D&D 4E 4E Theme - Catching the "sense of wonder"?

[Irda Ranger]

Changing the way a monster is presented can things mysterious for so long. As people gain experience with the system, they'll figure out the way monsters work. It's up to adventures, not rulebooks, to provide a sense of wonder by using the creatures presented in a new, unique, and interesting way.

What he said. Trying to engineer a "sense of wonder" with new monster abilities and fluff is a "one shot" sense of wonder. Once you know Hobgoblins breed big nasties, the SOW on that angle is gone.

It's the adventure, and the GM, that brings the SOW. It's not something that can be found in the core rules. There are plenty of other threads in General and elsewhere that discuss how to do this.

 

[Woas]

Yup. Since its already been stated in a blog that 4e hobgoblins keep monstrous spiders in their lairs, they are completely non-wonderful anymore.

...I really don't see how this is different from saying goblins and worgs work together. Or that barghests often lead goblinoids. New editions don't create sense of wonder, it's the DMs job and doesn't even need D&D to do it. Novelists have been doing it for years.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Of course the DM got peeved! A player should never do that, not without good reason or permission from the gamemaster. That's just as bad as looking behind the screen and reading the game notes.

The end result was that we ended the session before the fight began and at the start of new session, the DM changed that monster to something ALOT harder. Served the player right, IMO.

 

[freyar]

I have to agree with most of the posters that the "sense of wonder" is something that the DM has to evoke and isn't really generated by the rule set. I do worry that a really deeply points of light setting could mean that the PCs should be scared sh**less too much of the time really to have a sense of wonder, though. I could very well be wrong, I just don't know.

 

[Sadrik]

Sense of wonder can be made better by the rules set. If the game is less rulesy it can put more power back into the hands of the DM and the DM can tweak and easily be more descriptive and more evocative.

If the game rules get the game table jargon to flow like this, "I take a 20 and search this 5' cube." That doesnt evoke anything except rules speak; but those are the 3.5 rules. If it were more like, "I search the base of the statue for hidden compartments." That is so evocative and brings cool stuff to the game.

BTW, I really hope they make searching different in 4E. Dungeons like Tomb of Horrors really lose something when characters are searching 5' cubes and taking 20.

 

[Scribble]

(BTW, templates and monster advancement should have accomplished this in 3e, and did at some tables. Quicker templating, shorter stat blocks, etc., would certainly help, as would the ability of the DM to easily create new monsters.)RC

I think the issue with Templates wasn't that they failed, it was just how they were interpreted...

Using a template kind of implied that a monster with one on was something "special" something out of the ordinary. You're "adding on" as opposed to simply changing.

If you design the monsters in a way that allows you to change them, and not just add features, then you make something that can be varied, but not "special."

For instance if each monster has a list of say 8 powers, but can only choose 3 of them, then each time you face it, it could have a slightly different variation on it's abilities.

Shrug. That's how I would do it at least.

 

[DaveMage]

Looking at Bruce Cordell's latest blog entry, I was reminded of some things that have been discussed about 4E monsters by the designers. One of the things they considered a major positive was the players not knowing what was coming around the corner. When they fought a monster, they didn't necessarily know how it was going to fight. After all, did you know that hobgoblins keep strange beasts?

Thinking of all the changes in the core background, I begin to see a pattern. They are keeping enough of the old D&D to make it "D&D." However, they are also not afraid to change things to keep it fresh.

Lots of complaints I've seen lately on the boards about 3E has dealt with a lack of "sense of wonder." It's been discussed pretty thoroughly, but a strong case was made that "sense of wonder" comes with learning the game and the game world, not knowing what's coming around the corner.

Perhaps one of the major goals of 4E is to try to recapture some of that sense of wonder. Keep the players off their toes. Make it easier for a DM to improvise a monster on the fly or adapt it quickly. Come up with fresh evocative themes that haven't already been tread on a billion times.

Thoughts?

Two parts of this:

I think there may be very little difference in one case between "wonder" and "nievety." No matter what version of D&D you play there's going to be a sense of wonder when you're new to the game. Once you get used to the system, most of the "wonder" fades.

However, regardless of ruleset, a talented author can instill a sense of "wonder" quickly. Reading over the Wilderlands box set, for example, evokes mystery after mystery. For those that like that sort of thing, the wonder is clearly there. Great DMs can also evoke a sense of wonder in their players regardless of what the text of an adventure says.