I'm ready for Fourth Edition now (a brief manifesto)

[PJ-Mason]

You make some good points, here are my responses:

1) I don't want long periods of dullness, I want opportunities for roleplaying! Which is where the less combat oriented characters will get to shine. With four encounters per session, most of them combat oriented, this isn't the case. On the other hand, I don't see why you need boring combats. Fighting kobalds doesn't give people the opportunity to stretch their abilities or to roleplaying. It's just dice rolling.

Is four encounters per session really the norm? I don't think we could ever manage that! Granted, maybe our one encounter (or maaaaaybe two) is bigger than what an average encounter is supposed to be, but trying to run 4 encounters/combats in one session (or even in two sessions) seems impossible to me. Maybe we play too slowly, or don't play long enough! Or both.

 

[Quasqueton]

d02 ain't D&D. so don't worry about d02 and just play D&D. no need for a new edition.

Dungeons & Dragons [current edition] is the only true D&D. All previous editions are just attempts to acheive this level of excellence.

Quasqueton

 

[Berandor]

Sometime I'm gonna write my own game system, as well.

But who'd take my place on all those D&D boards, then?

Read: I feel your pain.

 

[Turjan]

And F.A.T.A.L. was *barely* an RPG. It had a ton of rules to be sure, but no real cohesion. There were classes (IIRC), and spells, and lots of tables, and a lot of rules concerning rape, sex, sizes of body parts, and this sort of thing.

Oh, I'm sure the authors were "serious" with their intent. What that intent was, I don't think even they could answer that.

FATAL was a sexist, homophobic and otherwise distasteful game. The authors were defending it heavily on rpg.net, as I heard, because it was a "mature" game. In principle, it was a bad excuse for playing out rape fantasies. Good that it's gone.

On a lighter note, the original poster might have meant FATE, a free download of a versatile rules-lite game engine that is quite popular with lots of people. The download link is in the menu on the lefthand side of the linked page .

 

[Balsamic Dragon]

Is four encounters per session really the norm? I don't think we could ever manage that! Granted, maybe our one encounter (or maaaaaybe two) is bigger than what an average encounter is supposed to be, but trying to run 4 encounters/combats in one session (or even in two sessions) seems impossible to me. Maybe we play too slowly, or don't play long enough! Or both.

Based on the way that published adventures tend to be written, I'd say that four encounters per session is the norm, and most of them involve combat.

Examples (from memory, so apologies if I am incorrect):

Sunless Citidel: 1) climb down rope, fight with monsters, 2) avoid trap, monster in trap, 3) find secret door, monsters behind secret door, 4) encounter NPC, either large combat or large encounter with tribe of monsters. End of first session.

Forge of Fury: 1) find way into dungeon, fight with monsters, 2) find room with prisoners, fight with monsters, 3) find guard post, fight with monsters, 4) find monster chieftan, big fight with monsters. End of first session.

I'd like to see more like this:

Dungeon Adventure to-be-named: 1) find dungeon (uses wilderness skills, bardic lore, questioning the natives, etc..., 2) avoid trap on entrance of dungeon, full-length encounter rather than simply a couple of die rolls, 3) find dungeon guardian who has been harmed/damaged by villian, need to heal/fix guardian to find out more about dungeon, why villian is here, why heroes have to stop him/her (i.e., puzzle solving/roleplaying/skills encounter, not combat), 4) encounter villian in the midst of dastardly scheme, big fight scene. End of first session.

Or, you could have this:

Other Dungeon Adventure to-be-named: 1) sneak into dungeon past guards without triggering alarm, 2) see villian, but can't get to him/her, evil solliloquy, exchange of nasty quips, villian runs away, but not before triggering, 3) nasty trap that players have to figure a way out of, 4) catch up with villian and inflict vengeance, big fight. End of first session.

In the first examples, combat was a necessary part of each bit of the adventure, even if that's not what the encounter centered around. Plus, the monsters in the first three encounters were pretty wimpy. So lots of dice rolling, but little strategy needed, and you don't have as much time for the real important bit of the encounter. I like combat, but I don't like to see it used as filler.

Balsamic Dragon

 

[WizarDru]

Forge of Fury: 1) find way into dungeon, fight with monsters, 2) find room with prisoners, fight with monsters, 3) find guard post, fight with monsters, 4) find monster chieftan, big fight with monsters. End of first session.

Actually, in my game it was more like: 1) Depart Greyhawk by request of Merchant Lord patron to lay low after attempted assasination by Scarlet Brotherhood and seek items in dungeon, 2) Spend days travelleing to town, meet several important recurring NPCs, 3) Spend day gathering information in town, meet another important NPC, 4) travel to dungeon, 5) scope out local area, 6) sneak into dungeon, 7) some of the things you mentioned, in differing order.

The module is written very dry, because they know (and expect) that individual DMs will be modifying the module, as I and others did. Compare my story hour with Wulf Ratbane's and see if the module played out the same. You'll see it didn't, of course.

Your 'dungeon-to-be-named' first example sounds an awful lot like how my Forge of Fury actually played out, honestly. Your second example sounds a little bit like railroading, if used too frequently. All combats are interesting to some players, regardless of whether or not you're always facing the BBEG. In fact, many of the lesser combats are more exciting, because you get to flex your muscles. Being able to use those abilities you've spent time developing is worthwhile.

Further, if you reduce the number of combats too much, then some characters are going to have a greater chance of being ineffective. What's that, the BBEG is undead? Well, the rogue just found herself reduced in effectiveness for the only combat in two weeks. Oh, it's a ghost? Hmm, well I guess the sorceror will deal with it, while the fighter misses again, with his non-magical weapon. This week it's a golem? The wizard will be over there, in the corner, waiting 'til it's over.

I would highly recommend Unearthed Arcana: it's got lots of variant rules that might appeal to you, particularly the 'generic' adventurers.

 

[Balsamic Dragon]

Further, if you reduce the number of combats too much, then some characters are going to have a greater chance of being ineffective. What's that, the BBEG is undead? Well, the rogue just found herself reduced in effectiveness for the only combat in two weeks. Oh, it's a ghost? Hmm, well I guess the sorceror will deal with it, while the fighter misses again, with his non-magical weapon. This week it's a golem? The wizard will be over there, in the corner, waiting 'til it's over.

This problem can be solved by giving the players more options and improving monster design. This is also why I need to rewrite the whole system, not just change my campaign style and add some house rules. In the fourth edition that I envision, you wouldn't have a monster that was immune to every possible effective attack made by a particular character class. The point would be to force the players to use strategy in coming up with options that _would_ work against the monster, not just sitting in the corner and waiting for the other party members to handle it.

After all, the same problem you describe exists in normal D&D games, doesn't it? And does it really make the wizard feel better to know that she took out all those low level monsters easily without any strategy at all, when she can't take part in the fight against the big bad?

Balsamic Dragon

 

[Davelozzi]

Rule 4: Characters are not their equipment list. If your high level character is stripped naked and left out in the middle of the desert, he should still be able to kick ass and take names. He might have to go hunt down and kill the guy who took his grandfather's sword, but other than that, he's cool. Magic items are rare, powerful and they _all_ level up with the user. In other words, they take time to master, and they increase in power the more of their secrets you can unfold.

I'd like to see characters not be their equipment lists. I also like magic items that level up. However these two ideas conflict with each other. Any item that continually levels up in power is going to be a major party of the character's stats, and losing it will hurt.

 

[Zappo]

Rule 1: Cut the game session down to the good bits, get rid of the filler.

My sessions are already the way you described.

Rule 2: Give players options not plusses.

This would make the game much more complex. The current way works because you have tons of options but any given character will only have a few of them. Giving tons of options to every single character would make the learning curve for D&D a lot steeper, and slow down the game as players try to figure out how they can use their numerous abilities to solve the situation.

Rule 3: No required classes.

D&D is already playable with any combination of classes. Obviously, the DM will have to craft an appropriate adventure - but that's not a problem with the system.

Rule 4: Characters are not their equipment list.

In truth, equipment in D&D is a lot less important than it seems. I've played characters with less than half of their recommended wealth. They were still very playable. Anyway - I don't think that "leveled items" would make the characters less dependent on equipment. Simply, their equipment would change less often.

And if I never again have to figure out how to spend my starting gold for my 12th level pre-gen character, I will die a happy Dragon

Well, this is an intrinsic problem of having more options. You have more options, you need more time to choose. Make the players have few magical items, and they will take less time to choose them - but they will have few magical items. Either options, or speed.

 

[diaglo]

Actually, in my game it was more like:

yeah, WizarDru's story hour sounds alot like our experience too. read the story hour in my sig.

heck, read most of the story hours on ENWurld.