Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 5890405" data-attributes="member: 996">The most important thing in supporting the 'Three Pillar' model is to make all classes capable in all three 'Pillars.'&nbsp; That way a DM is free to 'tell his stories' or 'let his campaign grow organically' in whatever direction, without having to always throw in some traps for the thief or quest of the Paladin or whatever the needs of some over-specialized class dictate to keep it involved.Ideally, each 'Pillar' could use a distinct system, and the role played in each pillar could be a defining aspect of the character.&nbsp; For instance, currently there's talk of having theme as well as class and race.&nbsp; If class (obviously) strongly determines how a character approaches Combat, perhaps race could most-strongly determine how it Interacts, and Theme determine how it contributes in Exploration?&nbsp; It would be a tidy layout, at least.Rituals and Skill Challenges are definitely good ideas and could be improved and expanded upon.&nbsp; That's unlikely to happen, tough, given the all-editions mandate of 5e.&nbsp; More likely, rituals will be folded back into spell lists, allowing casters to pour all their resources into one pillar or another if they so desire, and skill challenges (heck even skills) vanish without a trace.However much you try to develop rules for exploration and interaction, though, combat rules are likely to remain more complex and detailed, and in greater need of balancing, because combat is such a very high-stakes, high-drama aspect of the genre.&nbsp; Combat could be run in a 'shared storytelling' mode, too - in some freestyle RPGs, it is.&nbsp; That would be quite a departure for D&amp;D with its wargaming roots, though.A really good non-combat system should evoke the tension and interest of the conflict being modeled, almost like a game within a game, with its own rules and strategies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 5890405, member: 996"] The most important thing in supporting the 'Three Pillar' model is to make all classes capable in all three 'Pillars.' That way a DM is free to 'tell his stories' or 'let his campaign grow organically' in whatever direction, without having to always throw in some traps for the thief or quest of the Paladin or whatever the needs of some over-specialized class dictate to keep it involved. Ideally, each 'Pillar' could use a distinct system, and the role played in each pillar could be a defining aspect of the character. For instance, currently there's talk of having theme as well as class and race. If class (obviously) strongly determines how a character approaches Combat, perhaps race could most-strongly determine how it Interacts, and Theme determine how it contributes in Exploration? It would be a tidy layout, at least. Rituals and Skill Challenges are definitely good ideas and could be improved and expanded upon. That's unlikely to happen, tough, given the all-editions mandate of 5e. More likely, rituals will be folded back into spell lists, allowing casters to pour all their resources into one pillar or another if they so desire, and skill challenges (heck even skills) vanish without a trace. However much you try to develop rules for exploration and interaction, though, combat rules are likely to remain more complex and detailed, and in greater need of balancing, because combat is such a very high-stakes, high-drama aspect of the genre. Combat could be run in a 'shared storytelling' mode, too - in some freestyle RPGs, it is. That would be quite a departure for D&D with its wargaming roots, though. A really good non-combat system should evoke the tension and interest of the conflict being modeled, almost like a game within a game, with its own rules and strategies. [/QUOTE]

Verification