New Rule of Three 11/29/11

[Imaro]

I don't think it's on the home page yet but there's a new Rule of Three up here... Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Rule-of-Three: 11/28/2011)

Answers...
What is the design philosophy behind each power source? What unites each class under that power source?

What was the design purpose for the power sources, and how do you think they've played out? What things have you learned and what would you do differently?

Through D&D's edition progression, initiative seems to have become more complex and threatens to pull people from the immersion of the game. How important do you feel initiative is to D&D and 4E, and what changes would you make if you had it to do over again?

Still reading and will comment a little later but, I found this sentence from the second question pretty interesting...

" While we never intended to try to color in each combination of role and power source, the combinations certainly inspired some class concepts we might not otherwise have tried. For example, the swordmage came into existence simply because we were intrigued by the idea of an arcane defender and wondered what one might look like."

It would seem to infer that the inspiration for at least some classes in 4e came specifically from combat role for a power source... not sure what to make of that or whether I think that's a good or bad thing to base the design of an entire class on.

D'uh... wrong date in the title and it is on the homepage now.

 

[GSHamster]

It would seem to infer that the inspiration for at least some classes in 4e came specifically from combat role for a power source... not sure what to make of that or whether I think that's a good or bad thing to base the design of an entire class on.

I think it would be a bad thing to base all the classes on. But one or two classes here and there is cool with me. Inspiration can strike from any direction, and rejecting something just because you don't like how it was inspired seems short-sighted to me.

 

[Imaro]

I think it would be a bad thing to base all the classes on. But one or two classes here and there is cool with me. Inspiration can strike from any direction, and rejecting something just because you don't like how it was inspired seems short-sighted to me.

True, but that's what I'm curious about, is this the standard inspiration for classes in 4e and perhaps the reason combat role is linked to class.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

" While we never intended to try to color in each combination of role and power source, the combinations certainly inspired some class concepts we might not otherwise have tried. For example, the swordmage came into existence simply because we were intrigued by the idea of an arcane defender and wondered what one might look like."

If they needed the "arcane defender" role/power source in order to come up with the swordmage, they're either severely lacking in imagination or haven't been playing D&D long, seeing as how that's a character concept that dates back to at least BD&D.

 

[SpydersWebbing]

So here's a question:

What's side initiative?

 

[am181d]

So here's a question:

What's side initiative?

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh! I thought the same thing when reading the article. ("What? You roll initiative off to the side?") But he clearly means "one initiative roll per side." Which would explain how it could be faster than cyclical.

For what it's worth, in 2e, I'm pretty sure we always did individual initiative once per round. Which would certainly NOT be faster than cyclical initiative. (I suppose it would be the same speed if the combat only lasted one round...)

 

[MerricB]

If they needed the "arcane defender" role/power source in order to come up with the swordmage, they're either severely lacking in imagination or haven't been playing D&D long, seeing as how that's a character concept that dates back to at least BD&D.

Is it? Is it really?

The swordmage isn't as simple in concept as "fighter/magic-user" (or elf, from BD&D). Its implementation of the defender mechanic isn't similar to anything in previous editions of D&D that I can think of. Certainly not as a constant ability!

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh! I thought the same thing when reading the article. ("What? You roll initiative off to the side?") But he clearly means "one initiative roll per side." Which would explain how it could be faster than cyclical.

For what it's worth, in 2e, I'm pretty sure we always did individual initiative once per round. Which would certainly NOT be faster than cyclical initiative. (I suppose it would be the same speed if the combat only lasted one round...)

I'm wondering if the "counting down" method of 2e may well be the one that saw play in Combat & Tactics, which I enjoyed but got rather wacky.

Cheers!

 

[Dire Bare]

True, but that's what I'm curious about, is this the standard inspiration for classes in 4e and perhaps the reason combat role is linked to class.

We're talking two different kinds of inspiration, or the inspiration of two different aspects of class design. One type, is the inspiration of the mythic/literate archetype. Regardless of the mechanics in a game, "wizard" is a highly resonant mythic archetype. "Ardent" (psionic class) is not so mythic and is solely a D&D concept. Did power source inspire any of the class archetypes? Not the traditional ones, such as wizard, fighter, cleric, rogue, etc. Maybe the uniquely D&D ones like ardent, seeker, etc.

If they needed the "arcane defender" role/power source in order to come up with the swordmage, they're either severely lacking in imagination or haven't been playing D&D long, seeing as how that's a character concept that dates back to at least BD&D.

The second type of inspiration, and I think this is what Baker is talking about via the swordmage, is for the mechanics. Olgar is right by saying the idea, or archetype, of a swordmage, a warrior who balances weaponcraft and magic, goes back to almost the beginnings of the game. But I'm 100% sure that Baker is talking the mechanics of the current swordmage class, which are pretty new and different. Contrast it with the 4E bladesinger, which is pretty much the same archetypal idea, but with different mechanics.

Role and power source are important to the design of all the classes, although with the D&D classics like fighter and wizard, roles and power sources were designed to fit the existing "core" mechanics. For other classes, it was the other way around, "We need an arcane defender".

Either way a particular class (and it's parts) were inspired and designed, I couldn't care less, as long as the class is fun to play. And the swordmage certainly has been for me.

 

[Neonchameleon]

We're talking two different kinds of inspiration, or the inspiration of two different aspects of class design. One type, is the inspiration of the mythic/literate archetype. Regardless of the mechanics in a game, "wizard" is a highly resonant mythic archetype.

I utterly and emphatically disagree with this case. I'm searching my brains to think of one mythic wizard who fits the ideas of D&D wizards rather than loremasters and masters of cunning and deception backed by mostly mind-altering magic (i.e. bards) or evil cursing beings who had made pacts offering their soul in exchange for power (i.e. warlocks). In fact I'd go so far as to say that the wizard in any edition (except 3e Batman Style) plays more or less like its mechanical inspiration; mobile field artillery for a fantasy skirmish wargame.

For the record, Merlin literally was a bard - and far more known for cunning and skill than for fireball. And Gandalf? Who met the balrog sword to sword and was known for the breadth of his knowledge and the cunning of his tongue rather than any flashy magic? Show me the D&D wizard that behaves that way - rather than the average bard.

We've had gamist class design in D&D right from the beginning. And in many cases it's helped.

(So I agree with your overall point even if I emphatically disagree with the detail).