New Legends and Lore:Head of the Class

[TerraDave]

I tossed that around too, but (to me) it sounded like he was speaking of what is to come rather than what we have. Were he speaking of the current environment I'm assuming he would have spoken about core 4e and essentials 4e ( which if I remember correctly he didn't even mention).

I am wondering if he is talking about a new edition, or some new book that is released for 4th, but test drives 5th

What I rememberd from this is that last year at Gencon, they promised a product that would show the math behind the classes, and give you more options to customize (Hero Builders Handbook?).

This was one of the dropped products, and unlike some of the others, we have heard little of it since. Wonder if it has morphed into something else?

 

[rogueattorney]

I'm afraid having basic rules and advanced rules in the same book is the same as only having advanced rules.

This is precisely true.

The issue is trying to give beginners and casual players (and old crotchety players like me who just don't want to deal all your ding darn rules) a manageable (as in under 600 pages of core rules) ruleset one can actually use to play an extended campaign.

If you stuff those core rules into a gigantic tome or tomes, you've done absolutely nothing to serve those who don't want the complexity.

 

[Gundark]

He's ignoring the middle ground, here. [...]

The thing about a sliding scale is that there are many points between the two extremes. A system that provided only a Complex Option and a Simple Option wouldn't be able to grow and change with a player.

At each decision point, a character should be able to choose "simple" or "complex." Being locked into a choice for about two years of game time isn't great, especially as you get better and learn a system more intimately.

Perhaps you have a fighter who starts out basic, but eventually learns their abilities well, and wants to opt into more complicated powers further down the line.

Perhaps you have a wizard who is happy to have complicated illusion powers with a wealth of options, but would like simple powers when it comes to damage-dealing.

Perhaps you have a barbarian character who revels in tactical combat, but who wants to be able to grunt and be effective when out of combat.

I'm actually slightly seeing this with my Essentials-mostly game now. Level 3 seemed a little underwhelming for everyone ("I get to use my encounter power again!"), in comparison to Level 2 ("I get to choose a new power!"). They could've benefited from some scaling complexity, a sliding scale that let them take the easy option, OR, let them take another option. Without a feat tax.

One of the characters also likes burning things and going beyond his power set, so for him, a satisfyingly complex resolution mechanic for stunts is essential. Another one likes to take the diplomatic route, so having a complex interaction mechanic would make my job as DM much easier.

A class structure that had a "simple class" and a "complex class" is a step in the right direction, but it's not far enough. We need to give them the opportunity to be simple or complex as they desire at every decision point, not just once, and then they're stuck with it 'till the character bites the dust.

We also need options for "simple combat" and "complex combat," and "simple noncombat" and "complex noncombat," and, again, it needs to be a sliding scale, and maybe even different for each character, so that at each point, people are getting what they want out of the game.

That's a taller order than "Here's some classes with a defined progression, and here's some that give you more choice!"

....though I totally agree that it's not fair to make the fighter simple always and the wizard complex always.

I would agree with you here. I think what would be ideal would be, like you said a decision at every level, do I take the easy "prefab" option? Or do I take the choice of menu options? Thus the player gets that choice at every level.

I think these options of easy vs. crunchy needs to be present at the DM level. I have people that I game with who have interesting ideas for campaigns but are scared off by the "rules". An easy option of DMing and game prep is needed along with tactical decisions and planing for DMs.

 

[Hussar]

This is precisely true.

The issue is trying to give beginners and casual players (and old crotchety players like me who just don't want to deal all your ding darn rules) a manageable (as in under 600 pages of core rules) ruleset one can actually use to play an extended campaign.

If you stuff those core rules into a gigantic tome or tomes, you've done absolutely nothing to serve those who don't want the complexity.

I suppose this is where the idea of boxed sets come in.

I wonder if you couldn't go both ways. You start pre-fab for say, five levels (picking a completely random number there) and then have the options open up. The beginner boxed set would take you to level 5, with your prefab character, and then the meat and potatoes version would go on from there (with levels 1-5 included as well of course).

By the time you've leveled a character 4 times, you probably have a pretty decent handle on how things work. Your pre-fab then expands, but, only one level at a time. Heck, you could still include the pre-fab option as well simply by calling out specific powers and options at given levels for those who don't want to be bothered dealing with the added complexity.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I would say that it is up to the DM and players to narrate the retraining in a manner that is consistent with whatever level of realism they want to achieve in their games.

I'm just pointing out that any mechanics first, narrate to taste design elements are not going to regain any players who left the current ruleset behind no matter how you spin it. If that isn't the purpose of these design articles then fine.

If it is the purpose then understanding the reasons why some people didn't adopt a new edition is the first step in trying to get them back.

 

[Gundark]

What I rememberd from this is that last year at Gencon, they promised a product that would show the math behind the classes, and give you more options to customize (Hero Builders Handbook?).

This was one of the dropped products, and unlike some of the others, we have heard little of it since. Wonder if it has morphed into something else?

Yep....dare I say *cough*5th edition*cough*.

I seems too soon though....but who knows....unless in some weird way 4th and 5th are compatible?!?

 

[rogueattorney]

I suppose this is where the idea of boxed sets come in.

I wonder if you couldn't go both ways. You start pre-fab for say, five levels (picking a completely random number there) and then have the options open up. The beginner boxed set would take you to level 5, with your prefab character, and then the meat and potatoes version would go on from there (with levels 1-5 included as well of course).

By the time you've leveled a character 4 times, you probably have a pretty decent handle on how things work. Your pre-fab then expands, but, only one level at a time. Heck, you could still include the pre-fab option as well simply by calling out specific powers and options at given levels for those who don't want to be bothered dealing with the added complexity.

I can just say that for me personally, I don't become any more interested in spending time on character builds at 7th or 17th level than I was at first, second, and third levels. If anything, I become less so.

A 1-5 level basic boxed set that leads into the 600-700 pages of core rules that we've seen from the last few editions of D&D would just seem to be more of the same crippleware style intro-sets we've seen from WotC over the last 15 or so years. A 1-5 level basic boxed set that leads to something more like the old Expert boxed set or the Rules Cyclopedia would be far more interesting to me. The "advanced" options would be handled in splat book type products.

I think the Labyrinth Lord format used by Goblinoid Games is the model I'd use. You have your core Labyrinth Lord rules that give you rules through level 20 including sample dungeon, wilderness area, and tutorials in about 130 pages. Then you have various add-ons sold separately with all sorts of options - Original Edition Companion for OD&D-ish type games, Advanced Edition Companion for AD&D-ish type games, Labyrinth Lord for post-apoc Gamma World-ish games, Realms of Crawling Chaos for Lovecraft-y games.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I'm afraid having basic rules and advanced rules in the same book is the same as only having advanced rules. The setup suggests you sould advance to the more advanced game as soon as possible. Gamers will make this transition before even trying the basic game. Which would be a shame for those who would benefit from playing basic.

Not only this but for those who only want simple or complex it is a forced purchase of the one they don't want.

Here is our super duper deluxe edition with all new gizmos and flashing lights! Don't want all that? We have a solution, you can just use 25-30% of the product for the same price!!

Either way its this kind of deal:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm1GN-mEyvc]YouTube - ‪Free Dung from the "Book of the Month" Club‬‏[/ame]

 

[Gundark]

By the time you've leveled a character 4 times, you probably have a pretty decent handle on how things work. Your pre-fab then expands, but, only one level at a time. Heck, you could still include the pre-fab option as well simply by calling out specific powers and options at given levels for those who don't want to be bothered dealing with the added complexity.

Yeah, a lot of people (on other threads/forums) are getting caught up in the "only N00BS would choose the easy options!!!" . There are long term gamers who don't want to have to make some complex decision about builds every level. For some people it has nothing to do with being new.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

He's ignoring the middle ground, here...

The thing about a sliding scale is that there are many points between the We also need options for "simple combat" and "complex combat," and "simple noncombat" and "complex noncombat," and, again, it needs to be a sliding scale, and maybe even different for each character, so that at each point, people are getting what they want out of the game.

That's a taller order than "Here's some classes with a defined progression, and here's some that give you more choice!"

....though I totally agree that it's not fair to make the fighter simple always and the wizard complex always.

Drat it, Kamikaze, I've been giving you XP when you talked sense but I disagreed--and now I agree with everything you said and can't. Someone spot me for the man!

I think there is another reason why what you said holds true, too. Sliding scales give options, but designing for a sliding scale means that you are unlikely to have some ill-fitting "bolt on" pieces. Games that have tried the gambit of, "We are really complex as the main thing, but we'll provide you some prefab pieces that work 'well enough' in play," are often, err, rather optimistic about "well enough" in their assessment.