Avoiding "Glut" (Maneuvers, tricks and other options)

[eamon]

For example the 4e character builder is a great tool to provide all of the content in an organized way. If we could take it a step further, and let me cull down the content to just what I want, then we can reduce the impact of bloat.

Surely you're joking - the character builder is a textbook example of disorganization. Choices are presented in a huge unorganized bag; unless you know what you're looking for beforehand, it's an almost impossible slog. Worse, it shows you all immediate choices, but not the (potentially very relevant) consequences down the road. Need a multiclass to reach the paragon path best fitting a PC? Or need a particular ability score to achieve some key feat? You'll never know. It's hiding the forest using the trees.

The 4e character builder rewards the most boring type of system mastery ever, namely slogging through literally thousands of choices to find the gems. Not to mention the fact that it's slow, buggy, doesn't support flexibility or house rules, constrains charsheet layout to a really cluttered&expansive default: it's generally terrible.

If D&D next is to have any chance at all at DM empowerment, that type of character builder must go. That's really key: the current character builder is anything but modular. There's no houseruling, no (real) custom layouts, no ability for others to exchange their rules & content, no way to leverage D&D's key strength: its community.

If there's to be another character builder at all, I hope it'll at least initially abandon the rule verification aspect and focus on simply helping the user without pretending to be able to do everything for him. Because it can't (even after all these years), and even if it could, it undermines the very modularity and flexibility 5e espouses. If you will, a little more like a freeform spreadsheet that happens to make nice layouts with decent defaults for D&D and less like a constrained accounting data-entry app.

 

[GM Dave]

Articles and content lead to glut as well. When they make an article about Gladiators, and they add a few Gladiator themes, maneuvers, tricks, feats, powers, prestige classes, paragon path, epic destiny, exotic weapons, special arena rules, and a new tactical module for 1vs1 fighting, you get a bloat of new options, which lead to glut.

It's inevitable.

I know this is going to sound a bit like semantics but I don't feel that glut is inevitable. I believe that expansion is inevitable but glut does not have to be.

Glut occurs when you allow uncontrolled expansion.

Controlled expansion does not mean you have to be strict in what is allowed or not allowed.

Controlled expansion means having the systems and labels for the growth to keep things categorized and able to cross-reference ideas. There are thousands of books produced in the world every month but by applying the right set of filters, I can locate the specific types of books that I might want to purchase.

Filters only work if there is labeling given to each item to allow its merits to be judged and to find its connection to other things.

------------------------

Now, as a side note, I was working with a friend recently that wants to re-work the rules for 3.0 setting to make it more PF friendly and to change how some of the systems work.

One of the things that I suggested was that he bundle several skills together into Feat packages that represent jobs (d20 Modern does this in a way by offering several skills with a +1 modifier to one skill usually). My point was that comparing a focus of say +2 in two skills or a +3 in one skill was not really equivalent to the gain of something like power attack and there were many skills that were never chosen because they had 'less value' then comparable skills in the life of an adventurer.

I suggested it would be better to bundle a mixture of 'useful skills' along with some 'related skills' and give some ranks to all the skills.

A person that chose the feat 'Hunter' might then get Skill ranks in Survival, Perception, Knowledge: Nature, Craft: Fletcher, and Profession: Hunter. The player gets a suite of skills with some that they would have chosen anyways and some that are appropriate to being a Hunter.

 

[triqui]

I know this is going to sound a bit like semantics but I don't feel that glut is inevitable. I believe that expansion is inevitable but glut does not have to be.

Glut occurs when you allow uncontrolled expansion.

Controlled expansion does not mean you have to be strict in what is allowed or not allowed.

Controlled expansion means having the systems and labels for the growth to keep things categorized and able to cross-reference ideas. There are thousands of books produced in the world every month but by applying the right set of filters, I can locate the specific types of books that I might want to purchase.

Filters only work if there is labeling given to each item to allow its merits to be judged and to find its connection to other things.

------------------------

Now, as a side note, I was working with a friend recently that wants to re-work the rules for 3.0 setting to make it more PF friendly and to change how some of the systems work.

One of the things that I suggested was that he bundle several skills together into Feat packages that represent jobs (d20 Modern does this in a way by offering several skills with a +1 modifier to one skill usually). My point was that comparing a focus of say +2 in two skills or a +3 in one skill was not really equivalent to the gain of something like power attack and there were many skills that were never chosen because they had 'less value' then comparable skills in the life of an adventurer.

I suggested it would be better to bundle a mixture of 'useful skills' along with some 'related skills' and give some ranks to all the skills.

A person that chose the feat 'Hunter' might then get Skill ranks in Survival, Perception, Knowledge: Nature, Craft: Fletcher, and Profession: Hunter. The player gets a suite of skills with some that they would have chosen anyways and some that are appropriate to being a Hunter.

Glut is inevitable. Glut happens when you have too much material. Controlling it might help to slow the effect, but you'll have glut, always, unless you don't publish anything (which is impossible for a bussiness). If glut is 3000 feats and 3000 spells/powers, then if you publish 500 per year you will be glut in 6 years, and if you publish 1000 per year you'll be glut in 3.

 

[Sunseeker]

Glut is inevitable. Glut happens when you have too much material. Controlling it might help to slow the effect, but you'll have glut, always, unless you don't publish anything (which is impossible for a bussiness). If glut is 3000 feats and 3000 spells/powers, then if you publish 500 per year you will be glut in 6 years, and if you publish 1000 per year you'll be glut in 3.

True, but some excess is not really glut. Glut is an excess of options, many of which are often false choices, poorly made or deceptive. If we have 3 options, and all of them are viable, this is not glut. This is choice. If we have 30 choices and 3 of them are viable, this is glut. If we have 30 of them and 25 of them are mechanically identical, this is also glut.

But if we have 300 choices and 235 are unique, 50 are repetitive, and 15 are poor, this is not glut, this is just a really big amount of choice.

A lot of the debate on this topic really hasn't been about preventing glut, but individual perceptions of what glut is. Some people think giving the fighter more than 3 things to do in a day is glut. Some people think that a Wizard can NEVER have too many spells.

Personally I think that if WOTC can keep the splat and expansion material creative and interesting, then even if there are a million choices it won't be glut, because there'll always be creative and interesting choices for people to make. That's not glut except to the person who wants 4 races and 5 classes and 10 spells EVER.

 

[gyor]

I find people the whine about "glut" or "bloat" annoying. Guess what, what you call glut, I call options and fun. More importantly "Glut" is what the designers call making a living. See some people want more options and will actually play money for them. These people even want a descent amount of choice in the PHB.

All these anti "glut", less choice, fewer classes and races threads should be merged into one thread, it'd get rid of a lot of the glut of these threads.

Now less redunancy I can see, which they plan,to do, all martial classes get combat manvuers, all arcane classes get arcane spells, and all divine classes get divine spells, etc... This is as close to a comprise as I'm willing to get on this issue.

 

[eamon]

Glut is inevitable. Glut happens when you have too much material. Controlling it might help to slow the effect, but you'll have glut, always, unless you don't publish anything (which is impossible for a bussiness). If glut is 3000 feats and 3000 spells/powers, then if you publish 500 per year you will be glut in 6 years, and if you publish 1000 per year you'll be glut in 3.

You haven't really addressed the idea that it's not just the number of options but also what they do and how they're provided. Fewer options is a good, conservative bet, but (as discussed upthread), there's more to be done.

 

[Piratecat]

It really doesn't. Just because someone cooks me bacon...whether it is premium or store brand...doesn't mean I'm going to eat it. I reserve the right to decide what I put in my mouth.

You lost me when you claimed you might not eat the bacon. I'm having trouble understanding that.

 

[kevtar]

Perhaps its time to operationalize the term "glut" in reference to this discussion.

Glut (Merriam Webster)
Transivitive verb
1. To fill especially with food to satiety
2. To flood the market) with goods to the point where supply exceeds demand

(I just wanted to include that for a reference to the discourse)

Glut (Kevtar's D&D Dictionary)
Transitive verb
1. The act of producing material for Dungeons & Dragons, a tabletop RPG game, with seemingly little regard for how the players can implement those resources into the game. Glut is affected by a variety of factors including, but not limited to, a lack of a disposition towards distribution and management of the content and inconsistency in regard to the quality, distinctiveness and purpose of the game elements produced. The possible effect being that players are hindered in making meaningful decisions regarding the vast number of alternative presented to them.

Glut
Noun
1. A vast array of content produced through inadequate planning and management. Glut is an unwieldy collection of game elements lacking in consistency (i.e. the degree to which individual elements "agree" with each other) and coherency (i.e. the degree to which all of the elements work and "fit" as parts of a larger, unifying concept). As a result, players' ability to interact with a large number of game elements is greatly inhibited, resulting in a less-than-optimal gaming experience.

That's how I understand "glut."

 

[Savage Wombat]

Now find a definition for "operationalize", I dare you.

 

[kevtar]

Now find a definition for "operationalize", I dare you.

Curse you.

I read your post and thought, "eh... whatever" - but then I went back.

I looked at it again, and then left it alone - but then I came back.

Every time I returned, it was there.

Staring at me...

"I dare you."

I have no will to resist it.