The Advantage of MtG over D&D

[francisca]

I give this rant a 4/10, but only because he actually is trying to make a point.

Some food for thought:

Comparing D&D to M:tG is in fact, apples to oranges.

I just wish Hasbro/WotC understood that. Witness: the D&D Miniatures game.

Now, the Mini's game very well could become a rigid, tournament style game. And frankly, M:tG could benefit from some aspects of the Mini's game, namely, point limits on decks.

Of course, having rambled about the apples/oranges thing, I have to say, 3.X is a closer comparison to M:tG than 1E ever was. I mean, Magic is all about rules lawyering and the letter, not intent, of the rules. Mmmm. Maybe it is apples to apples afterall.

 

[Thanee]

D&D sadly, doesn't have this.

Well... it's hardly possible...

I also don't really understand the problem... house rules are part of roleplaying since decades, many rulesets even encourage them, since this is not a competitive game, the game is meant to be fun and that means different things to different people. Some rules are just not appropriate to certain campaigns or groups. Where's the point in "forcing" them to use them as written, if that's not what they want?

in my opinion until you sit down and work with the game without changing any of the rules as written in order to learn them you have no right to criticize and no competance to evaluate them.

I believe this is completely wrong.

While there are many, who make changes to the rules too quickly without having identified the real problem, this surely does not apply to everyone. And in some cases, it's totally silly to say that one needs to play with it first to criticise it. One needs to have put some thought into that issue before criticising it, but playtesting is not a requirement to understand a rule and how it interacts with the game. It might be for some, who are more practically inclined, so to say, but others can do that in a purely theoretical fashion with the same or usually even greater success (since playtesting just gives single examples, and single examples do not prove anything, it's just a random examination (unless it is done in a structured and professional way, which takes too much time and resources for such a huge product like D&D), where you hope, that issues get to the surface). By saying, these people have no competence, you are leaning yourself very far out of the window, so to say. Hope you got that ring of featherfall handy.

It doesn't need a genius to figure, for example, that 3.0 Harm or Miasma is highly broken, or the 3.0 PsiHB Psychofeedback, or the 3.5 XPH Energy Missile. Or how about the Dweomerkeepers ability to cast Wish without spending any XP. There's really no playtesting required. At all. The only question is, how these infamous examples actually made it into print...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darkness]

Or how about the Dweomerkeepers ability to cast Wish without spending any XP.

Her ability to do what? Wow. Didn't realize they can do that. Never saw that ability in Faiths & Pantheons... I only knew the efreeti monster class in S&S could do it.

 

[Dark Psion]

You make a good argument, but I can not help notice one word conspiciously missing from this thread (assuming it has not been consumed by Darkness )

ERRATA

I thought I knew the rules to Magic yesterday, but then they changed, and changed, and changed. I stopped playing Magic because the errata got in the way of the fun.

I don't mind a tournament-type strict rules system, but continually revising those rules in a strict setting is a migrane in search of my head.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

For the record: D&D player since 1977, MtG player from Alpha to 6thEd.

I agree with the apples/oranges thing but...

I fall into the learn-the-rules-before-you-break-them camp. It makes for good music, good writing, and a lot of other things as well, and MtG is definitely rules oriented.

If nothing else, it gives you a better conceptual grounding of the how a rule works, and why a rule exists- fundamental understandings of a rule that must exist before you can properly modify the rule.

Example: I have a buddy who is an excellent mathematician & rpg player. He was much put out by the change from the old (1st & 2Ed) stat system to the 3Ed stats, especially how STR was handled. While the new system is much simpler with all of the stats handled identically, he pointed out that by doing so, they changed the probabilities within the game.

He's always been a fan of point buy systems, and had designed one for 1st/2Ed. That small change to STR mucked up his system horribly: 3Ed characters using his old system were simply uber.

 

[Thanee]

Well... a problem of his system, not the 3rd edition.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Her ability to do what? Wow. Didn't realize they can do that. Never saw that ability in Faiths & Pantheons... I only knew the efreeti monster class in S&S could do it.

It's the 3.5 version, that can do that, not the 3.0 version.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darkness]

It's the 3.5 version, that can do that, not the 3.0 version.

Hehe. Didn't know there was a 3.5 version. I had to Google to find it. CD web enhancement, eh? I see. Supernatural Spell... Nice power. Giving it an xp limit would be a quick fix. Say, 500 xp maximum, the rest must be paid by the caster. There are only a few spells that cost more (not even limited wish does) but it would keep wish in check.