D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

The Bee posted:

I'll be honest, an edition of DnD that just went whole hog with breaking everything to bits and making everybody downright mythical would be amazing. Necromancers raising entire armies, paladins turning into walking avatars of their gods, rogues so good at their craft that they can steal concepts such as souls, talents, and hearts, fighters that can reshape the world around them with their bare hands . . .

Somebody should work on that. It'd be downright incredible.

Exalted 3 is coming Real Soon, and the designers promised to fix it so it won't drive you or your GM insane.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2014 13:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:42

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Jack the Lad posted:

Gotta have a separate entry for centipedes, obviously. But not different stats.

I think that's to show the stereotypical OCD neckbeard that you can make a swarm of insects anything - centipedes, bees, spiders, ants, etc.

# ¿ Aug 23, 2014 14:58

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

AlphaDog posted:

What PC wizards do doesn't even approach science. They just rote-learn the same exact thing out of a book every day. poo poo, they don't even need to do that for cantrips, just repeating the right gestures is enough.

The idea that you wouldn't teach your soldiers to shoot fire would seem bizarre in this world.

Welp, I think you have given me the basis of my D&D 5 campaign world. It's going to be a lot like Glorantha where everyone knows magic, and can cast basic cantrips.

# ¿ Sep 3, 2014 03:28

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

You know, I can totally understand why people around here are so upset at 5e. I mean, you guys (that is, fans of 4e who like a tightly balanced game where fighters can do just as much cool stuff as wizards) have basically been totally ignored, while abusive poo poo heads like Pundowski and Zak instead get consultant credits.

It's kind of the same problem with video games, where the loudest and most abusive voices end up being the ones responded to and listened to, while polite yet dedicated fans feel like they get ignored.

I'm not sure what the solution is... other than going to cons and punching the poo poo heads.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 01:03

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Countblanc posted:

This assumes the leads in the 5e project are just being forced to do what the fanbase wants; I've seen little evidence to suggest this isn't exactly the version of D&D they wanted to create.

I don't think they are forced to do what the fanbase wants. They WANT to create what the fanbase wants, since the whole goal of 5e was to cut down on the splintering of the fanbase.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 01:10

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Jackard posted:

Good job with that eh? 5E focus on optional content means even its foundation is splintered

Yes. Thats why D&D Encounters is important, in order to establish a baseline permissive atmosphere. But I have seen a lot of people spout silly rules opinions in all kinds of message forums.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 01:30

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

dwarf74 posted:

And this is exactly the kind of game which has the best chance of snagging PF players - simpler, less broken (though broken in similar ways), similar feel.

Apparently, the "consultants" just filled out a questionnaire on whether or not all the different elements of the game "felt like D&D."

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 02:10

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Generic Octopus posted:

I didn't think about organized play since I don't play except with friends, but how does that work in a system reliant on GM adjudication? Like doesn't that mean your character could play/function differently week-to-week depending on who your GM is?

Yes. Some GMs are going to let your warlock take a hand off the greatsword to cast, and let you put the hand back on so you can take an OA. while others will definitely let you not do that without combat casting.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 02:13

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Covok posted:

As someone who knows nothing of 1e, would it be rude to ask you to elaborate?

You had a tiny (2%?) chance of getting psionics, modified slightly by Wisdom, and possibly Intelligence. Then you would roll on a table to see how many of the attack and defense modes you would get, and you would roll for some major and minor powers. The powers were point driven, and had a % chance of working. They were totally unbalanced because if you had them, awesome. If you didnt, oh well.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 03:55

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

seebs posted:

He's sort of an rear end in a top hat, but a lot of my friends are sort of assholes, and I don't care about that.

you know, a strong case can be made that this is the fundamental problem with all nerd hobbies. We're all so afraid of being excluded, we include assholes, and hence, enable their assholery.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 03:59

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Arivia posted:

The game wasn't balanced around having or not having them really (excepting psionic monsters, which you would be hosed against if someone didn't have them.) It was cool since they were very specifically very rare, very hidden, and I think the text even recommends players not tell each other if they got some to keep the mystique alive.

Also there was a chance of driving your character insane, dumb, or similar if you rolled and failed to get powers. It's very 1e, and very inappropriate for anything beyond the OSR today, but it fits 1e very well.

The way i remember it, if you didnt have psionics, you were pretty much immune to at least psionic combat, and the attack and defense modes. That way, you could keep psionics as a mostly optional module. But then, some monsters, like the mind flayer, had some powerful special abilities that were basically described as psionic, and hence overcame spell resistance and dispelling.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 04:02

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

moths posted:

The fact that anyone straight-faced describes Zak S as only "kind of" an rear end in a top hat speaks volumes about this loving hobby.

GD Geek Social Fallacies.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 04:08

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Arivia posted:

He gets other people to do his harassment for him, that's different right?

It shows a level of social skill development thats above the average troll, thats for sure.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 04:09

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Arivia posted:

Yeah. One of the things that makes Gygaxian writing so Gygaxian - and in turn makes the 1e books so magical - was Gygax putting value judgments directly into the text. The fearsome MIND BLAST was one of those, and the illithid was basically the followthrough.

The names of the attack and defense modes were also quite evocative. I hope they come back into 5e in some way. You had Mind Blast, Id insinuation, Ego Whip, etc. etc.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 04:12

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Arivia posted:

They were around in the 3.5 XPH as powers, but it wasn't quite the same.

its because they became somewhat mediocre spells for the most part. Not the essential building blocks of your psionic character.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 04:19

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Grim posted:

There was a kit from Wizards and Rogues of the Realms where if you were from the Vilhon Reach you would automatically get a Wild Talent and I took that on a DMPC Wizard and legit ended up with hundreds of power points and disintegrate and all kinds of poo poo - this is a good example of 1) why Wild Talents were overpowered and 2) why friends don't let friends run DMPCs

kits? Then we are talking about AD&D 2e, which had a totally different psionic system, essentially powered by skill or proficiency checks.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 11:03

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Strength of Many posted:

What's the best way to play a 'death knight' in 5e? Skeleton/undead minions, full armor, necromancy spells/powers, knightly virtue and the like, etc?

I've thought about a Paladin/Wizard multiclass but Fighter/Wizard might work out better. Hrm.

Both options are valid. Put your first level in Fighter so you get proficiency in Con saves and Heavy Armor, tho! With Paladin, its worth getting Paladin 2, because you will still get that level's worth of spell slots, and access to smites.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 11:09

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Infinite Karma posted:

You also heal to full on a long rest. I'm sure the grogs are frothing at the mouth over healing more than 2 HP for free.

I can't figure out why they made short rests an hour. If I didn't know that a bunch of abilities recharge after a short rest, I don't know what the situation is that I would have my character take such a long break in an obviously dangerous agitation like dungeon-crawling.

Because grogs want the DM to decide whether or not you're able to get a short rest. For many grogs, forced gradual depletion of party resources is an intrinsic part of the D&D dungeon crawling experience.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 16:55

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Daetrin posted:

But healing surges were way better at this. They were super good as a pacing mechanic, probably to the point where you could have replaced Dailies with "Spend a healing surge to power this" powers.

By gradual depletion of party resources, the OSR/Pathfinder grogs basically mean, "run out of spells." Because none of the other classes are particularly important to OSR/Pathfinder grogs.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 17:18

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

dwarf74 posted:

Mearls literally said it was in response to people asking him, "My players are using their encounter resources every encounter! How can I stop this?!?"

Right now, it's a mess. Fighters can burn through all their dice in a single turn. Warlocks in just a handful. Monks, otoh, might take a while, and their best feature costs 1 ki. So while I'm in favor of shortening rest times, if you do this, the Fighter works properly, the Warlock is maybe a tad too potent, and the Monk just stun locks everyone for the whole combat, which is just too much.

I just don't get it. Monks are the only class that seems actually designed around rare short rests.

Yeah, but don't Monks specifically say Monks need 1/2 hour of meditation to regain ki? It seems like at least someone thought thru the issue of "what if people decided to make short rests, well, short?"

EDIT: Also, I hate OSR/Pathfinder Grogs.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 18:28

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Agent Boogeyman posted:

Remind me again why anyone cares about what the OSR people think? They already HAVE an edition of D&D that caters to what they want, they should go and play THAT and stop forcing game designers to moonwalk back to the dark ages. 4E alienating the most poisonous of the D&D grognards was the best drat thing to happen to D&D in years and its not like a new edition is going to magically bring them back to the fold when they consistently hate anything that isn't exactly the same as the edition they already play. The entire point of a new edition of D&D is to draw NEW gamers into the hobby. It absolutely baffles me that D&D is this backwards bizarro world in which the most vocal MINORITY holds sway over the entire loving system like a tyrannical dictator.

Then again, we have not one, but TWO games which very effectively play in the way we want - 4e, for the people who want more crunch than they could possibly use in their lifetime, and 13th Age.

Unfortunately, gaming in general is this backwards bizarro world where the most vocal minorities hold sway over the entire system. If you don't believe me, check out the WOW development.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2014 19:45

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Cerepol posted:

Also gently caress the fuckers who loving thought a non level-based sorting system was a good idea.

I feel like the sorting system sucks rear end because they want us to buy spell cards or the software. I also dare someone to point this out to Mike Mearls on Twitter.

# ¿ Sep 10, 2014 03:33

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Cant we just rule that the Crossbow feats give you training and the ability to rig up some kind of autoloading device for your hamd crossbow?

# ¿ Sep 17, 2014 03:39

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Well, i'm planning to buff non-casters a ton by giving people access to guns and grenades IMC. Im quite curious to see what the long term ramifications of this are.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 05:03

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Well, I know there's a lot of D&D Next hate in this thread, but its inspired me to write so far, at least 10 pages of campaign setting notes in a way that 4e did not.

Don't get me wrong, I loved 4e, and had a good run on it. But there's a fundamental disconnect between the verisimilitude that really rubs people the wrong way. In fact, i kind of blame 4e for the poo poo show that is Pathfinder, and the fact that the Pathfinder community is now basically the largest gaming community.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 17:15

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Generic Octopus posted:

I legit don't know what people mean when they say 4e lacks "verisimilitude".

It means they aren't imaginative enough to figure out how a non magical Fighter can suck in a bunch of mooks like a magnet and then smash them all.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 20:18

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

ImpactVector posted:

You going to get a lot of heat for that, but I think you're at least partially right, if for a totally different reason.

I'd actually agree that 4e was a bad move for Wizards, but not because of verisimilitude. It's because 4e is a very focused game. The problem is, for D&D to maintain its position at the head of the industry, it actually does need to try to be all things to all people.

That's why the rhetoric behind Next was probably a good direction for them to go in. They just didn't really do a very good job of following up on it, at least IMO. Maybe I'll be proven wrong and the tent ends up being "big enough" for whatever their goals were.

4e is a very focused game, with emphasis on game, that builds a fun, interactive, cooperative, combat encounter-based environment. Optimization is solid, but not ridiculous.

Problem is, people use D&D from everything from freeform story game to some kind of sadistic torture simulator.

Incidentally, I think I dropped some important words from my previous statement that make it now very hard to understand what I was getting at, which was that in 4e, they didn't really bother thinking through how the different martial effects work in-world, focusing entirely on their game effects. That rubs a lot of people the wrong way.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 20:29

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

The Bee posted:

I hear everyone say this but I've never understood. What makes 4E less idea-based and creative to so many people?

All the complicated interacting rule bits make it much harder to tinker with the system. The assumption of game balance means that I won't, say, arbitrarily decide martial characters can start off with guns and magic weapons in exchange for debt.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 20:32

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Sage Genesis posted:

Sure you can. Why not? Giving sweet loot to martial types in 4e will have the exact same impact as it does in any other modern D&D edition. The only difference is that 4e is so transparent that you can see what would happen. And what would happen is this: the game's default sense of balance would be disturbed. That's all. Doesn't mean the game crashes, doesn't mean a good DM or campaign-specific story can't handle it, just means you're no longer guaranteed the predictability of balance.

I swear, some people out there have some very strange ideas about what "balance" really means...

In 5e, the balance is once again tilted in favor of casters, so giving better gear to non-casters is more a way of adding balance back into the game.

# ¿ Sep 19, 2014 20:49

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Now dont get me wrong. I liked 4e lots. But the thing is, it was a bit too good at what it did. I never felt the urge to spindle, fold, and mutilate the system, All that desire to twist the system instead ended up in designing better and more effective characters, and then trying to fold a compelling backstory around those characters, none of which was ever relevant in L5R.

But the thing is, lots of "features" in 4e came across as bugs to long established players. for instance, powers were so heavily built around combat encounters, it meant that there were no powers (or very few) powers that could actually affect the game world. There wasnt really much support for sandboxy play.

Now, Im sure someone is going to tell me all about their awesome sandbox game, but i can assure you that you were the exception, not the rule.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 02:52

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Sage Genesis posted:

The original statement was about giving guns to martials... what you describe is something quite different.

nah, its not the guns that are a big deal. Its the explosives, magical weapons, and armor.

Edit: and i mean starting at level 1. Oh yeah, reminds me of another issue with 4e - Gold became this critical resource for upgrading your character, which meant you couldnt spend it on cool poo poo like castles, hirelings, and heck, other adventuring parities to do your dirty work for you.

ascendance fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Sep 20, 2014

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 02:57

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Kai Tave posted:

"And thus I declare myself VICTOR OF THIS THREAD"

i'm not declaring myself the victor of anything. We're all losers here, because we are all just bitching about how lovely a particular game is, rather than how we can use it to have more fun.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:02

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Really Pants posted:

How am I supposed to try whatever I like in a game without express permission from the writers!?

A game heavily incentivizes a certain style and method of play, especially in an organized play environment, Color me shocked when people dont stray too far from the marked path.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:04

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

moths posted:

drat, guy. I don't know what it's like to game with players born without imagination, but I don't like what I've heard so far.

its also the issue of how permissive a DM is, and how willing he or she is to let you stray from their predetermined vision of how the world works. Me, I have specifically set up my game setting so that players can abuse the poo poo out of the setting (for example, i fully acknowledge that conjuration and transmutation magic turns wizards into makerbots, but people are just starting to realise the potential of this).

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:08

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Bhaal posted:

I agree with you but wanted to say that the shift/slide mechanic and flanking definitions are what accounted for about 75% of combat slowdown in our 4e games and while that style of play has its place I don't think I'll miss it. What it should have done was create the feeling of a mad and frenetic melee, but instead always turned into slow and orchestrated waltz because if I shift here and then slide him there then that will get the cleric OUT of flanking for at least one turn and their caster is now set up for our rogue but next turn he could get piled on so maybe if instead YOU shift here on your turn then I'll shift here instead and slide that person over there and that way....

Basically when combat got serious, the game quickly turned into playing Go by committee because you had so many possibilities and decisions to optimize on. It sucks because all the little fighting details they attached to everything in the MM was really rich and flavorful. I'm probably going to find and salvage as many of those as I can for when I run 5e. Honestly I think there's a market for making a gaming supplement that gives simple-to-follow markov chains for monster types that the DM can use to distinguish different tactics and temperaments of enemy opponents.

The mobility free for all of 5e is really one of its best features.

Edit: because gently caress wizards. I think thats the one thing we can all agree on.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:10

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Kai Tave posted:

^^^To be fair that's basically how a lot of f2p games work.

Hey man, "I preemptively declare your counterpoints invalid" is a masterstroke. I'm gonna have to remember that for later.

Also I love "the problem with 4E is that it was just too well designed, I didn't feel the need to houserule it at all!" I too hate it when consumer goods work the way they're supposed to without me having to fix them myself, solidarity.

i'm saying it works very well in one particular way. The issue is, its not the way i want. And it clearly wasn't the way the vast Pathfinder community wanted it to work either. But hey, gently caress them all, they're all just grogs, right?

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:13

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Really Pants posted:

You know you've got a really good and fun game when you find yourself spending game resources to avoid playing.

4e kind of ignores one of the best features of BECMI - that maybe, after a certain point, your character might want to do something other than go into dungeons and look for bigger and bigger numbers.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:15

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

FMguru posted:

The defining characteristic of Dungeons and Dragons is the part where you stop going into Dungeons and fighting Dragons? Hmm, yes, I see, please tell me more.

Yes. You missed the part where you live the American frontier dream and found your own nascent microstate after ethnically cleansing your domain of the filthy natives

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:23

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Really Pants posted:

so do all the other editions

And we wonder why there is an OSR.

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:24

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 05:42

ascendance: Feb 19, 2013

Littlefinger posted:

Let me tell you about keywords and rituals. Let me introduce you to the wonderful world of skill checks. Let me acquaint you with the curious concept of making poo poo up.

(E: On second thought, you have the third part down pat already. That part about no or few powers that could "affect the game world"? Yeah, that's some poo poo made up whole cloth.)

Rituals purposely didnt let you do crazy poo poo like summoning up a vast army of undead, or manufacture permanent items, or do any other kind of crazy game breaking poo poo.
Edit: This is also why I'd like to like 13th Age more, but don't.

ascendance fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Sep 20, 2014

# ¿ Sep 20, 2014 03:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

«‹›8 »