Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LightPhoenix" data-source="post: 6079339" data-attributes="member: 115">Let me start with what was perhaps a misconception by myself.&nbsp; I had thought that the Basic/Standard/Advanced scheme was intended to be a narrow measure of complexity.&nbsp; That is to say, they were tuned to the individual player.&nbsp; Want to play a 1E Fighter?&nbsp; Basic Fighter.&nbsp; Want to play a 3E Fighter?&nbsp; Standard Fighter.&nbsp; Want to play a 4E Fighter?&nbsp; Advanced Fighter, using the &quot;AEDU&quot; (example only) module.&nbsp; All three would be roughly in the same ballpark of viability and balance, even if the complexity was different.&nbsp; That is to say, the player would be able to choose their complexity.&nbsp; However, I had the scope wrong.&nbsp;&nbsp; As shown by these articles, they're a broad measure of complexity.&nbsp; That is to say, they are tuned to the group versus the player.&nbsp; Now, we know that as far as classes go, the Basic classes are based on a subset of the Standard classes.&nbsp; So mechanically, there's no reason why the two aren't interchangeable.&nbsp; However, that doesn't actually address the simplicity of play that has been suggested in previous articles.&nbsp; That's only simplicity of character creation.&nbsp; The DM can make a character for someone, it doesn't need it's own designation.&nbsp; For there to be a real difference between Basic and Standard, there has to be a simplification of the set of rules as a whole.&nbsp; However, since complexity is seemingly measured at a broad level (the group versus the player), the game has to operate at the highest complexity of the group.&nbsp; So how does that get reconciled?&nbsp; In my opinion, that has not been adequately addressed by Mike/WotC.&nbsp; That's not to say it can't be, and I hope it will be.&nbsp; I'll freely admit at this point that since we don't know what the Basic or Standard rules are, any judgement is premature.&nbsp; However, the impression I'm getting is that the design team is thinking of Basic, Standard, and Advanced as separate entities loosely related but intended to be run as a set of rules for the whole group versus for the player.&nbsp; Or, to put it another way, Basic is actually a permutation of Advanced, albeit with the dials all turned down.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LightPhoenix, post: 6079339, member: 115"] Let me start with what was perhaps a misconception by myself. I had thought that the Basic/Standard/Advanced scheme was intended to be a narrow measure of complexity. That is to say, they were tuned to the individual player. Want to play a 1E Fighter? Basic Fighter. Want to play a 3E Fighter? Standard Fighter. Want to play a 4E Fighter? Advanced Fighter, using the "AEDU" (example only) module. All three would be roughly in the same ballpark of viability and balance, even if the complexity was different. That is to say, the player would be able to choose their complexity. However, I had the scope wrong. As shown by these articles, they're a broad measure of complexity. That is to say, they are tuned to the group versus the player. Now, we know that as far as classes go, the Basic classes are based on a subset of the Standard classes. So mechanically, there's no reason why the two aren't interchangeable. However, that doesn't actually address the simplicity of play that has been suggested in previous articles. That's only simplicity of character creation. The DM can make a character for someone, it doesn't need it's own designation. For there to be a real difference between Basic and Standard, there has to be a simplification of the set of rules as a whole. However, since complexity is seemingly measured at a broad level (the group versus the player), the game has to operate at the highest complexity of the group. So how does that get reconciled? In my opinion, that has not been adequately addressed by Mike/WotC. That's not to say it can't be, and I hope it will be. I'll freely admit at this point that since we don't know what the Basic or Standard rules are, any judgement is premature. However, the impression I'm getting is that the design team is thinking of Basic, Standard, and Advanced as separate entities loosely related but intended to be run as a set of rules for the whole group versus for the player. Or, to put it another way, Basic is [I]actually [/I]a permutation of Advanced, albeit with the dials all turned down. [/QUOTE]

Verification