Falling off the 4ed bandwagon

[jgbrowning]

The whole "water breathing" thing is a strawman, and has nothing to do with joe's point, AFAICT.

"Creative" use of anything requires that the useage expands upon the intended useage of the thing utilized. Preprogrammed balance requires that the useage of any given thing be known and quantifiable, and therefore must limit "creative" useage.

Every edition includes some tradeoff between these factors. It must do so in order to be playable as a game.


RC

Of course. Speaking generally, the more specific a rule becomes, the less likely a creative use will be found for it outside of how it synergies to other rules in the system. The more rules one has, the higher the probability of the players running into "You can't do that that way, because the rules say you have to do that this way. The only way of doing that is this way."

Its the eternal design struggle between creativity and clarity. Rules that are less clear, tend to have greater creative potential. Rules that are very clear tend to drive usage to those clarified regions to the exclusion of other regions. To me, these are obvious design conflicts.

IMO, D&D has seen a continual progression from less clarity to more programmable usage throughout every edition.

joe b.

 

[jgbrowning]

Yep. Pretty much.

Ever watch Angel Summoner and the BMX Bandit? It's a comedy sketch, British I believe, that shows a Gandalf-like figure and a BMX (bike) trick rider. BMX bandit forms these intricate plans about bike tricks and defeating bad guys, and the Angel Summoner says "Yes...or, I could just summon the angels?"

That Mitchell and Webb Look. Great show, IMO, and a particularly funny sketch. But that's quite a bit of hyperbole for an example. It's not like wizards are summoning angels to fix every problem.

Basically, the group is working on the sealing the door and the wizard walks up and says, "Yes...or, I could just cast Arcane Lock." To extend the meaning, "That will be much better than anything you guys could ever do, and it's much quicker."

And having that ability can lead the party out of "trying to creatively seal a door because arcane lock is too good" into "Let's get on with the adventure!"

joe b.

 

[BryonD]

Clearly, not everyone was playing the same 3E.

I'm sorry you missed out. But it isn't too late!!!!

 

[fuzzlewump]

I'm sorry you missed out. But it isn't too late!!!!

Haha, I'm considering pathfinder for when I go back to college in a week because someone in the group already has it. Though, I would probably only play a caster or a martialist(?) from the Book of Nine Swords.

 

[billd91]

Basically, the group is working on the sealing the door and the wizard walks up and says, "Yes...or, I could just cast Arcane Lock." To extend the meaning, "That will be much better than anything you guys could ever do, and it's much quicker." Like you said, you don't think casters ever over-shadowed non-casters (except at "high levels"?), so this argument will mean nothing to you. Clearly, not everyone was playing the same 3E.

Or... since arcane lock just makes the job of getting through the door more difficult (not at all impossible), perhaps they could do both if they have sufficient time and make it even harder to get through.

Too much of the Angel Summoner/BMX Bandit style debating about the wizard "winning" everything fails to take into account the intersection of the two tactics being an even better result than either of the two choices alone... given the right circumstances.

 

[jgbrowning]

I think that's a bit of a misconstruction, at least of the argument I made upthread. I was simply saying that 3e offered so many options for the mage (extreme versatility) that creativity was rarely required (why be creative if you have the proper tool e.g water breathing for a drowing person). In addition to having the proper tools allowing for creative spell use makes the mage even more versatile, so much so that the other classes get less opportunity to be creative - because they don't have to be (why should the rogue waste his time ferreting out a lead when the mage can scry, or use prying eyes, or legend lore, or a multitude of other options - for just one example).

For the same reason a 4e rogue wastes time ferreting out a lead when anyone now in 4e can consult mystic sages, consult oracle, detect secret doors, comprehend languages, view location, or wizard's sight... etc...

The group as a whole is more effective outside combat due the ritual system than previously. Saying that increasing the effectiveness of the group (now they call all be like wizards) increases the effectiveness of a single member (the rogue in your example) of the group doesn't necessarily follow.

If the rogue doesn't have those rituals, he's actually more likely to be made ineffectual because the other members of the group are more likely to have the ability to do so. Unlike in 3e where there would be a greater chance of the spellcasters simply not having those spells.

The issue, IMO, is one that wizards APPEARED to be able to do everything that everyone else could do, but in reality they weren't everything to everyone all the time and were commonly resources that could be more frail than overpowering. IMO, 4e's taking the tact that everyone should be able to do much of what only particular classes could do before.

That's it exactly. When 1 or a few characters has so many options that it limits the creativity of the group (because the 1 or 2 characters always have the proper answer/spell/response etc. and the rest of the group has no need to be creative) IMO this crosses a bad line. Where that line is, is a very interesting question.

And now that more people can do the same things, is the creativity of the group just as limited or more limited? I think you may be mixing up the feeling of individual effectiveness in the game with the capability of the group as a whole. They're interconnected, IMO, but are distinctive design issues.

joe b.

 

[ExploderWizard]

All too often the result of the challenge is more about the characters (and classes), not the players.

This is the heart and soul of WOTC edition game design. Challenges are all about the character and what the character is capable of per the RAW. Challenges designed to actually challenge the player have fallen out of fashion in D&D as designed these days.

 

[fuzzlewump]

That Mitchell and Webb Look. Great show, IMO, and a particularly funny sketch. But that's quite a bit of hyperbole for an example. It's not like wizards are summoning angels to fix every problem.



And having that ability can lead the party out of "trying to creatively seal a door because arcane lock is too good" into "Let's get on with the adventure!"

joe b.

That is the adventure. Sealing the door of eviiill...

 

[jgbrowning]

This is a games mechanics discussion that is avoiding painting people as simply either pro-4E or anti-4E and it has been very fruitful. Even one 3PP in this discussion that produces 4E GSL material is more closely examining the pluses and minuses of such restrictions with an objectively critical eye, so as a fellow EN Worlder, I implore you not to quash the discussion with edition war language, please.

Yeah, I've got something like 11 4e GSL licensed products and am probably the 2nd? largest 3rd party publisher for 4e in terms of content published. I'd say Goodman was 1st. Hell, I've got the Freeport 4e Companion coming to print this month, in fact.

Publishing for a system, however, doesn't mean I can't be critical of it, be it 4e, or 3e, or Pathfinder, or 1e or any of the many systems I publish under. I'm not edition waring in any sense.

joe b.

 

[AllisterH]

This is the heart and soul of WOTC edition game design. Challenges are all about the character and what the character is capable of per the RAW. Challenges designed to actually challenge the player have fallen out of fashion in D&D as designed these days.

I'm going to defend BOTH 3e and 4e.

I would argue it has fallen out of fashion since 2e.

I've always assumed that it was 2e that cemented the idea of "playing the character" and not either 3e or 4e. It certainly was reflected in DRAGON articles and the tone of the accessories.