Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4443312" data-attributes="member: 710">Well, it hasn't been done that, instead we seem to be jumping from one "extreme" to the other. So maybe it is impossible, or the designers just weren't smart enough to figure it out (for now). But in the end this might come down to the idea of creating the "perfect" game system. But that is a goal we try to achieve, but it's not something we really can achieve. I don't think you can appeal to every player. You just can appeal well to a large enough set of players. And it doesn't matter which edition of D&D we're talking about, each of them did that at their time. For example: One attempt to reach your goal might be to give players on non-wizards more "narrative" control (but not the character). Torg did something like that for superheroes and some races. You got improved mechanical abilities (superpowers, racial attribute bonuses), and in exchange had to pay an adventure cost in possiblities, the game meta-game resource for all kinds of stuff. You used possibilities to improve character skills, or to improve die rolls, or to reduce damage taken. Such a system can work nicely for spellcasters. Imagine every character had a resource, let's call it "Control Points" (I am just remember the d20 Farscape game, that had some good ideas, but was mostly a failure in design and balancing IMO). A wizard might either gets less, or needs to spend them on his magical abilities. He can eventually spend his conrol points to create a large fireball that deals terrifying damage to everyone inside. But non-spellcasters might be able to use this control points to reduce the damage they take, or get a reroll, or make up a connection that can help them out, or initiate a skill challenge that lets them seduce an NPC.This could certainly achieve a measure of narrative balance between the spellcaster.But then - what do these control points represent in the game world? Do they have an equivalent? You might make a point that control points for wizards describe mana, but what are they for mundane characters? Divine Luck? What if my setting doesn't have gods, or I am playing an atheist in a world were the gods hate atheist? And so, you end up alienating a subset of players that don't like such "meta-game" mechanics, that want everything to have an equivalent in the game world. (Torg circumvents this by making possibilities a reality of the world - some people actually know about the existence of possibility energy and how to use them, and that's the reason for the break-out of the Reality War on Earth. But if you wanted to use the system outside this context, you do no longer simulate anything)And there are also other design considerations. If you're running a lot of combats and not a lot of seduction or skill challenge scenarios, being able to spend lots of control points to deal massive damage to a large area is still way superior to the ability to swing a sword, even if the mage can do it only once per day why you had enough points to reroll your attacks for 10 combats. You will probably end up doing what the wizards wants to do (in D&D, this was resting), if that is what can recharge his control points. The powers of the wizard are just to useful to not use them if you have a choice. The other option is removing that choice, but then you end up with a wizard that is inactive for a long time. You can't make everyone happy all the time. You have to pick your priorities.I suppose the 4E design team might have been lead by marketing and has made design decisions as they seem to appeal to the largest market marketing could identify and categorize. Or they just did what they personally preferred. Or it's a mix of both, or a coincidence of both...</blockquote>

Verification