Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4457079" data-attributes="member: 22779">See, to me, given the choice, I'd rather the designers said, &quot;Ok, based on what we know, what works at the table&quot;?&nbsp; Look at 3e.&nbsp; What made 3e a better system for those who chose it over 2e or 1e?Was it better flavour?&nbsp; Or better mechanics?&nbsp; Look at the changes going from 3e to 3.5 and you get an even better view of what I'm talking about.&nbsp; 2e Haste was a flavour first design.&nbsp; You get double your attacks, but, there is a slight chance that using this spell will kill you.&nbsp; Makes perfect sense from the point of view of flavour, but, at the table, it was problematic to say the least.3e stripped out the chance of death and then lessened the effect - you got an extra partial action.&nbsp; But, again, this is trying to keep the flavour of 2e - Haste makes you incredibly super speedy.&nbsp; In 3.5, the designers realized that Haste was way too powerful - sorry, 5th level wizards don't really need to cast two spells per round - and nerfed it again.The whole reason for all this was because the spell was designed without a view of the table.&nbsp; Polymorph is another perfect example.&nbsp; Incredibly flavourful spell - very archtypal, WAYYY overpowered as written.Now, take a look at the Binder from Tome of Magic.&nbsp; Every vestige, regardless of flavour, source, or background, works identically.&nbsp; You get 5 (possibly 4) abilities, which, in 4e terms would be a single per-encounter ability, two or three at wills and a couple of buff abilities.&nbsp; Every level, every vestige works off the same premise.&nbsp; To make a new vestige, you simply look for a concept that isn't covered, and plug in the applicable effects.Short, sweet, to the point, and, after you are done, you can cover it with whatever flavour you wish.&nbsp; Invent a new being like Ahazu from Paizo, and poof, you got yourself a new vestige.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4457079, member: 22779"] See, to me, given the choice, I'd rather the designers said, "Ok, based on what we know, what works at the table"? Look at 3e. What made 3e a better system for those who chose it over 2e or 1e? Was it better flavour? Or better mechanics? Look at the changes going from 3e to 3.5 and you get an even better view of what I'm talking about. 2e Haste was a flavour first design. You get double your attacks, but, there is a slight chance that using this spell will kill you. Makes perfect sense from the point of view of flavour, but, at the table, it was problematic to say the least. 3e stripped out the chance of death and then lessened the effect - you got an extra partial action. But, again, this is trying to keep the flavour of 2e - Haste makes you incredibly super speedy. In 3.5, the designers realized that Haste was way too powerful - sorry, 5th level wizards don't really need to cast two spells per round - and nerfed it again. The whole reason for all this was because the spell was designed without a view of the table. Polymorph is another perfect example. Incredibly flavourful spell - very archtypal, WAYYY overpowered as written. Now, take a look at the Binder from Tome of Magic. Every vestige, regardless of flavour, source, or background, works identically. You get 5 (possibly 4) abilities, which, in 4e terms would be a single per-encounter ability, two or three at wills and a couple of buff abilities. Every level, every vestige works off the same premise. To make a new vestige, you simply look for a concept that isn't covered, and plug in the applicable effects. Short, sweet, to the point, and, after you are done, you can cover it with whatever flavour you wish. Invent a new being like Ahazu from Paizo, and poof, you got yourself a new vestige. [/QUOTE]

Verification