4E DMG: No guns?!?

[cangrejoide]

Then we are definitely in agreement.

On a Side Note: Those claiming WotC is holding things back until they work, or are balanced for the system...answer me this, how did the skill challenge system get through the way it was presented in the DMG? And why are we already seeing power creep and a widening of the skill gaps with the backgrounds presented in FRPG previews and the Dragon article?

It would have been great if the above mantra had been was actually being adhered to, but so far it's looking a little shaky as far as reasons go.

What is this power creep you talking about? care to give any examples?

 

[Imaro]

What is this power creep you talking about? care to give any examples?

Here's a whole thread on it, since it will be easier for you to read than for me to post the points here.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=239757

 

[ProfessorCirno]

All those extra options run in the periphery of what the actual core of D&D is: Adventure as a group and fight monsters with steel & magic.

So wait, your entire defense is "No, you're wrong. Shut up, you're just wrong."

That's...convincing?

 

[Imaro]

All those extra options run in the periphery of what the actual core of D&D is: Adventure as a group and fight monsters with steel & magic.

The funny thing is... the 3.5 core has more monsters, weapons/armor and magic than 4e, so even if we are just judging on those standards 4e is incomplete compared to 3.5.

 

[Wonka]

So wait, your entire defense is "No, you're wrong. Shut up, you're just wrong."

That's...convincing?

Im pretty sure that's not what they said... Im just saying.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

The funny thing is... the 3.5 core has more monsters, weapons/armor and magic than 4e, so even if we are just judging on those standards 4e is incomplete compared to 3.5.

Well I personally think powers make up for lots of that in-general. But, also in a way because of the way the rules are written and how open it is, it is almost more expansive. Since I personally find it actually possible to create something in say 5-10 minutes that is balanced and workable with the system.

 

[Imaro]

Well I personally think powers make up for lots of that in-general. But, also in a way because of the way the rules are written and how open it is, it is almost more expansive. Since I personally find it actually possible to create something in say 5-10 minutes that is balanced and workable with the system.

Don't agree with you at all about powers making up for the general variety of everything the 3.5 core had in it. It's kinda like saying that at a dinner having different types of steak (ribeye, top sirloin, etc.) makes up for having no vegetables, drinks or desert. If all you like is steak...I guess it makes up for it, but I definitely wouldn't say the steak dinner is more expansive or a complete dinner as one with veggies, drinks and dessert.

Maybe as far as pure combat goes it might but as far as the breadth of supported (and I'm not talking about advice, but actual rules) playstyles 4e is lacking when compared to 3e. But we can agree to disagree on that.

As far as the " possible to create something in say 5-10 minutes that is balanced and workable with the system.". I can do this with a myriad of systems...nWoD, Reign, Blue Rose/True20, etc. and none of them costs over a 100 dollars and is as bare as 4e that I have to count "I can make stuff up" as a positive towards it costing me so much money.

I mean honestly with 100+ pages less than the 3.5 core can you honestly say they couldn't at least have put in detailed guidelines on designing traps? The rules must be ready since they're creating samples...yet for some reason we don't get them... Or more low level monsters, which many people are complaining about recently? No, instead we get to infer and reskin and this is looked at as a positive as far as content vs. price goes...uhm, ok.

 

[cangrejoide]

So wait, your entire defense is "No, you're wrong. Shut up, you're just wrong."

That's...convincing?

I suggest you go back and read the whole thread, you seem to have miss something.

 

[cangrejoide]

The funny thing is... the 3.5 core has more monsters, weapons/armor and magic than 4e, so even if we are just judging on those standards 4e is incomplete compared to 3.5.

If we are to compare editions, there is lots of stuff 4E has that 3.5 doesn't and vice versa.

My point is that 4e was designed as a complete introductory game, from that point of view it is a complete game. There is nothing missing that would make it impossible to run a Adventure as a group and fight monsters with steel & magic.

 

[cangrejoide]

Maybe as far as pure combat goes it might but as far as the breadth of supported (and I'm not talking about advice, but actual rules) playstyles 4e is lacking when compared to 3e. But we can agree to disagree on that.

I totally agree with you. I agree that 4E playstyle is different than 3E. While 3E may have had a broader range of options, 4E focused on the core of D&D.

As far as the " possible to create something in say 5-10 minutes that is balanced and workable with the system.". I can do this with a myriad of systems...nWoD, Reign, Blue Rose/True20, etc. and none of them costs over a 100 dollars and is as bare as 4e that I have to count "I can make stuff up" as a positive towards it costing me so much money.

I agree with you on this too. Sadly none of those other games have the brand D&D on them.