I haven't seen much discussion about this week's Legends and Lore article by Mike Mearls. It's all about the amount of content and pacing of releases throughout the history of the game. Perhaps most importantly, the article ends with a pair of polls seeking opinions on how much content you would be comfortable with and what types of content you are most interested in. If you want to convey your views on this issue to WotC, these polls might be the easiest way to do so.
How much content do you want from WotC?
- Thread starter frogged
- Start date
Mouseferatu
Hero
I voted that I want more campaign settings above all else. I realize there's a line that has to be walked--heck, I've written entire essays on why the explosion of settings helped sink TSR--but I'm also getting overwhelmed by the constant flow of new mechanics. I'd like to see the pendulum swing further back toward flavor on the "flavor-crunch" continuum.
webrunner
First Post
I would love to see more support for:
classes that aren't wizards (seriously, they get like four class acts for every one warlord or ranger one)
Eberron (one article every few months, compare to forgotten realms and dark sun which get tonnes of support. There wasn't even an Encounters season for Eberron.)
crazier powers
rules which have fallen by the wayside (like item sets)
classes that aren't wizards (seriously, they get like four class acts for every one warlord or ranger one)
Eberron (one article every few months, compare to forgotten realms and dark sun which get tonnes of support. There wasn't even an Encounters season for Eberron.)
crazier powers
rules which have fallen by the wayside (like item sets)
Shadowslayer
Explorer
I voted More DM options like monster/NPC books. DMs play multitudes of one shot characters every week. Players usually play one...and its the same one every game night, unless you get killed. I just don't think there needs to be an infinite number of character/class/build combos.
When you consider most once-a-week guys are only playing one character, how many options do you really need to tell your story/play your game? How many before a wide variety becomes a daunting array?
When you consider most once-a-week guys are only playing one character, how many options do you really need to tell your story/play your game? How many before a wide variety becomes a daunting array?
chitzk0i
Explorer
For me, it's about the content level paired with the quality of the mechanics. Certain articles are just conversation pieces, with powers that no one should look at, much less take. That was acceptable back when there was a decent number of articles each month, but if they're going to start having only 5 articles per month*? They need to step it up. They need someone who is familiar with the game, who can say, "No, that's worse in every way then a druid 10 utility, try again." "That's a striker daily, not a cleric daily. Give it another go."
*Yeah, five articles. There's two columns, an administrative function, and five articles. Ah, wait. One of those in Unearthed Arcana, and I play in LFR. So four articles.
*Yeah, five articles. There's two columns, an administrative function, and five articles. Ah, wait. One of those in Unearthed Arcana, and I play in LFR. So four articles.
Nemesis Destiny
Adventurer
Yeah, I don't play LFR, but I agree with everything here, pretty much.
I don't care about the quantity of the crunch articles we're getting, as long as they're all solid options.
Actually wait, no. I actually like the number of articles we're seeing, I just want them to give us stuff that, you know, someone will actually take, over a stock PHB option. Most Dragon stuff is either so hopelessly underpowered or situational that nobody takes it, or so good that everyone does.
I want stuff that's as good as the White Well Hexblade article, or the Eladrin Knight one (minus the lame "must be Eladrin" restriction).
Everyone will want something different. I don't want more monsters, campaign settings, adventures, or fluff, I can (and do) create my own, and feel there is enough to play with out there. I want more player options and more updates to the game. Lob off the chaff, moderate the top dogs, and give me some more quality material that opens up options rather than pigeonholing everything into stereotypes.
Recently I was looking at the thief class guide on char op boards, and got rather miffed. The consensus there seems to be, if you are a thief, grab a rapier, be a kulkor arms master, charge, make two attacks, win. If you're not doing this, you're handicapping yourself. I don't want to see this sort of pigeonholed jank. I want options. Real ones. If there is a build option for a halfling thief with a staff, I don't want that option to come at the cost of gazillion feats, -4 to attack, -8 to damage.
Anyway, I feel the game needs a lot more mechanical help, than fluff/adventure/monster help. I can reskin monsters, switch around their powers and make pretty much anything I might conceive. I don't need anything more in that department. Fluff can occasionally inspire me in one direction or another, so I wouldn't want it to completely stop, but I sure would be pleased with more crunch focus.
Recently I was looking at the thief class guide on char op boards, and got rather miffed. The consensus there seems to be, if you are a thief, grab a rapier, be a kulkor arms master, charge, make two attacks, win. If you're not doing this, you're handicapping yourself. I don't want to see this sort of pigeonholed jank. I want options. Real ones. If there is a build option for a halfling thief with a staff, I don't want that option to come at the cost of gazillion feats, -4 to attack, -8 to damage.
Anyway, I feel the game needs a lot more mechanical help, than fluff/adventure/monster help. I can reskin monsters, switch around their powers and make pretty much anything I might conceive. I don't need anything more in that department. Fluff can occasionally inspire me in one direction or another, so I wouldn't want it to completely stop, but I sure would be pleased with more crunch focus.
delericho
Legend
A note up-front: I don't run 4e, I'm not in the market to buy anything 4e-related, and that won't be changing until 5e is released (hopefully, in several years time). So, treat what follows with the appropriate scepticism.
I would say it's not really a question of "how much", but rather "what type". At this point in time, there is so much material out there for 4e already that players should be able to create and run pretty much any type of character they want. As such, I really don't see much of a market for further expansions, except maybe for Essentialised versions. (Although, since Essentials is definitely not 4.5e, there really shouldn't be any call for such things...)
They should only publish more "player options" if they're sure they come up with something new and exciting that they're sure will have 'traction'. (Obviously, this is hugely difficult to judge - Warforged, Dragonborn, Tieflings and Shardminds all seem to have it; Zephs, Raptorans and Kalashtar not so much...) But just putting out books of options for the sake of it seems pointless at this stage.
That being the case, I would suggest their best option would be to focus on two things: providing tools to allow DMs to run the best games they can, and restoring the reputation of the DDI to the point where it becomes considered a "must-have", prior to an eventual 5e.
For DM tools, then, I would suggest doing a "beginner setting", and some "beginner adventures" - materials designed specifically to move new DMs from 'novice' to 'competent', and, crucially, allowing them not just to run the pre-canned materials, but also holding their hands through designing their own settings and adventures. (The existing books no doubt do this to a certain extent, but more is always welcome.)
For more experienced DMs, they should provide more (and better) adventures, and maybe some interesting settings (or maybe just a book of half a dozen "setting seeds").
Meanwhile, the DDI, they should aim to get the tools up and working (and improved) as quickly as possible. And they should be using eDragon and eDungeon to provide "something for everybody, every month".
So, Dragon should have class acts articles, should provide interesting takes on existing options, should expand the fluff surrounding the new races, and so on, and so on. The aim, as I said, should be to provide at least something for every class (and/or race) every month, even if that's just one feat, power, or whatever.
(They might also consider using Dragon, or Dungeon, to do a series on world-building, possibly also stepping through the process of creating a new web-exclusive setting. Thus giving subscribers something to play in that isn't available anywhere else.)
With Dungeon, I think they should aim for every issue to have at least three adventures (one per tier, though five would be better), to provide a mix of short zero-prep delves for DMs in a hurry, longer standalone adventures to drop into a campaign, and Adventure Paths. (I do think Dungeon should feature Paths, preferably one a year, possibly consisting of nine adventures covering 15 or so levels.) And they should also make a point of providing adventures set in the published settings, ideally tailored specifically for those settings (as opposed to being "generic adventures with FR Proper Nouns dropped around the place").
I think the ideal mix I would advocate for Dungeon would be:
1 Heroic zero-prep Delve (for use in a single session)
1 Paragon zero-prep Delve (for use in a single session)
1 Adventure Path module (of whatever level)
1 generic standalone adventure (Heroic, Paragon or Epic, whatever the AP is notusing this month)
1 setting-specific standalone adventure (again, H, P or E depending on what the AP and generic adventure aren't covering)
Naturally, they would need to ensure that the quality of both these mags is very high. I would strongly recommend also that they drop the "Delve" format for Dungeon adventures, except for the two zero-prep Delves.
I would say it's not really a question of "how much", but rather "what type". At this point in time, there is so much material out there for 4e already that players should be able to create and run pretty much any type of character they want. As such, I really don't see much of a market for further expansions, except maybe for Essentialised versions. (Although, since Essentials is definitely not 4.5e, there really shouldn't be any call for such things...)
They should only publish more "player options" if they're sure they come up with something new and exciting that they're sure will have 'traction'. (Obviously, this is hugely difficult to judge - Warforged, Dragonborn, Tieflings and Shardminds all seem to have it; Zephs, Raptorans and Kalashtar not so much...) But just putting out books of options for the sake of it seems pointless at this stage.
That being the case, I would suggest their best option would be to focus on two things: providing tools to allow DMs to run the best games they can, and restoring the reputation of the DDI to the point where it becomes considered a "must-have", prior to an eventual 5e.
For DM tools, then, I would suggest doing a "beginner setting", and some "beginner adventures" - materials designed specifically to move new DMs from 'novice' to 'competent', and, crucially, allowing them not just to run the pre-canned materials, but also holding their hands through designing their own settings and adventures. (The existing books no doubt do this to a certain extent, but more is always welcome.)
For more experienced DMs, they should provide more (and better) adventures, and maybe some interesting settings (or maybe just a book of half a dozen "setting seeds").
Meanwhile, the DDI, they should aim to get the tools up and working (and improved) as quickly as possible. And they should be using eDragon and eDungeon to provide "something for everybody, every month".
So, Dragon should have class acts articles, should provide interesting takes on existing options, should expand the fluff surrounding the new races, and so on, and so on. The aim, as I said, should be to provide at least something for every class (and/or race) every month, even if that's just one feat, power, or whatever.
(They might also consider using Dragon, or Dungeon, to do a series on world-building, possibly also stepping through the process of creating a new web-exclusive setting. Thus giving subscribers something to play in that isn't available anywhere else.)
With Dungeon, I think they should aim for every issue to have at least three adventures (one per tier, though five would be better), to provide a mix of short zero-prep delves for DMs in a hurry, longer standalone adventures to drop into a campaign, and Adventure Paths. (I do think Dungeon should feature Paths, preferably one a year, possibly consisting of nine adventures covering 15 or so levels.) And they should also make a point of providing adventures set in the published settings, ideally tailored specifically for those settings (as opposed to being "generic adventures with FR Proper Nouns dropped around the place").
I think the ideal mix I would advocate for Dungeon would be:
1 Heroic zero-prep Delve (for use in a single session)
1 Paragon zero-prep Delve (for use in a single session)
1 Adventure Path module (of whatever level)
1 generic standalone adventure (Heroic, Paragon or Epic, whatever the AP is notusing this month)
1 setting-specific standalone adventure (again, H, P or E depending on what the AP and generic adventure aren't covering)
Naturally, they would need to ensure that the quality of both these mags is very high. I would strongly recommend also that they drop the "Delve" format for Dungeon adventures, except for the two zero-prep Delves.
Incenjucar
Legend
I'd like to see more thematic player options that are independent of class and race. Mundane equipment, mounts, and vehicles are always welcome, especially if they increases the party's ability to explore, engage in unusual encounters, or to use ritual-like abilities. The game needs more interesting wondrous items, especially those which players will seek to improve as they progress through tiers. Finally, I'd love to see the return of articles outside of the D&D world, whether based on fiction or history, even if they consist of little more than "Here's some cool stuff, and here's how to reskin existing D&D stuff play it." Since the GSL isn't very functional in 4E, this would close some of the gaps left by killing off the 3rd party products.
