Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 5812466" data-attributes="member: 32164">Fair point. I am cautiously optimistic that WotC will start with the modern game engine, including such things as a single universal resolution mechanic (d20 + modifiers), consistent mechanics and ability score bonuses, fundamental system math, to-hit bonuses and escalating AC (vs. tables or THAC0), and so on that were codified in 3e and have been held over to 4e.But as they've really gotten under the hood, I think they've found that some of the choices they made need some tweaking. If saves are ability score-based, why should you have only 3 as opposed to 6? Sure, it means you either have more balanced PCs, or characters that have both strengths and weaknesses, but is that really a bad thing?I think you're right that the bulk of the market is in the 3e/4e camp, but I also think there's a solid "old school community" (the Castles & Crusades or Swords & Wizardry crowd). But in order to rectify the 3e and 4e camps, we have to find common ground. I think we'd all agree that skills and feats work differently between the two editions, and that the bulk of 4e's AEDU powers are largely a substitute for traditional so-called "vancian magic," right? Well, what happens if you strip those out?Well, we still want the classes to be unique, so we start adding class features. Different classes get access to different weapons and armor, some of them get granted powers, and so on. Eventually, we have to decide on a spell system - it's the elephant in the room.Fundamentally, although it may well have more classes, and more races, and a more modern engine, this is a system that is going to look and feel a lot like Dungeons & Dragons (1974). Because we don't have skills, ability scores form the basis for all checks. Because we're trying to decide between 3e's 3 saves based on 1 attribute each and 4e's 3 saves based on the best of two, we compromise and say "hey, why not 6 saves?"But the thing is, when all is said and done, that system looks a lot like what a OD&D, 1e, BECMI, or 2e player would expect in a game called Dungeons & Dragons. Sure, AC goes up instead of down, and (hopefully!) the classes are better balanced.A simple skill system (based on abilities) and a simple feat system are pretty much part of the game. Weapon and armor proficiencies and combat styles (at the least) have always existed, and proficiencies and secondary skills have been around almost as long. In simple form, it's likely nobody will object.Of course, as I said earlier, the elephant in the room is how you handle wizard (and cleric and druid and other spellcaster) spells. And, frankly, for history's sake, the old Vancian magic system (with some minor tweaks - a la what Pathfinder has done) will probably make almost everyone happy.Now, I think it's pretty obvious that wizards need a boost at low levels (compared to earlier editions) so that they can contribute in a meaningful way for more of the adventure. And, as the game moves into high levels, either spellcasters need to be reined in, or the other classes need a boost. So, for the sake of building a better game, we should probably re-write some of those old spells (especially the ones that have remained the same since Gary and Dave scribbled them down in 1974.It also seems to me that if we're going to have wizards who can alter reality and decimate armies at high levels (which I think most of us DO), we need to find an acceptable way to scale up fighters. Fighter vs. Wizard has always been the hardest balance issue - especially because it seems to trigger some deep-seated prejudice in the gamers who love overpowered wizards, and those who would really like to see more parity in the fighter class (call it "Raistlin vs. Conan"). The question seems to come down to this: should a high-level fighter's abilities still be limited to what is achievable or "realistic" for a normal human? Or is he capable of surpassing those limits? By how much?I raise this "balance issue" as fighter vs. wizard, because if you can get those two classes to "play nice" across all levels, slotting the other classes into the spectrum should be (comparatively) trivial.</blockquote>

Verification