Write this game for adults

Herschel

Adventurer
it's partially that it's more like a manual rather than a feeling it's one guy telling another about a cool game he's playing but it's mainly things like:
"play a dragonborn if you want...
to look like a dragon.
to breath fire.
Etc etc..."
I mean look like a dragon? What am I? Twelve?

I though that was a good addition to make the game/book accessible to kids/new players which are VERY important to the future of the game/product line. We "adults" don't need a 'Play a Dragonborn if you want a STR/CHA stat combo for a balanced Paladin or a Thaneborn Barbarian or Dragon Sorcerer in our upcoming releases.'

I would have liked to see a few more prose sections between the sections just to make for some nice reading, but that's just a fluff addition.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Crazy Jerome

First Post
This is probably peculiar to my tastes and the handful that share them, but the kind of "objects of player protagonism" pemerton is discussing above resonates for me as one of the main keys to creating the flavor of some of the stories that I happen to like. This rather primordial, elemental, ancient, but still personal, emnity matters in the works of E.R.R. Eddison (e.g. "The Worm Ouroboros"), the more serious Poul Anderson fantasy (e.g. "The Kingdom of Ys"), even Jack Vance's "Lyonesse" trilogy. In some of their better works, even someone not really wired that way, like Harry Turtledove or Harry Harrison, can edge into it, despite their limitations as writers.

You'll get references to that kind of things from all types of fantasy writers, and that might be enough to spark someone to run with it. That seems to be Raymond Feist's usual starting point, for example. It'd be easy enough for me to take Midkemia as a setting at a particular point, and then supply my own "objects of player protagonism" that are evoked by Feist's world, but rarely are his villains a good template for that. They are often too impersonal. In the Kingdom of Ys, however, there are minor characters that I could lift out wholesale and use in this manner.
 

Herschel

Adventurer
A few things. The gods, demons etc seem to me to be set up more overtly in conflict: Raven Queen vs Orcus vs Vecna vs Kas; Bane vs Gruumsh (whereas in classic D&D this is Maglubiyet and Gruumsh, both of whom are typically going to be off to the side as far as PCs are concerned); Bahamut and Dragonborn vs Asmodeus/devils and Tieflings; etc.

The last example above shows one answer to this question. Dragonborn and Bahamut; Tieflings and devils; Dwarves and Moradin; Elves and Corellon - part of what makes this significant is that the older demi-human gods are not brought into the cosmological mainstream. The history of fallen empires also creates an overlay on this: the default setting is in fallen Nerath, which has an ambivalent relationship to the previous empires of Dragonborn and Tieflings, not to mention other humanoids like hobgoblins (once had an empire) and gnolls (who killed the king of Nerath).

Other features that bring in these conflicts are warlocks (with their pacts), sorcerers (with their power sources), many paragon paths and epic destinies, and even clerics and paladins - these have obviously always brought in divine allegiances, but at least I've found in 4e do this more because (i) the mechanical style of multi-classing makes it more likely that you might have a divine PC or two in the party, and (ii) with fewer gods more broadly embedded into the story elements, any given cleric is more likely to be in some sort of relationship to any given monster/NPC.

Turning to monsters and NPCs, very many are defined in relationship to gods, or primordials, or demonlords, or the Dawn War - most of the classic humanoids, for example. Sphinxes, Naga and some of the other classic "magical guardians" are retconned in this way. Dragons of course keep their links to Bahamut and Tiamat, but this is again retconned to fit into a key aspect of the Dawn War. Elementals and Giants also take on a new cosmological signficance, because of the relationship between Elemental Chaos and the order that the gods have created.

And this in turn fits into the way that the planes and cosmology are set up as objects of player protagonism, rather than backdrops to it. I'm thinking here especially some of the ideas in Worlds and Monsters, in Underdark, in the Plane Above and in Demonomicon - this feature comes through less, I think, in Manua of the Planes or The Plane Below. The Plane Above, for example, even talks about old-style Rune/Hero-Quest "Heroquesting" (under the name "Journeying into Deep Myth") - travelling into the past of the Dawn War and before to reaffirm, or perhaps transform, some feature of the cosmic order.

I wouldn't expect everyone to read 4e in this way. It's something I hadn't anticipated about the game from the pre-release info until I read both Worlds and Monsters and the first Monster Manual, and then all these ideas for a cosmologically-based campaign (which is my preferred D&D style in any event), and the way the PC build rules seemed so strongly to support it, leapt out at me.

It's not everywhere in the game, either. A party of halfling rangers who worship Avandra and Melora don't really suggest to me cosmologicall-imbued conflict. Nor do ankhegs or giant ants as encouter elements. But even though it's a matter of degree, I have found that the difference of degree between 4e and earlier editions is fairly striking.

The only other comparable D&D experience I can think of is when Oriental Adventures first came out (1986, I think, in Australia) and it had all this stuff in it - about gods, and spirits, and clans, and honour, and PC build rules that integrated all that stuff and linked the PCs (and therefore the players into it). But (partly because 4e has volumes rather than pages!) I've found 4e richer - I'm not sure there's enough in OA to sustain years and years of play, whereas I've got 3 years out of the 4e default setting and its still going very strong. And 4e has other mechanical features, emphasising greater player protagonism and less GM force over the story, than classic AD&D OA.

Anway, just one poster's reflections!


Must spread XP but repeated for emphasis. I'm pretty much in lock step with you on this.
 

Here in germany, we have naked boobs in the ads and its no big deal.

I live in Bulgaria and the local newspaper often have large images of naked women on the back page. Pity I can barely read the language.

Anyway, sex and violence are not the same thing as adult

For me, it's nothing at all to do with the content. It's all to do with the writing style.

This is true and I admit independent of grade-reading level. However, lower grade levels are tacitly insulting, in much the same way the line to parody is a bit insulting a patronizing.
 

Remove ads

Top