Revisionist game publishing

[keterys]

Yeah, I'm just referring to the systems he specifically chose as having 'fixed' the problem. There are plenty of systems that cope, in different ways.

Like Amber or Theatrix, for example, to pick out a couple older systems All depends on what you're actually gaming about.

 

[M.L. Martin]

Games like fate and a few others said that a disadvantage when you are limited or restricted by it in some fashion becomes a source for fate points... or most likely action points (or establish a milestone?) in 4e or a similar limited use one off benefits... in other words there are solutions that to my mind work well. GURPS and Hero are still very old school in that regards.

Actually, HERO 6E includes that as an optional rule for Complications (formerly Disadvantages).

A more radical approach might be to do away with the Character Point value of Complications altogether and instead link the Complications system to Heroic Action Points. A character would simply get his full Total Points “for free,” with no requirement to take any Matching Complications at all. However, if he takes some Complications for his character, whenever one of them comes into play and he overcomes it (or triumphs in spite of it), he gets an extra HAP. If he voluntarily brings the Complication into play in a genre-appropriate manner (“I’m going to take my DNPC with me while I investigate the haunted house!”), perhaps he gets 2 HAPs for contributing to the story.

 

[Garthanos]

Yeah, I'm just referring to the systems he specifically chose as having 'fixed' the problem. There are plenty of systems that cope, in different ways.

Like Amber or Theatrix, for example, to pick out a couple older systems All depends on what you're actually gaming about.

I think the GURPSian and HERO model says

"If a player takes fear of Goblins frequently limiting.. for his characters means you the DM have a responsibility to knock on him with goblins ... frequently."

And if you think it would warp your campaign just say no to the disad.

 

[Garthanos]

Actually, HERO 6E includes that as an optional rule for Complications (formerly Disadvantages).

Figured they would get around to it... you could do some weird hoops to get something like it before...

 

[Garthanos]

Figured they would get around to it... you could do some weird hoops to get something like it before...

It is sort of a patchy after the fact thing where the standard is you get points at the beginning for something which may not really come up that often so the GM and players either get wired in to or have to reinvest those complications points so they mean something (do they recommend re-envisioning characters ;-)).

 

[pawsplay]

The egregious ones, of course. But, HERO is riddled with warnings with good reason, and even if you don't use any of those you can still sit down and have one person in a group with a 16d attack standard and another with a 2d standard, or have someone who needs to be hit by 21 body to notice an attack at all and another who potentially dies from 12. Depending on the game you're looking for those are strengths or weaknesses, but if I'm choosing to play a level-based game (which I am, when I play D&D), I don't want to deal with point buy's problems.

That's what mystifies me most about 4e's design. In a system like 4e, you can predict the range of numbers you would expect to see at each level. Something like flight or darkvision, then, is just a trump; it shouldn't mess with anything related to balance in the sense of "being able to affect or go to toe with an appropriate opponent." Either darkvision is going to break the game or it isn't, flight will or it won't. You could probably distribute such abilities willy-nilly if you wanted, provided the players were satisfied with the distribution.

Take a look at Fantasy Craft. It's d20-based and level-based. Yet somehow, it manages to present Unborn (warforged, golems, and the like) as PCs, along with Drakes (small dragons - not dragon-like humanoids, but dragons), giants, and regenerating trolls, all without breaking the system. Further, it also uses a different system for PC generation versus NPC generation, and PC races may differ slightly from NPC templates used for quickly generating members of that race. Yay, Fantasy Craft. So yes, there are system tradeoffs, but a good system should be able to handle some very basic variation in PC abilities.

Again, Hero system. If you use the standard design guidelines, you have ranges for to-hit, damage, and the like, and powers are allowed or not based on the GM's campaign design guidelines... essentially, Fantasy Hero characters are level X characters, where X = whatever power level established by the GM.

And Mutants & Masterminds, too. They recently released a swords-and-sorcery campaign book, too. And guess what? Kobolds with darkvision, no problem. Minotaur PCs, no problem. And usually with less fuss and mess than in 4e, to boot.

 

[Wik]

I guess I should weigh in on this. Because, well, I am the GM that caused Blargney's initial concerns.

So, we have a rule at our table that basically amounts to "When using the Character Builder, we do not use anything from DRAGON magazine". While you can say that's unfair or whatever, I just figure it saves me from one major headache. And we've been pretty good with it - people have accidentally taken dragon feats, and then corrected the problem with a heads-up to me.

The big problem came when Blargney put his minotaur PC through the CB, and realized he lost Oversized. Since he was playing a fighter that was built towards offence over defence, it kind of hurt his bottom line. However, at this point, I was kind of thinking that oversized had been errata'd out of the MM, and felt that there was a good reason for it (also, that it made sense - the minotaur fighter does a lot more damage than the Dragonborn Paladin).

To compensate though, because the minotaur lost a big "power", I offered Blargney the Iron Armbands of Power, a previously "no" item - essentially, balancing things out a little bit. Which I thought was a fair trade.

When we realized that the new minotaur was from DRAGON, though, I Had to repeal that rule, because it'd be kind of lame for me as a GM to say "you can't use any of the good stuff from dragon, but anything that screws you guys over has to be adopted". So, I took back my initial ruling, and went from there.

Really, I have NO problem with PC races being different mechanically than non-PCs of the same the race. Because, really, the only person who will notice (most of the time) is the GM.

 

[AllisterH]

I think people are forgetting that the designers "change" their viewpoints with more experience and feedback of the system.

As mentioned, Darkvision at one time seemed like it was too powerful an ability but now there are way more means to get it which I believe is an acknowledgement that it isn't as unbalancing as they originally thought AND you would likely see darkvision as a racial ability.

Personal Flight (all the time) is still too problematic at heroic level and thus I doubt you will see it in a PC race.

 

[blargney the second]

However, at this point, I was kind of thinking that oversized had been errata'd out of the MM

This is fundamentally what sparked me to start this thread. The MM race was never actually errataed, just reprinted and sold with alterations. Since we haven't been using Dragon articles, I'd never noticed that the official race had changed.

Am I alone in thinking that it's weird that some products get corrected with other products? Especially given the fact that WotC does, in fact, issue errata for their products? One error will be fixed for free, while another is only fixed for money.

If you're paying for and using the compendium or the character builder, errata and bought changes will be transparent and essentially the same. If you're not, you're basically running around with a partially fixed game that's out of sync with everybody else's copy.

it'd be kind of lame for me as a GM to say "you can't use any of the good stuff from dragon, but anything that screws you guys over has to be adopted".

As your player, I really appreciate this attitude!
-blarg

 

[Jhaelen]

Am I alone in thinking that it's weird that some products get corrected with other products? Especially given the fact that WotC does, in fact, issue errata for their products? One error will be fixed for free, while another is only fixed for money.

You're not alone but it's not _really_ an error that MM1 minotaurs get to use oversized weapons. Just like the semi-functional solo monsters in MM1 aren't in error. They work - they just don't work as well as they could.

In your case there's even a disclaimer right in the MM: Intended for npc's only. So, you've been warned (kind of). It's also fine that both versions are in the CharBuilder. It's up to the DM to define campaign-settings and verify the pcs don't violate them.