Where's the oppressive fluff?

[Scurvy_Platypus]

we probably would have "Midnight Sunstone Adoration" ...

Mmmmm. Midnight Sunstone Bazookas, and flying grizzly bears that shoot lasers from their eyes. World of Synnibarr, you were so close...

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

You just described the whole internet. But, yeah, the 4e forum over the last 9 months was particularly bad for that. The amount of wailing over utter trivialities like the folding of erinyes into succubus, Golden Wyvern Adept and dragonborn breasts was ridiculous.

I remember someone claiming (in the early days, just a month or so after the announcement) that he would never buy or play 4th edition because Asmodeus was raised to deity status...

... I am not making this up!

 

[Lizard]

Mmmmm. Midnight Sunstone Bazookas, and flying grizzly bears that shoot lasers from their eyes. World of Synnibarr, you were so close...

Glad to see someone got the reference.

 

[korjik]

For so many months, I was told on these boards that the 4e fluff was going to ruin homebrewing. That it was hardwired to the rules and made serious headaches for those that didn't play in "The Default World".

So, I'm looking at the core rules and... where is all that restraining fluff?

Eladrin coming from Feywild?
Tieflings are nobles from lost Bael Turath?

Two quickies I could think of at 1am

 

[Spatula]

The one thing that I've heard of that could be considered "homebrew-annoying" is the whole business about primordials/giants/elementals/gods/angels.

In particular the primodials, war against gods in the past, elemental archons and angels as footsoldiers in wars between gods and primordials etc etc.

There is a huge chunk of backing fluff which then finds its way into mechanics for a number of things too (e.g. the remoulding of giants into elemental creatures), and unweaving that might end up a complete pain in the neck.

Yes, very much so. The implied setting (which has always been there) does have an impact on the rules, especially when it comes to monsters. This was never a problem for me in the past, as I was always basically gaming in that implied setting, but when I started using Eberron and it's very different cosmology, using outsiders suddenly became work.

It's not some game-breaking massive problem, but it is an annoyance to DMs and possibly players trying to convert campaigns that used the previous implied setting over to 4e.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

And you assume the opposite. In all honesty I'm starting my real campaign going tomorrow... and I, as well as my players, are already tired of kobolds. My game will probably not feature a kobold for a pretty long time.

I can tell you that WOTC did a lot of polls and market research regarding this.

I also have a LOT of personal experience regarding what type of games get run out there. Just because I've had SO many different DMs in a couple of different cities.

I can tell you that the average DM has very little time(3 or less hours per week) to plan out their game. That is too little time to come up with new monsters every week unless that is almost all the work you are doing to prepare your game.

Running an interesting encounter in 4e requires a variety of different roles in the same encounter. Kobold Brute and Kobold Leader wouldn't do. If you want a Kobold encounter, you need a Kobold Skirmisher and a Lurker wouldn't be too bad either. And that's just running a Kobold encounter once.

Creating a monster in 4e is not easy. Not from scratch. I certainly wouldn't want to do it. I mean, it's easy to create a shell of a monster without a problem. Take the stats for a 5th level skirmisher, call it a Kobold and you are done. Of course, to give that monster flavor while not making it overpowered requires some real thinking and real work.

I tend to think most DM's have a setting or build a setting that have certain conceits, but to assume those conceits are the same as another's doesn't make much sense to me. It's sorta like...Well if I like chocolate then a company should make 50 variations of chocolate and 2 of vanilla, because most people eat chocolate since I do. That isn't sound logic.

No, what I'm saying is that a company that makes chocolates puts out a number of varieties of white chocolate, a number of varieties of dark chocolate, and a number of varieties of milk chocolate as those are their best selling products and what the majority of people coming into their store ask for.

You are suggesting that they should be selling more gumdrops and wondering why everyone likes all these chocolates.

When I create an adventure, the process is simple:
-Find a problem for the PCs to solve(kidnapped princess, undead infestation, flood caused by water spirits, etc)
-Find an interesting twist to the story(the mayor is secretly the one raising the undead, the princesss agreed to be kidnapped as part of a bigger plot, etc)
-Figure out the encounters that the PCs will be fighting which is a couple step process:
a) Look in the appendix of the MM at the level the PCs are and figure out what kind of monsters are around that level
b) See if any of the monsters might make an interesting twist to the story
c) If I can't find a good monster then go up or down a level or 2
d) Pick a couple of creatures from the list in order to create a balanced encounter. If I am missing a good creature for a role that I'd like in the combat then use the increasing or decreasing level rules on another creature in order to fit it in.
e) Find an interesting location for the encounters to take place in
-String the encounters together in a way that makes sense given the plot: First the PCs fight some undead, then after following some clues fight some cultists who worship Orcus, then they find a clue that leads them to fight the mayor and the most powerful undead he has created along with his guards.
-Fill in the details(where the clues are found, exactly what they say, make up some NPCs who they will meet, etc)

And the last step(since it takes the longest) is almost always the one that gets put off until I'm essentially making it up on the fly.

For this process, however, I never need to know the weight of any of the creatures. Nor much about them other than: What kind of creature are they and where do they come from? It's fairly easy to make up an excuse to use almost any monster if I want to.

 

[La Bete]

Thing is Lizard, there's not any real proof that the designers changed it. For all we know, they could've been pulling our chain to stir up controversy.

And people say that the marketing of 4e was poor. Hah!

 

[Imaro]

I can tell you that WOTC did a lot of polls and market research regarding this.

I also have a LOT of personal experience regarding what type of games get run out there. Just because I've had SO many different DMs in a couple of different cities.

I can tell you that the average DM has very little time(3 or less hours per week) to plan out their game. That is too little time to come up with new monsters every week unless that is almost all the work you are doing to prepare your game.

Ok, please provide me a link or any type of evidence that WotC polled their consumers on what type of MM they should do. It's becoming the in thing to throw marketing research up (without any real evidence) just because WotC decided to do something. So please show me any type of evidence this was specifically researched. Without it you have your anecdotal evidnce and that's it.

As far as the average DM having 3 or less hours, well the DMG suggests that unless you can devote 4 or more hours to prep time...you should probably be running from modules anyway...that way every monster role is stated up for you. Personally I try to devote around one hour a day, through the week and maybe 2-3 on saturday afternoon for my Sunday games.

Running an interesting encounter in 4e requires a variety of different roles in the same encounter. Kobold Brute and Kobold Leader wouldn't do. If you want a Kobold encounter, you need a Kobold Skirmisher and a Lurker wouldn't be too bad either. And that's just running a Kobold encounter once.

So, are you saying every monster should have stats of every role in the MM? Or that the only way to have a decent encounter is to stick every role in an encounter? What about solos and elites, do you need other roles to supplement them as well? I mean with this argument the MM still comes off as a weak product because it doesn't provide all the roles for every monster within it's pages. So not a lot of variety or inspiration in monsters (compared to 3.5) and not every role defined for the creatures it does contain. Who was this book satisfying again.

Creating a monster in 4e is not easy. Not from scratch. I certainly wouldn't want to do it. I mean, it's easy to create a shell of a monster without a problem. Take the stats for a 5th level skirmisher, call it a Kobold and you are done. Of course, to give that monster flavor while not making it overpowered requires some real thinking and real work.

You grab an ability or two you feel is on par with other monsters of it's level and role. In fact this would seem to be in favor of more monsters as they would give you a wider range of abilities to look at for different levels and roles.

No, what I'm saying is that a company that makes chocolates puts out a number of varieties of white chocolate, a number of varieties of dark chocolate, and a number of varieties of milk chocolate as those are their best selling products and what the majority of people coming into their store ask for.

You are suggesting that they should be selling more gumdrops and wondering why everyone likes all these chocolates.

Again, you assume chocolate is your best selling and most wanted product. This takes a little time to determine, and we'll see with this format if the MM continue to sell as well as the 1st. WotC is nothing if not adaptable, and I feel around the 3rd or 4th MM then we'll know if this format is preferred.

When I create an adventure, the process is simple:
-Find a problem for the PCs to solve(kidnapped princess, undead infestation, flood caused by water spirits, etc)
-Find an interesting twist to the story(the mayor is secretly the one raising the undead, the princesss agreed to be kidnapped as part of a bigger plot, etc)
-Figure out the encounters that the PCs will be fighting which is a couple step process:
a) Look in the appendix of the MM at the level the PCs are and figure out what kind of monsters are around that level
b) See if any of the monsters might make an interesting twist to the story
c) If I can't find a good monster then go up or down a level or 2
d) Pick a couple of creatures from the list in order to create a balanced encounter. If I am missing a good creature for a role that I'd like in the combat then use the increasing or decreasing level rules on another creature in order to fit it in.
e) Find an interesting location for the encounters to take place in
-String the encounters together in a way that makes sense given the plot: First the PCs fight some undead, then after following some clues fight some cultists who worship Orcus, then they find a clue that leads them to fight the mayor and the most powerful undead he has created along with his guards.
-Fill in the details(where the clues are found, exactly what they say, make up some NPCs who they will meet, etc)

And the last step(since it takes the longest) is almost always the one that gets put off until I'm essentially making it up on the fly.

For this process, however, I never need to know the weight of any of the creatures. Nor much about them other than: What kind of creature are they and where do they come from? It's fairly easy to make up an excuse to use almost any monster if I want to.

Again, great for you. See I approach an adventure from the route of looking for monsters that spark an idea or interesting hook that I think my players would be interested in, then moulding that idea into a full fledged adventure. Personally my players enjoy the immersion aspects of the game as much or more than the tactical combat part of the game, and in order to fulfill that I need a little more than just the stats and fighting tactics of a monster. Like I said it's a preference thing in how we go about creating and running our adventures.

 

[IanArgent]

The DMG may suggest that, but I haven't found that a lot of prep time has been necessary all the time. I'd like to have a palette of monster stats that I can draw from and completely wing the night's adventure. This was my typical pattern for running games other than D&D; and something that I never felt I could do with D&D, often because of the "tightness" of the system.

 

[Rechan]

Eladrin coming from Feywild?
Tieflings are nobles from lost Bael Turath?

Which is just like Elves live in Forets and Dwarves live in mountains.

That fluff is changable. The issue of Oppressive Fluff is fluff that isn't, or it can be changed, but it is an incredible headache because it's hardwired into the rules.