You don't like the new edition? Tell me about it!

[BryonD]

And to think... back in 3e when he described his OA game, I was enthralled by the detail and flavor he put into the game, with cool little tidbits from folklore. This doesn't sound like the James Wyatt we see quoted here.

Yeah, but duh...., that was BEFORE WotC went back in their secret room and flipped the 3E switch to "suck". And the switch was, of course, retroactive.


Seriously, he was speaking to and designing for completely different target groups.

 

[The Little Raven]

Seriously, he was speaking to and designing for completely different target groups.

Or he, like most people, actually changed over the course of seven years.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I remember this as well and was looking forward to it. I remember that race was going to make a difference for all classes so that an orc wizard was different than a human wizard which would be different than a dwarven wizard, etc. etc.

That's too bad it's not in there. It's just another reason for me to not buy the books. I'm going to have to think about how to do this for 3.xe. Maybe I'll continue to use racial substitution levels or something like that.

I think it's pretty clear what their initial plans where. 1st level would have Racial Powers, Paragon Paragon Paths, and Epic would have Epic Destinies.

But apparently, they figured it didn't work out as well as they hoped. I remember a designer comment that said they figured that due to the limits to level 1-10, race still lost its meaning after 10th level. Maybe this was just a designer worry, or it was common playtest feedback (we might never know.) So, we now have racial feats, some becoming available at paragon or epic tier. There should probably be more of them. I think it wouldn't hurt if there were also Racial Paragon Path (aka Diamond Throne Racial Levels) or Racial Powers that you could take via multiclassing.

For 3E, I prefer the idea of using racial abilities advancing over all levels, parallel to all other development. Racial levels always force to give you up abilities in the class you actually want to have, and substitution levels are limited to a few classes.

So, at 5, 10th, 15th and 20th level, your race (or maybe your dragonmark, or your bloodline, depending on setting and preferences) could grant another ability. Maybe something like this:
Elf (5th): Fey Step - Dimension Door once per day; +1 to Dex or Int
Elf (10th): Elven Lore - Reroll one Knowledge Check per day, and attempt any Knowledge Check as if trained: +1 to Int or Wis
Elf (15th): Elven Harmoy - Reroll one Balance, Concentration or Diplomacy Check or Will Save per day. +1 to Wis or Cha
Elf (20th): Elven Perfection - +1 to Dex, Wis, Cha and Int.
Racial feats could give extra uses of these abilities.

Off course, this might be unbalanced and overpowered, but I think such a subsystem would work pretty well with something like Pathfinder, that is already changing the game balance.

/threadcap

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Seriously, he was speaking to and designing for completely different target groups.

He might also talked about the difference between using a game system and designing a game system.

You can use D&D to cover the political machinations of the Faerie. But the game system is hardly designed for it.

There might be many reasons why that is the case, but my prefered one is:
It's less fun if you put hard rules on political machinations in the game.

Or rather, it is a different kind of fun. It is the "gamist" fun that D&D combat provides. You don't really try to figure out the enemies secret desires and hidden agenda - you'd be rolling your "Discover Secret Agenda" attack against the opponents "Hidden Subtext" Defense, or something like that. I am sure that would be a lot of fun - but it's not the role-playing game fun, it is the role-playing game fun.

So, D&D just provides a very low-level framework - it gives you skills (at least since 3E) to make a little of these, but the skills are vaguely enough defined so that you can spin a story around it without having to rely on game terms. Skill Challenges are a natural extension of this. You still roll to resolve the progress, but what actually happens is not found in the rules.

 

[DaveMage]

They don't, but I had thought that if you give feats every odd level then that leaves 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th, and 18th level open to give characters things that are not dependent on class. I'm working on using the racial levels mixed with some of the continuing racial abilities from the Paizo Dark Sun to give characters racial benefits (I can also use at least the human evolved levels from Arcana Evolved for this purpose).

Yeah, I was confusing it was the sorcerer bloodlines, where you do get level-dependent benefits.

 

[BryonD]

He might also talked about the difference between using a game system and designing a game system.

I think that is a pretty radical interpretation.
I think the difference is exactly what it appears on its face and is reflected in a wide range of comments from multiple designers.

 

[BryonD]

Or he, like most people, actually changed over the course of seven years.

Well, I have no way of knowing if he himself has changed preference from the richness of 3E OA to the board game approach he has endorsed here or not. I suppose it may be possibly.

However, there is nothing remotely "or" about that. All that would be is one possible explanation for why. It is in no way an alternative.

 

[Psion]

He might also talked about the difference between using a game system and designing a game system.

You can use D&D to cover the political machinations of the Faerie. But the game system is hardly designed for it.

It's not a game about fey politics, and I don't necessarily think extensive mechanics for such in the game is necessary. This is the sort of thing I like to incorporate as spice in a game.

To that end, I don't see 3e/4e as especially different on this score.

 

[JDragon]

First a quick thanks to the Mod's for keeping this thread under control and open vs just closing it.


What I don't care for in 4e....

Well most of its been said in the last 10 pages, and most of it much better than I probably can.

So I'm just going to leave it that, D&D 4e to ME is not an improvement on the previous edition. As said before it seems to be change for change and a change for $$$$, not a whole lot else.

So I plan to MAYBE play the test session or two my group had planned to do, but will do that by using someone else's books, because I plan to return the book I had ordered when I had some hope for the new system. (Which should be getting to my house about the time I get home tonight from B&N) Thats assuming I can keep my dislike in control enough to not make the sessions suck for everyone else at the table.

That is after we finish our Battletech campaign that we started when the announcement of 4e killed almost all my interest in D&D.

I expect that we will continue with 3.x and continue to embrace the improvements Paizo is making.

JD

 

[Roland55]

I'm hoping that I just need more play-time.

This new edition is supposed to be all about two things: "balance" and "fun."

I definitely see the extreme emphasis placed on balance. It's there in spades.

I'm not having the "fun" yet. Which really surprises me -- I've never had this issue with any other edition of the game. And I've played them all. I'm even having the "incomplete edition" issue someone else (Remathilis?) has already commented on.

Too soon to be sure, I think. I've only played about 4 sessions. I'll keep at it, show some persistence, and see what happens.