[Venting] I feel a bit dirty...

[Agent Oracle]

Over at the Augury Blog, the poster, a random gamer wrote what he wanted for the future of d&d.

So what will 4th Edition be like? My hope is that they throw away some of the long-term issues that have plagued D&D. Personally, I’d like to see:

* Removal of the alignment system. Goodbye, clunky, antisocial mechanics.
* Removal of the Vancian casting system. Goodbye, clunky, bookkeeping mechanics.
* A classless system. “Classes” might be provided for ease of use, but the core system ought to be classless.

These are about the only possible major changes that could convince me that a 4th Edition would be worthwhile.

Now, the thing is... he wrote this LAST YEAR.

for some reason, I got offended, and just started venting...

And venting... and... Well, i'll shut up, and just re-post what I posted in his article.

I know i’m writing a responce almost a year after a blog is published, but I felt like i needed to do this…

No.

Alignments stay.

As a matter of fact, i think that they should get MORE complicated! Goodman Games introduced a “Virtue and Vice” alignment mechanic which acted as an addition to the base alignment system in their d20 game Etherscope, and it has a mechanic that works with it to make acting according to your character’s virtue and vice a necessity! You would get excelence points for Acting on your virtuous tendencies, or falling to your vicious ones… and excelence points could be redeemed like Bennies to save your life.

d20 modern introduced “loyalties”, where you have personal obligations to certain structures. Major loyalties, and minor loyalties. You can even be loyal to “nothing” (though it kinda limits your RP opportunities) And doing things for your loyalties earned you respect and improved your relations with the community. Bring those into play as well!

Vancian Magic Stays.

The reason D&D online went with spell points is simple: MMO’s are built for players who are going to deliberately attack as many creatures as they can. Having the casters regenerate spell points is easier than punishing wizard players with a mandatory 8-hour rest just because they’ve already cast their three magic missiles for the day. In short: Vancian magic doesn’t work for hack & slash fests, but regenerating MP does. The reason D&D magic doesn’t feel like the book magic is because the book magic has the advantage of narrative ignorance. Gandalf flicks his finger and a ray of light shoots out. Ooohhh… Look at how Maaaagickallll! D&D player casts “Scorching ray”. Big freakin’ deal. Not knowing is what makes it magic. I’ve never seen a game with Magic written into it that can actually make a roleplayer feel a sense of wonder, or as if the magic is something bigger than they are.

Okay, One exception. Unknown Armies. But that’s only because the player had to jam a pencil in each of his eyeballs to get a spell charge. (His character! Not the player!)

Character Classes Stay.

Hell, I want more of them! Make the Knight, Scout, and Warlock PHB standard in the big four-oh! Give me your Shujenja, your Ninja, and your Wu Jen as viable heroes, calling from the far east! Bring me Spell thieves and beguilers, martials and healers, favored souls and Duskblades, true namers and Incarnum users… Each new flavor of magic, each new stab at sneak attack, each new approach to killing things and taking their stuff broadens the horizon! It all flows together so BEAUTIFULLY! As long as you don’t want to start the game as “the best in the world” that is.

My final word: 4th edition (which, by the way, is a pipe-dream, not likely to be released for the next ten years) should be more D&D than current D&D is. Refine, purify, and deliver. That’s what should happen.

Whew! I am spent! I feel good for venting… I don’t know why all that rage was bottled up inside me…

I don't normally write like this! Honestly! I just... lost control I guess... I get so sick of gamers Hating other games. It makes no sense! I mean, there are so many options, can't people just accept that there are other games that already do the things he wants, and go play those? Why do they all have to be "I game, but I'd never play this system unless..."?

So... do I get my internet privileges revoked?

 

[Wayside]

I mean, there are so many options, can't people just accept that there are other games that already do the things he wants, and go play those?

You're at least aware of the problem here, even if you've choosen not to address it, right?

 

[Alzrius]

I can sort of understand your rant here. In fact, two of those three points have already gotten published as d20 options - spell points were published in Unearthed Arcana, as were generic classes, which is almost a classless system (to say nothing of the classless and levelless system presented in Buy the Numbers by S. T. Cooley Publishing).

Interestingly, there's never been a supplement that's focused on removing just alignment from standard D&D/Fantasy d20 without making other, broader changes worked into that. I think it'd be sort of cool to see a product that talked about how to do away with alignment, talking you through the various mechanical changes that come as a result (such as alignment-based spells, alignment-based damage reduction, etc).

 

[Agent Oracle]

You're at least aware of the problem here, even if you've choosen not to address it, right?

Yeah... the first guy who responded addressed that part. I just vented...

I feel like such an idiot...

 

[robberbaron]

Actually, doing away with alignment is something I have been thinking about for some time but can't quite reconcile everything affected. More thought needed.

Nice rant though.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Well, I can understand the rant. It happens, especially after a bad day and when the original tone isn't the most cordial (he did make the three concepts sound like Very Bad Things, made it sound like his humble opinion was fact, and made it clear that he didn't want any compromise.

And why don't we just discuss those topics themselves?

Alignment
I don't see why it should go away. It's always a good way for new players to get a basic framework, just like so many other things in D&D. D&D didn't get this popular without reason: It makes it easy to create a character with a viable character concept, even if you've never played any RPG before!

I might consider two things:
1. Expand Alignment to include allegiances, like in d20 Modern, maybe with a "strength rating". Say, you might have the good allegiance, the strong lawful allegiance, and total allegiance to Torm the True.

2. Take it out as a mechanic - No more "this class must be good" or spells like "protection from good". That way, if you don't like the concept of alignments in your game, it's quite easy to get rid of it. You might hide some remnants of this in other mechanics, like the paladin's code, which might enforce a certain behaviour in accordance with your order's principles.

But I think in D&D, where a lot of concepts and privatives are reified, which is also true in fantasy (and everyday human life), an alignment/allegiance system has its place. It's not like D&D were the only system with something like this: WoD has its Moral/Humanity/Whatever, L5R has honour, and so on.


But it won't be the end of the world if they leave alignment in as is.

Vancian Magic
I'm not sure it should stay, but I am sure that we should not just replace it with Mana. Mana's so vanilla - so many games, especially computer games, use mana. Mana's boring.

If we go and change it, do it properly!
I might see something like Elements of Magic! If we have to leave behind the limitation that you must prepare beforehand what spell to use, we can as well do away with the limitation of using only the spells the books offer us. Give us options ("spell lists" EoM calls them) to build our own spells.

Another thing I have thougt about in the last couple of days/weeks is a mix of EoM, current D&D magic, skill tricks and Bo9S manoeuvres, and give every class something like this. The Combat types could choose from combat manoeuvres like "Powerful Strike" or "Whirlwind", sneaksters would get stuff like ghost step and sneak attack (in the form of boosts and such), and spellcasters would get spell options, each of which would offer several choices (their effectiveness determined by your level): Say, "evoke energy area" would give you a burst, cone or line, with one of the usual energies, at 1d6/level. "Inhibit Mind" would enable you to dazzle, daze, stun, paralyse or anaesthetise one or several targets of certain types (each option costing a certain amount of points, and your total points being equal to your level).
You could use a certain amount of your "fx" manoeuvres per combat.

But I certainly won't quit D&D if they don't change much with magic

Classes
I agree that classes, at least in some form, should definetly stay. They're a defining part of D&D. You're right to say that there are other systems to play if you want no classes, and that not everything should be the same (or we'd have only one RPG in the end). Plus, classes are another of those things that make it easy for a newblood to come up with a character.

It might be a nice idea to make more general classes, though, borrowing from d20 Modern:
Make it 3 classes: Warrior, Expert, Spellcaster
Each class gets its own BAB, Saves (though there could be more leeway here), Bonus Feats and Talents alternating per level (1,3,5.... Talents; 2,4,6.... Bonus Feat), and each would get some "FX manoeuvres" like I explained under magic above.

Current class abilities and spells would be put into talents and FX, depending on whether it's something that you decide to use, like Smite (FX) or whether it's always active, and maybe limited in some other way, like favoured enemy (Talent).

New books would introduce new talent trees and new FX paths, and maybe the d20M system of Basic Class, Advanced Class and Prestige Class could be used as well.

But I won't quit D&D if 4e turns out to be like 3e, or quite similar to 3e, in regards to classes.

 

[Alnag]

Alignment is good thing, but I would like to see more effects on actual game... current alignment thing is kind of half-baked. Yes, we have this nice concepts and except for some minor bonuses/protections and magical weapons stuff it is not doing much.

Something which would motivate you to follow an alignment... maybe two axis - +5/-5 lawful and +5/-5 good which would trigger something would be a good call.

 

[Maggan]

for some reason, I got offended, and just started venting...

Honestly I fail to see why someones hopes for how the game should change to make it a better game for him would upset you that much. He's wording it very much as his personal opinion (at least the bit you quoted), so I don't see much to get upset about.

That said, I don't think your venting was that aggressive. But again, it's just his opinions, expressed on his blog, of what he hopes for the future.

Nothing radical, in my mind.

/M

 

[Pbartender]

As a matter of fact, i think that they should get MORE complicated! Goodman Games introduced a “Virtue and Vice” alignment mechanic which acted as an addition to the base alignment system in their d20 game Etherscope, and it has a mechanic that works with it to make acting according to your character’s virtue and vice a necessity! You would get excelence points for Acting on your virtuous tendencies, or falling to your vicious ones… and excelence points could be redeemed like Bennies to save your life.

True20 uses pretty much the same system, though I can't honestly say who came up with it first.

Burning Wheel's Instincts and Beleifs system is another good example.

 

[Arkhandus]

Yeah, I agree that those three concepts are pretty integral to D&D being D&D....

But I have no compunctions against ranting about how much more D&Dish D&D should become.

In these regards though, in short......

Alignment should become more integral and influential, and better defined. Combining allegiances and 'priorities' or 'strengths' for each alignment/allegiance component would be just dandy. If it has no game mechanical importance, than it really becomes superfluous and wasted space; thus it should remain mechanically important, and in fact moreso than it currently is.

Vancian magic is good and neat, and shouldn't be ditched; on the other hand, casters should have fewer spell slots rather than the dozens they currently get at upper levels. Mana/spell points should not be an element of D&D, not for magic; Psionic Strength Points/PSPs for psionic abilities would be fine (I loathe the term/abbreviation 'power points/pp' that sprang up in 3E; though nowadays, PSP is associated with the PlayStation Portable, which annoys me; just calling mental energy Psi or something would be best).

Classes and levels should not be cut down, marginalized, removed, or mutilated into something different; not all of us like point-buy games, and it would mess up D&D's appeal for both beginners and many longtime players. I would hunt down and slap to death, with a stinky fish, so help me God, anyone who actually made 4th Edition D&D printed as a virtually classless or levelless game. That includes people who insist that 3 or 4 classes is a good number. It'd be like saying 'see, we kept classes and levels, this is still D&D yo,' while lying through your teeth. If anything, D&D needs more classes in the core, with better-defined roles. I'd prefer 4E to at least have 8 core classes: fighter, rogue, cleric, druid, monk, wizard, bard, and psionicist. More preferably, 10, 15, or 20 core classes, rather than trying to cram a bunch of European, Middle Eastern, Oriental, African, Native North/South American, and North Asian character archetypes into just a small handful of generic classes. I'd sure like me some 3 kinds of warrior, 2 kinds of skill-monkey, 5 kinds of priest, 3 kinds of mage, 2 kinds of psionicist, and 5 kinds of hybrid, yep. In the core. Let's lose the Eurocentrism, kay (no, I don't think ninjae and sha'irs are better, just equally cool and valid to armoured knights and viking berserks).