Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Discussion - LEW 4th Edition
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Wik" data-source="post: 4205856" data-attributes="member: 40177"><p>You know, I've been thinking about 4e for a while, now. And I'm really not as excited about it as I once was.</p><p></p><p>Anyways, here's my general take on L4W, as it stands now. I apologize for the lack of organization... It's 3 am, and I'm rambling. Anyways, here goes:</p><p></p><p>1) We pretty much okay the entire three starting books, much like how we have LEB set up now. If, in the course of play, it is discovered that everyone hates power X, we can get judges to axe power X.</p><p></p><p>2) CS: While you could say that D&D is going to be easier to run with the default gods, I think it's probably silly to assume that you can't make your own, or that it will be difficult in any way. I see no problem with starting up a basic world.</p><p></p><p>3) We should start small, of course, and build out from there. I really pushed for the "greek model", because the combination of islands and continents made for great exploration potential, and individual GMs could add their own islands. I still think the model is a great way to explain the campaign cartography - there's a lot of room for exploration.</p><p></p><p>4) I do think we should adopt "points of light", and make sure that there are no empires or the like. No nations, and small kingdoms - we want city-states, mostly, that individual GMs can add as the game progresses. Remember, one of the stated goals in a 4e preview book was to move away from a human-centred game, so we can expect to see halfling barge cities and elven warrior nations.</p><p></p><p>5) While I am a huge supporter of the "greek model" in terms of mapmaking, I don't think we should become totally Greek. Really, adopting ANY cultural model as a basis may be jumping the gun. I really think we should try to take a wider range, and have individual city states ranging from renaiisance Venice to ancient Sparta, to Moslem Cairo to 1800s London, all wrapped up in a fantasy theme.</p><p></p><p>6) Of course, that's a bit much. What we SHOULD do is detail perhaps five major islands, and sprinkle the surrounding area with hundreds of smaller, ruin-filled islands for PCs to explore. Invent a backstory to explain for ancient empires. And go from there.</p><p></p><p>7) I REALLY want to see "World Judges" - basically, a judge or three who maintain an online Wiki (with MAPS!) and try to keep the world consistent. They would allow individual GMs to add to the world, without one GM placing a continent where it shouldn't be, that gets in everyone else's way.</p><p></p><p>8) Personally, I like the judging format of LEW. While we shouldn't add Judge XP/credits starting off, once we get the rules downpat, we should add them in. </p><p></p><p>9) I like the idea of starting players off with only 1 PC, starting at level one. Then, as we progress, we more or less state that you can only have one level 1 PC at a time, but raise the limit to, say, five. This way, those who really wanna play, can do so, but we'll be less likely to be flooded. </p><p></p><p>10) I like CS's earlier statement, about how each player should have a thread in a sub-forum detailing idndividual PCs. But, I think LEW probably has it easier. THAT BEING SAID, I think L4W should have standardized advancement tables and rules, so that individual players are keeping track of info the same way. That'd make things easier for me, at least.</p><p></p><p>11) Regarding adding new info: Player-created info should be voted on and added - I love the idea, and I stand by it. We should also be able to vote in wotc material (again, much like LEB)... but be very selective about how it is done. A manifesto of sorts should be adhered to, saying what should and shouldn't be allowed in the game.</p><p></p><p>12) I like CS's idea of players voting on campaign info, but instead, I think it should be for major game expansions only. "Should we add this new God?", not "Should we Add Rule X?" Anything that ups the power curve will wind up being voted in if we follow the latter... but the former will make things more enjoyable for the player base.</p><p></p><p>13) A minor meta-plot, perhaps organized by world judges, should be allowed. No mega-adventures, as they stand now, but perhaps minor hooks that could better inter-relate adventures and make them more "alive". </p><p></p><p></p><p>***</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wik, post: 4205856, member: 40177"] You know, I've been thinking about 4e for a while, now. And I'm really not as excited about it as I once was. Anyways, here's my general take on L4W, as it stands now. I apologize for the lack of organization... It's 3 am, and I'm rambling. Anyways, here goes: 1) We pretty much okay the entire three starting books, much like how we have LEB set up now. If, in the course of play, it is discovered that everyone hates power X, we can get judges to axe power X. 2) CS: While you could say that D&D is going to be easier to run with the default gods, I think it's probably silly to assume that you can't make your own, or that it will be difficult in any way. I see no problem with starting up a basic world. 3) We should start small, of course, and build out from there. I really pushed for the "greek model", because the combination of islands and continents made for great exploration potential, and individual GMs could add their own islands. I still think the model is a great way to explain the campaign cartography - there's a lot of room for exploration. 4) I do think we should adopt "points of light", and make sure that there are no empires or the like. No nations, and small kingdoms - we want city-states, mostly, that individual GMs can add as the game progresses. Remember, one of the stated goals in a 4e preview book was to move away from a human-centred game, so we can expect to see halfling barge cities and elven warrior nations. 5) While I am a huge supporter of the "greek model" in terms of mapmaking, I don't think we should become totally Greek. Really, adopting ANY cultural model as a basis may be jumping the gun. I really think we should try to take a wider range, and have individual city states ranging from renaiisance Venice to ancient Sparta, to Moslem Cairo to 1800s London, all wrapped up in a fantasy theme. 6) Of course, that's a bit much. What we SHOULD do is detail perhaps five major islands, and sprinkle the surrounding area with hundreds of smaller, ruin-filled islands for PCs to explore. Invent a backstory to explain for ancient empires. And go from there. 7) I REALLY want to see "World Judges" - basically, a judge or three who maintain an online Wiki (with MAPS!) and try to keep the world consistent. They would allow individual GMs to add to the world, without one GM placing a continent where it shouldn't be, that gets in everyone else's way. 8) Personally, I like the judging format of LEW. While we shouldn't add Judge XP/credits starting off, once we get the rules downpat, we should add them in. 9) I like the idea of starting players off with only 1 PC, starting at level one. Then, as we progress, we more or less state that you can only have one level 1 PC at a time, but raise the limit to, say, five. This way, those who really wanna play, can do so, but we'll be less likely to be flooded. 10) I like CS's earlier statement, about how each player should have a thread in a sub-forum detailing idndividual PCs. But, I think LEW probably has it easier. THAT BEING SAID, I think L4W should have standardized advancement tables and rules, so that individual players are keeping track of info the same way. That'd make things easier for me, at least. 11) Regarding adding new info: Player-created info should be voted on and added - I love the idea, and I stand by it. We should also be able to vote in wotc material (again, much like LEB)... but be very selective about how it is done. A manifesto of sorts should be adhered to, saying what should and shouldn't be allowed in the game. 12) I like CS's idea of players voting on campaign info, but instead, I think it should be for major game expansions only. "Should we add this new God?", not "Should we Add Rule X?" Anything that ups the power curve will wind up being voted in if we follow the latter... but the former will make things more enjoyable for the player base. 13) A minor meta-plot, perhaps organized by world judges, should be allowed. No mega-adventures, as they stand now, but perhaps minor hooks that could better inter-relate adventures and make them more "alive". *** [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Discussion - LEW 4th Edition
Top