Manual of the Planes: The Evolution of Rules Complexity

[AnthonyRoberson]

I am going to post the following on my blog as well, but since it is not exactly widely read (yet) I decided to post it here as well so a few more eyes would see it...

I often hear the cry from D&D grognards that the new versions of the game are 'too complex' or have 'too many rules'. The game has certainly grown more detailed and complex in many ways, but I noticed something curious while I was leafing through the new 4th Edition Manual of the Planes. Take the following rules snippet on moving in the Astral Sea:

"It gains the ability to fly at one half its normal speed if not under the effect of the gravity. It can hover, but it is a clumsy flier."

That's pretty much it. When characters are on the astral plane, they gain the ability to fly at half their normal movement rate (unless they can already fly). Pretty simple and to the point.

Here is the equivalent rule snip from the 1st Edition Manual of the Planes on moving in the Astral Plane:

"Mental movement is achieved by willing oneself in a direction. The maximum speed possible by this method is 10 yards per minute (30 feet per melee round) per intelligence point...Encumbrance slows down the astral traveler by 10' per round for every 10 lbs (100 gp) carried. Intelligence determines additional carrying capacity (use the Strength table on page 9 of the Player's Handbook). Magical items (but not normal items under an enchantment spell) have no encumbrance."*

*NOTE: I left out the information about physical movement versus mental movement, etc. I think that even the excerpt above more than proves my point.

Good grief. How clunky is that?! It seems that not all rules have gotten more complex over time...

 

[Jack99]

Weird. I thought people thought 4e was a dumbed down version of D&D, not a more complex one (at least that's the song I have heard the most by those who aren't quite the fans)

 

[AnthonyRoberson]

Weird. I thought people thought 4e was a dumbed down version of D&D, not a more complex one (at least that's the song I have heard the most by those who aren't quite the fans)

I guess I was speaking more about 4E vs. 1E rather than 4E vs. 3E in terms of complexity...

 

[mmu1]

There's two issues here: the special rules themselves, and the mechanics governing them.

4E definitely has the better mechanics, here, but in this case (and in many others) I find I like the special, circumstance-based rules from earlier editions better.

It's much cooler to go to a different plane and find out your intelligence now determines how fast you can move, then go there and find everyone can now fly clumsily at roughly the same speed, which is based on how fast you could walk in the material plane.

And it's not that hard to have the flavor and the simple mechanics. I think whoever wrote the 4E rules in this case was just too worried that allowing the character too much 3D movement would work badly with 4E's complicated push/pull/adjust/slide mechanics.

 

[AnthonyRoberson]

...4E definitely has the better mechanics, here, but in this case (and in many others) I find I like the special, circumstance-based rules from earlier editions better.

It's much cooler to go to a different plane and find out your intelligence now determines how fast you can move, then go there and find everyone can now fly clumsily at roughly the same speed, which is based on how fast you could walk in the material plane...

I can certainly sympathize with that view and many of the older guys that I play with would certainly agree. Their idea of 'mastering' the game involves knowing that they should pack their Helm of Kick-Ass Intellect or whatever when they go Astral so they can move at lightspeed...

However, as a DM, I find it a REAL headache to remember all those 'special' rules for various situations. One of the things that I do like about 4E is that it really cuts down on that stuff and lets me focus on actually running the game.

 

[mmu1]

I can certainly sympathize with that view and many of the older guys that I play with would certainly agree. Their idea of 'mastering' the game involves knowing that they should pack their Helm of Kick-Ass Intellect or whatever when they go Astral so they can move at lightspeed...

However, as a DM, I find it a REAL headache to remember all those 'special' rules for various situations. One of the things that I do like about 4E is that it really cuts down on that stuff and lets me focus on actually running the game.

Well, you still have special rules to remember in 4E:

1. Fly at 1/2 speed
2. ...but only in the absence of gravity
3. You can hover.

Would it be so much more complex if rule #1 was "You can fly at a speed of 5' per point of Intelligence"?

Like I said before, it'd rather break all the movement-dependent powers if everyone could just zip around that quickly, and that's the real reason why they did oversimplify things to the point of blandness - but what's the point of having the PCs go to the Astral Plane if the only difference is the color palette?

 

[Sir Brennen]

Would it be so much more complex if rule #1 was "You can fly at a speed of 5' per point of Intelligence"?

To a degree, yes. The rules are nice and neatly summarized under "subjective gravity" as a planar trait, rather than having to remember all the specifics for just one plane. And I daresay, they're more intuitive. The only real mechanical change to a character is they gain fly at 1/2 move.

Though, making an added feature of the plane to allow one square per point of Int bonus would work with the existing system more consistently, and wouldn't add to the complexity by that large a measure.

But when comparing to earlier editions, that wasn't the only special rule related to Astral travelers. IIRC, most of your mental stats essentially replaced your physical stats, so that Int became Str, Wis became Dex and... well, I'm not sure if Cha became Con, but it sure seems likely such symmetries were enforced. Plus the special rules of calculating movement.

I remember running an encounter in the olden days, where a group of astral wolves pulled the party (somewhat low level) into their plane. Then we spent the next several minutes (and I do mean several) having everyone re-calc their movement, AC, attacks, etc. And then have questions and double-checking come up throughout each round of combat. And that wasn't even including all the other special rules for planar travel, like magic items losing a +1 per plane away from their origin.

Conceptually, having a realm where mind is more important than body, cool. In practice, a huge PITA.

Plus, any fighter or thief got fairly hosed, as their mental stats were usually pretty low, and became disproportionately important in this environment - i.e., a fighter with low Int was more handicapped on this plane than a wizard with low Str was on the Prime Material. You say having such rules in 4E would break things and that's why it was omitted. I suggest the mechanics were broken even in previous editions.

 

[mmu1]

But when comparing to earlier editions, that wasn't the only special rule related to Astral travelers. IIRC, most of your mental stats essentially replaced your physical stats, so that Int became Str, Wis became Dex and... well, I'm not sure if Cha became Con, but it sure seems likely such symmetries were enforced. Plus the special rules of calculating movement.

Right, like I said, the mechanics suck... They should be greatly simplified, but they should still reflect the fact that you're in a place where mind is more important than matter.

And if the Astral Plane is not a place well-suited to your adventuring party... well, don't make them go there, or if you do, give them tools to deal with it - but don't change the plane so much that the differences between it and the material plane become meaningless. That's like having an adventure that takes the party to hell, but removes the fire and the rivers of brimstone - because it's too much hassle to deal with rules for environmental damage and rivers of fire.

 

[Hussar]

I guess, in the end, it depends on how much mechanics you need to make a place different. And everyone's going to have a different answer to that one. Take the Hell example. Is Hell different because of the fire and brimstone, or because of who you're going to meet?

After all, it's not like Dante needed a suite of spells to protect him on his journey. Neither did the various Greeks who headed down there either.

To me, using extreme environments becomes somewhat boring because they wind up being entirely binary. Either you're not prepped for it and you die. Or, you're prepped for it and pretty much ignore it for the duration of the adventure, which means that it might as well not be there in the first place.

I'd prefer to make planes memorable based on who you meet and what you do, rather than what you see or how you feel. It's much more imediate to players, IMO, when they meet a horde of devils bearing down on them rather than, "well, we're in Hell, everyone got their Planar Protection Sunblock on?"

YMMV and all that of course.

 

[AnthonyRoberson]

...To me, using extreme environments becomes somewhat boring because they wind up being entirely binary. Either you're not prepped for it and you die. Or, you're prepped for it and pretty much ignore it for the duration of the adventure, which means that it might as well not be there in the first place...

BINGO. That's a perfect way to put it. In the olden days, you ever prepped and ignored or suffered the consequences. It's almost a version of a save-or-die mechanic. I don't think that a system that depends heavily on the ability of players to memorize the rules for prepping and dealing with various game situations is very interesting. This has been minimized in 4E and that's a GOOD thing in my book.