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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Delivering on the Promise in the Pages
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="innerdude" data-source="post: 6099445" data-attributes="member: 85870"><p>This may not immediately seem like a "D&D Next" specific thread, but hear me out. </p><p></p><p>The question I have is, based solely on a "read through," what RPG system most closely delivers the "play experience" outlined in its core rules?</p><p></p><p>For example, for me, of all the systems I've actually read through and played, Savage Worlds wins this competition. You may not like the system. You may not like what it delivers. But there's no question that for me at least, the game "experience" I envisioned while reading the Savage Worlds rules is very, very similar to the way it plays at the table. It's fast, it's a little bit kinetic, a little bit swingy with exploding dice, and a little bit pulpy. And you just <em>feel </em>as you read through the rules that that's exactly what is going to happen, and that it's intentional. </p><p></p><p>(I haven't played either system yet, but as a side note, Fantasy Craft also presents for me a fairly clear picture of the type of game that playing its RAW will produce, as does Radiance RPG). </p><p></p><p>And call me crazy, but I think it's extremely important, even critical to D&D Next's success, that the type of game it delivers is infinitely clear within its pages. Obviously there's going to be variances from group to group. Everyone's going to have their own ideas of what the most important elements are to focus on. </p><p></p><p>But if D&D Next is going to reach high levels of success, I think it needs to "play the way it reads." When I get done reading the D&D Next PHB, I should be able to say, "Yeah, this is going to produce a game with qualities X, Y, and Z" and even have some idea of which mechanics have that effect. </p><p></p><p>Why is this important? Mostly because WotC needs some good will. They need some "win" in the early going to gain traction. They need to do it to show customers that they're listening, and want to give them the best gameplay experience they can. If D&D Next has a particular playstyle in mind, TELL US and let us decide if that's what we want. </p><p></p><p>The other reason I think this is necessary? Because it displays a confidence in the material, in the preparation it took to create the material, and confidence in the material's ability to deliver on the promise. It became very, very clear after the first 5-6 months after 4e's release that WotC really didn't know what they building. Yeah, they had the PHB2 and the "X Power" splats in the works. But I never had the sense that they truly had confidence in the product until the release of Essentials. </p><p></p><p>To be sure, I hate the basic Essentials presentation. I don't like the smaller format, and I really dislike the art. But having read through both "Heroes" Essentials books, there's a very subtle but clear shift in tone that this is finally a product that is <em>understood</em>. The creators understand what they've built, and there's purposeful reasons for the changes outlined in the pages. </p><p></p><p>If D&D Next can encompass that level of purposefulness in its initial release, I'll feel a lot more confidant about the product line going forward.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 6099445, member: 85870"] This may not immediately seem like a "D&D Next" specific thread, but hear me out. The question I have is, based solely on a "read through," what RPG system most closely delivers the "play experience" outlined in its core rules? For example, for me, of all the systems I've actually read through and played, Savage Worlds wins this competition. You may not like the system. You may not like what it delivers. But there's no question that for me at least, the game "experience" I envisioned while reading the Savage Worlds rules is very, very similar to the way it plays at the table. It's fast, it's a little bit kinetic, a little bit swingy with exploding dice, and a little bit pulpy. And you just [I]feel [/I]as you read through the rules that that's exactly what is going to happen, and that it's intentional. (I haven't played either system yet, but as a side note, Fantasy Craft also presents for me a fairly clear picture of the type of game that playing its RAW will produce, as does Radiance RPG). And call me crazy, but I think it's extremely important, even critical to D&D Next's success, that the type of game it delivers is infinitely clear within its pages. Obviously there's going to be variances from group to group. Everyone's going to have their own ideas of what the most important elements are to focus on. But if D&D Next is going to reach high levels of success, I think it needs to "play the way it reads." When I get done reading the D&D Next PHB, I should be able to say, "Yeah, this is going to produce a game with qualities X, Y, and Z" and even have some idea of which mechanics have that effect. Why is this important? Mostly because WotC needs some good will. They need some "win" in the early going to gain traction. They need to do it to show customers that they're listening, and want to give them the best gameplay experience they can. If D&D Next has a particular playstyle in mind, TELL US and let us decide if that's what we want. The other reason I think this is necessary? Because it displays a confidence in the material, in the preparation it took to create the material, and confidence in the material's ability to deliver on the promise. It became very, very clear after the first 5-6 months after 4e's release that WotC really didn't know what they building. Yeah, they had the PHB2 and the "X Power" splats in the works. But I never had the sense that they truly had confidence in the product until the release of Essentials. To be sure, I hate the basic Essentials presentation. I don't like the smaller format, and I really dislike the art. But having read through both "Heroes" Essentials books, there's a very subtle but clear shift in tone that this is finally a product that is [I]understood[/I]. The creators understand what they've built, and there's purposeful reasons for the changes outlined in the pages. If D&D Next can encompass that level of purposefulness in its initial release, I'll feel a lot more confidant about the product line going forward. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Delivering on the Promise in the Pages
Top