Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[AllisterH]

No, it's not exactly the same. A level 1 monster in earlier editions is a level 1 monster in the reality of that game world. It's a threat to other level 1 creatures and, in numbers, to somewhat higher level ones. Depending on the situation, the name-level PCs can judge that they should or should not take out the orc lair based on how much of a threat those orcs pose to the rest of the game world (local towns, passing caravans, etc.). The orcs are assumed to have an existence "off-screen" that is much the same as their existence "on-screen."

On the other hand, we are not supposed to assume that the 1-hp minion is some pathetically inferior class of being relative to the rest of its species and that, if it gets by the PCs, it will easily be slain by the town beggar with a rock. No, the case is that minions are weakened to the brink of death by facing PCs.

Minions certainly allow for some kinds of cinematic action, and they can speed gameplay. But minions are not just like low-HD monsters.

Exactly.

I LIKE the fact that the game mechanics don't represent the gameworld.

When I describe the after effects of an orc horde, why exactly do the PC need to know whether or not the orcs were minions or not?

I like the fact that D&D has finally said "you know what? D&D should be able to model the standard classic action scene found in both books and movies such as Conan and LotR" - THIS is what D&D supposedly is actually trying to simulate is it not?

re: Simulation
I honestly thought the term "D&D as a simulation" meant that D&D was trying to simulate what it actually draws influence from?

I mean, what other type of simulation are we referring to?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It's relevant, unless you want to be the one to tell the players that an unarmoured pirate was Godzilla because of his bracers, and not hand out the items when he's dead!

Previous editions had the internal consistency to account for things like boosted stats and healing magics, which is why 4E is sometimes considered, re the OP, nonsensical.

But you also force the DM to have an explanation ready why the monster has just the right statistics to make the fight interesting, challenging and entertaining.

"Oh, damn, I can't give him the Bracers, that would exceed their Wealth by Level. I will make up a PrC that gives him a bonus to unarmored AC. Oh no, the PCs could qualify for it, too and then they are overpowered! Ah, I say that the pirates in this region made a Pact with the GOd of Piracy and get this as a special template, that works like this".
Of course, you could just handwave it because after all the PCs are not entitled to know every mechanical detail. But if you do that, what is the point of the "simulation rules".
If you want your PCs to get Bracers of Armor, they'll get it from the pirate. If you don't think they need that, they won't.

I think it is far more important that the rules tell me how challenging a monster is (or how I create a monster that is "this" challenging) then to give me an arcane way of creating a monster that might or might not be equivalent to a certain level.

 

[Jack99]

Why was 3E the "golden age" as Clark Peterson recently put it? Why was it the "high point in a generation" as Joesph Goodman put it? Perhaps they should consult with you before they continue their businesses, as clearly they are unaware of your insights.

I didn't quote all of your post, because you were being extremely rude.

I could of course mis-remember (is that a word?), but I am pretty that Clark uses that term in reference to the amount of stuff published for the edition. I am however pretty certain that Joseph talks about the sales of 1 specific year, when he talks about high point in a generation. Not the quality of the game.

I see nothing that contradicts the theory that it is easier to find someone willing to DM 4e than it was to find someone willing to DM 3.x.

 

[BryonD]

Ok colour me confused.

You don't have a problem with escalating defenses, but you DO have a problem with the half-level escalating AC?

Can you explain why you have a problem with the latter?

I think I somewhat spoke to that in the post above. It wasn't the key idea.

Even more on the particular point, the pirate's level is defined not by the pirate, but by the party.

And why should everything's AC go up with level?

Escalating defenses based on concept: cool

Arbitrary and uniform, self-canceling escalating defenses for everything: unappealing

You asked your question in response to this statement from me:

In 4E the world is built to fit the combat system.

I'm sorry if I can't explain that concept more clearly. (no snark intended in that)

For reference, I was hoping that 4E would further differentiate attack progressions as well......
Escalating attack bonuses are fine, but the concept neutral uniform attack bonus increase of 4E is just as unappealing to me as is the mathematically correct challenge trumps mechanically realization of concept issue.

 

[cangrejoide]

No, it's not exactly the same. A level 1 monster in earlier editions is a level 1 monster in the reality of that game world. It's a threat to other level 1 creatures and, in numbers, to somewhat higher level ones. Depending on the situation, the name-level PCs can judge that they should or should not take out the orc lair based on how much of a threat those orcs pose to the rest of the game world (local towns, passing caravans, etc.). The orcs are assumed to have an existence "off-screen" that is much the same as their existence "on-screen." .

How is this different in 4E?

On the other hand, we are not supposed to assume that the 1-hp minion is some pathetically inferior class of being relative to the rest of its species and that, if it gets by the PCs, it will easily be slain by the town beggar with a rock. No, the case is that minions are weakened to the brink of death by facing PCs.

It is not. Its a minion, but if it faces a town beggar armed with a rock, that poor beggar will be skewered in no time. A minion will be a minion to a PC but that same minion may change to a full monster to an NPC or any other monster.

It's all relative, get it?

Minions certainly allow for some kinds of cinematic action, and they can speed gameplay. But minions are not just like low-HD monsters.

Minions are just a condition imposed on any creature by definition of narrative, or what the story demands.

 

[Hairfoot]

It's far past bedtime in my world, but I want to (prematurely) congratulate the indefatiguable Ariosto on his 1000 posts in a frighteningly short span of time.

Well done.

 

[Imaro]

But isn't this also "narrative"? In the story of the combat, the kobold is the guy running around, backstabbing people and trying to evade combat. That's his purpose in the story, and the rules provide you to give that outcome when running the combat.

Personally I think your stretching a bit here. The kobolds have one power...the At-will shift... which simulates sneakiness (though in reality a shift can be numerous things, according to fans of 4e, so were not even sure it simulates sneakiness in combat).

You see, IME with games based around narrative, in said game the kobolds would basically have an ability called sneakiness and it would allow the DM/GM to alter the story being told in ways specifically accounting for a kobold being "sneaky" and all the DM felt that entailed within the confines of the story being told. What we get is the ability of a kobold to move 5ft at will (an ability balanced for it's role and level as opposed to it being concerned with story first)... now that could be interpreted as "sneakiness" but it could also be interpreted as many other things... it's just a mechanic that one interprets in the way you want and thus it is not narrative based but mechanics based. Or at least that is how I see it.

 

[AllisterH]

It's relevant, unless you want to be the one to tell the players that an unarmoured pirate was Godzilla because of his bracers, and not hand out the items when he's dead!

Previous editions had the internal consistency to account for things like boosted stats and healing magics, which is why 4E is sometimes considered, re the OP, nonsensical.

Um, aren't you arguing FOR 4e here. Certainly as a DM, 4e is looking way more attractive

As a DM, all I'm seeing is more headaches using the pre 4e approach as now I have to explain "WHY" for pretty much everything....

"Ok, I have to give him a super high DEX but wait that now affects his other stats such as initative, skills and reflex save..."

"ok, maybe I'll just say he is wearing a really good pair of Bracers of armour, but now the PCs have it and the wizard isn't hittable at all"

"ok, I'll use say a prestige class...ah, hell, now Johnny asking about it"

Why is it wrong for a DM to want to say

"Ok, I want my 10th level party to fight Blackbeard's crew - here's what the AC and to hit needs to be"?

Korgoth, seriously, pre 4e, did nobody do this? Was I the only DM that did this before 4e actually gave guidelines.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Your players expect you to show your math?

It is important how the pirate got so hard to hit. It's not important because of the numbers. It's important for the description. For the narrative. For internal consistency. For character expectations ("how can I get that high of an AC while being barechested?").

Maybe it's best to present it in terms of mathematics. I am not a very mathematically-inclined person. To me, a number represents something. 6 isn't just "the number 6," it is 6 of something. It is one more than 5 of that thing.

AC 21 represents 21 of something. If I don't know what it represents 21 of, it gets in the way of me imagining it, describing it, and, ultimately, presenting it in my game.

Previous editions started with what those things were -- those nouns. 4e starts with what the number is, and asks you to come up with what the things it represents are.

This is an issue for me because numbers don't mean anything to me.

 

[Jack99]

It is important how the pirate got so hard to hit. It's not important because of the numbers. It's important for the description. For the narrative. For internal consistency. For character expectations ("how can I get that high of an AC while being barechested?").

I need to start with a noun, not a formula.

Maybe he is quick on his feet or good at parrying?