4e "getting back to D&D's roots" how?

[thedungeondelver]

Amen.

I never considered 3e to be remotely old school, quintessentially 'D&D', or anything like that. . .

Until recently.

It is weird, isn't it? With "3e" I felt at least like the designers were somewhat interested in maintaining a sense not only of what they thought D&D was but what it had been.

This new one is just a different game altogether with D&D put on it.

(I think I'm straying into dangerous waters for this forum so I'll let it be at that...)

 

[rounser]

Specialty Priests

Some of them were cool, weren't they? I liked the FR ones. They were so flavoured that they sort of seemed conspicuous next to other classes not given a similar treatment. For some reason, it seemed less gratuitous than prestige classes ended up seeming, because the theme was always the deity (rather than the "crunch first, flavour afterthought" classes that occasionally appeared in prestige class land, perhaps).

Had some good times with the 2E monk kit, too. That was a cool cleric as well, if maybe a bit broken.

 

[Hussar]

Some of them were cool, weren't they? I liked the FR ones. They were so flavoured that they sort of seemed conspicuous next to other classes not given a similar treatment. For some reason, it seemed less gratuitous than prestige classes ended up seeming, because the theme was always the deity (rather than the "crunch first, flavour afterthought" classes that occasionally appeared in prestige class land, perhaps).

Had some good times with the 2E monk kit, too. That was a cool cleric as well, if maybe a bit broken.

A "bit" broken? And you put that in with Faiths and Avatars?

Hrm, let's take a priest, given him major access to EVERY sphere, and then allow him to choose wizard spells in place of cleric spells, without a spellbook. Oh, no, not unbalanced at all.

Or, how about being able to summon an elemental at 5th level that serves you for an hour with no chance of it turning on you? And, we'll give you the ability to cast any wizard spell with the word "fire" in it just for giggles.

Loved the fluff, but this is one of the poster boys for why flavour first is a BAD BAD idea.

 

[rounser]

Loved the fluff, but this is one of the poster boys for why flavour first is a BAD BAD idea.

I've refuted you before on this point. There's a really, staggeringly obvious logical fallacy to your argument. Can you spot it?

It goes something like "because X was implemented badly and is an example of Y, all Y will be implemented badly". That's nonsense.

The converse is also not true. Not all crunch-first design will end up with sucky flavour, so long as you don't compromise the flavour for crunch purposes too much.

Likewise, compromising crunch for flavour purposes is bad design too. That's the case in the example you gave, and is no trump card for your theory that crunch-first design is bettah. Crunch-first design with few flavour concessions tends to suck too.

Also, your opinion wasn't supported by the majority of people who responded in that thread you made on the topic.

 

[Hussar]

I've refuted you before on this point. There's a really, staggeringly obvious logical fallacy to your argument. Can you spot it?

It goes something like "because X was implemented badly and is an example of Y, all Y will be implemented badly". That's nonsense.

No, you've argued with me before on this point. Refuted means that you actually proved your point.

I stand by the point that when you start with flavour and then try to make mechanics fit that flavor, more often than not, you wind up with piss poor mechanics. There's evidence all over the game, in every edition.

And Faiths and Avatars is Exhibit A. Add Complete Priest to the pile to on the other end of the spectrum power wise. Again, fantastic flavour, unbelievably piss poor mechanics. Yeah, 2e clerics really, really needed to be beaten with the nerf bat that hard.

Here's a game. Show me an example of flavour first mechanics where the flavour inspired mechanics came out well and I'll show you two examples where it came out badly. We'll see who runs out first.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I stand by the point that when you start with flavour and then try to make mechanics fit that flavor, more often than not, you wind up with piss poor mechanics. There's evidence all over the game, in every edition.

Nope.

'Piss poor mechanics' have nothing to do with their source of inspiration or lack of same, and everything to do with implementation.

There is a staggering amount of evidence supporting this absolute fact, throughout the RPG world.

 

[Hussar]

Then how do you explain that in the overwhelming majority of cases where you have bad mechanics, they are flavour inspired?

And, how do you explain that when the mechanics are then adjusted for actual game play, they pretty regularly eject anything to do with the inspiring flavour?

Meh, this is off topic for this thread, so, I'll not belabor the point yet again. Whenever designers start from a position of flavour first, IMNSHO, the mechanics suffer. Nearly every time.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Then how do you explain that in the overwhelming majority of cases where you have bad mechanics, they are flavour inspired?

How do you know?

Seriously, how?

You can "just tell"? I guarantee you, if that's your yardstick, you're wrong almost half the time, at least. (Not just "you" personally, but "you" anyone.) Seriously. Unless you know the people writing the books, you have no way of telling. I guarantee you, some of the ones you think are the most obvious are actually not nearly so clear-cut.

Especially considering the fact that there really isn't a solid line of demarcation between "flavor" and "mechanics" in terms of which came first. Usually when an idea comes to an RPG writer, it has a mix of both from the get-go.

 

[radferth]

Well, if you create bad mechanics that are mechanics-inspired, you really might want to second-guess your choice to be game designer.

 

[Simon Atavax]

Just wanted to add one little thing that might brought the feel back: Combats are now against groups again, like they were in earlier adventures unlike 3E where it was based arount one Opponent.

Ummm . . . every 3e game I ever played in featured combat against multiple enemies. Guess we were doing it wrong.