D&D 1E Do you think 4e is d20 1e?

[Staffan]

Actually, it seems from what we've heard of paragon paths it makes ypu even more "single-classed" diving into an even narrower role of the class... but I could have completely misunderstood

They haven't said much about them yet, but I distinctly recall that they've said that each of the paths included in the DMG would appeal to at least two different classes.

 

[pawsplay]

No, 1e was fundamentally an imaginative game, 4e is "exception-based."

 

[The Little Raven]

No, 1e was fundamentally an imaginative game, 4e is "exception-based."

The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[pawsplay]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

Not in principle. But 1e and 4e are a mode apart, for sure.

 

[The Little Raven]

Not in principle.

Nor in execution.

But 1e and 4e are a mode apart, for sure.

Umm.... duh? There's 30 years between the two. If they were the same, then our industry would be in serious trouble if the flagship game hasn't evolved at all.

 

[pawsplay]

What do you mean "not in execution?" Are you saying there's never any tension in game design between world detail and jazzy game play?

 

[The Little Raven]

What do you mean "not in execution?" Are you saying there's never any tension in game design between world detail and jazzy game play?

I'm saying that an "imaginative game" and an "exception-based game" are not mutually exclusive in either principle or execution.

 

[pawsplay]

Yet exception-based games require codified rules, whereas imaginative play requires a cohesive, flexible game. There is a turning point where one gains and the other loses. In any case, it's certainly possible to invest in one aspect more than the other, and I think 1e and 4e have clearly different design styles.

 

[The Little Raven]

Yet exception-based games require codified rules, whereas imaginative play requires a cohesive, flexible game.

Not really. Magic users have pretty much always been based on exception-based design, since the core rules do not support players doing the things magic users do. That's why rules for invisibility and things like that were presented directly in the spell itself under 3e came along and tried to be "all things to all people."

There is a turning point where one gains and the other loses. In any case, it's certainly possible to invest in one aspect more than the other, and I think 1e and 4e have clearly different design styles.

I agree they have different design styles. However, I will not comment on those differences because it'll just turn into a "Mourn is bashing 1e and Gygax's designs" incident.

 

[Professor Phobos]

Question says it all, really: Do you think that the 4e design principles are like 1e but just using the d20 mechanics?

To an extent, yes. To a much greater and more accurate extent, no, not at all.