D&D 4E 4e and My Setting: Can You Convince Me To Convert?

[Lanefan]

My setting is a hodge-podge of concepts. The basic premise is that there are nine "forces" in the world: magic, psionics, technology, the blue (world memory), time, chaos (entropy, free will, and randomness), divine, nature, and the void. These nine are then divided into Trinities - three groups of three forces, with each force in each Trinity opposed to the other two (so magic is opposed to psionics and technology, and so on).

If these 9 forces are intended to line up with the 9 alignments (you don't mention either way), you'll have to ret-con alignments back into 4e; because it sounds like they're gone.

Currently, I have thirty-some races allowed, and fifty-some base classes - and there are more yet to be written. I know it's a mess, but I'm slowly working on cleaning it up, to make it cleaner and more internally consistent.

Don't worry - a couple of years worth of splats and 4e will be right there with you on that.

I'm a fan of the simulationist view. In my mind, the world is alive, and I try to convey that in games. Monsters are relatively rare, and most combats are with humanoids of some kind or another. NPCs aren't there just to kill or be killed, and I try to ensure that anyone the party interacts with is at least not entirely two-dimensional. Their skills outside of combat can be just as important as their skills in combat.

From all I've seen, this is quite likely a non-issue. In any other edition, other than the most basic of guidelines you as DM are free to give the opponents any type of personality or character you want, and that won't change. That said, if you want to give non-combat skills to opponents you're probably going to have to give them to PCs as well, as it sounds like the skills will mostly be geared to combat of either the physical or social variety.

The world's physics are yours to determine as well, again within broad guidelines. The most important thing is internal consistency in all things from the start of the campaign to the end, even to the point of having to live with mistakes.

Everything else you mention as a potential problem is only such if you're not willing to houserule. The rings-at-11 business, for example, should be trivially easy to houserule around; and if all the stock 4e rings are really powerful throw some weak ones back in.

Gnomes and Hobbits would also be easy to tweak to whatever you want them to be.

4e as written might well not be the game for you. However, it could serve as a perfectly good jumping-off point for you to house-design and build the game you want, if that's the stage you find yourself at; looked at from that point of view, given your stated goals, you might find it well suited.

Lanefan

 

[Connorsrpg]

After a quick view of your wiki I say GO FOR IT. You are already half way there You have the power sources already set out. (Just need to decide where Martial fits in - but being mundane it doesn't HAVE to be a force).

Don't worry about the 'roles'. They have always been there. Between them and the power sources you could actually come up with more combinations for classes...though don't forget classes with similar concepts could easily be covered by different talent trees.

You may even have general talent trees for those cool '9 Forces' you use and any class using that force could take it (just like the Force talents in Star Wars Saga).

Again - your many races is a none issue (as far as edition is concerned). 4E will make race a more important part for character. My players LOVE lots of choice in this regard and I am always adapting races to become player character races. Don't limit yourself. There will be MANY races for 4e (don;t forget the MM). You won;t have to wait for splat books at all. You may have to come up with some racial feats for the races, but that should be easy (and fun).

As far as your mechanics go I wouldn;t want to play this campaign in any other version of dnd BUT 4E.

I am still in love with the Force trinities - especially how they relate. Awesome. Can I play ?

Oh and totally with you on the if the dragons be in the forest and you go there = meet a dragon. Just b/c you are low level doesn't mean the dragon doesn't show. Players must learn they can;t win every fight...and there are other options to fighting Anyway that is how we have always played.

C

 

[MichaelSomething]

Well Gnomeworks, it seems that you are willing to try 4E to see if it the gaming system you want to use. You have objections but you are giving the system a chance. If you do like it, you'll switch. If you don't like it, you won't switch. That seems to be perfectly rational.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Not really.

Now, you see, this counts as a "threadcrap" and it's pretty much guaranteed to make people cranky. While at least minimal effort (mostly through omission) has been made to "stay civil", there's no adding to the thread. Further, there's a stated purpose to this thread--can 4E handle the OP's game world. If you really have nothing to add, then please sit this one out and watch from the sidelines.

Others were able to make statements and then come back with an "Only you can decide..." type statement. That makes people much less cranky.

I would say that the first thing you might look at is that psionics are almost guaranteed to come out, but probably not for the first year--that might mean that you delay a full port of your gameworld or come up with some method of looking at what was done with magic and divine power sources and coming up with a psionics system that operates similarly (clearly with different results than the two, but something similar for the per encounter/per day type thing handled).

I'm going through the same thing with my gameworld, but as it stayed much closer to core (fewer power sources, although I do use psionics), I'm feeling less nervousness about a port. The loss of the chaos vs. evil axis that we seem to be getting might have an impact, but can also be added back in.

Gnomes will be in the MM, and likely see a full writeup in a future PH. My gameworld deals heavily with gnomes as an integral part, so they need some effort on my part--as does at least one other really core non-human race and my human regional variants. I'm looking forward to seeing how these things can be handled.

In a lot of ways, this is the worldbuilding that I enjoy doing most--non-standard races, classes, and religions. If you have the same mindset, then you'll probably find a port to be a way to rethink what you like about your setting and what really doesn't work.

 

[Mephistopheles]

Howdy, all. I've been lurking here on the 4e boards for awhile now, and I think that now - with a bit more information, and some more hopefully coming in the next month or so - is a good time to begin contemplating the big question: do I convert to 4e?

For the most part I've been doing the same so far, keeping an eye on developments as information is released but not getting too invested until more solid information is available. Apparently we'll be getting a crunchy look in with D&D Experience at the end of this month. If that turns out to be so that will likely be a good time for you to begin considering if a conversion will be feasible for you.

 

[Connorsrpg]

So, are you convinced???

 

[green slime]

I'd be surprised.

In my mind, it will take 4e quite some time until it has the level and depth of support you seem to want for your ideas (psionics, technology, classes, humanoids).

In my mind, it's far easier for you to stick with what you have, streamlining it a bit more, and wait to make the shift for at least two another years. During which time, you'll be able to read about 4e, see what it has, what makes it work, and whatever failings it may have will become apparent. Which in turn will allow you to get involved, (if you choose) with the benefit of other people's experiences.

 

[Connorsrpg]

Still awaiting your response here???

 

[Engilbrand]

He said that it would take him another 6-8 months to develop his own setting with what he already has. Is it just me, or are there better things that one could do with that time? I would want to spend that time actually playing the game and developing parts of the setting as they come up. If the PCs never go to the Kingdom of Bingbang, why would you need to develop everything about Bingbang? If all of the adventuring for the first 10 levels will be in the Whatwasthat Jungle, then just develop the hell out of that jungle.

 

[Wepwawet]

Hey, your setting is very interesting indeed
I might even steal some ideas
I hope it's not copyrighted heheh (but i believe I'll only play published settings, as I don't have time anymore to create my own worlds)

About some of your fears:
The roles stuff: There's already two martial strikers defined, the Rogue and the Ranger. So don't worry about limiting classes to each power/role combination.

Encounter powers: it's not much different from vancian magic, and it even makes more sense. Be it special attacks which require more effort, the right moment to do, and/or some special preparation beforehand... A set of conditions that only come once in a fight.
(That surprise attack explanation doesn't make much sense to me )

Rings: if their effects are too powerful, you wouldn't give them to lower level players anyway. If the designers decided that they'll be only usable at those higher levels, there must be a good reason for that.


And you know that you won't have all races and classes in the first books...
So if you need a full set of published races and classes you'll have to wait one or two years to switch. Or you can improvise. Or simply don't define some areas of your world until you have what you need.

So, what's your veredict?
I'd really like to know