The Call of the World Builder

[Voadam]

So the problem is incomplete, poorly thought-out rules?

Or is it that the fluff says one thing, and the mechanics don't reflect it?

No, the problem is complete, poorly thought-out rules

I agreed with Mustrum Ridcully's point from post 59 that the shadow's spawning ability is problematic.

The Shadows ability to spawn is a very awkward type of mechanics, since if taken at face value, Shadows would overrun the world. It you only put this ability in the fluff, you never run into that problem. Each DM can decide on its own, and until the PCs have researched the information for the campaign, shadows and shadow creation/spawning is a mystery and can create suspense...

However his solution seems nonsensical.

If you just shift that ability into the description section then you will create a disconnect of description and mechanics.

If there are no mechanics for spawning the default would be no spawning, that they'd need to be individually created somehow just as mummies, zombies, skeletons, and liches must be.

If shadows spawn instantly this must be clear beforehand because it will significantly impact encounters with shadows.

I want powers described enough for me to use them meaningfully in encounters and I want the descriptions to match the mechanics.

The solution to the poorly thought out but mechanically valid spawning ability IMO is to change it, not to say this is not the type of thing the monster manual should define mechanically for creatures.

 

[Hussar]

No, the problem is complete, poorly thought-out rules

I agreed with Mustrum Ridcully's point from post 59 that the shadow's spawning ability is problematic.



However his solution seems nonsensical.

If you just shift that ability into the description section then you will create a disconnect of description and mechanics.

If there are no mechanics for spawning the default would be no spawning, that they'd need to be individually created somehow just as mummies, zombies, skeletons, and liches must be.

If shadows spawn instantly this must be clear beforehand because it will significantly impact encounters with shadows.

I want powers described enough for me to use them meaningfully in encounters and I want the descriptions to match the mechanics.

The solution to the poorly thought out but mechanically valid spawning ability IMO is to change it, not to say this is not the type of thing the monster manual should define mechanically for creatures.

But, again, since this is the level of campaign creation, why not leave the actual mechanics up to the individual DM? In the flavor text you say something to the effect of, "some slain by the hideous energies of a shadow arise as spawn." ((Ok, I suck at this, but you get the idea)).

It's then up to the DM do determine how often things spawn. Toss some guidelines into the DMG discussing this sort of thing and you're good to go.

If you have rock solid mechanics for this, then any campaign which uses the default shadow should follow those mechanics. If you leave the mechanics fuzzy, then an individual DM can deal with it as needed. DM A might just want to use half a dozen shadows in his dungeon because they're cool and he doesn't need spawning rules. DM B wants to make shadows a major part of his campaign, so, he looks at the guidelines in the DMG for how to develop this sort of plot (assuming he wants a Dawn of the Dead sort of thing) and goes ahead and does that.

Shadow spawning rates only matter to a very small subset of games. Unless shadows play a fairly large part in a given campaign, most people don't care and completely ignore the rules. Leaving out those rules would not affect them.

For those who do feature shadows as a main element, they're likely going to go beyond the RAW anyway, so, anything you provide is likely going to get ignored also.

Why include left handed torque wrenches in a toolkit?

 

[LostSoul]

However his solution seems nonsensical.

If you just shift that ability into the description section then you will create a disconnect of description and mechanics.

What you will have is something that does not affect PCs.

This could be a problem. I could see a PC killed by a shadow. It doesn't say he spawns in that encounter, so he doesn't. Maybe the DM will decide he does - he's got that authority, specifically, the authority to add another monster to the combat. But what happens when the PCs try to use the Raise Dead ritual on him?

Is he dead, or not?

This is why I think players should be able to initiate skill challenges. If they can, there's no problem. "We want to use Raise Dead." "No - he's not dead." "Okay, then - skill challenge: can we get him to the state where we can use Raise Dead on him?"

In my view, the role of fluff is to frame a conflict. In the shadow spawning case, it does a great job of adding to the dead character issue. Not only do you have to spend your Ritual resources, but you have to succeed at a skill challenge as well. (And if you succeed, you get XP. Important!)

But if it's only up to the DM, there could be arguments. If you can agree to let the dice settle it, and everyone has the option to say, "Let's go to the dice", functional groups should be okay. (And I think functional groups could still have that argument - "No, no skill challenge here, sorry guys, he's not dead" - if the authority rests in only one person. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe functional groups don't need that.)

If there are no mechanics for spawning the default would be no spawning, that they'd need to be individually created somehow just as mummies, zombies, skeletons, and liches must be.

That's just not true. The DM can say something happens without having to use mechanics to say it does, just like I can say my PC has red hair without having to roll on a table. There aren't any human reproduction mechanics, yet life still goes on.

What you do need mechanics for is resolving conflicts (in 4e, at least how I think it is designed to be played) between PCs and "the world". If you don't want PCs to become shadow spawn if they are killed by them, then don't let shadows have that ability. That says nothing about how shadows can affect NPCs.

If shadows spawn instantly this must be clear beforehand because it will significantly impact encounters with shadows.

Very true. If you don't want them to spawn PCs, don't let them.

I want powers described enough for me to use them meaningfully in encounters and I want the descriptions to match the mechanics.

If the shadow spawn ability stands as it is, no mechanics, you can still have the description match what happens in the fictional world as resolved by the dice.

I think you know how I would play it - either the PC spawns as a Shadow (if I, as DM, think the encounter could use some more spicing up) or he writhes in agony, about to become a shadow, out of the reach of divine intervention - unless you succeed at a skill challenge, that is...

 

[hong]

I agree that despite the adventures sucking, killing monsters and taking their loot was fun. But in the long term that grows really old. I played Basic D&D and AD&D 1e between the ages of 10 and 15, and it got boring. Very boring. Because killing monsters got old and there were better things to do.

Nonsense. Killing things never gets old!

 

[DandD]

To make/keep monster killing fun and fresh, that's why we get a new edition of the D&D-rules. Oh, and some abstracted social interaction rules too.

 

[Just Another User]

So, why are all the world builder's here pissed off?

You assume that constraints are always bad for creativity. This is not always true. And certainly is not true for everyone. There are those that like to build their own walls and there are those that like take the existing walls and paint them, put on a nice wallpaper, maybe open some extra windows or put on a roof and, if necessary, throw them down some of them and rebuild.

I'm more of the second type myself, "do whatever you want" it is not a real source of inspiration for me. I like more "the world is like this, this and this" and I go "mmh, interesting but what would could happen if I change this part like that"

 

[Just Another User]

And about that thing about Demogorgon and the balors, I disagree, demogorgon don't need to be higher CR than a balor more than a king need to be higher level than his generals, the genral can ba a 15 level fighter veteran of the dwarves wars and the knig a 3rd level aristocrat, and the general still obey him, because he is the king, because the genral know that even if he defeat him the other generals and most soldiers would no obey him, because the king have an high enough Diplomacy to keep him Friendly and/or a number of other reasons. Even in 3rd edition level is not everything.

 

[med stud]

And about that thing about Demogorgon and the balors, I disagree, demogorgon don't need to be higher CR than a balor more than a king need to be higher level than his generals, the genral can ba a 15 level fighter veteran of the dwarves wars and the knig a 3rd level aristocrat, and the general still obey him, because he is the king, because the genral know that even if he defeat him the other generals and most soldiers would no obey him, because the king have an high enough Diplomacy to keep him Friendly and/or a number of other reasons. Even in 3rd edition level is not everything.

I defenitly agree. Anyone of the American generals could kick Roosevelt's ass, since he had polio, but that didn't mean that they had more power than the president. Personal authority doesn't correlate with personal prowess very often.

Maybe a case could be made that demogorgon should be strongest since demons are a Chaotic breed. On the other hand, they all have intelligences in at least the 20s, so they are most likely too sophisticated to just fight each others physically all the time.

 

[Hussar]

You assume that constraints are always bad for creativity. This is not always true. And certainly is not true for everyone. There are those that like to build their own walls and there are those that like take the existing walls and paint them, put on a nice wallpaper, maybe open some extra windows or put on a roof and, if necessary, throw them down some of them and rebuild.

I'm more of the second type myself, "do whatever you want" it is not a real source of inspiration for me. I like more "the world is like this, this and this" and I go "mmh, interesting but what would could happen if I change this part like that"

Then I think that you are going to be happy considering the amount of basic shared world they are including in the core books. Racial histories, implied schools of magic, things like that. Fantastic.

But, even better, those elements are not solidly tied to the mechanics apparently. The Golden Wyvern school of magic is not Evocation School. Now, you can define Golden Wyvern School in whatever way you want and not have it lock tied to the idea that all member of that school blow stuff up.

That was my point in the original post. You can finally start at the goal and work backwards. That was extremely hard to do in 3e. Possible, but hard. There were so many fiddly bits in 3e to keep track of. Heck, look at the stat blocks in published materials. Even the professionals couldn't get them right.

Finally, apparently, I'll be able to watch a movie and say, "Wow, that would make a really cool campaign, and then design from that end point without having to massively rewrite the rules. Think about it, for all the freedom of 3e, you cannot even do something as archtypal as Conan without rewriting the rules to the point where they aren't even compatible with core rules.

This is why I am excited about 4e. And, it's why I really wonder what the world builders are complaining about.

 

[Hussar]

On the Demogorgon thing.

Look, I'm simply repeating canon here. I didn't make this up. Demogorgon became prince of demons by kicking the ass of every demon that challenged him.

But, seriously, if you think that demons, the lords of the chaotic abyss would actually bend knee to someone because they talk better, AND, you think that Demogorgon is the one to do this, more power to you. Me, I think that the Abyss is a place where, if you are weaker, you are fodder. The strongest survive and rule.

Considering that's how Chaotic Evil is defined in the game, I'm really wondering how you define it.