Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
All Fours: the Rule of Fours? the Game of Fours?
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="Primitive Screwhead" data-source="post: 5758536" data-attributes="member: 20805"><p>[delurk] <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>[MENTION=6675228]Hassassin[/MENTION] has it right.. too many different rules and exceptions.</p><p></p><p>What I meant by learning curve is primarily on the current editions rule-set in which you can't just plunk a new player down with a human fighter and say 'act like conan'. You have to explain to hits, skills, feats, powers, combat advantage, combat superiority, the different action types, saves, ongoing damage, non-ecludian movement, skill checks where you go versus a DC, skill checks where you take the total and do some math to determine the result {jump checks}, etc...</p><p></p><p>I see this creeping into your discussion here with comments about specific items, like the weapons vs armor.</p><p></p><p> My thinking was more along the lines of a stripped down rule-set in which the GM does alot more interpreting while the player gets to just try things.</p><p></p><p>For instance:</p><p> Choose a character type:Strong, fast, smart, or leader {this is your stat set}</p><p> Chose a focus or role: melee combatant, ranged combatant, offensive spell caster, defensive spell caster {these give free 'talents'}</p><p> Chose a race: Human, Elf, Dwarf, halfling {these give free 'talents'}</p><p> Choose 4 talents </p><p> - fighting style {Heavy Striker, sword and board, flashing blades, Brawler} </p><p> - armor mastery</p><p> - defender</p><p> - weapon mastery</p><p> - skirmisher</p><p> - seek the soft spot</p><p> - arcane melee {sword mage}</p><p> - diplomat</p><p> - street wise</p><p> - wilderness background</p><p> </p><p> Leave equipment for later levels or exclude completely.</p><p></p><p>Use a unified resolution mechanic. One possibility would be to use a D6 pool on a scale of 1 to 12...</p><p> You roll 1D6 and add the correct stat and any talent bonus. Either opposed or against a static DC.</p><p></p><p> If you have a focus talent in this area, you get an additional roll.</p><p> If you have a racial talent in this area, you get an additional roll.</p><p> if you have a general talent in this area, you get an additional roll.</p><p></p><p>scaled successes based on how many of your rolls succeed.</p><p></p><p></p><p>... and play. That is all the player needs to know. And technically its all the DM needs to know.. maybe add in a scale for DCs of 5= easy, 7 = moderate, 9 = difficult, and 11 = nigh impossible, and 13 = plaid speed</p><p> </p><p>This auto-scales as the character gains experience because they get additional dice to roll, meaning they will generally succeed more often at higher DCs. It also means that the fighter will almost always be better at swinging a sword than a mage, instead of the dreaded low rolls while the mage criticals with his dagger..</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This makes for a very modular system because all you need to do is add talents and talent groups {like race} and talent trees {talents that build on each other} </p><p> Instead of leveling, you have a point score for how many talents the character has.. so you can start a game with 10 talents or 50. </p><p></p><p>You don't need multi-classing as that is handled by allowing different talents. You maintain role integrity by having talents with prerequisites for a specific role. {and the 'talent' of picking up an additional role}</p><p></p><p>Half-breed would be a generic racial group that allows you to select two other races and mix/match the talents those races have, limited to 4 of course.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Basically... this post covers the majority of the rules {leaving out health and talents} That was the level of rewrite I was thinking of.</p><p></p><p>Any attempt to build on the bones of the current editions will carry forward the system assumptions and create bloat. Having 5 different kinds of elves is eliminated above by having many racial talents for elfs, but limiting the starting selection to 4. A wood elf would take 'wilderness background', 'bow mastery', 'herbal healer', and 'woodland stealth'. No need for an extra race that drives extra game mechanics later. Talent trees could build off the basic race of 'Elf' or the individual talents. A 'potion brewer' could have a prerequisite of 'herbal healer', allowing wood elfs to go that route easily as well as anyone else who spent their talent on 'herbal healer'</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, as you can see your goal of paring DnD down to clumps of 4 took me in a completely different direction....</p><p></p><p>Hence going back into lurking <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/angel.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":angel:" title="Angel :angel:" data-shortname=":angel:" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Primitive Screwhead, post: 5758536, member: 20805"] [delurk] :) [MENTION=6675228]Hassassin[/MENTION] has it right.. too many different rules and exceptions. What I meant by learning curve is primarily on the current editions rule-set in which you can't just plunk a new player down with a human fighter and say 'act like conan'. You have to explain to hits, skills, feats, powers, combat advantage, combat superiority, the different action types, saves, ongoing damage, non-ecludian movement, skill checks where you go versus a DC, skill checks where you take the total and do some math to determine the result {jump checks}, etc... I see this creeping into your discussion here with comments about specific items, like the weapons vs armor. My thinking was more along the lines of a stripped down rule-set in which the GM does alot more interpreting while the player gets to just try things. For instance: Choose a character type:Strong, fast, smart, or leader {this is your stat set} Chose a focus or role: melee combatant, ranged combatant, offensive spell caster, defensive spell caster {these give free 'talents'} Chose a race: Human, Elf, Dwarf, halfling {these give free 'talents'} Choose 4 talents - fighting style {Heavy Striker, sword and board, flashing blades, Brawler} - armor mastery - defender - weapon mastery - skirmisher - seek the soft spot - arcane melee {sword mage} - diplomat - street wise - wilderness background Leave equipment for later levels or exclude completely. Use a unified resolution mechanic. One possibility would be to use a D6 pool on a scale of 1 to 12... You roll 1D6 and add the correct stat and any talent bonus. Either opposed or against a static DC. If you have a focus talent in this area, you get an additional roll. If you have a racial talent in this area, you get an additional roll. if you have a general talent in this area, you get an additional roll. scaled successes based on how many of your rolls succeed. ... and play. That is all the player needs to know. And technically its all the DM needs to know.. maybe add in a scale for DCs of 5= easy, 7 = moderate, 9 = difficult, and 11 = nigh impossible, and 13 = plaid speed This auto-scales as the character gains experience because they get additional dice to roll, meaning they will generally succeed more often at higher DCs. It also means that the fighter will almost always be better at swinging a sword than a mage, instead of the dreaded low rolls while the mage criticals with his dagger.. This makes for a very modular system because all you need to do is add talents and talent groups {like race} and talent trees {talents that build on each other} Instead of leveling, you have a point score for how many talents the character has.. so you can start a game with 10 talents or 50. You don't need multi-classing as that is handled by allowing different talents. You maintain role integrity by having talents with prerequisites for a specific role. {and the 'talent' of picking up an additional role} Half-breed would be a generic racial group that allows you to select two other races and mix/match the talents those races have, limited to 4 of course. Basically... this post covers the majority of the rules {leaving out health and talents} That was the level of rewrite I was thinking of. Any attempt to build on the bones of the current editions will carry forward the system assumptions and create bloat. Having 5 different kinds of elves is eliminated above by having many racial talents for elfs, but limiting the starting selection to 4. A wood elf would take 'wilderness background', 'bow mastery', 'herbal healer', and 'woodland stealth'. No need for an extra race that drives extra game mechanics later. Talent trees could build off the basic race of 'Elf' or the individual talents. A 'potion brewer' could have a prerequisite of 'herbal healer', allowing wood elfs to go that route easily as well as anyone else who spent their talent on 'herbal healer' So, as you can see your goal of paring DnD down to clumps of 4 took me in a completely different direction.... Hence going back into lurking :angel: [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
All Fours: the Rule of Fours? the Game of Fours?
Top