I Really Like Keywords

[Shroomy]

While I know that keywords are not exactly a new thing, I really have to give credit to the 4e designers for their organizational usage of keywords. Now that I've read two excerpts that explore the keyword system quite heavily (Power and Weapons) I find it a very efficient and easily accessible system. Kudos to WoTC!

Am I alone here with my enthusiasm (or is it analness)?

 

[malcolm_n]

I agree with you. Ever since I learned to play magic: The gathering in 99, I've been hooked on keywords. They're literally what they say: keys to understanding what you're doing. I know a what a hammer does just as easily as a high-crit, heavy thrown weapon.

I wonder though; did the guys working on 4e take this idea from MtG and their other games, or did they just happen about it in a meeting? This leads to a much bigger question. With the 4e use of keywords, when are we gonna see a MtG Campaign setting?

[/steal thread]

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I too love keywords, especially if they have a lexicon in the beginning with all the keywords listed out with short descriptions (or online to be printed out for quick reference).

I also love the symbols.

 

[Valerion Steele]

i like it too.
and i think they really took the concept from magic.
before there was this wording and keywording of cards , they could easily misinterpreted (at least a few). same was true for 3e. (i had lots of arguments about rules wordings)
now i look forward to much less fuss about some aspects of the game and much less powergaming because of keywords and the clarifications they bring.

greetings from berlin

 

[MaelStorm]

Its one of the change I like the most. Clearer and shorter explanation, plus when you understand the mechanical effect behind every keywords you can easily modify or create new stuff.

Kudos to you Wizards.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I wonder though; did the guys working on 4e take this idea from MtG and their other games...]

The keyword concept started crop up in 3E - spell descriptors, but was neglected. Monte Cook used it in AU/AE to limit and regulate spell access.

But the heavy proliferation of key words with more attached meaning... well, it's probably a mixture of ideas that were already there and going and concepts the D&D designers got, when they looked "over the rim" in their offices.

Don't forget that the MtG key word craze is only a few years old - during the last two or three sets, they introduced more key words than ever before.

Cheers, LT.

 

[drjones]

I think they shrink the learning curve a bit as well. A new player trying to decide which powers to give his fighter can focus on the keywords he knows are important and skim past all the powers that will not do much for him.

 

[Destil]

Eh. I dislike them for the moment because their just so bloody random so far. Energy/damage types need to be be a lot more symmetrical for me to really be happy, for instance. I really hope we don't see a Fire / Cold / Electricity vs. Acid vs. Sonic vs. Force hierarchy again...

 

[TwinBahamut]

I like the keywords too... I hope the raw number of them doesn't get quite as bad as with Magic the Gathering (memorizing stuff is good, but too much information to memorize can be difficult and problematic), but I can really see how keywords will benefit D&D.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The keyword concept started crop up in 3E - spell descriptors, but was neglected. Monte Cook used it in AU/AE to limit and regulate spell access.

Montes AE and Mikes Iron Heroes made good use of descriptors and keywords. 3E already had them, but used them sparingly. The Conjuration, Enchantment and Illusion subtypes/Descriptors and the energy and alignment subtypes have proven relatively useful, I think.