My first 4E game...

[Scribble]

We all go by what "makes sense" to us. So far some things about 4E don't make the kind of sense I like. Still, it has at least two more sessions to convince me.

Yeah, I was just saying the 4e idea makes sense to me... But if it's not your cup of tea, I can understand that. It might just win you over though.

Whether or not it will be your "fantasy game of choice" though... not sure.

$75?!?! Buy it from the Trolls for full retail plus shipping or see if Amazon still has it in stock. Its something like $14 plus shipping. MSRP on the book is $19.95. Besides, if its the first printing I wouldn't buy it. The second and third printings are HUGE improvements, and the 4th is shaping up to be even better.

Yeah... I wasn't quite sure about why it would be that much. Was there a special release or soemthing of the game? like the leatherbound D&D stuff?

At some point I'll probably grab it... (the one from T&T and not the 75 dollar one) But right now all gaming purchases have been severely limited, as my wedding is in October, and I'm in the "every little bit I can save keeps us one step out of the poor house" crunch mode.

 

[Mallus]

Monopoly is no closer to being realistic then "everyone is equal".

True, but it is a game. Aren't we talking about games?

 

[Treebore]

Yeah, I was just saying the 4e idea makes sense to me... But if it's not your cup of tea, I can understand that. It might just win you over though.

Whether or not it will be your "fantasy game of choice" though... not sure.



Yeah... I wasn't quite sure about why it would be that much. Was there a special release or soemthing of the game? like the leatherbound D&D stuff?

At some point I'll probably grab it... (the one from T&T and not the 75 dollar one) But right now all gaming purchases have been severely limited, as my wedding is in October, and I'm in the "every little bit I can save keeps us one step out of the poor house" crunch mode.

There is a "special Edition" $75 version, so that may be it. go to trolllord.com and you'll quickly see if its the special edition. If its embossed, etc... it is the special edition. I would still check to see what printing it is though. The first printing does suck. So if anyone is interested in one of the "specials" make sure it is the second printing or later.

Congrats on the marriage.

 

[Treebore]

True, but it is a game. Aren't we talking about games?

If you want to argue about something do a forked thread. I am not going to argue about my opinion. Its my opinion, and its going to stay that way. If you want to try and change it your going to need to change your approach.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Monopoly is no closer to being realistic then "everyone is equal".

It's not about realismn, but about gamisn.
Gamers all want to have the same chance to participate in a game. If someone is excluded or per default weaker in a major part of the game, frustration is not unlikely.

Realismn doesn't matter. It might be totally realistic that my Noble character isn't as badass in combat as the Wizard or the Fighter, but why do I even have the option of creating a Noble character if he will not be useful in a significant part of the game, possibly paying with his life (or that of his comrades that try to bail him out) for it?

It is in some ways even worse for a Rogue - there is little in the characters abilities or its description that tells me he might not be as good in combat as the fighter. A Noble at least would certainly not have damage-increasing powers or an extensive list of combat-related abilities.

Of course, there are groups and scenarios that this works. But I don't think D&D tends to facilitate these groups or scenarios that much.

 

[AllisterH]

I'm actually going to agree and disagree with Treebore's opinion.

I think there's nothing inherently wrong with having a weak class and or a class that can't contribute in combat and shines in certain situations. Ars Magica, IMO, is one of the best games EVER and it works on that premise.

Where I disagree with is NOT telling the players explicitly that this class is "only for certain situations". Especially when the rest of the system seems to tell you that it is "equal" to other classes in combat given its XP table (e.g. the Bard class has the same XP table as does a fighter, but there's absolutely no mechanic in the 3.x DMG that mentions how much xp a bard gets in NON-combat situations. What is a DM or player supposed to think other than, "Yeah, a monk is as good as a fighter")

Again, Ars Magica is open about is assumptions and I have no issues playing a Companion since I knew what THAT meant going in.

If D&D wants rogues and bards not to contribute in combat as much as the fighter, that's ok, but make sure you tell us this UPFRONT and not basically mislead gamers by having the same xp chart and NO other method of xp allotment other than through combat.

 

[Mallus]

Ars Magica, IMO, is one of the best games EVER and it works on that premise.

I thought the premise of Ars Magica is "we all play magicians"...

Where I disagree with is NOT telling the players explicitly that this class is "only for certain situations".

That's a good point. But it doesn't address the question; "what do classes that can't meaningful contribute to the game's core activity add to the game"?

 

[AllisterH]

I thought the premise of Ars Magica is "we all play magicians".

Er no.

Ars Magica fluff is that the real important people are the magicians. You can play a companion but it is understood going in that you are there to support the mage as the game explicitly mentions it.

Basically, Ars Magica is a lot like D&D other than it is upfront about its assumptions.

 

[Mallus]

Basically, Ars Magica is a lot like D&D other than it is upfront about its assumptions.

Apparently, like Rick in Casablanca, I was misinformed.

(I've never players Ars Magica, just read about it. It looks like it has a fantastic magic system and that play revolves around magicians.)

 

[MerricB]

Er no.

Ars Magica fluff is that the real important people are the magicians. You can play a companion but it is understood going in that you are there to support the mage as the game explicitly mentions it.

Basically, Ars Magica is a lot like D&D other than it is upfront about its assumptions.

IIRC, it also assumes that the players will rotate around the Wizard, Companion and Grog roles - you don't play a companion for the entire campaign, just for a couple of sessions and then you get a turn as the Wizard.

(BTW, Treebore - I've just learnt my copies of Yggsburgh and Dark Chateau are on their way to me. Don't know where my C&C rulebooks are yet, but hopefully they'll arrive within the month).

Cheers!