D&D "Flavors..."

[LostSoul]

I think they could release a 4E "Dungeoneer's Handbook" that was full of advice for running an exploration-focused game. In it you'd have:

-Wandering monster tables, as well as rules on when and how to use them
-Random treasure tables based on monster/dungeon level
-Traps & Tricks! (especially tricks that permanently alter a character)
-Changes to the XP system (to focus on exploration)
-NPC morale tables
-NPC reaction tables
-Random dungeon generator
-How to use skill checks (instead of "Perception DC 20", "If a character searches the cupboard, they may find the hidden drawer (DC 20)")
-Most importantly, DM advice and player advice on how to play the game with a focus on exploration

They could follow that up with a 4E "Hex-Crawler's Handbook" for wilderness adventures.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

On the whole I think they're not likely to make variants of the core 4e game style. I think it would lead to (or at least WotC would be afraid it would lead to) the kind of balkanization that happened with TSR in the days of 40 different settings.

I think what they are doing now is pretty much the way they'll go forward. Now and then they'll release a 4e based theme game that focuses on a fairly narrow niche like horror, science fantasy, etc.

 

[Tony Vargas]

For that real old-school flavor, dust off some real old-school books, some #2 pencils, the oldest dice you can find in your bag (the ones from an 80s boxed set that are nearly spherical after decades of wear) and play. I do that with the first ed of Gamma World a couple times a year. I call it 'paleogaming.' It's loads of fun, and it'll really help you apreciate the merits of a modern system, too.

 

[Wik]

Honestly, a better way to do it would be to release a new "Unearthed Arcana" like they did with 3e. Provide a bunch of houserules that GMs can play with to tailor the game to their own tastes and needs, while still keeping the game close enough to core thematically and mechanically that there is almost 0% division of the player base.

To put it another way, it might be a smarter idea to have your "campaign" books instead be a sort of tool kit for one type of genre, with a big mixing bowl of ideas. For example, rather than "eberron" we get "Steampunk/Adventure" book, with a bunch of ideas on how to make a steampunk campaign and whatnot. Next year, when "Sword and Sorcery/Dark Deserts/Dark Sunish" comes out, you haven't divided up the fanbase one iota - it's quite conceivable that people will naturally want to try and combine the ideas in the Steampunk book with the ideas in the Dark Sunnish book.... and the game would be designed for it.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Wik, I think you're right on there. Honestly I think using PoL as a generic but very non-specific background for these kinds things would be fine too. IMHO that is the strength of a generic background that is NOT a really well-defined setting of its own. You can put out a book that describes all the deadly desert survival stuff and throw in a few locations and whatnot that people can use. Call it the "Great Southern Desert". You can imply it can fit in the same world that holds Nentir Vale, but the two need not share any real connection or relation to each other outside of a few throw away historical references.

Some genre of course don't really mix too well with the established generic world fluff, but they can be portrayed as existing in some alternate world or whatever and at least tie into the existing cosmology. Most of the books would be crunch, story ideas, etc anyway.

Tony, we still play 1e GW, lol. There hasn't been a later version that was really anywhere near as cool. "We have the power, the choice is yours!" lol. Well, OK, we all long ago hacked the mechanics of the game into virtual unrecognizability but it sure beats any of the later editions. Oh, and my d20 comes from the SEVENTIES boxed Basic set, that new-fangled Red Box is revisionist! It is indeed round, the players here won't even let me put it on the table

 

[Klaus]

I think they could release a 4E "Dungeoneer's Handbook" that was full of advice for running an exploration-focused game. In it you'd have:

-Wandering monster tables, as well as rules on when and how to use them
-Random treasure tables based on monster/dungeon level
-Traps & Tricks! (especially tricks that permanently alter a character)
-Changes to the XP system (to focus on exploration)
-NPC morale tables
-NPC reaction tables
-Random dungeon generator
-How to use skill checks (instead of "Perception DC 20", "If a character searches the cupboard, they may find the hidden drawer (DC 20)")
-Most importantly, DM advice and player advice on how to play the game with a focus on exploration

They could follow that up with a 4E "Hex-Crawler's Handbook" for wilderness adventures.

Exploration XP, eh?

Opening a locked/barred door = minion XP
Recovering treasure equal to your level x100 gp = major quest XP
Losing a hand to a stationary spehere of annihilation = priceless

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Exploration XP, eh?

Opening a locked/barred door = minion XP
Recovering treasure equal to your level x100 gp = major quest XP
Losing a hand to a stationary spehere of annihilation = priceless

Seems pretty much how the existing 4e XP rules work. They don't spell out which things should be "quests" and calling opening a door a "minor quest" might be bending the common sense definition of the term, but it certainly conforms with the rules. The DM can easily give away treasure XP in the same fashion. The nice thing about it is that it is not hard coded into the system. 1e was especially painful in that regard.

Really I would like to see ALL XP moved to a goal oriented system vs giving out a fixed XP reward for each encounter. As little as XP interacts with the rest of the 4e system though it is really not that significant. The DM can pretty much get away with giving out whatever XP he wants or ignore it entirely anyhow. Honestly I stopped bothering to track XP LONG ago. Usually the players tell me when they think they're wanting to level up, lol.

 

[LostSoul]

I don't think that the standard 4E XP system works well for standard 4E. Goal-oriented XP awards seem like a better fit for the game. The idea that you can ignore the reward system in a game - and it still works - points to the fact that the reward system isn't doing what it should.

 

[Klaus]

You can ignore, and it does change things.

If you use strictly the XP damage presented in the rules (XP from monsters/traps and quests), the game becomes more "dungeon-crawly", to clear out levels (and thus gain XP).

If you go by a goal-based XP, you can forget about putting in enough encounters to award XP for levelling up. You put in whatever encounters you deem "interesting" and then hand out the level-ups as desired. The game becomes more story-oriented, with fewer combat encounters.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You can ignore, and it does change things.

If you use strictly the XP damage presented in the rules (XP from monsters/traps and quests), the game becomes more "dungeon-crawly", to clear out levels (and thus gain XP).

If you go by a goal-based XP, you can forget about putting in enough encounters to award XP for levelling up. You put in whatever encounters you deem "interesting" and then hand out the level-ups as desired. The game becomes more story-oriented, with fewer combat encounters.

Right, and remember, different groups of players are motivated by different things. My group is mostly LONG time players. They just tell me what they want, or else I just know what will be good as far as rewarding them. We've all played together for ages. When I run other groups I will use whatever seems to work best for that group. New players are usually thrilled by getting XP for specific things. The veterans pretty much know how the advancement is going to go. I'll tell them what their goals are and tell them what they're worth, but I just eyeball advancement. Saves paperwork, lol.