Monte Cooks First Legends and Lore

[Gundark]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (Very Perceptive)

Discuss!!!

 

[Dice4Hire]

Already did over in the 4E forum

 

[Argyle King]

Well, I can't say I am a fan of the idea proposed. It takes one of the aspects I dislike about 4E and takes it even further away from my tastes.

 

[Grydan]

I'm honestly puzzled.

I mean, he's practically describing the existing system, as if it's some wonderful new idea that's just come to him now.

Monte, that thing you like to call "passive perception"? It's in the rulebooks already. They called it passive perception.

If your passive perception is higher than the DC (or, as you might call it, "rank") of the hidden object, you automatically find it, you don't have to roll.

If the DC is higher than your maximum possible roll, then the DM just says "you don't find anything".

In between, you roll.

So yeah, the existing system works pretty much exactly like how he describes, other than not using the name "ranks", and keeping the math transparent.

 

[Gundark]

Already did over in the 4E forum

Wow you must have faster interwebs than me.....

 

[billd91]

And rather than assuming that things are all hunky dory, they're now asking for feedback on that particular mechanic. What's puzzling about that?

 

[Grydan]

Because he's not presenting it as "Here's a primer on how 4th Edition perception works, for those who forget or didn't know; Now, how do you feel about it?".

He's presenting it as if it's new and different, when what it is is the current system with the serial (or DC...) numbers filed off.

If I'm misinterpreting him, and he really is intentionally describing the existing system and looking for feedback on it, then okay. Then my problem is instead with the lack of clarity in conveying his intentions.

 

[Mark CMG]

"And it would be horrible if a poor die roll wrecked it all."

This sort of statement always bothers me. I've written some thoughts on this on my own blog here.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Well, we're just revisiting the proposed skill system that Mearls talked about a few weeks ago. I disliked that system then, and still do today. It's too linear for my tastes (but then again, I like narrow skills, not broad skills).

My thoughts about Monte coming back when it was announced were, "after seeing the skill system, I have low expectations, but high hopes," and, "I hope he keeps in constant communications with Mike Mearls, as I found his columns interesting, even if I didn't like a lot of it." My feelings are basically the same after this article. Other than the introduction, there's nothing really new yet for me to evaluate, so there it is.

Just my input. As always, play what you like

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Because he's not presenting it as "Here's a primer on how 4th Edition perception works, for those who forget or didn't know; Now, how do you feel about it?".

He's presenting it as if it's new and different, when what it is is the current system with the serial (or DC...) numbers filed off.

Actually, what I think he might be doing is trying to present a framework that all previous versions of D&D can be tied to - not just 4e. By having broad categories of expertise, each edition can be mapped to the "new" system. My character's an expert in x because he is an elf, or is a thief, or has a particular kit, or has so many ranks in a skill, or has a particular theme or item.

The meat of the article is reducing the amount of rolling - trying to make things automatic when they should be, and non-automatic when they shouldn't. It allows for a degree of commonsense by the DM rather than a strict observance of numbers and a check. Roll when it's exciting to do so, don't roll when you can just transfer the standard information, and reward attentive players and good play.

There are of course many issues with this approach - as there are issues with any chosen approach. By maintaining a universal feel though, I think he is succeeding at the primary goal of inclusiveness - even if many think the actual approach sucks.

I will always have time for someone who likes to put ideas out there, and particularly when that someone is Monte Cook.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise