Wire Fu Demonic Magical Superheroes

Because I want to respect the OP's wishes about keeping the thread positive, I will start a new thread for this:

Doug McCrae said:

Also I get the feeling the game's going to be that bit more kickass. Faster, more exciting, sexier. It's going to be a bit more wire fu demonic magical superheroes and a bit less deciding how many iron spikes to buy. More Feng Shui, less Chivalry & Sorcery.

Click to expand...

See, this IMO should not be an assumption of the Core of D&D. You could do this in 1E, 2E, 3E and even BECM D&D if you wanted. This stuff is all about presentation and flavor text at the table or in a setting sourcebook. Hardwiring this stuff into the rules system harms the game by keeping D&D from being the go-to game for fun, generic fantasy that is easy to twist and turn into whatever kind of setting/tone you like. It is a whole lot harder to excise tone like this than it is to add it in.

Moreover, I don't understand why D&D fans would want this game, because there is already one out there that does it very well. it is called Exalted. That's not a dig. i wrote for the game. I love Exalted. It is the pinnacle of the "build and combo" type of gaming that late 3.5 and it looks like 4E will be going for. Just play that. It's popular -- finding players shouldn't be too hard. Its setting is extremely broad, so it doesn't matter if you want Anime or Beowulf or Grecian Heroes -- it is all there. And, it is designed from the ground up for wire-fu demonic magical superheroes, high action and crunchy character building goodness all included.

Why do (general) you -- though I would like an answer directly from Doug -- want D&D to be Exalted when you already have Exalted. More to the point, why do you want to take D&D from me so you can have Exalted with D&D on the cover?

I think OD&D and Exalted are very far apart from each other on the spectrum. I also think 4E is moving in the direction of Exalted on that spectrum, but they will remain plenty separated. I do not think that D&D will become D&E.

Does this excite me? Yes. Put from a purely mechanical point of view. It's always felt to me that D&D rules were 'cannot rules' (you can't do this, you can't do that) but 4E will be 'can' rules.
I want my 1st levels to fight more than rats.
I want Vancian magic to go away.
I want characters to do cool things...and I want players to have to choose when to do them. 'Roll to hit, roll for damage' got old a while ago.

I could go on, but my wife is calling me to watch 'Journeyman' on the TiVo!

I would say that D&D is already "wire fu demonic magical superheroes" at high levels. I think it will end up being the same in 4E as it is now.

LVL 1-10 (Heroic) saving the town from orcs and being cool
LVL 10+ The party is already Superheroic, they just don't have tights.

That's one of the reasons I never liked Exalted, I already had it in my D&D.

Reaper Steve said:

Does this excite me? Yes. Put from a purely mechanical point of view. It's always felt to me that D&D rules were 'cannot rules' (you can't do this, you can't do that) but 4E will be 'can' rules.
I want my 1st levels to fight more than rats.
I want Vancian magic to go away.
I want characters to do cool things...and I want players to have to choose when to do them. 'Roll to hit, roll for damage' got old a while ago.

Click to expand...

Then I don't understand why you want D&D at all. There's lots of games out there that give you what you want.

Not that I am blaming you, specifically, for this. I just mean: D&D has maintained, through many variations and editions, a certain core set of assumptions and aspects that make it D&D. Why want an edition that gets rid of those, when there's a million and one alternative RPGs out there? Why "ruin" D&D so that it won't be D&D anymore?

EDIT: And what the Fizban is with the constant use of the word "powers"? That drives me insane. It is like a big, flashing red light that says, "Come blow crap up in 4E! We know that's all you want!"

More to the point, why do you want to take D&D from me so you can have Exalted with D&D on the cover?

Click to expand...

Personal animus.

Not that I am blaming you, specifically, for this. I just mean: D&D has maintained, through many variations and editions, a certain core set of assumptions and aspects that make it D&D. Why want an edition that gets rid of those, when there's a million and one alternative RPGs out there? Why "ruin" D&D so that it won't be D&D anymore?

Click to expand...

Based on what you have said in this and other threads, I apparently disagree very strongly with you on what counts as the "core set of assumptions and aspects that make it D&D." What you seem to see as the core assumptions of D&D, I see as crappy game design. A first level play experience in which a longsword is a serious threat of a total party kill? Crappy game design. An awkward magic system in which abilities scale in some ways, don't scale in others, scale in some and have caps, come in 10 different resource slots with complex rules for moving them between slots, and refresh based on an easily exploitable mechanic? Crappy game design. All of this effort expended on magic standing in stark contrast to melee combat, which consists, for most players, of exactly one option, "I attack!"? Crappy game design.

On the other hand, the class system? A nice mechanic that accomplishes its goal of encouraging archetypical play with a minimum of fuss, and with the opportunity for opening up a great deal of design space. Good game design. The party system where each character has a role in the party's overall success? Good game design. I could go on and on.

Frankly, none of the things I cherish about D&D seem to be changing. They were there in first edition, and they're still there now. A lot of new material that I think I may enjoy, or at least don't begrudge others, is being added. Actual game mechanics for doing a lot of the things I've always had to ad lib seem to be being added.

3rd edition in my view was a massive step forwards in terms of sheer professionalism of game design. 4th edition seems to have a similar degree of quality, plus the experience of many years of many people playing 3rd edition.

Things are looking up from where I'm sitting.

Reynard said:

EDIT: And what the Fizban is with the constant use of the word "powers"? That drives me insane. It is like a big, flashing red light that says, "Come blow crap up in 4E! We know that's all you want!"

Click to expand...

Probably because until the last few days they may not have nailed down the exact terminology they want to use and 'powers' is a good neutral word for 'ability that is not a spell'. With the lessening of Vancian magic, I'm thinking you're going to see more supernatural abilities and 'powers' rather than 'spells'.

Cadfan said:

Based on what you have said in this and other threads, I apparently disagree very strongly with you on what counts as the "core set of assumptions and aspects that make it D&D." What you seem to see as the core assumptions of D&D, I see as crappy game design. A first level play experience in which a longsword is a serious threat of a total party kill? Crappy game design. An awkward magic system in which abilities scale in some ways, don't scale in others, scale in some and have caps, come in 10 different resource slots with complex rules for moving them between slots, and refresh based on an easily exploitable mechanic? Crappy game design. All of this effort expended on magic standing in stark contrast to melee combat, which consists, for most players, of exactly one option, "I attack!"? Crappy game design.

Click to expand...

Crappy game design that has been on top of the heap for 30 years.

I've said it before and I am sure I will say it again: it isn't that 4E looks like it is going to be a poorly designed game, or that it isn't going be intended to be a fun game to play. it is that it is certainly not intended to be the D&D that has been around for 30 years. If you're good with that, great. But you can't feign surprise when some people look at it and say, "That's not D&D and I don't like it."

For every person that is all excited about changing everything about the game, there's a person who doesn't want the change. That isn't a good thing. It puts WotC in the uneviable position of having to replace half their consumer base with... who, exactly?

I play D&D. I want the new version because I want to increase the depth of tactical combat with more tactical options. I want it because it improves the weak points that trip up my game again and again. I want it because it moves the system closer to the feel I want. Exalted is not tactical or crunchy enough.

Reynard said:

Then I don't understand why you want D&D at all. There's lots of games out there that give you what you want.

Click to expand...

That's where I disagree. Those things in my list don't define D&D to me... they are aspects of a game that I love that I would love to see (and am now seeing) improved.
Other games don't give me what I want. What do I want? Well, I would have a hard time verbally describing what defines D&D to me, so it will be impossible for me to type it.

But there is an essence of D&D that is not captured by other games. To me, 4E is shaping up to be a vast improvement while maintaining and improving that essence. To you, 4e violates what you consider its essence. I think we're going to have to cite irreconcilable differences...

WayneLigon said:

With the lessening of Vancian magic, I'm thinking you're going to see more supernatural abilities and 'powers' rather than 'spells'.

Click to expand...

This of course has its own problems, but it has been discussed to death elsewhere. So rather than go into it, I would suggest everyone who can track down a copy of Best of dragon Vol II and read EGG's "From The Sorcerer's Scroll" on why D&D had Vancian Magic in the first place. it was hardly the only magic system he was familiar with from myth and literature. He chose it for a reason.