Most ridiculous thing about Epic Rules

[I'm A Banana]

You do have a certain point, ronseur. The massive amounts of crunchy goodness don't give a whole lot of different suggestions for campaigning. They give you the ingredients, but offer precious little advice on how to put them together...

I mean, obviously most DM's can put them together themselves, or the game would've tanked long ago. But still...there's that "cool! What do I do with it?" quality for D&D, and many RPG's in general...


What I think we need is a sort of 3e Creative Campaigning...something that gives advice on how to tell a story, make a villain, create heroes out of the PC's, and generally make a Good Game.

Anybody want to pay me to write one?

 

[LightPhoenix]

What I think we need is a sort of 3e Creative Campaigning...something that gives advice on how to tell a story, make a villain, create heroes out of the PC's, and generally make a Good Game.

Anybody want to pay me to write one?

You know, I was just going to write a sarcastic post along the lines of "if you all are such know-it-alls, write such a book yourselves".

However, I think that last line really underscores a point I failed to consider - how many of us really have time to write books, have the resources to have them published, and have the motivation to do so?

Even so, instead of griping about epic rules, or the reasons that young kids munchkinize, or what have you, I think it would be much more constructive to take the time and post suggestions for how to run good campaigns.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Heck, I'd write one for pay, no problem. I've got some time, I've got some motivation, now all I need is some sucker of a company to publish it. (Hey, I convinced Silicon Phoenix to publish me!)

But that is a good idea....posting suggestions for a good campaign....


Starting Thread Now!

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

Even so, instead of griping about epic rules, or the reasons that young kids munchkinize, or what have you, I think it would be much more constructive to take the time and post suggestions for how to run good campaigns.

I would, but I've got this desparate hope that my ideas will soon be the intellectual property of WOTC.

Perhaps after August.

 

[hong]

So in some ways, I think gamers deserve what they are given by the market research-based decisions.

You say this like it's a negative thing.

In the end, though, I think it's somewhat like a child asking for candy - give them the cool stuff they crave, and you'll please them, but it won't do their games much good.

Who are you to tell me what's good for my game?

 

[Numion]

If they really took thier assumptions seriously, a real Epic Level handbook would deal in great depth with running realistic economies, handling the book keeping of nations, and running mass combat between mighty empires, because as someone who reached the 'epic levels' of 1st edition (say 15th) can attest - Epic Level characters have to deal with that sort of thing on a day to day basis. Instead, the emphasis seems to be on increasing ability to deal hp damage.

Why should a book on running empires and high-level rulebook be mutually exclusive? ELHB should be used by those who want to duke it out with Thor, and Empire Book (the kind of which you described) for those who enjoy more political challenges.

No need to get on high horse about one style of play, when you could have both.

FYI, I'm firmly in the Kick-Thors-Ass camp. Well, not actually to rival the gods, but at least storm the Abyss!

 

[rounser]

You say this like it's a negative thing.

Yup.

Well, it is for me, because I don't see these things (e.g. Splatbooks, MoP etc.) improving the quality of games I play, nor reducing the amount of work I have to do in preparation as a DM. I also think the focus on things like god stats is counterproductive in terms of producing a good campaign, and constitutes a distraction which sells, but does little to improve the quality of most D&D campaigns.

Who are you to tell me what's good for my game?

I'm arrogant like that. And I'm not telling you in particular, I'm referring to an overall D&D gamer demographic's spending habits. That's pretty darn arrogant, neh?

I believe that what actually sells and what should sell to D&D gamers is back to front. Crunchy bits and macro-level setting material sell, while adventures don't. I think that many gamers think that they're better at writing adventures and putting together campaigns than they actually are. Writing a good adventure is harder than it sounds; look at the often low quality of published adventures for evidence, and many a boring railroaded campaign. I also think that many DMs spend a disproportionate amount of effort on worldbuilding and making pretty maps rather improving their actual game sessions. I think that a lot of D&D players dream about D&D more than they play.

I think that the quality of individual games suffers as a result, and that with that the hobby overall suffers - and I think that the publishers of D&D are somewhat responsible for these things by publishing books which focus on window dressing, and distract from what makes the game "good", in my opinion.

But, as you so bluntly point out, hong, maybe feats and prestige classes and god stats and guidelines for making planes improve your game and make you happy. I just see wasted opportunities and games which don't get measurably better with these resources, and I find myself spending the same amount of time in preparation as always. I just think I see a better way - but because of D&D gamer preferences, player "psychographic" surveys, brand management, and commercial needs, it probably won't happen.

I'm not saying trash these kind of books, but provide something in addition to them to save DMs some work at a low level rather than hogging macro level stuff (which many DMs like to do anyway, such as worldbuilding), apart from Dungeon magazine and some thoroughly detailed city books from d20 publishers.

And yes, I think I know better than a demographic of buying D&D players, so that makes me pretty darn arrogant on this count!

Maybe I should go into politics.

 

[hong]

Well, it is for me, because I don't see these things (e.g. Splatbooks, MoP etc.) improving the quality of games I play, nor reducing the amount of work I have to do in preparation as a DM. I also think the focus on things like god stats is counterproductive in terms of producing a good campaign, and constitutes a distraction which sells, but does little to improve the quality of most D&D campaigns.

Oh. Of course, your particular definition of quality is something that I or any random d00d should care about.

I'm arrogant like that. And I'm not telling you in particular, I'm referring to an overall D&D gamer demographic's spending habits. That's pretty darn arrogant, neh?

Well, if that's the tack you're going to take, just write "I AM A TROLL" on your forehead in big pink texta or something. Like this.

I AM A TROLL

It works for me!

I believe that what actually sells and what should sell to D&D gamers is back to front. Crunchy bits and macro-level setting material sell, while adventures don't. I think that gamers think they're better at writing adventures than they actually are.

Does this judgement apply to your good self, or is it the I AM A TROLL thing at work again?

Writing a good adventure is harder than it sounds; look at the often low quality of published adventures for evidence, and many a boring railroaded campaign. I also think that many DMs spend a disproportionate amount of effort on worldbuilding and making pretty maps rather improving their actual game sessions. I think that a lot of D&D players dream about D&D more than they play.

Bear in mind Sturgeon's Law.

I think that the quality of individual games suffers as a result,

Your caring and solicitous regard for the quality of my game is appreciated, even if it's disguised by that darn I AM A TROLL sign.

and that with that the hobby overall suffers - and I think that the publishers of D&D are somewhat responsible for these things by publishing books which focus on window dressing, and distract from what makes the game "good", in my opinion.

Your caring and solicitous regard for the quality of my hobby is appreciated, even if it's disguised by that darn I AM A TROLL sign.

But, as you so bluntly point out, hong, maybe feats and prestige classes and god stats and guidelines for making planes improve your game and make you happy. I just see wasted opportunities and games which don't get measurably better with these resources,

Who are you to come along with a measuring stick and tick off my game?

and I find myself spending the same amount of time in preparation as always. I just think I see a better way - but because of D&D gamer preferences, player "psychographic" surveys, brand management, and commercial needs, it probably won't happen.

Whinger.

 

[rounser]

Oh. Of course, your particular definition of quality is something that I or any random d00d should care about.

WELCOM 2 TEH INTARWEB. ENJOY UR STAY.

Does this judgement apply to your good self, or is it the I AM A TROLL thing at work again?

How can I be a troll when I'm so sincere?

Bear in mind Sturgeon's Law.

Indeed. It seems to apply to adventures moreso than setting material or crunchy bits. Or, at least, it used to not apply to the crunchy bits until 3E arrived, and then the crunchy bits became especially hard to get right, it seems...

EDIT: Nope, I think that's a perception error. On second thought, the 2E splatbooks seemed less broke because the 2E core rules were kind of off balance as well. 3E core just tends to make it's supplements look bad, come to think of it...

Your caring and solicitous regard for the quality of my game is appreciated.

I care because you do.

Who are you to come along with a measuring stick and tick off my game?

Arrogant. I think we established that already, somehow...

Whinger.

It's a fair cop.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

You know, I was just going to write a sarcastic post along the lines of "if you all are such know-it-alls, write such a book yourselves".

Well I hate to 'blow my own trumpet' but...