4E Necromancer!

Nikosandros · Mar 2, 2009

Jack99 said:
It sounds like an interesting idea. I will definitely be following the development closely. It is going to be an enormous project though.

Agreed on both points. It's a very ambitious project... I'll definitely keep tabs on it, to see how evolves.

xechnao · Mar 2, 2009

I cant understand what Clark is saying. 1e and 4e are two different games. They are both focused and not open ended. I do not see how he can mix them. Even if he tried so, he would have to end up doing a game either like 1e or like 4e. Unless he does something totally different, such as adding some game element -that is found in none of the two- around of which his game is based and tries to fit the things of the two editions that he likes around this element.

Festivus · Mar 2, 2009

No offense meant here, and I do wish Clarke all the luck in the world with the project, but when I heard about this project the other day I kinda scratched my head. If I want to play a game with the old school feel I'll go grab my old edition books. I like 4E because of what it is and the way it is, and don't really want it to be old school.

I can see where you want to keep up support for the latest edition, and perhaps this is a way to help suport both fans of Pathfinder and 4e and get more of an audience?

Perhaps I should just keep my opinion to myself until I see the final product, it might blow me away.

Orcus · Mar 2, 2009

Nymrohd said:
Well I read that magic missile, and I have to say, I agree with the locals at those forums.

Good! because they are right! There are issues with the magic missile I posted. It was a one-off 5-minute design effort designed to get people talking about how to do what i want to do. The stuff we are posting is the initial discussion. It is not a preview of a coming book. Literally, I want people to come in and share the whiteboard with me and help me solve this design problem. We are in the infancy of the discussion. I am designing out loud and I want smart, helpful folks with all viewpoints to come on in and help me with this issue. I think it will be fun! Dont judge the end of the process by what is discussed in the first 5 minutes. We're just getting started.

Nebulous · Mar 2, 2009

Clark, as much as i love Necromancer and i support what you're doing, i'm also a little befuddled as to the exact goal. Personally, i'm not a fan of the way magic works in 4e, it's just like all the others powers.

Are you talking about revamping magic, maybe a new class with a unique spell list, but balanced specifically for 4e?

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

Orcus said:
Good! because they are right! There are issues with the magic missile I posted..

Could you give a link?

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

Festivus said:
No offense meant here, and I do wish Clarke all the luck in the world with the project, but when I heard about this project the other day I kinda scratched my head. If I want to play a game with the old school feel I'll go grab my old edition books. I like 4E because of what it is and the way it is, and don't really want it to be old school.

First, keep in mind that 1e is a big inspiration for the 4e designers. Mearls said his favorite book is the 1e Fiend Folio, and it's clear that he and Noonan tried to capture some of the essence of those monsters and the "exception-based" nature that they operated under. So, 4e is all ready a little like 1e.

Next, it's not so much about "Making 1e compatible with 4e", as it is having a certain level of Tone. Adventures that are a lot about just exploration, or going into a dungeon with the expressed intent of killing everything in there. And, 1e had very, very crazy things in it.

I'll use an example. The module "Pyramid of Shadows". It's a dungeon with radically different environments and thematic rooms, all in one place. It doesn't make any sense from a simulationist perspective. It's actually rather wacky. The module, however, "feels" like a 1e adventure because of that. Another example would be traps that invoke the "Grimtooth" feel.

Additionally, it looks like it's more a matter of taste. For instance, Paladin powers that target Evil opponents. Succubi that are demons, not devils. Things like that which are more sacred cows that got slaughtered.

Finally, just because people liked the nostalgia of 1e and the feelings it invoked doesn't mean they want to play with those rules. It's like saying that you want a car that makes you feel like your first car did, without going out and looking for a 1968 model car; cars that old have massive flaws, if for no other reason than the passage of time.

Granted, I say this as someone who agrees - if you want a playstyle that a system doesn't facilitate, you're better off playing that system you LIKE as opposed to trying to take a crowbar to the other one. And, I took a look at the various suggested fixes Orcus posted, and I want to run far, far away from any discussion like that, because it raises my hackles ("Alignment-based powers, IN MY 4e? No!")

Jack99 · Mar 2, 2009

Rechan said:
Could you give a link?

It's possibly the single most broken power I have seen ever

It should be in one of the links in the OP, if you scroll a bit down.

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

Jack99 said:
It's possibly the single most broken power I have seen ever It should be in one of the links in the OP, if you scroll a bit down.

Yeah, I took a look at it. I... well, I don't even think I can contribute to that conversation. The aims and desires of apparently what 1e is, is far beyond my grasp. I think it would get me a headache trying to help with designs like that. :erm: