D&D 5E "But Wizards Can Fly, Teleport and Turn People Into Frogs!"

Status
Not open for further replies.
It did. But its origins were truly in the 2e D&D culture. That was the only time in my life that I was ever connected to a "greater gaming culture" and boy was it metagame averse. The 3.x culture seemed to just be an extension of that. That cultural connection (metagame aversion) is likely why many feel that 3.x is much more a kindred spirit to 2e than 4e is to 3.x (even though both 3.x and 4e are d20 systems).

I'd second this thought. It seems to match my experiences and conversations (even if the other participants couldn't or wouldn't put it that way.) IMO, appreciation, tolerance, or aversion for (what I would call) meta-fictional mechanics is the single greatest division amongst rpg gamers.

How, if, and to what extent Next utilizes this form of mechanics will be an interesting question indeed.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yeah, I do recall (dimly now) that part of 2e culture. I played it through its entire published life as well, but I had never heard the term metagame until the 3e handbooks, probably because I wasn't pursuing a lot of D&D-related things online at the time.

The relevant terminology has changed repeatedly over the years. "Abstract", IIRC, was the in-vogue term during most of 2e's tenure. I'm personally not a fan of "metagame", because outside the rpg community that has a different meaning that's just close enough to make it confusing.
 

The idea that magic strips the knowledge from your brain, but not the knowledge that you have the knowledge written down in your handy dandy spellbook is IMO, dumb.

Here is my answer to that issue:

[sblock=I am crazy]WIZARDS AND SPELLS

SPELL is an arcane term for the controlled energy of creation. A usable pattern forms through the study of the raw elements of creation - a way of thinking that allows the caster to create something out of nothing. The mortal mind cannot understand the ineffable mysteries of true creation; spells are the only way wizards have been able to tap into that vast power. They involve chants, mantras, ritual movements, self-hypnosis, fasting, and mind-altering drugs: anything that allows the wizard to expand his consciousness enough to grasp the true nature of reality.

There are three types of spells: cantrips, minor, and true spells.

Sidebar: Wizards
These rules are meant to add flavour and colour to the wizard class. They bring the wizard in conflict with the setting, not only because he needs to explore to find new spells, but also because he needs time away from any interruption to prepare them./sidebar

PREPARING SPELLS

Think of trying to see the universe, in its entirety, in one single glimpse of insight - and comprehending it. That's what a wizard does when he prepares spells.

You can memorize a number of spells equal to your Intelligence (indeed, anyone can); some wizards scribe their spells into spellbooks to avoid having to keep every spell memorized at all times. These grimoires are jealously guarded by their owners.

Simply knowing the spell is not enough, however. A sage may have a hundred spells in his grimoire yet be unable to cast the simplest one. Before you can cast the spell, you must bring it into being - a pattern of energy caused by thought, held within your mind. You need to put yourself into strange and exotic mindsets to force a spell into being. Only a few of these spells may be contained in your mind at any one time without driving you mad; this is represented by the number of spells you may cast in a day.

Forcing a spell into being is a time-consuming process, requiring you, through ritual, study, and alchemy, to alter your perspective of reality to match that of the spell. Each wizard has his own, idiosyncratic method of altering his perception; some wizards require quiet meditation, some use mind-altering psychotropics, and others use intensive study. Decide what your own method is at character creation.

You must spend 6 hours per spell you wish to prepare; during this time you may take no other actions and gain no benefit of rest. Any interruption during this time spoils your concentration; you must repeat the process from the beginning. You may prepare the same true spell more than once, as long as you don’t exceed the total number of spell slots available, using slots of the spell's level or higher and of the same type.

Preparing Rituals: You can prepare a ritual you know, just as though you were preparing a true spell. It requires the use of a true spell's slot of the ritual's level or higher, 6 hours of ritual preparation, and the expenditure of the ritual's components. At the end of this period, you have prepared the spell. Note that any extra time required by the ritual (such as drawing the runes of a protective circle) are still necessary.

CASTING SPELLS

Casting a spell: You merely need to speak - loudly and clearly - a Word of Power when you want to release the spell’s energy. The spell takes form and becomes real, and you guide it to fulfil your wishes, within the parameters of the spell. There is usually no difference in casting spells of different types, the difference lies in what happens to the spell after it is cast.

Cantrips: When you cast a cantrip, you do not need to release the spell from your mind. The spell remains prepared. You may loose a cantrip from his mind at any time. Replacing a cantrip with another takes a week, during which you cannot adventure, rest, or prepare other spells.

Minor Spells: More powerful than cantrips, when cast, a portion of the spell is released from your mind. Restoring the released portion is relatively simple for an experience wizard, however; you need only spend five minutes of ritual preparation, during which you can take no other actions and gain no benefit of rest.

You may loose a minor spell and replace it with another as he does with cantrips, above.

True Spell: True spells are the most powerful. The power released when the spell is cast wipes it from the wizard's mind. No trace of it is left, and the wizard must prepare it again.

ECCENTRICITIES

Spells are slippery things. When you force a spell into being in your mind, the spell exerts its own will on you! This can be hard on your mental state, which is why many old and powerful wizards are considered mad. Most wizards know their limits - the number of spells they may have prepared in any one day - but some seek to break these.

If you go past this limit, you give a part of yourself over to the spell, and it can control your mind.

Eccentricities Table
What happens to you when you break your limit
Per extra spell
This would be an "interesting event" list
Must be crazy, enough to cause problems even during down-time, but not so crazy as to make it a never-selected option

WORDS OF POWER

Though the primordial power of creation cannot be expressed in language, some mortal (and immortal) beings have attempted to describe it. Wizards do not need to be fluent in this language in order to cast their spells; merely a word or two associated with the spell will do. Fluency helps, however, and can provide a situational bonus to checks when researching new spells or when casting rituals.

LEARNING NEW SPELLS

When you gain levels, you do not learn any new spells! You must adventure or study and research in order to expand their repertoire of spells.

You may learn new spells from long-forgotten tomes of knowledge, from grimoires taken from defeated opponents, or through experiment. Learning a spell from a book or scroll requires 4 hours of study per spell (during which time no other actions can be taken and the wizard gains no benefits rest).

Creating new spells requires a week of experiment and requires arcane alchemies. See the chapter Character Growth for more.

FEAR OF MAGIC AND WIZARD'S ASYLUMS

Most people fear arcane magic. The strangeness of the world terrifies those who do not have the power to control it and cannot understand it. To them, wizards seem less-than-human, with their eccentricities, strange alchemies, and rituals. When a wizard prepares spells in a settlement, the villagers become uneasy. Many wizards have been driven from the safety of a town's walls because of superstition.

Because of this, most wizards with the means create an asylum (or seclusium): a place where they can be left alone to study, research, and prepare in peace. The ruins of these places still dot the land, and much of the owner's research can still be found.[/sblock]

edit: I've been working on this tonight.
 
Last edited:

See, here PC will and Player will seem to be getting confused, to my eyes. The fighter never chooses to use the power - that's me. The character sees an opening and takes advantage of it, but it's not the PC saying 'I choose use my daily now,' it's the player.

Isn't this the whole idea behind dissociated mechanics? I think so, though I could be wrong - I don't have an issue with mechanics like this; I don't find them harmful to my immersion or my ability to play a role, so I have trouble understanding the theory.

At any rate, I can see why people don't like these sorts of mechanics. I wonder, though, if it's dissociated mechanics that cause issues for most people, or a lack of fictional positioning. In my experience, most people who haven't role-played before don't have an issue with dissociated mechanics, but they do have an issue with the fiction not taking centre-stage (an issue with all iterations of D&D, and most other RPGs, in my experience).

To be clear: I'm just offering my personal experience; I haven't done a study, so I can't speak to the preferences of anyone save myself.
 

Isn't this the whole idea behind dissociated mechanics? I think so, though I could be wrong - I don't have an issue with mechanics like this; I don't find them harmful to my immersion or my ability to play a role, so I have trouble understanding the theory.

If I understand the whole "dissociated mechanics" thing, yes. I think. I must say I have trouble understanding why the whole concept seems to generate such emotion.

At any rate, I can see why people don't like these sorts of mechanics. I wonder, though, if it's dissociated mechanics that cause issues for most people, or a lack of fictional positioning.

I'm not precisely sure what you mean here. So if I've got this wrong, just correct me.

I think its the loss of fictional positioning, but what causes that loss differs amongst individuals. I've had many conversations with people about the 4e fighter in particular. I can group the responses as follows:

  • new-school 4e fans often express that they like having all sorts of interesting things to do. They may also appreciate that balance thing.
  • new-school 4e disparagers have all sorts of complaints about recharging E and D powers, realism, etc., To me they echo the complaints rookie wizard players had back in my 2e days. Which, I think points to that "dissociated" thing.*
  • old-school 4e fans like that their fighter is once-again central and awesome. They are happy to be doing all these awesome tricks that they felt 3e discouraged.
  • old-school 4e disparagers feel that they are "locked in" to the powers as described, and that even with p42, using a power is almost always mathematically better so why would you ever not use a power? They may or may not have positive feeling towards 3e.

To me, these groups indicate that it is, in fact, the ability to participate dynamically in the fiction which is the critical factor. However, the mechanics that help one do so vary between individuals. Especially with the Old-schoolers, I often wonder how much of their opinion/reaction was shaped by their early DMs, though I suspect it is critical. I would note that this is what they say. I got a chance to observe someone from that last category in play as a fighter; stunningly repetitive in the "Anvil Chorus" way. What that says, I dunno. Maybe they don't like their fighter doing all sorts of interesting things in a round?

Anyway, usual disclaimers: local area and small sample size etc. Play what you will.

*Of course, for those wizard players, the long description of "This is how magic works" eventually burned into their brain as a rationalization. This isn't really an option for classes which supposedly function using physics that are similar to our everyday experience.
 

The downside here is that the presentation of it as a critical presupposes that it should be rare. Now it most certainly is rare at lower levels, but by level 10 an ADEU fighter is going 3W pretty often.

But I think DDN might resolve this with proper tweaking of the MDD, allowing players to spend dice in order to throw more [W]'s on there. I certainly hope that they do, it's a very simple and IMO, elegant way to reproduce a great deal of the "I hit things really really hard!" 4e dailies. Again, we could also use a "fatigue points" system....but I think that has greater implications on the game as a whole rather than just giving fighters nicer things with more believability.

I'm not sure if crits are supposed to be that rare though. I mean, 3e has it about 1 in 10 to 1 in 20 with the additional rider that you have to hit the second time. End results are probably somewhere in the neighbourhood of 1 in 30? That's an awful lot of crits per level. One character might not get a bunch, but, with, say, a higher level (take 11th, instead of 10th) fighter with three, possibly four attacks per round (plus maybe an AOO from time to time), we're talking a crit probably every other encounter. Certainly one in three.

Well, that's pretty close to the number of 3W (or more) fighter powers we're likely to see each day.

Yeah, I know, it's the process that counts, but, I really have to wonder why? When the end result is very, very close, but instead of dropping a crit and massively overkilling something, you get to choose when that crit is. It's just another player resource.

I thought player resource management was a pretty big draw for a lot of gamers.
 

I wonder, though, if it's dissociated mechanics that cause issues for most people, or a lack of fictional positioning. In my experience, most people who haven't role-played before don't have an issue with dissociated mechanics, but they do have an issue with the fiction not taking centre-stage
I think there might be a connection, though - in so far as fortune-in-the-middle resolution requires the details of the fiction to be retroactively elaborated, it might lead to a certain sort of play feeling a lack of fictional positioning grounding their action.

But I think that is highly player-sensitive. I know from some of your other posts, for instance, that you care about detailed bodily positioning (ducking, jumping, etc) as part of the fictional positioning of combat - whereas, for me, the 4e battle grid is plent of information. And for me, therefore, CaGI is triggered by ficitonal positioning - the enemies are here, with the help of the sorcerer and his thunder powers (slides and teleports) we bunch them up here, and BAM they're in the perfect position for my signature takedown!

If I understand the whole "dissociated mechanics" thing, yes. I think. I must say I have trouble understanding why the whole concept seems to generate such emotion.
For my part, I don't care that Justin Alexander doesn't like 4e. That's a modestly interesting biographical fact about him.

It's the rampant characterisation of others' games as mere tactical skirmish games linked by merely colour-providing freeform roleplaying that I find irritating, and tend to respond to with fairly strong rebuttal!

Need someone who won't quail at the sight of the terrible wyrm? Martial. Need someone to shoulder through the collapsing building carrying 3 children and a cat? Martial. Need someone able to lay down massive smack on the enemy? Martial.
There's nothing wrong with these as design goals, but I don't think they're specific enough relative to the CaGI/metagame powers debate, because I look at 4e and I see just these things.

But the "not qualling at the sight of the terrible wyrm" is implemented via encounter or daily free- or no-action anti-de-buff abilties.

The "laying down the massive smack" is implemented via encounter or daily X[W] and close burst powers (eg CaGI it fits this description).

But pretty clearly these aren't the things you're looking for. (As best I read your posts.)
 

I'm not precisely sure what you mean here. So if I've got this wrong, just correct me.

I don't think you've got this wrong, but some elaboration is probably necessary for continued exchange.

What I mean by "fictional positioning" is that what your character can do in the game is based on the "fiction" - that is, what's happening to your character, and all the little details that surround that. So if you're fighting with a spear, and there are two kobolds in line, you should be able to try to stab both of them with one thrust of your spear. Or something like that - where you actually resolve what's happening in the game world instead of resolving a mechanical "to-hit" roll or something like that.

I've personally seen - in my experience, so it has little meaning except that it informs my own beliefs - players attempt actions that their characters could do, only to be shot down by the rules (not the DM, the rules). When that happens, players start to "meta-game" - they don't think about what their PC could do, they think about what options the game offers to their PC.

Playing The Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil with a guy who hasn't played D&D before has opened my eyes to this - he does things that should make sense in the game world, and be reasonably optional choices, but with the system those choices tend to be very poor.

(I tend to ignore the rules in order to make his actions work.)

Now I believe that if the mechanics of the game were dissociated, but allowed the player to achieve the results that he expected given the colour/flavour of his class - I don't think there'd be a problem. I think that he would enjoy such abilities, those that allow his PC to act as he imagined his PC to act, as I expect (but have no way of telling) most new players would.

But only if the fictional actions - as chosen by the player - have an impact on resolution! It would require the player to describe the action and the DM to validate it. If that was met - player describing action - even if it was dissociated - and using powers to support the class/theme they chose, DM validating the action - then I think you'd have a happy gamer.

I could be wrong.
 

And to decide when and how those mistakes happen. In essence, every 4e martial power is CaGI. You're controlling your opponent's mind to make them do something foolish. At least, that's the case if this explanation is true.

I'm absolutely sure that the Fighter in question isn't mind-controlling anyone. They're taking advantage of a mistake the opponent makes. The reason for that mistake happening then is that the player wanted it. But that's not a case of the character mind-controlling anyone. It's something outside the game affecting what happens inside it. And that's something which every dice roll does.
 

The downside here is that the presentation of it as a critical presupposes that it should be rare. Now it most certainly is rare at lower levels, but by level 10 an ADEU fighter is going 3W pretty often.

That seems more like a feature than a bug to me. A more experienced, higher level, more 'epic' (in the colloquial sense) fighter should be able to achieve extraordinary levels of success more often than an inexperienced one.

And note that, past a certain point, characters in 4e don't keep gaining additional Daily powers, instead swapping out lower level ones for higher level replacements, so they'll only ever have access to a handful of such moments per day.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top