Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="kevtar" data-source="post: 5907001" data-attributes="member: 27098">As I read the design team's blogs and articles about the development of D&amp;Dnext, I feel generally optimistic about the next iteration of the game. However, once in a while, a little &quot;something&quot; will catch my eye and shakes that optimism a bit. Sometimes this is a temporary &quot;jiggle&quot; and sometimes it's a more significant, reoccurring aftershock. I came across my most recent &quot;something&quot; in this <a href="http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/blog/2012/05/10/goblins_care_only_about_your_axe" target="_blank">blog entry</a> (Goblins only care about your axe). While the main topic of the entry focused on the use of a grid vs. TotM, one sentence in particular caught my eye and, with the mentioning of things like &quot;maneuvers, tricks and other options available to classes), I'm starting to feel a little tremor...Here's the sentence:&quot;For instance, if a fighter uses an ability that seems to make sense on the grid, we should design that same ability to also be useful in the TotM...&quot;I like what Bruce is saying in this sentence, but what concerns me is when he talked about designing an ability. This brought me back to the fighter's &quot;maneuvers&quot; and the rogue's &quot;tricks&quot; concept for D&amp;Dnext - that these classes will gain these features as they advance in level, and that made me think of powers and 4e.Now, I've enjoyed 4e (as I've enjoyed ALL editions of D&amp;D. I tend to think think of them as various versions of a recipe - each edition has its pros and cons), but there is something about 4e that I felt was exciting at first and then exhausting as I continued to play the game: Powers (or more precisely &quot;power glut&quot;).I know this is a subjective topic, but for me, after a few source books were produced, the sheer number of powers became overwhelming - especially when power effects overlapped or became redundant. IMO, there were simply too many powers from which to choose with very little difference between many of those powers to make the number of choices meaningful.My hope for D&amp;DnextMy hope is that the designers can manage the distribution, presentation and selection of &quot;maneuvers, tricks and whatevers&quot; in such a way that players aren't confronted with an overwhelming number of options, but rather,&nbsp; are presented with a number of options shaped by the distinctiveness of each element so that the navigation of such options is intuitive and the decision to choose such options is meaningful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="kevtar, post: 5907001, member: 27098"] As I read the design team's blogs and articles about the development of D&Dnext, I feel generally optimistic about the next iteration of the game. However, once in a while, a little "something" will catch my eye and shakes that optimism a bit. Sometimes this is a temporary "jiggle" and sometimes it's a more significant, reoccurring aftershock. I came across my most recent "something" in this [URL="http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/blog/2012/05/10/goblins_care_only_about_your_axe"]blog entry[/URL] (Goblins only care about your axe). While the main topic of the entry focused on the use of a grid vs. TotM, one sentence in particular caught my eye and, with the mentioning of things like "maneuvers, tricks and other options available to classes), I'm starting to feel a little tremor... Here's the sentence: [INDENT]"For instance, if a fighter uses an ability that seems to make sense on the grid, we should design that same ability to also be useful in the TotM..."[/INDENT] I like what Bruce is saying in this sentence, but what concerns me is when he talked about designing an ability. This brought me back to the fighter's "maneuvers" and the rogue's "tricks" concept for D&Dnext - that these classes will gain these features as they advance in level, and that made me think of powers and 4e. Now, I've enjoyed 4e (as I've enjoyed ALL editions of D&D. I tend to think think of them as various versions of a recipe - each edition has its pros and cons), but there is something about 4e that I felt was exciting at first and then exhausting as I continued to play the game: Powers (or more precisely "power glut"). I know this is a subjective topic, but for me, after a few source books were produced, the sheer number of powers became overwhelming - especially when power effects overlapped or became redundant. IMO, there were simply too many powers from which to choose with very little difference between many of those powers to make the number of choices meaningful. [B]My hope for D&Dnext[/B] My hope is that the designers can manage the distribution, presentation and selection of "maneuvers, tricks and [I]whatevers[/I]" in such a way that players aren't confronted with an overwhelming number of options, but rather, are presented with a number of options shaped by the distinctiveness of each element so that the navigation of such options is intuitive and the decision to choose such options is meaningful. [/QUOTE]

Verification