Why I think you should try 4e (renamed)

[Psion]

IMO, the seminal difference between 4e and the prior incarnations of D&D is this: In 4e The world exists based upon the PCs interactions. (For example: In this type of role-playing minions make sense. The power of a creature is viewed only in relation to the PCs powers.)

The earlier editions of D&D believed this: The world exists and the PCs interact with it. (For example: In this type of role-playing minions do not make sense. Each creature has power based upon it's place in the world, regardless of the power of the PCs.)

Both types of play can be a lot of fun, but they are entirely different ways of viewing a role-playing game and, I believe, this is the primary reason for the dissatisfaction many of the the D&D audience has with 4e. The basic assumption of what type of role-playing game D&D is changed.

I think this is worth noting for anyone in the audience who is having a fundamental bit of trouble understanding why some folks (especially those with broad experience with pre-3e D&D) are experiencing a bit of a style clash with 4e. For us (I'll be bold enough to presume speak for the group here), kobolds are NOT something that should be threatening high level characters. Kobolds occupy the mindspace of "weak low level challenge", and for them to fill some other space other than as an oddity (such as the kobold sorcerer lich in Bastion/Dragonwing's Villains) is to define something that is not a kobold.

I have been using the idea of "sliding scale heroism" in other games (like Spycraft 2.0), and don't object to the approach for its own sake. It's only the way that the approach warps the landscape when speaking about D&D that seems wrong to me.

It's worth noting that you don't have to use 4e this way. I know if I were to ever run 4e, you'd only see unique kobolds that weren't minions and you'd never see a Balor minion regardless of level. And indeed, I wonder how many DMs who moved on to 4th but preferred an "older school" feel do just that.

 

[EroGaki]

Does this mean that DM's can't invent their own PrC's and template and the like, because that is essentially the same as because I said so. I mean really what's the difference between "because I said so" and "because he has the bare-chested pirate template"? Why make the DM jump through hoops to do what he's going to do anyway? I frankly don't understand how a DM can cheat in a game where he make up any mechanical content he wants anyway. When players start playing the gotcha game on the DM and demanding to know the mechanical minutia behind every little thing there is a serious problem IMHO.

As I have explained, "Because I said so" isn't the same as creating a prestige class/template/whatever. Any of those things exist in the game world, for good or ill, to be used by or against the players.

"Because I said so" is nothing more than a smoke screen for the DM to *possibly be a tyrant. "Because I said so" implies that at any point in the game, the DM can do whatever he wants to your character.

The Gotcha game won't happen if you actually play by the rules, IMO. As long as you use the rules as a framework (even if it is incredibly loose and far-fetched) you will be fine. If you get caught with your pants down because a player discovered that Mr. Pirate has no mechanical basis for being a badass other than "because I said so," then you'll be in trouble.


* I say this only because I myself have experienced this sort of tyranny. Most DM's aren't like that, and if it sounded like I was saying you were, I apologize; it was not how I meant it to come off.

 

[Imaro]

And if you make one of the requirements "Must have been born and raised among the Pirates of the Iron Coast?", can any PC dip into the PrC for the AC? Which you can do, since you're the DM and you have control over entrance to prestige classes and any other mechanic you devise.

SO now your argument is that handwaving is the same as creating a PrC and creating requirements no one can attain at the moment... now who's jumping through hoops?

Unless of course their PC dies and they create one born and raised on the Iron Coast. Really we can do this all day, but it seems like this is just you avoiding the fact that there is a difference between creating an actual PrC and handwaving an effect.

 

[Ariosto]

Compared to the effort expected of a 3e DM?

Once again: No.

All this chat about how the new poke in the eye with a blunt stick is so much better than the old root canal was pretty funny when WotC offered it in a faux French accent.

What was really funny was how it was depicted as all downhill after 1st ed. AD&D. The supposed big problem with that game? Miniature figurines had yet to be invented in 1979 ... riiight.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

And if you make one of the requirements "Must have been born and raised among the Pirates of the Iron Coast?", can any PC dip into the PrC for the AC? Which you can do, since you're the DM and you have control over entrance to prestige classes and any other mechanic you devise.

Yes, you can certainly do that. But if you do go down the road of making it a PrC-based ability (rather than just assigning a number because you're the DM) and make it just slightly less exclusive, then you can have adventures where the swashbuckler PC is trying to bribe/cajole/trick his way into the pirate community to learn these awesome skills... in some games, that would be a derailment of the plot, in others it could become the plot.

As opposed to flat bonuses per se, the things that explain bonuses -- PrCs, feats, weapon mastery (BECMI), items, etc. -- all offer potential for roleplaying, not just mechanical advantage (which unfortunately is how they are most often used/viewed IME).

 

[Psion]

Does this mean that DM's can't invent their own PrC's and template and the like, because that is essentially the same as because I said so. I mean really what's the difference between "because I said so" and "because he has the bare-chested pirate template"? Why make the DM jump through hoops to do what he's going to do anyway? I frankly don't understand how a DM can cheat in a game where he make up any mechanical content he wants anyway. When players start playing the gotcha game on the DM and demanding to know the mechanical minutia behind every little thing there is a serious problem IMHO.

Well, it's a matter of perspective. For some DMs (and some moods for some DMs that do it different ways at other times ), "playing by the same rules the players do" is something to be aspired to and enjoyed.

 

[EroGaki]

Hold on a minute...We've been talking about a 10th level unarmoured human with an AC of 21 as if it was something "4e doesn't allow PCs to match NPCs"

That's not hard to do in 4e as a PC.

10th level buck naked human PC started with a 20 DEX.

10 + 5 (from level) + 6 (from 22 dex - two stat point increases) = 21 AC.

(anyone care to check my math?)

Is this another one of those "make a point but exaggerate the problem significantly"

The 21 AC was the example. If you want a better example, let's say the 10th level pirate has an AC of 31. Or 41.

My intention was not to exaggerate a problem so much as to point out something I find irksome and in poor taste. The fact that you get a boast to AC as you level is actually one of the good things in 4E, IMO.

I was illustrating something I think is messed up, regardless of system. My apologizes if that wasn't clear.

 

[Fifth Element]

SO now your argument is that handwaving is the same as creating a PrC and creating requirements no one can attain at the moment... now who's jumping through hoops?

No, that's just an example for a PrC. A PrC doesn't have to be the reason. Just an example.

But yes, I agree that it is jumping through hoops, and that's my point. As a DM, why should I have to jump through hoops, even if "within the rules", to get the desired result? Since I can jump through the mechanical hoops to get the desired result if I'm so inclined, why can't I also just use the desired result?

 

[Glyfair]

It's not the same thing, because once you create the "Dread Pirate" prestige class... a PC can now, by meeting the requirements of said PrC, attain the same bonus.

Which adds to the DMs work the need to balance this prestige class so that it doesn't become unbalanced in the hands of PCs. Unless you backload this class so that no PC can ever take it (which a lot of players and DMs consider "cheating") then it that's a lot of balance work.

In 4E (and many other systems and styles of some systems) I can ignore the PC balance issue and just worry about the encounter. Sometimes I might have to work it into the feel of how the world works, but not always.

 

[Fifth Element]

Yes, you can certainly do that. But if you do go down the road of making it a PrC-based ability (rather than just assigning a number because you're the DM) and make it just slightly less exclusive, then you can have adventures where the swashbuckler PC is trying to bribe/cajole/trick his way into the pirate community to learn these awesome skills... in some games, that would be a derailment of the plot, in others it could become the plot.

Well yes, of course. That's a nice side effect. But that doesn't mean I should have to do it this way. If I often do it this way, but sometimes simply lack the time and just handwave it, what's wrong with that?