.
The core is DM Neutral and balanced at the start. Then a module adds organic and unbalancing elements.
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 02:03 PM #117
Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)
Originally Posted by Bedrockgames To accomodate 4e I really think they are going to have to focus on those modules. I mean as it is now their is almost too much 4e material in the playtest document for my taste. Anymore and I probably wont have much interest in Next. I think There was some large bones in there for the 4e crowd already (HD, one day heals, themes, daily powers for fighters).
Daily powers for fighters is not a bone for the 4e crowd as implemented. The daily power for fighters is just Hit Moar. And go back to your 3.5 rulebooks and look at the Barbarian. If Fighter Surge was meant to be a bone for 4e players then it is worse than useless - it demonstrates that whoever thought of it doesn't get 4e in the slightest. And themes are if anything a 2e thing - they are kits reborn rather than the 4e themes. That said I'm considering introducing them into 4e as having a feat collection rather than having to pick and choose feats as you level saves casual players a lot of time. It's a genuine improvement from both 3.X and 4e.
As for one day heals, these I will grant.
Okay - but say you are playing in the module - with a solo character. How do you have that fight (with no change to what is written in the module, jsut house rules for the character) - without making the solo character so high a level that his hit bonus and AC is so high that the combat is boring.
It's a very slightly modified version of the 4e one with the half level bonus removed from all parts of the game and the trained bonus dropped from +5 to +3 and a couple of non-adventuring skills added. Except that at present it appears easier to get an extra skill in 4e.
Oh, and the packages all appear to give at least three skills with one social and one exploration. In 4e you could easily decide not to pick a social skill or not to pick an exploration skill.
But yes, the 4e skill system does work well. And I'm glad they didn't tinker with it much for D&D Next
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 02:07 PM #118
Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)
So what you need to do to get the effects you want is to make the core system balanced and then give add-on spells to imbalance the classes, pleasing the oldschool players. That way is easy, the other way is almost impossible.
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 02:19 PM #119
Waghalter (Lvl 7)
You're right, though... after you get rid of that half-level bonus, too-high training bonus, and set-in-stone skill list, it does work well. Which is why I like the Next skill system, but not the 4e system.
Monday, 2nd July, 2012, 02:24 PM #120
Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)
- Join Date
- Jan 2002
- Belfast, Northern Ireland, U.K.
- Read 0 Reviews
° Block Upper_Krust
Originally Posted by Bedrockgames
Its a virtually impossible task to unite the fanbase because ultimately they'll end up alienating fans of either 3rd or 4th Edition.
You could argue that alienating fans of 4th Edition would be worse (for WotC) because the 3rd Edition fans have all jumped ship for Pathfinder.
The only option open to WotC is to make 5th Edition CLEARLY superior to either 3rd or 4th. At the moment I don't think we have seen enough of it to make such a judgement.
Beyond the following flaws and a few minor rules tweaks I think 4th Edition is pretty much perfect:
1. The original GSL (now sorted albeit too late)
2. Rules Bloat from Classes (Class design needs condensed)
3. Higher Tiers basically the same with more math
4. Less focus on Tactical Combat in the books, particularly adventures
5. New ideas for books (instead of retreads and splatbooks)
By Jack7 in forum Roleplaying Games General DiscussionReplies: 47Last Post: Sunday, 12th July, 2009, 05:42 AM
By Hexmage-EN in forum Roleplaying Games General DiscussionReplies: 965Last Post: Wednesday, 13th May, 2009, 01:59 PM
By Rodrigo Istalindir in forum Older D&D Editions (4E, 3.x, 2E, 1E, OD&D), D&D Variants, and OSR GamingReplies: 182Last Post: Wednesday, 5th March, 2008, 01:49 PM
By TerraDave in forum Roleplaying Games General DiscussionReplies: 110Last Post: Saturday, 16th February, 2008, 01:57 AM
By Ermanaric in forum Roleplaying Games General DiscussionReplies: 46Last Post: Monday, 30th September, 2002, 04:10 AM