Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e needs a Definitive Guide
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6411987" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Unfortunately there is no section in the rules pertaining to this. I don't even see any indication that the designers INTENDED keywords to work in this fashion. I think it is probable that it was something they THOUGHT OF at some point, in passing, but that the primary intent for keywords was the purely mechanistic interaction with other game elements (IE vulnerability/immunity, other powers, items, feats, etc). </p><p></p><p>Regardless, they failed utterly to even mention the narrative function of keywords (which is more obvious, the DM describes the fire attack as FIRE, but still not ever discussed). More critically they failed to mention the use you describe, the extension of the rules into areas that aren't covered explicitly, the use of 'Page 42' and its ilk. It was a fatal oversight. </p><p></p><p>Personally I think the coherence of the objections to 4e has less to do with 4e 'weaknesses' and more to do with fan expectations for D&D. My experience is that most D&D players want to reproduce an EXACT experience with no variation. The details vary depending on when the player was introduced to the game, and there are certainly players that are more flexible, but the typical player is playing 'D&D' and they expect, just like Monopoly, that D&D will be a specific exact thing. Its irrelevant to debate with them or even speculate on why they have specific likes and dislikes. </p><p></p><p>That isn't to say that we cannot discern the areas that 4e could be improved on by looking at what people have said. I think some forms of complaints are largely spurious when considering 4e IN AND OF ITSELF as a game. For example I put the "classes are too much the same" complaint in this category. Its not a complaint about 4e, its a complaint that arises out of an expectation from a different game. </p><p></p><p>As for the whole thing with Rituals and being an area that 'needed improvement', I think my answer to that is that the text of the rituals themselves needs improvement. I also think that perhaps even using a scroll might want to be a trained only skill use, and that certainly casting a ritual itself should require training in the requisite skill(s). I think there might be more skills involved as well, though not TOO many. This would force ritual casters to specialize a bit and make things more interesting. </p><p></p><p>As far as the ritual text itself, I think ALL rituals should be scaling. Many of them are simply due to being a 'beat some DC' sort of thing (like Knock where you have to beat the DC of the 'lock'). Many others however don't have scaling effects at all. These rituals often suffer from becoming trivial at higher levels or are too powerful all around. The other thing that should have happened is that rituals costs should scale with results. If you are getting flying steeds from your Phantom Steeds, that's kinda expensive but getting an ordinary riding horse costs next to nothing. </p><p></p><p>I think the other thing is that rituals should probably be devised to be a bit more immediately relevant in adventuring. A lot of them ARE, but a LOT of them are pretty auxiliary and it seems to me almost like the design decree from on high was "rituals should never be required to make things work, they should always be an alternate way to do things". Obviously that inherently makes the whole system redundant.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6411987, member: 82106"] Unfortunately there is no section in the rules pertaining to this. I don't even see any indication that the designers INTENDED keywords to work in this fashion. I think it is probable that it was something they THOUGHT OF at some point, in passing, but that the primary intent for keywords was the purely mechanistic interaction with other game elements (IE vulnerability/immunity, other powers, items, feats, etc). Regardless, they failed utterly to even mention the narrative function of keywords (which is more obvious, the DM describes the fire attack as FIRE, but still not ever discussed). More critically they failed to mention the use you describe, the extension of the rules into areas that aren't covered explicitly, the use of 'Page 42' and its ilk. It was a fatal oversight. Personally I think the coherence of the objections to 4e has less to do with 4e 'weaknesses' and more to do with fan expectations for D&D. My experience is that most D&D players want to reproduce an EXACT experience with no variation. The details vary depending on when the player was introduced to the game, and there are certainly players that are more flexible, but the typical player is playing 'D&D' and they expect, just like Monopoly, that D&D will be a specific exact thing. Its irrelevant to debate with them or even speculate on why they have specific likes and dislikes. That isn't to say that we cannot discern the areas that 4e could be improved on by looking at what people have said. I think some forms of complaints are largely spurious when considering 4e IN AND OF ITSELF as a game. For example I put the "classes are too much the same" complaint in this category. Its not a complaint about 4e, its a complaint that arises out of an expectation from a different game. As for the whole thing with Rituals and being an area that 'needed improvement', I think my answer to that is that the text of the rituals themselves needs improvement. I also think that perhaps even using a scroll might want to be a trained only skill use, and that certainly casting a ritual itself should require training in the requisite skill(s). I think there might be more skills involved as well, though not TOO many. This would force ritual casters to specialize a bit and make things more interesting. As far as the ritual text itself, I think ALL rituals should be scaling. Many of them are simply due to being a 'beat some DC' sort of thing (like Knock where you have to beat the DC of the 'lock'). Many others however don't have scaling effects at all. These rituals often suffer from becoming trivial at higher levels or are too powerful all around. The other thing that should have happened is that rituals costs should scale with results. If you are getting flying steeds from your Phantom Steeds, that's kinda expensive but getting an ordinary riding horse costs next to nothing. I think the other thing is that rituals should probably be devised to be a bit more immediately relevant in adventuring. A lot of them ARE, but a LOT of them are pretty auxiliary and it seems to me almost like the design decree from on high was "rituals should never be required to make things work, they should always be an alternate way to do things". Obviously that inherently makes the whole system redundant. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
4e needs a Definitive Guide
Top