Scott Rouse blog - Rogue ability

[billd91]

It has been said that work on 4E has been going on for 2 years. if you look back at the releases over those 2 years, it is readily apparent. It starts with Complete Arcane. This wasn't when the 4e work started, but when the seed was planted. WotC did something very different with Complete Arcane -- it created the Warlock, the first "at will" D&D caster. And as much as there has been and continues to be controversy over the class specifics, the concept must have taken hold. That was 2004. 2005 was likely spent thinking about how that one little change, that very "video game" change, has created such a stir and what to do about, and with that.

Unless they happened to be shooting for the comic book blaster or wizard (like Dr. Strange) rather than the video game feel.

 

[Gentlegamer]

My only experience with 1st edition D&D is the Curse of the Azure Bonds CRPG.

Stop right there. You weren't playing AD&D or an actual role-playing game. This underscores how the limited experience of a video game rpg translates into "combat is the whole of the experience" that seems to be coming into 4D&D thinking. This limiting of the experience means all classes need "something to do in [tactical] combat."

 

[med stud]

Stop right there. You weren't playing AD&D or an actual role-playing game. This underscores how the limited experience of a video game rpg translates into "combat is the whole of the experience" that seems to be coming into 4D&D thinking. This limiting of the experience means all classes need "something to do in [tactical] combat."

Yes, I only played the computer game. I'm absolutely sure you could have fantastic intrigues and a very good time with ADD, but that's not unique for that game. You can have the same intrigues etc with many games. The limits, though, in the sense I'm talking about, is that in combat there are many times classes just don't contribute to much. I also read the PHB and DMG of 1st edition but they left me (and my players) with the same feeling while 3e was exciting enough to learn a new game for.

 

[Prince of Happiness]

Yes, I only played the computer game. I'm absolutely sure you could have fantastic intrigues and a very good time with ADD, but that's not unique for that game. You can have the same intrigues etc with many games. The limits, though, in the sense I'm talking about, is that in combat there are many times classes just don't contribute to much. I also read the PHB and DMG of 1st edition but they left me (and my players) with the same feeling while 3e was exciting enough to learn a new game for.

That computer game was a big fail in a lot of ways in combat as well. Magic Missiles that miss? WTF???

 

[jasin]

It starts with Complete Arcane. This wasn't when the 4e work started, but when the seed was planted. WotC did something very different with Complete Arcane -- it created the Warlock, the first "at will" D&D caster. And as much as there has been and continues to be controversy over the class specifics, the concept must have taken hold. That was 2004. 2005 was likely spent thinking about how that one little change, that very "video game" change, has created such a stir and what to do about, and with that.

Sorry for picking out what might be a peripheral point, but it interests me: why is the warlock as an at will caster a very "video game" change?

It seems to me that your typical fantasy wizard (even though there's really no such thing) looks like something quite close to a hybrid of the warlock's system and the Bo9S system: no hard, fixed limit to magic, certainly not in terms of "X/day", but you cannot just keep pumping out fireballs incessantly because it's in some vague way draining or tiring. "Fireball at will if ready, 1 minute rest to re-ready" would model that pretty well.

In any case, I don't see why you'd associte at will with video games in particular.

 

[Henry]

That computer game was a big fail in a lot of ways in combat as well. Magic Missiles that miss? WTF???

Really?? I never saw that! The magic missiles in all those Gold Box games worked by the book for me -- such to the point that they were 90% of what my magic-users carried.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

Stop right there. You weren't playing AD&D or an actual role-playing game. This underscores how the limited experience of a video game rpg translates into "combat is the whole of the experience" that seems to be coming into 4D&D thinking. This limiting of the experience means all classes need "something to do in [tactical] combat."

I can't think of any reason that all classes shouldn't have something to do in combat... Nor can I think of any reason that all classes shouldn't have anything to do in any part of the game that is likely to come up often or to take up a significant amount of game time..

Later
silver

 

[Reynard]

Sorry for picking out what might be a peripheral point, but it interests me: why is the warlock as an at will caster a very "video game" change?

It seems to me that your typical fantasy wizard (even though there's really no such thing) looks like something quite close to a hybrid of the warlock's system and the Bo9S system: no hard, fixed limit to magic, certainly not in terms of "X/day", but you cannot just keep pumping out fireballs incessantly because it's in some vague way draining or tiring. "Fireball at will if ready, 1 minute rest to re-ready" would model that pretty well.

In any case, I don't see why you'd associte at will with video games in particular.

That's a good question. It has to do with the shift between the resource management element to the instant gratification element. It has to do with the idea that in video games, even if there is some sort of spell point system, it is usually extremely fast in refreshing -- so much so as to be near "at will". Tabletop play doesn't do refresh rates real well because it means a lot of paperwork -- or pushing around chits or tokens or whatever -- so the answer to that is "at will, but only once per round".

I certainly can't prove that the warlock in particular is "video-gamey" in any objective way; I can only say that is where I see the first fundamental shift in playstyle in 3.5 that leads us to 4E.

 

[Bishmon]

It has to do with the shift between the resource management element to the instant gratification element.

What video game RPGs have you played?

 

[The Little Raven]

It has to do with the idea that in video games, even if there is some sort of spell point system, it is usually extremely fast in refreshing -- so much so as to be near "at will".

Not in my experience.

In WoW, when I run out of mana as a mage, I am dead in the water. Unless I can recover mana (which I have a special ability that regenerates some of it as long as I can go without being hit for 8 seconds, and then there are some limited-use potions and such) instantly, I will die with nothing to do. The worse thing you can hear from a healer is "out of mana." So no, there is no "at will" with most classes in RPGs. Resource management (in this case, mana) is still king. Other classes (rogue, warrior) have different energy sources (energy, rage) that work on different rules, but they are still limited in other regards (timing, primarily).

Between battles, yes, you can recover very quickly, but that feeds into the game design philosophy that it's poor design when your players are sitting around NOT HAVING FUN. Thus, you reduce downtime as much as possible.