-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
I read the books enough to grasp all the math and how the system operates: I won't run any system until I get that down (and I've run a lot of systems). I ran several sessions. I played in others. This was right was the books were published, yes. It's not like I liked the system enough to care what happened after I put the books in the pile of "systems I own but don't use"Sounds like he read the book, once. Possibly before the ink dried. (another thing laughably wrong with 4e that got better fairly quickly)
The initial SC rules really were stand-out, obviously, mathematically, borked.
Yeah, and it even got intentional support, later. As did the pacifist cleric build, though it was a little.... IDK... technical about it's pacifism.
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
also a funny typo I assume
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
Dunno 'bout you, but after enough beer I definitely need a roll to walk!Oh certainly just like you do not roll to walk
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
I don't have a walking problem I walk I fall down no problem... and in modern style, doesn't hurt much all them temp hit points so just wash rinse and repeat.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I get where you’re coming from. However.I'm not the person who posited this idea but I'll take a stab at answering anyway:
Not that they're always used for this, but skill challenges in 4e can take what in prior editions would have potentially been half a session's worth of exploration, dice rolling, resource attrition, and maybe mapping and concatenate it down to a ten-minute affair where the players say how they're approaching said challenge, some dice are rolled, success or failure is declared, and on we go. (my go-to example for this is the sandstorm scenario in Marauders of the Dune Sea - the module says to just run it as a skill challenge, where doing it the long (i.e. 0-1-2e) way could provide hours of potential fun and entertainment)
Ditto for social challenges. All the role-playing and conversation can, if desired, be neatly streamlined down to a goal, an approach, and some dice.
And what does all this streamlining accomplish? It lets you get back to combat sooner!Thus, it feels like the game is focused on combat because that's what you're doing (and what the system seems to expect you to be doing) most of the time at the table.
All of that is true of having nothing in place to complicate those challenges mechanically, though.
Not having a system beyond “set dc, make roll” can also (IME just as easily) lead to the same sort of “mechanics first questions later” play. Ultimately all any system can do is encourage. It can’t force RP.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Why do you think you will always be fighting in the middle of a narrow passage?
Hussar
Legend
I was going back and forth as to whether to weigh back in or not. But, what the hell. Might as well.
Ok, I'm going to try to lay this out as clearly as I can.
Evidence of Primacy of Magic Being Essential to D&D.
((Caveat - being essential to D&D does not preclude it from being present or even essential in other games. Just that without the primacy of magic, it no longer is D&D))
1. The perception of 4e D&D not being D&D. While there are arguably additional factors as to why some might perceive 4e as not being part of D&D, one of those factors unarguably IS the fact that magic was made less "magical". There are numerous quotes, even in this thread, that support this.
2. Every edition of D&D has increased the caster's options and efficacy. A Basic/Expert Magic User had a choice of 12 spells/spell level and only 6 or 7 levels of spells. A cleric had 6. An AD&D MU has more options at 1st level than existed in the entirety of Basic/Expert, never minding cleric and druids. 2e added to this list and added specialist wizards which had more spells per day. 3e added to the list, added stat bonuses to all casters for per day spells, AND added easily craftable magic items like scrolls and wands. 5e has removed the memorization requirements for casters, granted them more spells per day, granted them unlimited cantrips and added in Rituals which are unlimited as well (although costing in time). At no point, other than in 4e, was a caster reduced in options from the edition previous.
3. The perception that anything that cannot be explained must be done with magic. Thus, the example of a rogue jumping using only skill vs a wizard using a Jump spell. A rogue jumping further than an Olympic athlete is verbotten while a wizard is perfectly acceptable. Or, a rogue falling off a cliff using acrobatics to not take damage is also impossible, while a wizard doing it at 1st level is perfectly acceptable. So on and so forth.
4. Simple word count. This hasn't been brought up, I don't think, but, even in 3e, you could write everything in the PHB that applied to a fighter on a dozen pages at most. Just the spell descriptions, not even the rules regarding spells, in my 3.5 PHB is over a hundred pages long. Or, put it another way, it takes more page count to describe all the spell options in 3.5 D&D than the entirety of the Basic/Expert ruleset. (an exaggeration, true, but, not much of one) Even in 5e, which tones down magic from 3e, still has 70 PAGES of spell effects. That's still longer than the entire Basic ruleset. And, of course, this does not count magic items.
5. Every edition has added more magical goodies to each of the classes. Paladins and Rangers in AD&D gained spells at what 8th level (ish). In 3e, that went down to about 4th level. Now, they gain spells from 2nd level. We have flying barbarians, monks capable of directly casting spells, and, of course, the hybrid archetypes which grant casting to fighters and rogues. There is no longer any class in the game that cannot gain spell casting if the player chooses.
So, in conclusion. It's not just about the perception of 4e not being D&D. That was simply one piece of evidence. If we want to look at what is essential to people for something to be considered D&D, then, well, it's not unreasonable to look at what isn't considered D&D. The notions that this is somehow some sort of edition warring or whatnot are perceptions that, IMO, exist more in the critic's mind than in what's actually been presented. It ignores the other evidence which aren't related at all to 4e but on a recognition of trends within the design of D&D.
Like I said way back when, many pages ago, it's no secret why the 5e development team made 5e the way it is. It's not a huge cognitive leap to see that the magic level of D&D has risen every edition. Are other things essential to D&D? Quite possibly. I'm not arguing that they aren't. I AM arguing that the Primacy of Magic is one of the main ingredients of D&D and without that, any game would be perceived as "not D&D".
Ok, I'm going to try to lay this out as clearly as I can.
Evidence of Primacy of Magic Being Essential to D&D.
((Caveat - being essential to D&D does not preclude it from being present or even essential in other games. Just that without the primacy of magic, it no longer is D&D))
1. The perception of 4e D&D not being D&D. While there are arguably additional factors as to why some might perceive 4e as not being part of D&D, one of those factors unarguably IS the fact that magic was made less "magical". There are numerous quotes, even in this thread, that support this.
2. Every edition of D&D has increased the caster's options and efficacy. A Basic/Expert Magic User had a choice of 12 spells/spell level and only 6 or 7 levels of spells. A cleric had 6. An AD&D MU has more options at 1st level than existed in the entirety of Basic/Expert, never minding cleric and druids. 2e added to this list and added specialist wizards which had more spells per day. 3e added to the list, added stat bonuses to all casters for per day spells, AND added easily craftable magic items like scrolls and wands. 5e has removed the memorization requirements for casters, granted them more spells per day, granted them unlimited cantrips and added in Rituals which are unlimited as well (although costing in time). At no point, other than in 4e, was a caster reduced in options from the edition previous.
3. The perception that anything that cannot be explained must be done with magic. Thus, the example of a rogue jumping using only skill vs a wizard using a Jump spell. A rogue jumping further than an Olympic athlete is verbotten while a wizard is perfectly acceptable. Or, a rogue falling off a cliff using acrobatics to not take damage is also impossible, while a wizard doing it at 1st level is perfectly acceptable. So on and so forth.
4. Simple word count. This hasn't been brought up, I don't think, but, even in 3e, you could write everything in the PHB that applied to a fighter on a dozen pages at most. Just the spell descriptions, not even the rules regarding spells, in my 3.5 PHB is over a hundred pages long. Or, put it another way, it takes more page count to describe all the spell options in 3.5 D&D than the entirety of the Basic/Expert ruleset. (an exaggeration, true, but, not much of one) Even in 5e, which tones down magic from 3e, still has 70 PAGES of spell effects. That's still longer than the entire Basic ruleset. And, of course, this does not count magic items.
5. Every edition has added more magical goodies to each of the classes. Paladins and Rangers in AD&D gained spells at what 8th level (ish). In 3e, that went down to about 4th level. Now, they gain spells from 2nd level. We have flying barbarians, monks capable of directly casting spells, and, of course, the hybrid archetypes which grant casting to fighters and rogues. There is no longer any class in the game that cannot gain spell casting if the player chooses.
So, in conclusion. It's not just about the perception of 4e not being D&D. That was simply one piece of evidence. If we want to look at what is essential to people for something to be considered D&D, then, well, it's not unreasonable to look at what isn't considered D&D. The notions that this is somehow some sort of edition warring or whatnot are perceptions that, IMO, exist more in the critic's mind than in what's actually been presented. It ignores the other evidence which aren't related at all to 4e but on a recognition of trends within the design of D&D.
Like I said way back when, many pages ago, it's no secret why the 5e development team made 5e the way it is. It's not a huge cognitive leap to see that the magic level of D&D has risen every edition. Are other things essential to D&D? Quite possibly. I'm not arguing that they aren't. I AM arguing that the Primacy of Magic is one of the main ingredients of D&D and without that, any game would be perceived as "not D&D".
Arnwolf666
Adventurer
if
darn spell correct
