D&D 4E I may have had a 4e epiphany...

[Scribble]

I don't see why that can't be done in any edition. In AD&D, C&C, or 3e, I just grab an orc, slap whatever AC and HP I want on him, give him +3 to hit, just cause and roll with it. Nobody cares that I didn't follow some blueprint. They just care whether or not it was an interesting encounter.

It can be. I've done it in every edition. The problem though, lies in the things like published mods and game books and stuff.

Say I'm designing a game of x level, but want an orc that can cast offensive spells. I want a decent spell so it's actually a challange to the party and not just a wasted attack in disguise... But now in order to do that by the rules, I need to pump my orc up to a point where he's too much of a challenge for my pcs... Now what? Skip the orc?

By making it so an orc with magic is just an orc, with his attack "power" altered, it allows for people to more easily insert X concept into an adenture, which means it's easier to design a good adventure wich is ultimately good for the game.

When 3e first came out I was happy because it gave rules for making any and all concepts pretty much... My orc can cast spells and I have rules to do it! But those rules were cumbersome, and often came with other things you never realized would appear.

 

[Irda Ranger]

The heretical notion occurs to me that it would have been interesting if PCs were designed the same way...

They are, if you consider each level a unique monster.

15th level Brute vs. 15th level Fighter. Same idea. The only real difference is that the Fighter has Dailies.

 

[Blackeagle]

I should have said if I wanted something other than a standard orc, one who's a bit tougher, a bit more skilled or who has 12 ranks of Knowledge: slinkies.

For tougher or more skilled, I think 4e will accommodate you. As far as Knowledge: slinkies goes, you're on your own (at least until 2013 rolls around and DMG VI: Slinkies and Hula Hoops comes out).

 

[rob626]

"I don't see why that can't be done in any edition. In AD&D, C&C, or 3e, I just grab an orc, slap whatever AC and HP I want on him, give him +3 to hit, just cause and roll with it. Nobody cares that I didn't follow some blueprint. They just care whether or not it was an interesting encounter." - JRRNeiklot

<sorry, the quote feature has me stumped>

You are absolutely correct up to a point. In 1st and 2nd ed this was exactly what dm's did and the players agreed that this was not only good but was proper. The faith in the dm was strong and the dm rewarded that trust by making interesting encounters and tweaking as needed, even in the middle of combat, should the need arise. There was much rejoicing.

And then the evil 3.x arrived and began squashing puppies and forcing dm's to kowtow to the god Balance and his twin Fairness. There was gnashing of teeth by dm's and the players felt empowered but did not count the cost. No longer was there trust that the dm could and would tailor an encounter by knowing his players and their characters' abilities. No, it became a contest between player and dm. Who can create the craziest power combinations and get around the intent of the rules?

Slavish adherance to a set of arbitrary rules was encouraged, lauded, even demanded by players everywhere. Should the dm simply create a monster based on what an appropriate hp/ac/attack/powers set would look like then he was accused of breaking the contract between players and gm. Much fingerpointing and sulking, gm's and players alike, ensued.

The point of this tirade was this: in earlier editions the gestalt creation method worked. In 3.x that method was deemed unfair and a breach of trust. I am happy to be moving back towards the gestalt method.

And Lizard, your original post put things succinctly and, if I may be so bold, beautifully. Well done.

 

[Storminator]

While I feel 3.x D&D is a grind for a DM, I love making Mutants and Masterminds villains. I think it's very much related to the 4e philosophy. I just make up the numbers I want my villains to have to fight my heroes, and don't worry about the costs. In M&M all the different parts of a character (powers, stats, feats, skills, equipment, etc) are all decoupled, so I don't have to double check anything to see if it's right. Just do a quick power level check when he's done.

PS

 

[Evilhalfling]

does this mean I have to edit my ignore list?

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

They are, if you consider each level a unique monster.

15th level Brute vs. 15th level Fighter. Same idea. The only real difference is that the Fighter has Dailies.

They pretty much are made using exception based designs, just with more rules on choosing the exceptions and having more exceptions.

The idea is that they all get the same bonus to hit always with a couple of small exceptions. Their damage is almost the same with a couple of exceptions. Always with a heavy focus on only allowing small exceptions to the general rules.

 

[Hussar]

I don't see why that can't be done in any edition. In AD&D, C&C, or 3e, I just grab an orc, slap whatever AC and HP I want on him, give him +3 to hit, just cause and roll with it. Nobody cares that I didn't follow some blueprint. They just care whether or not it was an interesting encounter.

The ability to ignore rules in a system is not an argument in favor of the mechanics of that system.

The fact that you have to break the rules (and that is what you are doing) in order to get the results that you want means that the rules are not particularly suited to doing what you want.

In 1e it wasn't as much of an issue because the monsters were considerably weaker. Adding a few plusses to hit and some HP's on a 1e orc doesn't dramatically change that orc. 3e becomes somewhat more problematic since a given creature of a given CR can, generally, kill an equal leveled PC in one round. It may not be likely, but, it is usually possible. So, upping a creatures to hit bonus can have some very serious ramifications.

 

[Colmarr]

WotC undoubtedly has those ranges, but I doubt they'll be providing anything like that to their readers in as many words.

Otherwise, why buy MM books at all?

Not that I wish to go back and re-ignite a discussion that has since been forgotten, but I feel compelled to defend WotC's honour by pointing out that it has been confirmed that the monster stat ranges are included in the DMG.

Guess that makes me a f4nboy...

 

[Jack Colby]

Just a quick congrats on "getting it", Lizard. You truly must unlearn what you have learned! I think with the proper mindset this edition has great potential and will be fun. You just have to see where they are coming from with the rules and what you're intended to do with them, that's all.