D&D 4E The WotC designers will be bashing 4e once 5e is announced . . .

[ptolemy18]

And this brings me to NPC creation and monster advancement. It sucks, plain and simple. To challenge my highish-level group with a BBEG spellcaster, I have to spend an extraordinary amount of time on his creation. Even if I skip details that really won't be used by the said NPC (like most skills), selecting feats, spells and magic items takes too much time.

What about the NPC templates in the DMG? Those are WAY better than any NPC-generating resources which were available prior to D&D3.x. If you go beyond that, you're just asking for pre-generated NPCs.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I took it as comedy. A loving tribute to past editions, and some of the quirks with the rules. It didn't enter my mind that it could be considered bashing. I thought it was an amusing trifle.

/M

The specific point of the teaser was to establish the message that previous editions were painful to play--now here's something that won't be!

 

[SkidAce]

Don't tell me I'm the only person who just eyeballs it? Take a creature from the Monster Manual, give it a level in this or that, enlarge its size (love that size change chart!), maybe give it a new feat or two, and viola... always worked for me. 3.x gives you all the tools to fiddle with the monsters, so I fiddle with them. I've rarely if ever bothered to do the exact "monster level progression" -- that, I will agree, is CONFUSING -- but it's nice to have a bunch of options listed out that I can pick and choose from. (Like the list of monster templates in the Savage Species book... hurray, I can make a Lizardfolk Wight or an Insectoid Ogre!)

Granted, I don't necessarily have any idea what the resulting mutant's CR is supposed to be, but...

Jason

Bravo Bravo!

 

[Maggan]

The specific point of the teaser was to establish the message that previous editions were painful to play

Which is quite truthful, as far as I'm concerned. Every edition has its bright sides, and its dark sides.

Grappling in 3e is a perfect example. I've seen the same scene played out at tables I've sat at, so for me it was a joke perfectly grounded in the real world.

/M

 

[Sun Knight]

You need to work at a company where people are proud of the work they do.

It happens all the time there.

There is pride in one's work and then there is hubris. It is a fine line...

 

[Piratecat]

There is pride in one's work and then there is hubris. It is a fine line...

Just like repeatedly threadcrapping in multiple threads, dropping in disparagement without adding content. You've passed that line. Please stop it.

Email me if you have questions about this.

 

[Forrester]

A huge one is monster design. I remember the early days of 3e how everyone was raving about the brilliance of "intuitive" monster stats in 3e and how "finally" monsters and PCs had the same rules governing their design.

Now they trumpet what is, essentially, a return to the monster design philosophy of AD&D 1e/2e. And everyone cheers!

"We have always been at war with Eurasia."

I was one of those who really liked that in 3E, monsters and PCs would have the same rules governing their design -- for instance, the idea that an Ogre only did d10 damage in 1E, while a fighter with Ogre strength (18/00) did a minimum of 7pts of damage, annoyed me big-time.

I think what a lot of us didn't realize back-in-the-day was how complicated that would make life for GMs, and how much prep time it would take to create encounters for parties at higher levels, not to mention run combats. I guess I'm one of the flip-floppers -- I cheered the move towards the same design for monsters and PCs, and now I'm cheering the move back!

(As long as ogres will still do more damage than the average buff fighter, of course . . .)

 

[Pygon]

I remember when Charmin did all those absorbency tests in their commercials. Then Improved charmin came out and when they compared it to the original Charmin, it performed as badly as those other brands.

Strange how when new and improved products come out, the existing ones invariably become worse.

 

[Merlion]

I remember when Charmin did all those absorbency tests in their commercials. Then Improved charmin came out and when they compared it to the original Charmin, it performed as badly as those other brands.

Strange how when new and improved products come out, the existing ones invariably become worse.

They wouldnt be new and improved otherwise.


Personally, I like the fact that the designers are owning up to the fact that there work isnt perfect....which of course is inevitable, especially since theres a lot of gamers and most of them are picky, and so pleasing them all is impossible anyway. And that includes both how the game is presented, and the game itself.

 

[Pygon]

Unfortunately, we won't hear from them what's wrong with 4e until 5e. I'd prefer to hear it from them sooner, frankly.