David Noonan on D&D Complexity

[Mark CMG]

Top Ten New Units of Measurement for Game-Design Complexity

 

[DaveMage]

I love the complexity of 3.5.

I hate the time it takes to implement it.

 

[Eridanis]

Heh. I don't know if there's an accepted definition of "rules bloat" out there, but this is pretty much the closest I've seen yet.

It's rules bloat in a way, but not 100%. They have explored so much design space that it's hard, even for the designers, apparently, to remember it all. (See my fresh new sig.) That's not such a bad thing, as long as you keep the editor in your head for the purposes of your own campaign. And have smart friends like James Wyatt to fill in the bits you forget.

My main question was: Why did he use the version of the breath weapon spells from DRACONOMICON? They were updated in SPELL COMPENDIUM to be swift actions, not standard actions as he states in his article. (I know the answer, of course: he didn't know, or had forgotten about, the changes. Another point for the rules-bloat folks, I guess.) He could have increased his PC-killing efficiency by several percentage points, methinks...

 

[ruleslawyer]

My thoughts:

1) One solution to the dragon spell-battery problem is that posed by Monte Cook in an online article a few weeks back:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?otherd20_Spellcasters

This is also a philosophy that informs my current game: Switching to Iron Heroes rules and to a spellcasting class with lots of constant "buffs" and a limited array of fire-and-forget spell effects. Doing this with monsters like dragons would seem to make sense as well: Just give them an array of always-on effects, protect them from the typical nuke spells that get thrown around at high levels, and let them have sufficient spell-like abilities to pull off the big-gun tactics (scrying, teleporting, etc.).

2) Simplifying bonus and penalty types would definitely be a step in the right direction. As it stands, there are simply too many different kinds of buffs and debuffs in the game. Streamlining them would seem to make sense. While I understand it might detract slightly from the "rules mastery" effect, I think it's probably a worthwhile tradeoff.

3) It seems to me that a lot of the "complexity" in 3e is due to the fact that feats, spells, items, and classes are now spread across a vast number of supplements, and especially the fact that designers have kept adding new options to fill in gaps that they see in the core rules. For instance, a unified spell list plus the ability to combine caster level and spells per day from multiple spellcasting classes plus pushing some class-defining spell effects into the realm of class abilities would radically reduce the need for mystic theurges, geomancers, the Arcane Disciple feat, et cetera. Likewise, making fighter/mages more workable in the core itself could obviate the need for the bladesinger, duskblade, eldritch knight, spellsword, etc.

All of these issues might well be comfortably and simply resolved by a (gulp) fourth edition. For instance, there's no reason why one couldn't just have written Quicken Spell to lower a spell's casting time by 1 action or action step, as in Arcana Evolved. That would have obviated the need for Dave to be looking through his own book for the appropriate feat (that's Rapid Spell, Dave).

 

[Dracorat]

Personally, I think SOME monsters are so characteristic that they SHOULD require a great deal of study and familiarity on part of the DM.

Dragons qualify.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Personally, I think SOME monsters are so characteristic that they SHOULD require a great deal of study and familiarity on part of the DM.

Dragons qualify.

QFT.

All the complaints just sound like D00d's don't want to do the prep work. Either that or they need to streamline thier own prep process into something that works FOR THEM.

Or find another game that doesnt require as much prep...

 

[delericho]

All the complaints just sound like D00d's don't want to do the prep work. Either that or they need to streamline thier own prep process into something that works FOR THEM.

Bah. Statting up a Great Wyrm Red Dragon can easily take in excess of an hour, especially if you want to make use of feats and spells from non-Core sources so that your pimped-out PCs don't simply walk all over it.

Said creature is likely to survive four rounds in combat.

Now, being an efficient sort, and generally very good at running fast and exciting combat, I can expect to run two or three such combats in a typical game session. Each encounter will require a similar amount of prep (actually, most will have more than one creature, and unless they're clones of one another that means more than four custom stat-blocks).

I would love to be able to put in four hours of prep time on every game session. I simply don't have the time to do so. What's more, in the time I do have available, I would rather focus on things like plot and characterisation, rather than just producing another uber-NPC for my PCs to fight.

Besides, I don't think it's unreasonable to complain that spending an hours prep-time for four rounds of action is a bad investment.

 

[jodyjohnson]

The recalculation once a negative level becomes a permanent level loss doesn't bother me. As you said, it won't need done in mid-combat, so isn't a problem.


It's the effect on spellcasters that's the difficult part. Plus, of course, the effect on psionic classes (has this even been addressed?).

Each negative level decreases effective caster level (relevant for psionics) and checks off one highest slot or prepared spell (not relevant for psionics). That's it.

Psionics falls in the same category as Spell-like abilities, as in -- no lost slots or uses but a lowered effective level.

It does not require you to recalculate spell slots, or spells known, or spell prepared based on a lowered caster level.

Each negative level gives a creature a -1 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, ability checks, and effective level (for determining the power, duration, DC, and other details of spells or special abilities).

Additionally, a spellcaster loses one spell or spell slot from his or her highest available level. Negative levels stack.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Bah. Statting up a Great Wyrm Red Dragon can easily take in excess of an hour, especially if you want to make use of feats and spells from non-Core sources so that your pimped-out PCs don't simply walk all over it.

Said creature is likely to survive four rounds in combat.

Now, being an efficient sort, and generally very good at running fast and exciting combat, I can expect to run two or three such combats in a typical game session. Each encounter will require a similar amount of prep (actually, most will have more than one creature, and unless they're clones of one another that means more than four custom stat-blocks).

I would love to be able to put in four hours of prep time on every game session. I simply don't have the time to do so. What's more, in the time I do have available, I would rather focus on things like plot and characterisation, rather than just producing another uber-NPC for my PCs to fight.

Besides, I don't think it's unreasonable to complain that spending an hours prep-time for four rounds of action is a bad investment.

Like I said, then you might want to start looking at another game with less prep time.

As for me I tend to run pretty streamlined combats as well. I find that one of things that slows down combat is players not knowing what thier own abilities and spells do. But I try to cut that down by using spell cards and having them jot down what thier feats do on index cards. As for prep time I'm sure youre busy as am I. I work full time and on off nights while my wife is in class at grad school I take care of my 4 year old son. Not to mention the typical day of child rearing is busy at best. I still find the time to prep for both a Mutants and Masterminds game and a D&D game that I run.

Even if I prep for 4 hours and the the PC's run through whatever I put in thier way (and lets be honest depending on your players there's always a chance of that happening, whether you prep for 1 hour or 8), it's still worth it to actually be prepared. I'm of the school of 'better to have it and not need it , than to need it and not have it'. As for rather focusing on characterization and plot depending on the type of game youre running those might just be more important, but then that's a choice, your choice, on what to focus on. I like a balance and honestly plot and characterization are easier and take less time for me to nail down than stat crunching.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the way to go would be to make dragons a bit more modular, either utilizing templates or prestige classes (or both). Have the basic dragon be non-speaking, non-spellcasting and suitable for a single knight on horseback to take on. Scale up from there to Smaug or the dragon from Beowulf, where they can speak and are menaces requiring a group or even a small army to take down. And from there, there needs to be a level where they're just crazy tough.

Currently, the biggest way of scaling dragons is by age category, but they start off relatively complicated even at the ages where they're a joke (probably too weak, in fact).