Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Cook back at wizards
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5694913" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>I think part of the issue here is that it was an untenable vision. It sounded good in theory, but when each feat is tied to a very narrow set of options the result is (and 4e shows it well) massive feat bloat. They recalibrated slowly and found that it made more sense to write more general feats, and with Essentials we see the final evolution of that, with a relatively svelt feat list. I get what you're after and I sympathize entirely with you. It just was one of those cool but fatally flawed ideas.</p><p></p><p>I think 4e in a lot of ways is like that. It is a good system. It is just very hard for a group of game designers to fully comprehend how such an extensive game is going to feel when it is all done. They had certain goals. Those goals might not have been entirely met, and some of them probably couldn't actually be met within the context of the design. The problem is you have to at some point nail down the broad outline of the mechanics of a game so you can get on with it, and often you find out towards the end that a lot of decisions you made 2 years earlier didn't exactly contribute to your goals, or even undermine them. Other things are just "this is off a bit" (like monster damage and certain other things). Those can be fixed. 4e, being almost a ground up new game design, came with a lot of areas where I think the developers going back 2 years in time would say "no, that won't get you what you want, maybe do this instead", so it is something of a prototype. Unfortunately you don't get easy do-overs and revisions are costly. </p><p></p><p>I rather agree with Nemesis on the feel thing. I'm working up ideas now for another campaign and one of the things that I want to do is a much more radical take on Points of Light. The world isn't just one where the 'Empire of Nerath' fell apart and the roads are bad. This is a world where the very existence of humanity was and is in doubt. Getting to the next town is not something you attempt lightly. In fact nobody is even sure if the next town still exists. You'll be lucky to get word once in a year from someone who's gone that far. If you wander around in the woods at night (the woods that surround the edges of every field) you're not likely to come back. 4e can handle that. It just isn't Nentir Vale as presented in the DMG. It is a lot more like a fairy tale, the world is big, hostile, and largely unknown. Only the toughest adventurers venture out into it, and even they step carefully.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5694913, member: 82106"] I think part of the issue here is that it was an untenable vision. It sounded good in theory, but when each feat is tied to a very narrow set of options the result is (and 4e shows it well) massive feat bloat. They recalibrated slowly and found that it made more sense to write more general feats, and with Essentials we see the final evolution of that, with a relatively svelt feat list. I get what you're after and I sympathize entirely with you. It just was one of those cool but fatally flawed ideas. I think 4e in a lot of ways is like that. It is a good system. It is just very hard for a group of game designers to fully comprehend how such an extensive game is going to feel when it is all done. They had certain goals. Those goals might not have been entirely met, and some of them probably couldn't actually be met within the context of the design. The problem is you have to at some point nail down the broad outline of the mechanics of a game so you can get on with it, and often you find out towards the end that a lot of decisions you made 2 years earlier didn't exactly contribute to your goals, or even undermine them. Other things are just "this is off a bit" (like monster damage and certain other things). Those can be fixed. 4e, being almost a ground up new game design, came with a lot of areas where I think the developers going back 2 years in time would say "no, that won't get you what you want, maybe do this instead", so it is something of a prototype. Unfortunately you don't get easy do-overs and revisions are costly. I rather agree with Nemesis on the feel thing. I'm working up ideas now for another campaign and one of the things that I want to do is a much more radical take on Points of Light. The world isn't just one where the 'Empire of Nerath' fell apart and the roads are bad. This is a world where the very existence of humanity was and is in doubt. Getting to the next town is not something you attempt lightly. In fact nobody is even sure if the next town still exists. You'll be lucky to get word once in a year from someone who's gone that far. If you wander around in the woods at night (the woods that surround the edges of every field) you're not likely to come back. 4e can handle that. It just isn't Nentir Vale as presented in the DMG. It is a lot more like a fairy tale, the world is big, hostile, and largely unknown. Only the toughest adventurers venture out into it, and even they step carefully. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Monte Cook back at wizards
Top