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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Complete Disagreement With Mike on Monsters (see post #205)
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="Creamsteak" data-source="post: 3733308" data-attributes="member: 552"><p>I'm curious where 4e is drawing the line in the sand. All this speculation (9 pages worth at this point) is still speculation. Good or bad. There are just so many different possible implementations of the differences between the two sides. There are a lot of compromises that will keep some portion of people happy from both sides. And mearls statement leeds me to believe that he made this decision "for this system." And he said that he understand the desire to have some portability. </p><p></p><p>Dnd is somewhere other than the cthulhu example given though. The idea of a drow, half-dragon, or minotaur pc falls in line with a lot of dndisms that I've seen. All of these options still "play" like a PC, just 'different.' That's right in line with what the goals are by making distinctions between the dwarf fighter and the elf fighter. By allowing multiple options to play the same classes (or in this case roles) in completely different ways. But a half-(insert cthulhu monster number 7 here) is a completely different game than a regular investigator in CoC.</p><p></p><p>Some monsters are, I feel, intended to fight on the level of a whole party at once. The dragon or the beholder are the two common examples here. There's a whole lot of examples in between the dragon and the town guardsman. There's going to be some kind of "line" of seperation somewhere.</p><p></p><p>This brings a totally stray wandering thought to me. What if classes are the base, rather than the race? As it stands in 3e, the race is a set of statistics that are base, and then the class kind of gets "applied" to the racial modifiers. Obviously you "could" build the character around the class first then tack on the racials, there's nothing stopping it, but I mean intuitively. </p><p></p><p>It's also possible though that the approach could be reversed in design, which would "imply" some rather significant differences with how monsters and other creatures work.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Creamsteak, post: 3733308, member: 552"] I'm curious where 4e is drawing the line in the sand. All this speculation (9 pages worth at this point) is still speculation. Good or bad. There are just so many different possible implementations of the differences between the two sides. There are a lot of compromises that will keep some portion of people happy from both sides. And mearls statement leeds me to believe that he made this decision "for this system." And he said that he understand the desire to have some portability. Dnd is somewhere other than the cthulhu example given though. The idea of a drow, half-dragon, or minotaur pc falls in line with a lot of dndisms that I've seen. All of these options still "play" like a PC, just 'different.' That's right in line with what the goals are by making distinctions between the dwarf fighter and the elf fighter. By allowing multiple options to play the same classes (or in this case roles) in completely different ways. But a half-(insert cthulhu monster number 7 here) is a completely different game than a regular investigator in CoC. Some monsters are, I feel, intended to fight on the level of a whole party at once. The dragon or the beholder are the two common examples here. There's a whole lot of examples in between the dragon and the town guardsman. There's going to be some kind of "line" of seperation somewhere. This brings a totally stray wandering thought to me. What if classes are the base, rather than the race? As it stands in 3e, the race is a set of statistics that are base, and then the class kind of gets "applied" to the racial modifiers. Obviously you "could" build the character around the class first then tack on the racials, there's nothing stopping it, but I mean intuitively. It's also possible though that the approach could be reversed in design, which would "imply" some rather significant differences with how monsters and other creatures work. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Complete Disagreement With Mike on Monsters (see post #205)
Top