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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Problems With Modularity
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="Mercurius" data-source="post: 5809362" data-attributes="member: 59082"><p>Another way to look at it is that modularity <em>is </em>(or will be) 5E's major innovation (if, of course, they pull it off!).</p><p></p><p>I agree that it is potentially very problematic but I don't think it is insurmountable. But the problem only approaches insurmountable if we expect and want a perfectly balanced game, one that is impossible to bend to the point of breaking (that is, one in which system mastery doesn't reward those who spend hours upon hours trying to find ways to optimize their characters). I would suggest that we simply accept the fact that no matter what 5E's design is, there is going to be some degree of system mastery, of munchkinization and character optimization possible. And yes, "core" characters will likely end up not quite as powerful as "advanced" characters. There probably isn't a way around this - and, I think, this is OK, as long as the gap isn't too much or too obvious.</p><p></p><p>There are a couple other ways to look at it this. It may also be that core won't be quite as simple as we might think it will be, but that a lot of its ease of play will be through pre-given options. For instance, a core fighter will still be able to do something akin to Combat Maneuvers, but they will be laid out in a relatively straight-forward manner and won't be as granular. In other words, "Advanced" won't simply mean "more stuff" as much as "greater detail of stuff." </p><p></p><p>The challenge of core-to-advanced also varies depending upon what aspect of the game we're talking about. Ability scores and skills are relatively easy, with modular degrees like so:</p><p></p><p>Ability score -> skill group -> specialty skill</p><p>(e.g. Strength -> Athletics -> Swim, Climb, Jump, etc)</p><p></p><p>A core character would likely just have an ability score (for passive checks) and modifier (for active checks), along with some kind of level adjustment and/or bonus for specialization. An advanced character would take that same number and then differentiate it further, like so:</p><p></p><p>Core STR mod +8</p><p>Advanced STR skills: jump +9, swim +7, climb +8</p><p></p><p>Same average, but more detail.</p><p></p><p>This has a correlate in class features:</p><p></p><p>class feature -> combat maneuvers -> specific combat maneuver (trip, grapple, push, etc)</p><p></p><p>A core fighter might have a single number for all combat maneuvers, while an advanced fighter would have different numbers for different maneuvers. </p><p></p><p>But again, with different degrees of complexity there are going to be ways to optimize and exploit; the key for WotC will be to minimize this as much as possible. But I would also argue that even if it could be totally balanced, it shouldn't be - that <em>some </em>degree of system mastery should be rewarded, in the same sense that players that really put their hearts into playing should be rewarded over those that just show up to eat snacks and kill things. The difference shouldn't be huge, but it should be (imo) there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mercurius, post: 5809362, member: 59082"] Another way to look at it is that modularity [I]is [/I](or will be) 5E's major innovation (if, of course, they pull it off!). I agree that it is potentially very problematic but I don't think it is insurmountable. But the problem only approaches insurmountable if we expect and want a perfectly balanced game, one that is impossible to bend to the point of breaking (that is, one in which system mastery doesn't reward those who spend hours upon hours trying to find ways to optimize their characters). I would suggest that we simply accept the fact that no matter what 5E's design is, there is going to be some degree of system mastery, of munchkinization and character optimization possible. And yes, "core" characters will likely end up not quite as powerful as "advanced" characters. There probably isn't a way around this - and, I think, this is OK, as long as the gap isn't too much or too obvious. There are a couple other ways to look at it this. It may also be that core won't be quite as simple as we might think it will be, but that a lot of its ease of play will be through pre-given options. For instance, a core fighter will still be able to do something akin to Combat Maneuvers, but they will be laid out in a relatively straight-forward manner and won't be as granular. In other words, "Advanced" won't simply mean "more stuff" as much as "greater detail of stuff." The challenge of core-to-advanced also varies depending upon what aspect of the game we're talking about. Ability scores and skills are relatively easy, with modular degrees like so: Ability score -> skill group -> specialty skill (e.g. Strength -> Athletics -> Swim, Climb, Jump, etc) A core character would likely just have an ability score (for passive checks) and modifier (for active checks), along with some kind of level adjustment and/or bonus for specialization. An advanced character would take that same number and then differentiate it further, like so: Core STR mod +8 Advanced STR skills: jump +9, swim +7, climb +8 Same average, but more detail. This has a correlate in class features: class feature -> combat maneuvers -> specific combat maneuver (trip, grapple, push, etc) A core fighter might have a single number for all combat maneuvers, while an advanced fighter would have different numbers for different maneuvers. But again, with different degrees of complexity there are going to be ways to optimize and exploit; the key for WotC will be to minimize this as much as possible. But I would also argue that even if it could be totally balanced, it shouldn't be - that [I]some [/I]degree of system mastery should be rewarded, in the same sense that players that really put their hearts into playing should be rewarded over those that just show up to eat snacks and kill things. The difference shouldn't be huge, but it should be (imo) there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
The Problems With Modularity
Top