D&D 5th Edition With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base - Page 10




What's on your mind?

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    Because, from what I've seen here and on the WotC message boards, older fans are happy with the compromised version they've been given and are happy to get something, and are not asking for everything. Meanwhile, the 4e fans are arguing over Vancian magic and every single throw back.
    If you think the current version is a compromise, then you clearly don't know what 4E fans what. Which is kinda the whole point of what 4E fans are complaining about. 5E hasn't actually achieved any of the major goals of 4E, and thus is a "compromise" that completely fails to bring in large numbers of existing D&D players. A "compromise" that fails to bring agreement isn't a compromise at all, its just a failure at best, or an ultimatum at worst.

    Compromise can only happen once both sides listen to each other and strike a deal satisfactory to both parties. If one side is still complaining, then it's pretty clear that a compromise hasn't been made yet.

    If you don't want to buy 5e that's fine. I wish you well and hope you have continued fun playing whatever games you end up buying and enjoying. Roll some dice, have some laughs, make some memories with friends. I salute you.
    But please, please, please don't ruin it for the rest of us who want 5e to succeed and are looking forward to it.
    So it's "you can play what you want, but don't ask WotC to make a game for you and ruin it for me," huh? How on earth is that an attempt to compromise?

    It's pretty clear that all of your talk of "compromise" is just hot air. You make it sound like you want a game suited for you and you alone, want to dress that up as "the best path for the game", and just want people with different opinions to shut up. Sorry, I'm not going to oblige that.

    Also, what's with this "want 5E to succeed" stuff? I've never wished for 5E to fail. I want to see 5E succeed at its goal of unifying everyone. I just think that the chances of it actually doing so are pretty slim.

    Remember: the best revenge is living well. Thusly, the best revenge on WotC is to play something else and have fun.
    Revenge? What on earth? Who, exactly, is looking for revenge on WotC? Where did you come up with this kind of ridiculous and insulting idea?

 

  • #92
    Registered User
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,419
    Cortex+ZEITGEISTWotBSI Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Neonchameleon
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    Ummm... the 4e skill system is pretty much exactly the same as the 3e system. The only difference is it automatically puts ranks into the skills you chose at first level via your 1/2 level bonus. And, like 3e, if you're not trained in a skill you really shouldn't bother even attempting it (unless you have a high ability score, in which case you probably should have trained that skill).
    False or misleading on three counts.

    The first count is that in 4e you get a bonus to your untrained skills as well as your trained ones. Huge difference because except for major focus-skills it keeps the difference down.

    Second, as 4e has fewer skills, and it's easier to gain the trained bonus, it's possible to make a first level fighter with effectively more trained skills than a high-int 3.X rogue - while not substantively weakening him as a fighter. Needing to make skills without training or decent stats is therefore comparatively rare.

    Third, there are three tiers of skill checks - hard for specialists (and yes, specialists blow through this one), medium for people with training or a high stat, and easy that will challenge those without either. If you have a low stat and are untrained (remember that 4e skills are much broader than 3.X skills) you just need to work out how to make something easy - or use another skill.

    Except Utilities are almost exclusively combat orientated.
    No. Utilities are largely combat orientated. Something very different. Yes, probably three out of every four utilities are for combat. Between splat books, themes, and skill powers (normally more out of combat than utilities) you're still spoiled for choice. You only need to actually pick one utility at each level.

    Out of curiosity, do you use DDI and the Character Builder? Because it might explain this assertion if you don't.

    And rituals drain the party coffers, being prohibitively expensive at low levels for very little benefit.
    And very cheap when you've levelled a little. Or are a bard and can cast bardic rituals for free.

    What is fun for casters is the cantrips. I loved cantrips in my wizard and it was a great shame more classes didn't have them. I was especially disappointed by the psion, who had a mage hand equivalent as an encounter power.
    Agreed. And it's one of the things Essentials-era classes do much better than classic 4e classes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    Yes, I'm sure 4e had a completely sustainable fanbase. Which is totally why WotC decided to tank their profit for eighteen months and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars, risking all their jobs and the survival of the brand, on the success of a new edition.
    You mean the 4e fanbase is slightly less lucrative than the 3.5 one? Where they only tanked it for a full year (the final non-DM supplement for 3.5 was Complete Champion, released in May 2007). And they weren't raking in DDI cash then so it's not quite as high a level of tanking.

    The only non-transition book published after Complete Champion was the Monster Manual V. (The final non-transition 4e book appears to be Heroes of the Elemental Chaos).

    So yeah, I don't see the treatment of 4e to be substantively different to that of 3e.

    Because, from what I've seen here and on the WotC message boards, older fans are happy with the compromised version they've been given and are happy to get something, and are not asking for everything. Meanwhile, the 4e fans are arguing over Vancian magic and every single throw back.
    You must have missed the long arguments about the hit dice and self healing being a bad thing, at will spells being terrible (including someone saying that an at will spell gave unlimited power to destroy doors or walls, seeming to confuse it with at-will disintegrate), and a lot of active gravedancing about 4e.

    Remember: the best revenge is living well. Thusly, the best revenge on WotC is to play something else and have fun.
    If you're talking about revenge, I suggest you look at your own feelings as to why you have the impressions you do.

  • #93
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    Jester Canuck's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,091
    Blog Entries
    2
    RavenloftGygax Memorial FundI Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Jester Canuck
    Quote Originally Posted by Neonchameleon View Post
    False or misleading on three counts.

    The first count is that in 4e you get a bonus to your untrained skills as well as your trained ones. Huge difference because except for major focus-skills it keeps the difference down.

    Second, as 4e has fewer skills, and it's easier to gain the trained bonus, it's possible to make a first level fighter with effectively more trained skills than a high-int 3.X rogue - while not substantively weakening him as a fighter. Needing to make skills without training or decent stats is therefore comparatively rare.

    Third, there are three tiers of skill checks - hard for specialists (and yes, specialists blow through this one), medium for people with training or a high stat, and easy that will challenge those without either. If you have a low stat and are untrained (remember that 4e skills are much broader than 3.X skills) you just need to work out how to make something easy - or use another skill.
    You get the 1/2 bonus but the DCs go up at the same rate so the bonus is largely irrelevant. So the 5-10 disparity in skills never goes down. And, for specialists, it only goes up as stat boosts come into play. And feat. Plus backgrounds and racial bonuses. It's easy to have a skill bonus +14 higher at 1st level and +25 at 39th.
    Yes, you can use any skill but you're always better off letting someone else make the roll and training in skills where you have an ability score bonus.
    Some system mastery at work.
    My gaming Webcomic 5 Minute Workday at www.5mwd.com

  • #94
    Registered User
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    11,831

    Ignore pemerton
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    Except Utilities are almost exclusively combat orientated. And rituals drain the party coffers, being prohibitively expensive at low levels for very little benefit.
    The comment about utilities has already been rebutted - within the PHB, off the top off my head, I can point to the Paladin's Diplomacy buff, the Warlock's glibness buff, the Ranger's "help my friends at skill checks" buff and the many invisibility/stealth buffs that Warlocks, Wizards and Rogues get.

    As for rituals, my group has not found them prohibitively expensive. And if your group won't spend the money for rituals because you're worried about purchasing items, then unless those items are themselves for non-combat use I would say you're making a combat-focused rod for your own backs!

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    the 4e skill system is pretty much exactly the same as the 3e system. The only difference is it automatically puts ranks into the skills you chose at first level via your 1/2 level bonus. And, like 3e, if you're not trained in a skill you really shouldn't bother even attempting it (unless you have a high ability score, in which case you probably should have trained that skill).
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny3D3D View Post
    Not useless, but far enough behind that there are many situations in which you are far better off allowing someone who is trained in the skill to roll during a skill challenge.
    I think that this goes to how skill challenges are run.

    In a recent challenge I ran, the dwarven Fighter-Cleric was having his artefact dwarven thrower, Whelm, reforged as Overwhelm, a mordenkrad. He had the assistance of the party Invoker-Wizard. The dwarf made a Dungeoneering check to make sure that the forge and so on were in order (Dungeoneering and Thievery being the two approximations to an engineering skill in 4e) - not a trained skill. As the magical energy rose, the Invoker-Wizard made an Arcana check to contain those energies - a trained skill. As the dwarven artificers became anxious, the dwarf reassured them - an untrained, 10 CHA Diplomacy check. But they were still having trouble taking hold of Whelm with their tongs. The dwarf prayed to Moradin, but his prayers weren't enough - he failed his trained, 8 INT Religion check. Finally, he decided to use Fighter's Grit (a condition-resisting Fighter utility) and shove his hands into the furnace to hold down Whelm himself long enoug for the artificers to take hold of it. He succeeded at the Hard Endurance check (with +2 for Fighter's Grit), which was also the 4th success for the challenge. The wizard then used Remove Affliction (with Fundamental Ice as part of the material component) to relieve some of the damage to the dwarf's hands.

    That's just one example, but it's generally consistent with my experience that players will attempt the use of skills in which they are not trained, if that's what the fictional stakes require that they do.

    Given that D&Dnext will still have PCs with significantly different stat bonuses, it will also need GMs to use techniques to encourage players to make checks other than with their biggest numbers, if it is to avoid the "only the face does any talking" problem.

  • #95
    Registered User
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)



    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    11,831

    Ignore pemerton
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    Yes, you can use any skill but you're always better off letting someone else make the roll
    People keep reciting this as if its self-evidently true.

    Suppose I am playing a dwarf fighter with a dumped CHA. And suppose my PC enters a new town, and wants to make a good impression with the mayor/baron/dwarven clan leader/etc. Having the bard or rogue do the talking isn't going to work. If I want my PC to make a good impression, I am going to have to say stuff.

    That's not to say that the bard/rogue/whatever can't act as my PC's herald, announcing my PC's entrance and giving bonuses, reducing difficulties or otherwise changing the fictional situation in favour of my guy. But in the end my guy is going to have to say something, and I'll have to pick up the d20 and make a roll.

    It's the same as combat: the wizard doesn't fight because combat is his/her thing, the wizard fights because the monsters are attacking him/her!

    When it comes to out-of-combat resolution, the main requirement is to explain to GMs how to resolve the failed checks that will inevitably follow upon players making checks in which their PCs have poor bonuses. Burning Wheel does an excellent job of this. D&D, to date, has done a terrible job. Judging from posts I read around here, the default narration for the dwarf fighter attempting and failing the Diplomacy check is "You open your mouth and spray your spit over the mayor - sucks to dump CHA, I guess!" - and then people complain that their players won't use anything but their biggest numbers!

    If the fighter fails the Diplomacy check, then there are any number of ways of narrating that failure without making the PC look like a fool - from "The mayor listens briefly, but then excuses herself to go off to the next meeting" to "Of course the mayor would love to help you, but she swore an oath to her late brother that she would never do XYZ" to "As you begin your address, rain starts to fall, and the mayor's entourage usher her back into the city hall before you can get your point across".

  • #96
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Johnny3D3D's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Claysburg
    Posts
    2,164

    Ignore Johnny3D3D
    My communities:

    Quote Originally Posted by pemerton View Post

    That's just one example, but it's generally consistent with my experience that players will attempt the use of skills in which they are not trained, if that's what the fictional stakes require that they do.
    I think that's cool, but it is generally not consistent with my own experiences playing the current version of D&D.

  • #97
    Community Supporter COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)

    Jester Canuck's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,091
    Blog Entries
    2
    RavenloftGygax Memorial FundI Defended The Walls!

    Ignore Jester Canuck
    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    So it's "you can play what you want, but don't ask WotC to make a game for you and ruin it for me," huh? How on earth is that an attempt to compromise?
    It's not.
    Someone once told me "Compromise can only happen once both sides listen to each other and strike a deal satisfactory to both parties." So if one party has made it clear they do not wish to compromise, then any further attempt to compromise is a waste of time.
    So you move on to people who are willing to compromise and listen and share.

    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    It's pretty clear that all of your talk of "compromise" is just hot air. You make it sound like you want a game suited for you and you alone, want to dress that up as "the best path for the game", and just want people with different opinions to shut up. Sorry, I'm not going to oblige that.
    I will be very, very disappointed with WotC if 5e is just for me. I'm not expecting my perfect game. I want it to provide me the tools and options to make my perfect game, while also providing tools and options for others to make their perfect game that is completely and totally different from my perfect game.

    I want those with different opinions who are willing to buy into the concept of a modular shareable game to share those opinions, to make the game better. It's a big tent game and we need many voices.
    It's only the people unwilling to join us in a shared, moduar, customizable game I want to stop bringing us down.

    4e was a good many things, but unifying was not one of them. There needs to be a step back. Moving forward from 4e to 4e evolved (despite already being tried and called "Essentials") would have just divided 4e's audience and not attracted many old players. Like any franchise, be it comics or movie or fiction, when the audience shrinks and splinters there needs to be a return to basics and the franchise's roots. That's just the way it is.
    The only franchise I can think of as an example right now is Batman, which has gone "back to basics" in movie form twice and comics four or so times. But that's not a good example as it equates 4e with Batman & Robin and even the most fanatical 4e hater wouldn't go THAT far.

    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    Revenge? What on earth? Who, exactly, is looking for revenge on WotC? Where did you come up with this kind of ridiculous and insulting idea?
    I was just riffing off the quote. It's metaphorical revenge, not literal. If someone's unhappy with losing D&D to a retro-inspired edition then the best thing to do is keep playing the game they like, as many have done before.
    My gaming Webcomic 5 Minute Workday at www.5mwd.com

  • #98
    Pathfinder subscriber COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)

    billd91's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Verona, WI
    Posts
    8,864
    I Defended The Walls!

    Ignore billd91
    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    If you think the current version is a compromise, then you clearly don't know what 4E fans what. Which is kinda the whole point of what 4E fans are complaining about. 5E hasn't actually achieved any of the major goals of 4E, and thus is a "compromise" that completely fails to bring in large numbers of existing D&D players. A "compromise" that fails to bring agreement isn't a compromise at all, its just a failure at best, or an ultimatum at worst.
    You must have a pretty good crystal ball if you can see how 5e is going to turn out. We've got very little so far to go on.

    Quote Originally Posted by TwinBahamut View Post
    Compromise can only happen once both sides listen to each other and strike a deal satisfactory to both parties. If one side is still complaining, then it's pretty clear that a compromise hasn't been made yet.
    That assumes that the side that's still complaining will even accept honest compromise. They could have just dug in their heels and not budged an inch. It's not like we don't see examples of that all the time in politics. The existence of complaints is not evidence of lack of compromise.
    Bill D

    "There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
    - Doctor Impossible

  • #99
    Pathfinder subscriber COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    Grandfather of Assassins (Lvl 19)

    billd91's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Verona, WI
    Posts
    8,864
    I Defended The Walls!

    Ignore billd91
    Quote Originally Posted by pemerton View Post
    If the fighter fails the Diplomacy check, then there are any number of ways of narrating that failure without making the PC look like a fool - from "The mayor listens briefly, but then excuses herself to go off to the next meeting" to "Of course the mayor would love to help you, but she swore an oath to her late brother that she would never do XYZ" to "As you begin your address, rain starts to fall, and the mayor's entourage usher her back into the city hall before you can get your point across".
    Yes you can have all sorts of consequences that are caused by the dwarf fighter's poor attempt at diplomacy. That's what a good, creative set of players and DM do well. Although I would be pretty pissed off if my dwarf's low diplomacy roll made it rain. I'm playing D&D, not Toon. I don't think the consequences should be unrelated to the cause.

    That said, it's still more advantageous to just roll your good scores in a formal skill challenge situation if there's any significant consequence of failure. Approaching the math of that structure with a low modifier is a killer.
    Bill D

    "There's a fine line between a superpower and a chronic medical condition."
    - Doctor Impossible

  • #100
    Registered User
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Fifth Element's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Fredericton, NB, Canada
    Posts
    6,040

    Ignore Fifth Element
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester Canuck View Post
    You get the 1/2 bonus but the DCs go up at the same rate so the bonus is largely irrelevant. So the 5-10 disparity in skills never goes down.
    Whereas in 3E the disparity just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

  • + Log in or register to post
    Page 10 of 150 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415161718192060110 ... LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Replies: 575
      Last Post: Monday, 30th July, 2012, 09:26 AM
    2. What happens if 5E fails to unite the base?
      By Bedrockgames in forum D&D 5th Edition
      Replies: 67
      Last Post: Tuesday, 31st January, 2012, 01:52 AM
    3. The Real Reason(s) Behind the PDF Debacle
      By Roman in forum General RPG Discussion
      Replies: 50
      Last Post: Sunday, 12th April, 2009, 08:56 PM
    4. What's the real reason we RP?
      By Velira Evangeline in forum ISRP General Chit Chat
      Replies: 37
      Last Post: Sunday, 9th September, 2007, 02:37 PM
    5. 3.5 is the REAL reason everyone is angry
      By Gargauth in forum Older D&D Editions and OSR Gaming
      Replies: 201
      Last Post: Saturday, 25th August, 2007, 04:13 AM

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •