Jonathan Tweet: Prologue to Third Edition - Page 13
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 3456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 144
  1. #121
    Frazzled
    Dracolich (Lvl 29)

    Morrus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Intrawebs
    Posts
    40,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Parmandur View Post
    Thing is, fast and loose with lots of forgiveness is how people, overwhelmingly, play D&D. That's the standard.
    But you cant write rules under the assumption that people will ignore them.
    XP kenmarable gave XP for this post

  2. #122
    Member
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    kenmarable's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    48823
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Parmandur View Post
    Thing is, fast and loose with lots of forgiveness is how people, overwhelmingly, play D&D. That's the standard.
    Like most generalizations, it may fit my anecdotal evidence as well, but I'd be wary of making claims about standards and overwhelming majorities without actual data citations.

    And if someone doesn't play that way, then why is it surprising that they might want it to work differently?

    I'm just confused by the basic exchange being:

    "Such and such doesn't really work for me, so in my system we do it differently."
    "But such and such works for me!"

    Seems to be missing the point. Or in other words:

    "Chocolate ice cream doesn't really work for me for these reasons. I prefer orange sherbet."
    "But I like chocolate ice cream."
    "The overwhelming majority of people like chocolate ice cream."

    Yes, and your point is....?

  3. #123
    Member
    Orcus on an Off-Day (Lvl 22)



    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    5,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Morrus View Post
    But you cant write rules under the assumption that people will ignore them.
    But given the nature of RPG, that is one of the safest design assumptions possible. Baked right into Rule Zero, innit?

  4. #124
    Member
    Orcus on an Off-Day (Lvl 22)



    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    5,614
    Quote Originally Posted by kenmarable View Post
    Like most generalizations, it may fit my anecdotal evidence as well, but I'd be wary of making claims about standards and overwhelming majorities without actual data citations.

    And if someone doesn't play that way, then why is it surprising that they might want it to work differently?

    I'm just confused by the basic exchange being:

    "Such and such doesn't really work for me, so in my system we do it differently."
    "But such and such works for me!"

    Seems to be missing the point. Or in other words:

    "Chocolate ice cream doesn't really work for me for these reasons. I prefer orange sherbet."
    "But I like chocolate ice cream."
    "The overwhelming majority of people like chocolate ice cream."

    Yes, and your point is....?
    Just going off of what WotC found in their studies of the playing population, and what is happening in the streaming game world. The rules are there, but rulings from a DM matter way more and no design can replace that, and can never be "balanced." Eliminating that fuzziness is Quixotic, and video games will win that competition every time.

  5. #125
    Member
    Titan (Lvl 27)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    San Jose/Santa Clara, CA
    Posts
    15,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Morrus View Post
    But you cant write rules under the assumption that people will ignore them.
    Porque no?

  6. #126
    Member
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    kenmarable's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    48823
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Parmandur View Post
    Just going off of what WotC found in their studies of the playing population, and what is happening in the streaming game world. The rules are there, but rulings from a DM matter way more and no design can replace that, and can never be "balanced." Eliminating that fuzziness is Quixotic, and video games will win that competition every time.
    Having the recharge for spells built into the system for easier balancing rather than left to the whims of DMs and Players is hardly eliminating fuzziness and Rule Zero!!

    He just mentioned having the recharge mechanic worked into the system. That's it. If the existing D&D system doesn't work for him, I'm glad he has something better that does work for him. Going from that to somehow talk of eliminating all DM rulings and any fuzziness, etc. is a wee bit of an exaggeration, and again, totally beside the actual point being made.
    XP Parmandur gave XP for this post

  7. #127
    Member
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)



    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Lund, Sweden
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Morrus View Post
    But you cant write rules under the assumption that people will ignore them.
    This reminds me of one of the things I like best about 13th Age: the Designer Notes. The game is full of sidebars where Jonathan and/or Rob say things like "This bit works like this because of X. If you change it, consider Y."
    XP kenmarable gave XP for this post

  8. #128
    Member
    A 1e title so awesome it's not in the book (Lvl 21)



    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    6,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathan Tweet View Post
    In fact, it's hard for me to play D&D and take it too seriously because per-day spells are more or less impossible to balance. The number one thing that limits PC power is limits on resting and re-upping their spells, but that limit isn't built into the system and balanced. Instead, it's an ad hoc limit set by the game-world circumstances and by how well the players beg the GM to let them rest. If the game designer can't control how many rests a party takes while undertaking an adventure, then they can't anticipate the party's power level and can't really balance the adventure.

    In 13th Age, we made spell resets part of the system and under mechanical control so that we game designers can balance scenarios better.
    I probably wouldn't disagree to much but it's a big part of D&D, sacred cow. You can design a different game dumping dailies and probably the u part of AEDU. Might even have a better game but its not D&D at that point.

    Some of the clones I think have made a better D&D than what they were based on and even compare well to modern D&D's. 4E, 5E, 13th age are kind of default easy mode with generous recovery rates. It's not bad but monsters aren't scary anymore unlike say a Wight in AD&D.

    It's quite funny reading old D&D spells they're a lot less powerful than modern efforts. Level 3 or 4 spell +1 to hit. Not exciting but doesn't break the game.

  9. #129
    Member
    Thaumaturgist (Lvl 9)



    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    404
    Quote Originally Posted by kenmarable View Post
    Depends on what you mean. As a DM, I don't have much trouble balancing it for my particular group, either.

    However, as a game designer, that variable is far out of their control. So when deciding how powerful effects should be that recharge on short or long rests or whatever, there has to be a lot of assumptions made but also taking into account the fact that at any table (or even different times with a single table), those assumptions can be very, very wrong. Needing to balance all of that is extremely challenging. So I can certainly sympathize with the point that daily effects can be very difficult to balance well, and what works for one group or even one situation in a group might not work for others at all.

    Balancing as a DM and balancing as a game designer are entirely different things.

    Personally, my games tend to be run pretty fast and loose, and are pretty forgiving mechanically, so I haven't noticed it myself. But that doesn't mean I don't think it's a potentially big issue for others. Just because it's not a problem for me really has zero bearing on whether others find it a problem for them.
    Entirely different things that he talks about as if they were the same thing (?). Or I took it that way at least. He talks about not being able to balance per day powers (spells) on an adventure, not in a system. Once you've accepted the assumptions of the system on recovering resources and understand the requirements it's not hard to figure out if your PCs will have the time / place available to recover in an adventure. That's my point. If you give them that time / option, fine. If not, fine. The "balance" is whatever is established for that system. That's part of the adventure design, not the system. The power level baked into the system by mechanics like this are part of the game design. Running the game, or designing an adventure happens within the constraints of the system which you have already accepted. Or, if you're homebrewing, you have already established. I use longer short / long rests for example. But my players (and I) already work with those assumptions. If you do your own system, of course, the balance will be whatever your rules establish. Now, as for people playing the rules differently, that has always been there

    Maybe I'm just misconstruing what he is talking about, but once I accept the constraints of a game system (any system) I don't have any issues working within that system and planning accordingly. If I don't like the system, or parts of it, I either homebrew the parts I don't like or use a different system. Not taking something in the system "seriously" (which is a fundamental part of the system) tells me its time to use a different system. Or Frankenstein away and change things as needed / desired

    Ymmv, of course.
    XP Parmandur gave XP for this post

  10. #130
    Member
    Cutpurse (Lvl 5)

    Jonathan Tweet's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Zardnaar View Post
    ...monsters aren't scary anymore unlike say a Wight in AD&D.
    That's true. The game has fewer feel-bad results now, but that means that you're not afraid that the monsters will make you feel bad.

Similar Threads

  1. Jonathan Tweet & Rob Heinsoo: Making their own 5th Edition?
    By Morrus in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 90
    Last Post: Monday, 23rd April, 2012, 05:24 AM
  2. Jonathan Tweet's 4th Edition Campaign
    By GoodKingJayIII in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Friday, 3rd October, 2008, 07:55 PM
  3. Jonathan Tweet's new blog
    By TerraDave in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Friday, 12th October, 2007, 09:16 PM
  4. Jonathan Tweet's email
    By jester47 in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Wednesday, 9th June, 2004, 06:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •