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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Prose, Terminology, Fluff, & Presentation: Spreadsheets or Haiku?
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="Fallstorm" data-source="post: 5903780" data-attributes="member: 55683"><p>You keep talking about adding wizards and elves to the game like that was what added the fluff. It was a fantasy wargame, those are part of the genre. I will agree that perhaps Gygax designed the rules around the "fluff" in the sense that he designed the rules to mimic much of what he had read in fantasy, in particularly Sword and Sorcery, fiction but again it was the mechanics and being able to make up your own character within the rules of a systemic system that attracted people to DnD. That's the difference between DnD and Cowboys and Indians, DnD is essentially Cowboys and Indians but with rules present so you don't have the "I shot you your dead" "No, I'm not I ducked down in time to make you miss" arguments. Yes, those mechanics may have changed from being to determined by a DM to hit chart, to a THACO chart, to BAB or some such and the way your X type damage spell was described my have changed from all creatures in a 20 ft readious burst with a range of X amount of feet +10 ft/per level to area burst 3 within 20 squares but the overall point is the mechanics, the crunch of how building your character within the guidelines provided and with the various rules in mind is what is attractive (at least as equally as the fluff) to DnD...otherwise people would just play a fantasy version of cowboys and indians or some such. This is the reason why DnD as despite the various editions maintained being a class and level based system, because a class and level based system provides a clear and systemic way to measure the success of your character and creates a sense of accomplishment (no matter how illusory) that your character has achieved something mechanically and is getting mechanically stronger vs other games that say okay you used X skill this game so instead of a level you gain +1% point to X skill. The C&L system and heavy mechancis is what also made Pathfinder strong.</p><p> </p><p>Secondly, the designers of 4th did write the rules with Fluff in mind. I will use FR specifically sense you mentioned the Spell Plague. The whole point of 4E from a world design perspective was "Points of Light". The heroes are brave beacons of hope in a time that is dark and perilous. FR, since mid-to-late 2E had gotten far away from this root. When FR first came out you had the Old Gray Box with the skeletal blood rider on the front pulling the woman's hair as they rode on horseback, the sky was covered with storm clouds in the background...FR was dark and gritty almost like the Word of Warhammer in tone but with more magic prevalent. Over the years it brightened up to the point as one designer put it FR was almsot like Keystone cops. It became ligher and more whimsical, you had the SEven Sisters, The magister, Khelben Black Staff Arunsun, Drizzt, and of course Elminster running around so no matter how "dark" things got in the world (like the Time of Troubles) it never really seemed that perilous or dark (not like the early Darkwalker on Moonshae novels) and 3.5 did nothing at all to change this. So, with 4E they needed something to tone done the lightness to talk Elminster and other NPCs more into the background and make the Realms more of a PoL game, hence the Spell plague was invented so the mechanics were made with the fluff in mind. So, is your problems with the mechanics of 4E or the fluff of 4E. If the problem is with both or you don't like one or the other that is fine, but to say this edition didn't do what other editiions did is in my opinion part of an ongoing issue of people romanticizing previous editions.</p><p> </p><p>An example, of this would be earlier in this thread when someone mentioned how much more freedom you had in 2E and how 2E rules like THACO and such were not all that bad. I say this is a romanticization. I played 2E and still have the core books for that edition. I remember things like race/level limits in 2E. Humans were not allowed to multiclass. So, in 2E if I wanted to play a Fighter-Rogue like Conan (an iconic archetype of fantasy literature) as a human it was hard to do. You would have to dual class as a thief (although conan was a barbarian before he was a thief) up to a few levels and then dual class into Fighter (with the barbarian kit), but never ever be allowed to pick up rogue profiencies/ abilities anymore because the rules of dual classing stated once you switched into your new class you could never go back and pick up levels/abilities from the class you left Also most non-human races had level limits on how far they could progress in each class. If you used the optional rules presented in the 2E DMG it allowed certains races to progress a little further, but they were stilll caped. For example, (and I am just going from memory here as I don't feel like digging out my 2E DMG) Half Elf was the only 2E demihuman race, as they were then called, that was allowed under the expanded advancement rules to be unlimited in class advancement as they had unlimited advancement in the Bard class, but every other race maxed out around 12th level I believe. Clearly, these were not well designed rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fallstorm, post: 5903780, member: 55683"] You keep talking about adding wizards and elves to the game like that was what added the fluff. It was a fantasy wargame, those are part of the genre. I will agree that perhaps Gygax designed the rules around the "fluff" in the sense that he designed the rules to mimic much of what he had read in fantasy, in particularly Sword and Sorcery, fiction but again it was the mechanics and being able to make up your own character within the rules of a systemic system that attracted people to DnD. That's the difference between DnD and Cowboys and Indians, DnD is essentially Cowboys and Indians but with rules present so you don't have the "I shot you your dead" "No, I'm not I ducked down in time to make you miss" arguments. Yes, those mechanics may have changed from being to determined by a DM to hit chart, to a THACO chart, to BAB or some such and the way your X type damage spell was described my have changed from all creatures in a 20 ft readious burst with a range of X amount of feet +10 ft/per level to area burst 3 within 20 squares but the overall point is the mechanics, the crunch of how building your character within the guidelines provided and with the various rules in mind is what is attractive (at least as equally as the fluff) to DnD...otherwise people would just play a fantasy version of cowboys and indians or some such. This is the reason why DnD as despite the various editions maintained being a class and level based system, because a class and level based system provides a clear and systemic way to measure the success of your character and creates a sense of accomplishment (no matter how illusory) that your character has achieved something mechanically and is getting mechanically stronger vs other games that say okay you used X skill this game so instead of a level you gain +1% point to X skill. The C&L system and heavy mechancis is what also made Pathfinder strong. Secondly, the designers of 4th did write the rules with Fluff in mind. I will use FR specifically sense you mentioned the Spell Plague. The whole point of 4E from a world design perspective was "Points of Light". The heroes are brave beacons of hope in a time that is dark and perilous. FR, since mid-to-late 2E had gotten far away from this root. When FR first came out you had the Old Gray Box with the skeletal blood rider on the front pulling the woman's hair as they rode on horseback, the sky was covered with storm clouds in the background...FR was dark and gritty almost like the Word of Warhammer in tone but with more magic prevalent. Over the years it brightened up to the point as one designer put it FR was almsot like Keystone cops. It became ligher and more whimsical, you had the SEven Sisters, The magister, Khelben Black Staff Arunsun, Drizzt, and of course Elminster running around so no matter how "dark" things got in the world (like the Time of Troubles) it never really seemed that perilous or dark (not like the early Darkwalker on Moonshae novels) and 3.5 did nothing at all to change this. So, with 4E they needed something to tone done the lightness to talk Elminster and other NPCs more into the background and make the Realms more of a PoL game, hence the Spell plague was invented so the mechanics were made with the fluff in mind. So, is your problems with the mechanics of 4E or the fluff of 4E. If the problem is with both or you don't like one or the other that is fine, but to say this edition didn't do what other editiions did is in my opinion part of an ongoing issue of people romanticizing previous editions. An example, of this would be earlier in this thread when someone mentioned how much more freedom you had in 2E and how 2E rules like THACO and such were not all that bad. I say this is a romanticization. I played 2E and still have the core books for that edition. I remember things like race/level limits in 2E. Humans were not allowed to multiclass. So, in 2E if I wanted to play a Fighter-Rogue like Conan (an iconic archetype of fantasy literature) as a human it was hard to do. You would have to dual class as a thief (although conan was a barbarian before he was a thief) up to a few levels and then dual class into Fighter (with the barbarian kit), but never ever be allowed to pick up rogue profiencies/ abilities anymore because the rules of dual classing stated once you switched into your new class you could never go back and pick up levels/abilities from the class you left Also most non-human races had level limits on how far they could progress in each class. If you used the optional rules presented in the 2E DMG it allowed certains races to progress a little further, but they were stilll caped. For example, (and I am just going from memory here as I don't feel like digging out my 2E DMG) Half Elf was the only 2E demihuman race, as they were then called, that was allowed under the expanded advancement rules to be unlimited in class advancement as they had unlimited advancement in the Bard class, but every other race maxed out around 12th level I believe. Clearly, these were not well designed rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Prose, Terminology, Fluff, & Presentation: Spreadsheets or Haiku?
Top