The New Design Philosophy?

[Belen]

I detest the new philosophy, although I see it more as a development rather than a design standard.

The developers are trying to make everything fit a single mold. They seem to worship at the altar of balance and they are trying to balance everything to fit the combat round. I think the end result is going to kill the thing that made the game so endurable.

I do not think everything has to abide by the holy combat round. A monster could be designed to be effective in combat and have spells or powers that could be used outside of that.

When I read WOTC material these days, I am bored to tears. All of the items are functional, but they often lack any flavor. This has been the trend throughout 3e and I do not see it changing anytime soon.

WOTC wants to deal with mechanics. Flavor seems to be a dirty word with them. They want everything to fit a specific niche and utilize standard effects.

Boring.

I miss the days when a powerful spell with good flavor may have been balanced by taking 3 rounds to cast, or causing the cleric to need bedrest for a few days. Now, everything has to be able to be handled in 6 seconds.

Bleh!

 

[Knight Otu]

The new design philosophy seems to suggest that the features be stripped rather than the CR System have a mechanism for adjusting to creatures having features that aren't meant for direct combat.

Simplifying something doesn't require removing all of the bells and whistles that don't directly inform combat capability.

Then I guess it's good that the ogre mage article shows that this is not the case, right?

 

[Mark CMG]

Then I guess it's good that the ogre mage article shows that this is not the case, right?

Many do not believe that to be the case and that is a discussion for the other thread.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=169179

 

[Lanefan]

WotC's way of doing things seems to be based around how they've done Magic cards...and even those have gone a similar route, from flavourful, random, and widely disparate in power level at the beginning to now being so balanced and overdesigned it's boring. A side effect is that their designs tend to force you into playing from among a relatively limited number of workable decks.

Same thing is starting to rear its ugly head in D+D. Look, for example, at "buff" spells. In days of old, sure somebody might cast "Strength" on a fighter now and then, but that was about it. But that wasn't "balanced", that Fighters could get such a thing but no-one else could, so they dreamed up an equivalent spell for the other 5 stats. Now, with so many buff spells in the system, it's almost expected the party will be buffed to the max every time. In other words, the game is somewhat forcing you to play that way...kinda like when a Magic set has loads of good Goblin cards, that somewhat forces you to play a Goblin deck to be competitive.

I'm not being very clear here...if this doesn't make sense, ask away and I'll try to clarify.

Lanefan

 

[Pants]

When I read WOTC material these days, I am bored to tears. All of the items are functional, but they often lack any flavor. This has been the trend throughout 3e and I do not see it changing anytime soon.

During the entire Fiendish Codex I fiasco, the argument was swapped in favor of people complaining about the functionality of certain creatures, blasting the book for it, then ignoring the oodles of flavor that it conatined.

WOTC wants to deal with mechanics. Flavor seems to be a dirty word with them. They want everything to fit a specific niche and utilize standard effects.

Back in 2003 I would've agreed with you. Thankfully, this seems to be changing now.

As for the Ogre Mage, it's a web article of 'what if's.' The Ogre Mage is the same semi-useless monster that it used to be. Mearls is doing a bunch of 'what if' articles to spark controversy and debate about HOW the monsters work and how they could be better-ified.

If the new revised versions of the rust monster and the ogre mage suddenly start appearing in books, then maybe I'll agree with the griping, but as it stands now, the articles are forcing us to pick out what we like about certain aspects of the game, how they work, and how they could be improved.

The articles are doing their job, apparently.

I miss the days when a powerful spell with good flavor may have been balanced by taking 3 rounds to cast, or causing the cleric to need bedrest for a few days. Now, everything has to be able to be handled in 6 seconds.

Bleh!

You're ignoring all the spells that have 1 minute, 1 round, 10 minute, 1 hour, etc. casting times ja know.

 

[Scribble]

WotC's way of doing things seems to be based around how they've done Magic cards...and even those have gone a similar route, from flavourful, random, and widely disparate in power level at the beginning to now being so balanced and overdesigned it's boring. A side effect is that their designs tend to force you into playing from among a relatively limited number of workable decks.

Same thing is starting to rear its ugly head in D+D. Look, for example, at "buff" spells. In days of old, sure somebody might cast "Strength" on a fighter now and then, but that was about it. But that wasn't "balanced", that Fighters could get such a thing but no-one else could, so they dreamed up an equivalent spell for the other 5 stats. Now, with so many buff spells in the system, it's almost expected the party will be buffed to the max every time. In other words, the game is somewhat forcing you to play that way...kinda like when a Magic set has loads of good Goblin cards, that somewhat forces you to play a Goblin deck to be competitive.

I'm not being very clear here...if this doesn't make sense, ask away and I'll try to clarify.

Lanefan

I don't really agree that it's "forcing" anyone to use buff spells... There's just an option for all types of Buff spells. Those seem like spells people would have house ruled into the game anyway.

 

[sjmiller]

You're ignoring all the spells that have 1 minute, 1 round, 10 minute, 1 hour, etc. casting times ja know.

Could you, perhaps, give examples of spells with these casting times? Preferably spells found in the core books, as they are ones that would apply to everything.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Back in 2003 I would've agreed with you. Thankfully, this seems to be changing now.

I see far more emphasis on crunch than flavor. Magic of Encarnum, PHb2, etc. The explosion of sudden/swift/immediate stuff is a good example, I think.

The articles are doing their job, apparently.

I've got no problem with what-ifs, and given a choice between a closed development process and these kinds of articles, I'd take the more open approach any day. Being people that have a lot invested in D&D, we're just doing our job, too, by providing push-back on elements we find unwelcome.

 

[Lanefan]

I don't really agree that it's "forcing" anyone to use buff spells... There's just an option for all types of Buff spells. Those seem like spells people would have house ruled into the game anyway.

Oddly enough, coming from someone from whom no rule, spell, or ability is safe from tweak or redesign, I'd never even considered adding in such things until seeing 3e...the thought had simply never entered my mind. That said, those aren't the only buff spells out there...just look at what a Cleric can do to herself if given 5 rounds prep time before a battle...it's almost ridiculous.

Lanefan

 

[Banshee16]

I agree. I actually really liked 3.0, from a rules perspective, except for a few things...the emphasis on measuring everything against the idea of how it performs in a dungeon, the reliance on X many magic items/level for balance, and a few minor things...but otherwise, it was awesome. I really started having problems when they moved to 3.5, and now, with some of these redesigns of monsters, it's just getting worse.

Paladins with a summonable warhorse...sheesh.

I'm not sure I'll end up moving to 4 when it comes out, if this is the direction they want to go.

Banshee