Nemesis Destiny
Adventurer
First of all, Oberoni primarily refers to "broken" rules and systems like LFQW.It refers to the ability to house rule fixing problems, that a problem does not exist because you can house rule it.
I said that the inability to customize or have mid-treasure games was problematic. You said "no it wasn't" because the DM can choose to give out less treasure than prescribed. That's saying fixed treasure parcels are not a problem because you can house rule how much treasure is awarded.
Second, there is nothing preventing you from running a "mid treasure" game. At all. Even in the scope of the rules. Treasure is, and has always been, DM purview, so Oberoni doesn't apply. Further, nothing stops you from using IB, and sprinkling in some magic items for flavour. I do it all the time, and the builder even plays ball!
Yeah, much as I loved 3.x UA, it was not without its pitfalls, despite being designed by so-called professionals. I think that says more about the nature of the system they were working with than their abilities as game designers though.My favourite book for 3e was Unearthed Arcana that did just that. I loved a mass of pre-designed hacks done by experienced designers who know the game, designed to avoid "ridiculous cascade effects". (Sometimes successfully, sometimes not.)
Similarly, I have been hacking 4e since it came out (after having played with "stock" rules). In an effort to accommodate my players that do use the builder, and to keep headaches to a minimum, I make most of my changes on the DM-side. As my group became more experienced, they started only using the builder for a shortcut and still either write down their characters on sheets or use online sheets, which has freed up my ability to use deeper "hacks" - but even so, it can be done within the builder, and all you need to do is add in "placeholder" items/feats/powers and just make a note about any differences. In that regard, it's really no different than any other RPG in which you would need to do that. As a player, I would always expect to have to make notes on things eventually.I did a little toying with 4e when it first came out, making some house rules and the like. I eventually gave up because my players were entirely reliant on the character builder, and it was too much effort to get the game to do what I wanted.
It was easier to go with a game that stated closer to what I wanted, a game with a better payoff:effort ratio.
And again, I agree with your last point, which is why I don't run 3.x, PF, or have much interest in the direction that Next is taking - because it's still easier for me to start with a game that is closer to what I want (4e) and go from there. Based on what I have seen of Next, it's already going to be more work to do what I want, so I find it really funny that people are telling me that I'm wrong for leveling criticism at it for those reasons.
While YMMV, I found that 4e was easier and quicker to master, requiring less time and skill than prior editions (certainly much less than 3.x). Maybe I'm getting smarter, or more systems-savvy as I age, but I don't think that's the case. I think the baseline is just easier to understand; it's very clear about its expectations and what the nuts and bolts do, and it's also very clear how changing those "moving parts" will affect everything else. That said, I would have loved an "official" UA for 4e.And no everyone wants to hack a game system themselves, especially an unfamiliar one. I agree that 4e was quick customizable once you got the hang of it, but that took some time and skill. And the game itself didn't offer any suggestions or help, and because of the GSL prohibition on altering the rules (and fluff) there were not even any 3PP to do the work for you or mine for ideas.
As to the GSL, I honestly don't care, outside of the fact that it means I will never get a 4e-PF. I never used any 3rd party material under 3.x, because honestly, most of it was garbage, IMO (suddenly every basement-dweller thought they were a game-designer). Sure, there were a few gems, but even so, most of those were not permitted in organized play or online games that I was a part of, so even the stuff I had or wanted to use just collected dust.
It would have been nice to see more official adventure support from 3PP, but at the same time, it is trivial to run a Paizo AP under 4e with a few minutes prep time to pick monsters for the encounters, thanks to its efforts to streamline things behind the screen.
Last edited: