20 dex or 18 str

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Imp Zone > 20 dex or 18 str

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

ProfessorCirno posted:

There's a lot of really bizarre revisionist history with D&D due to 3e. poo poo that appeared in and only in 3e like NPCs being created like PCs or useless fighters with bad saving throws or supercharged wildshaping druids with pets are constantly called out as "core D&D-isms" by 3e fans.

Yeah, it would be more amusing if it wasn't so infuriating. The fighter really suffers from this trend. BECMI and AD&D fighters were amazing warriors, competent adventurers, and, often, inspiring leaders. The AD&D fighter was the classic warrior hero. It started as a reasonably skilled warrior and grew into a nearly unstoppable murder machine with an army.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 05:27

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2024 11:10

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Another example is 4e warlords. At the start of 4e, you got "Anyone can take Ritual Caster!" as one of it's big draws. This soon morphed into "even WARLORDS can revive the dead, if they take this feat and take Religion as a skill! You don't need a cleric!"

Which morphed into "Even WARLORDS can raise the dead if they use resources!"

Which morphed into "Warlords can raise the dead just like clerics can."

Which morphed into "All warlords can raise the dead."

Which morphed into "Warlords just shout people back from the dead."

Which morphed into "Warlords constantly shout people back from the dead."

Which morphed into "Warlords can yell at people to come back to life without expending any resources, with ease."

Because not one loving person between and of these ever so much as read 4e, much less played it. And now you have chucklefucks on ENWorld who never stop ranting about how broken warlords are because they can raise the dead whenever they want and it's impossible to die. And you can't correct them, because nerd culture is fundamentally broken, and in most of these websites even proving your point by linking to poo poo is meaningless because they just say "No you're wrong" and continue to vomit this poo poo out in other threads.

Human beings have a rather gross tendency to latch onto ideas that fit into our world view, and then never, ever letting go. D&D is just one aspect of this, really, but it's still annoying to encounter. In D&D you roll 3d6. This is a belief. Ergo, in all editions of D&D, you roll 3d6 down. AD&D 1e is the "essence of D&D" according to many, including the D&D Next developers. Therefore in AD&D 1e, you roll 3d6 down and never increased your stats. This isn't even going into how muddied things get even more when people forget that they used houserules and just assume their playstyle was the norm.

I remember awhile back when one OSR douche on ENWorld started beretting others on how whatever edition wasn't TRUE D&D, unlike AD&D, and one person not only called him out for being full of poo poo, they openly linked and copied/pasted from the AD&D PHB and DMG on where he was wrong. The only thing this changed is that now whenever the two are in the same thread, the former mocks the second for not knowing anything about AD&D despite being proven factually incorrect about it.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 05:40

Barudak: May 7, 2007

JohnnyCanuck posted:

Bare minimum for tequila is Patr�n Silver.

Depends on how you plan to drink the Tequila; if you plan on sipping a Tequila Anejo is the minimum. Silver and Golds are fine mixers but I wouldn't drink them solo. If you want a good, modern Tequila you can't really go wrong with Tres Generaciones if you can find it around.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 05:43

Asimo: Sep 23, 2007

ProfessorCirno posted:

And you can't correct them, because nerd culture is fundamentally broken

It's okay Cirno, there's people who do know better. Really! :unsmith:

Although honestly, over the years I've slowly realized just how badly a lot of geeks 1) hate change, 2) overreact to the most trivial of problems*, and 3) are completely unable to read any sort of literary or mechanical subtext, and it sticks out like a goddamn sore thumb in any sort of nerd game or media conversation. It's really astoundingly depressing. And unfortunately, Next being a regressive paean to Ye Olde Days (that never really existed) just justifies these sorts of attitude and keeps D&D from advancing as a game, despite the fact it's clear that if you step back and look at things that it's really just kind of... broken, even in a historical context. gently caress, I played 1e and BECMI back in the day, and the sort of stuff assumed incorrectly about classic D&D is amazing.
_{_{*See also: Mass Effect 3}}

# ? Apr 17, 2013 06:13

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Oh, I'm not talking about how much nerds hate change or how deeply, deeply conservative the hobby is. I'm talking about how nerds are incapable of receiving any sort of correction or criticism, to the point where doing either in most high profile tabletop gaming based forums will get you banned.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 06:19

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

ProfessorCirno posted:

Oh, I'm not talking about how much nerds hate change or how deeply, deeply conservative the hobby is. I'm talking about how nerds are incapable of receiving any sort of correction or criticism, to the point where doing either in most high profile tabletop gaming based forums will get you banned.

I literally avoided all RPG forums / mailing lists / blogs / etc from about 1999 until last year, when I realised that the SA forum isn't like most RPG forums.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 07:51

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

I used to lurk on Gitp's RPG forums, and they weren't too bad. I think a big part of the problem is that you have small communities where the spergiest of the sperglords gather to shout about how everything about every edition except X edition is bad. See also No Mutants Allowed and Fallout, where they will complain about everything that had changed or hadn't changed.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 08:11

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

AlphaDog posted:

Roll 4d6, drop lowest die, arrange as you like. (This is the one we always used).

Same here. 5d6 if I was pushing them to be standout specimens of Special-People from the get-go. Trade 2 for 1 after that if they were supposed to be prodigal Pinnacle-People.

PeterWeller posted:

Yeah, it would be more amusing if it wasn't so infuriating. The fighter really suffers from this trend. BECMI and AD&D fighters were amazing warriors, competent adventurers, and, often, inspiring leaders. The AD&D fighter was the classic warrior hero. It started as a reasonably skilled warrior and grew into a nearly unstoppable murder machine with an army.

This was the exact reason I didnt get all the complaining about fighters. We didnt convert to 3e, and a well played fighter in a mixed 1e/2e game was great.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 09:46

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

JohnnyCanuck posted:

For amounts? Eyeball it, but your acid should be the primary ingredient. More sugar than salt, too.

Shake that poo poo up and let your steaks rest in it, covered as much as they can be, overnight.

Oh poo poo, I'm using too much salt and vinegar and not even using any sugar. Thank you.

JohnnyCanuck posted:

Bare minimum for tequila is Patr�n Silver.

Man, Patr�n isn't even that great; it's good, but not as good as its pricetag. Don Julio is better, and El Jimador is as good as many expensive tequilas. The marketing of liquor, like wine, is fundamentally hosed--the bottles that get high ratings in blind taste tests are often not expensive at all.

ProfessorCirno posted:

AD&D 1e is the "essence of D&D" according to many, including the D&D Next developers.

Rereading Mearls' L&L columns, I see Basic is barely mentioned. When comparing editions, it's "1e did it like so, 2e was slightly different, 3e cleaned it up but made it complicated, 4e solved the problem but it didn't feel like D&D."

Wasn't Basic very very popular? The Red Box was the Basic set, and people go on and on about it.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 14:58

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

B/X and BECMI were huge gateways into the hobby, and most people who started in the late 70s to mid 80s probably started with the Red Box, but I think a lot of people quickly 'graduated' to AD&D because it provided more options and was much better supported, especially in the 2E era.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 15:06

Jimbozig: Sep 30, 2003; I like sharing and ice cream and animals.

I thought I had read somewhere that Basic was the most successful product in D&D's history. But my google-fu is failing me and I can't back that up right now.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 15:34

Small Strange Bird: Sep 22, 2006; Merci, chaton!

PeterWeller posted:

B/X and BECMI were huge gateways into the hobby, and most people who started in the late 70s to mid 80s probably started with the Red Box, but I think a lot of people quickly 'graduated' to AD&D because it provided more options and was much better supported, especially in the 2E era.

I started with B/X (still have the red and blue books) and 'graduated' to AD&D... but in hindsight, a lot of that was because of the teenage "Well, it's advanced, so it's got to be better than basic :rolleyes:

, hasn't it?" mentality. AD&D added a lot of cruft and crap that was largely ignored in play because it slowed everything down, where B/X laid down simple and (mostly) straightforward rules and let you get on with it. (I just noticed that B/X combined have the same number of pages as the 1e PHB, but you can't even play a game with just the latter.)

Next unfortunately seems to be going the "moar equals better!" route with regard to rules. Gotta fill out those three core hardbacks!

# ? Apr 17, 2013 15:41

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

PeterWeller posted:

B/X and BECMI were huge gateways into the hobby, and most people who started in the late 70s to mid 80s probably started with the Red Box, but I think a lot of people quickly 'graduated' to AD&D because it provided more options and was much better supported, especially in the 2E era.

AD&D vs Basic was the first "edition war." Basic sold more then AD&D due to the Red Box, but AD&D fans are the ones that more or less went on to work for WotC.

When TSR died, it died with both 2e and basic (in the form of the Rules Cyclopedia) still in print. The 3e team were all major D&D fans, so that's the one they continued.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 15:50

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

ProfessorCirno posted:

AD&D vs Basic was the first "edition war." Basic sold more then AD&D due to the Red Box, but AD&D fans are the ones that more or less went on to work for WotC.

When TSR died, it died with both 2e and basic (in the form of the Rules Cyclopedia) still in print. The 3e team were all major D&D fans, so that's the one they continued.

Basic outsold AD&D only because the Red Box was positioned as the gateway product to both games and the hobby as a whole. If you compare the rest of the product lines, AD&D outsold BECMI by a long shot, largely due to the fact that there was so much more AD&D material available. Sure, BECMI was still in print when TSR went under, but the product line was almost non-existent and completely overshadowed by AD&D's plethora of settings and supplements. Hell, BECMI's core setting was made into an AD&D setting towards the end.

Payndz posted:

AD&D added a lot of cruft and crap that was largely ignored in play because it slowed everything down, where B/X laid down simple and (mostly) straightforward rules and let you get on with it.

This is true, but more importantly, AD&D added a lot of character and campaign options that were nonexistent in BECMI.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 17:47

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

PeterWeller posted:

Basic outsold AD&D only because the Red Box was positioned as the gateway product to both games and the hobby as a whole. If you compare the rest of the product lines, AD&D outsold BECMI by a long shot, largely due to the fact that there was so much more AD&D material available.

PeterWeller posted:

B/X and BECMI were huge gateways into the hobby, and most people who started in the late 70s to mid 80s probably started with the Red Box, but I think a lot of people quickly 'graduated' to AD&D because it provided more options and was much better supported, especially in the 2E era.

Yeah, they were not really comparable when it came to the volume of material. I think thats its easy for people to forget (or not really understand) just how much was produced during the 1e/2e era. Entire settings came and went that were nothing but a road bump in the total line-up. Thats the advantage to having a stable system that you build on (rather than scrapping it like a CCG repeatedly), you can produce material for the game (which adds variety and richness) instead of just breaking the game apart and re-selling the game from scratch.

My cynicism makes me think DnD will never be 'stable' again, because WotC just doesnt think that way.

# ? Apr 17, 2013 19:04

neonchameleon: Nov 14, 2012

jigokuman posted:

Two things I remembered from back when I started were the terms "munchkin" and "Monty Haul". Isn't munchinism really just another word for system mastery? I suppose wealth-by-level and magic item crafting would seem pretty Monty Hall to old-school gamers, but I don't see much anger toward either of these things anymore and I wonder where it all went.

Monty Haul was actually explained on the previous Grognards.txt. In the early days of D&D it wasn't "The party sticks together and you use different characters in different games." It was "Whoever turns up can bring one of their current charactes on this dungeon crawl expedition" and people playing in multiple groups commonly took the same characters between the groups. This meant that someone handing out ten times the WBL was spoiling every other DM's game because they now had a ridiculously overpowered character to deal with. With that default Monty Haul is a problem.

Munchkin is (or was) used to refer to any attempt to get a character that was more powerful than either the rest of the group or than the DM expected. And it referred to anything from system mastery to exploiting the RAW to out-and-out cheating with either loaded dice or picking your dice up immediately after they were rolled. Or even wanting to play a concept that would be at home in Exalted. It's gone away a lot as a term because we now have better games. Exalted exists, as does Wushu and a range of other options for people who want OTT play. We aren't stuck in the days of late 2e or 3.X or WoD where system mastery will break the game in half. Instead we have games like Smallville where system mastery merely enhances the game by leading to more drama - or FATE where playing as hard as possible involves giving in and taking compels throughout the first two acts so you have a stack of Fate Points a foot high to drop in the third act. Which means that the only problematic Munchkins these days are the out-and-out cheats.

Edit: And the abuse of the word Munchkin about several groups that are only tangentally linked reminds me a lot of the use of the word Grog round here. I think there are several different (if overlapping) groups of Grogs - and by using one word to describe the creepy sexual fetishists of Black Tokyo and the Games Don't Have Story brigade a lot is being missed.

neonchameleon fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Apr 18, 2013

# ? Apr 17, 2013 23:39

Asimo: Sep 23, 2007

PeterWeller posted:

B/X and BECMI were huge gateways into the hobby, and most people who started in the late 70s to mid 80s probably started with the Red Box, but I think a lot of people quickly 'graduated' to AD&D because it provided more options and was much better supported, especially in the 2E era.

Payndz posted:

I started with B/X (still have the red and blue books) and 'graduated' to AD&D... but in hindsight, a lot of that was because of the teenage "Well, it's advanced, so it's got to be better than basic , hasn't it?" mentality. AD&D added a lot of cruft and crap that was largely ignored in play because it slowed everything down, where B/X laid down simple and (mostly) straightforward rules and let you get on with it. (I just noticed that B/X combined have the same number of pages as the 1e PHB, but you can't even play a game with just the latter.)

Next unfortunately seems to be going the "moar equals better!" route with regard to rules. Gotta fill out those three core hardbacks!

Yeah, this pretty much maps to my experience. Teenage-Asimo got into D&D through one of the big intro box sets, then sort of wandered into AD&D because it was ~advanced~. Honestly though in retrospect I think I had a lot more enjoyment from the Compendium-era BECMI stuff, but sadly hindsight is 20/20.

PeterWeller posted:

This is true, but more importantly, AD&D added a lot of character and campaign options that were nonexistent in BECMI.

Honestly, the character options didn't matter much, especially considering some of the crazy supplements BECMI put out later in its life. Campaign options though... yeah that's where it fell apart a bit, and while Known World/Mystara was infinitely better than Forgotten Realms, it was still just a single broad setting. Of course the glut of poor-sales campaign lines is part of what did TSR in, but...

# ? Apr 18, 2013 22:38

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

In my group, the character options were a big draw, but we moved to playing mainly 2E pretty quickly, so I never dug too deeply into all that BECMI had available.

And you're wrong regarding Mystara and FR. :colbert:

# ? Apr 18, 2013 23:41

Asimo: Sep 23, 2007

Does Forgotten Realms have a Tyrannosaurus Rex god who loves the world and would give everyone hugs if not for his tiny dinosaur arms? Huh? :colbert:

_{_{No seriously I don't remember the FR pantheon that well}}

# ? Apr 18, 2013 23:56

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Asimo posted:

Does Forgotten Realms have a Tyrannosaurus Rex god who loves the world and would give everyone hugs if not for his tiny dinosaur arms? Huh?
_{_{No seriously I don't remember the FR pantheon that well}}

Ubtao generally appears as a flying snake with wings, but otherwise yes.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 01:43

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

Asimo posted:

Does Forgotten Realms have a Tyrannosaurus Rex god who loves the world and would give everyone hugs if not for his tiny dinosaur arms? Huh?
_{_{No seriously I don't remember the FR pantheon that well}}

Delve deep enough into the Realms pantheon and you'll find half a dozen different dinosaur gods, some of whom are probably willing to put out if you're a high enough level wizard.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 18:27

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

PeterWeller posted:

Delve deep enough into the Realms pantheon and you'll find half a dozen different dinosaur gods, some of whom are probably willing to put out if you're a high enough level wizard.

The depth/breadth of FR was great. We never used the ongoing rules-drama of the Time of Troubles and all the messes after that, but if you didn't want to take the time to write the equivalent of a five foot stack of material to give an end-to-end skeleton/background to your game world then FR was nicely done. It was pretty hard for players to cut a corner and catch you with "Who are these people and what language are they speaking and and and" because some writer somewhere had a reference ready for you and you could just worry about the narrative and adventure.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 20:31

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Someone tell me if I'm wrong, because I really don't want to watch 3.5 hours of interviews to find out: Is it true that Mearls was once asked what Next had to offer 4e fans, and his response was a befuddled approximation of "Well, you can play it, I guess?"

# ? Apr 19, 2013 21:36

Death Bot: Mar 4, 2007; Binary killing machines, turning 1 into 0 since 0011000100111001 0011011100110110

I feel like "you don't have to play it" is a better answer.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 21:49

fatherdog: Feb 16, 2005

Halloween Jack posted:

Someone tell me if I'm wrong, because I really don't want to watch 3.5 hours of interviews to find out: Is it true that Mearls was once asked what Next had to offer 4e fans, and his response was a befuddled approximation of "Well, you can play it, I guess?"

iirc this was when he was running the Penny Arcade guys through some playtests and Gabe basically asked what it had to offer him as a guy who wasn't unsatisfied with 4th.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:02

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Is Mike Mearls actually excited about 4e or is it just something he's doing for a paycheck?

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:06

Randalor: Sep 4, 2011

So, just to clarify, at the start, WotC did say that Next was intended to unify the players of all editions, correct?

So why has everything from staff working on it seemed to be that they're going out of their way to make it "D&D Next: gently caress YOU 4TH and gently caress you if you liked it!" edition?

Edit: When you do a fondue, do you prefer oil fondues or cheese fondues? And if you use meat, which kind?

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:20

Mendrian: Jan 6, 2013

Randalor posted:

So, just to clarify, at the start, WotC did say that Next was intended to unify the players of all editions, correct?

So why has everything from staff working on it seemed to be that they're going out of their way to make it "D&D Next: gently caress YOU 4TH and gently caress you if you liked it!" edition?

Edit: When you do a fondue, do you prefer oil fondues or cheese fondues? And if you use meat, which kind?

I get the impression that 'unifying' the player base means 'bringing lost players back into the fold.' It's D&DNext: Apology Edition. D&DNext: You-Were-All-Right-About-4th Edition. For some reason their marketing or PR department seems incapable of conceptualizing the loss of current (4e) players. I assume at least a portion of 4e's current fans are 'hardcore' enough to let Next's constant nose-thumbing ruin the game for them. I can't imagine the Next plan working unless they drag like 80% of all edition holdouts from 3.5 and earlier back into the D&D franchise. Which is not going to happen. So they're trading one edition's holdouts(4e) for another edition's fair-weather fans (since really 'hardcore' PF and OSR guys aren't going to switch the same way 4e's hardcore fans won't.) It's a losing game.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:30

Kai Tave: Jul 2, 2012; Fallen Rib

Arivia posted:

Is Mike Mearls actually excited about 4e or is it just something he's doing for a paycheck?

Assuming you mean 5E, I think it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I don't believe this is solely some cynical all about the nerd-dollars thing, chances are that Mearls is genuinely excited to get to helm a new edition of his favorite RPG. At the same time, it's not like WotC has been shy about laying people off from the RPG department for their own inscrutable reasons, and I would imagine that anyone working there in that capacity is abundantly aware that they could be next unless they justify their continued employment.

I've got to be honest, I couldn't really blame Mearls if his thought process over this project was, at least in part, "milk this for all it's worth while I can."

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:36

fatherdog: Feb 16, 2005

I'm pretty sure Mearls' thought process begins and ends with "The guys that post on ENworld are gonna think this is SO COOL."

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:42

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Kai Tave posted:

Assuming you mean 5E, I think it's six of one, half a dozen of the other. I don't believe this is solely some cynical all about the nerd-dollars thing, chances are that Mearls is genuinely excited to get to helm a new edition of his favorite RPG. At the same time, it's not like WotC has been shy about laying people off from the RPG department for their own inscrutable reasons, and I would imagine that anyone working there in that capacity is abundantly aware that they could be next unless they justify their continued employment.

I've got to be honest, I couldn't really blame Mearls if his thought process over this project was, at least in part, "milk this for all it's worth while I can."

Yes I meant 5e :suicide:

That said, it just seems weird that a guy who was so in favour of modern and evolving design for D&D (through Iron Heroes and then his 4e work) would be glad to just send the game back to the Dark Ages, so to speak. I can't blame him either, but I just wonder if this is really what he wants D&D to be.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:44

FRINGE: May 23, 2003; title stolen for lf posting

Mendrian posted:

PF and OSR guys aren't going to switch

It was easier to game-hop when books werent 50+ dollars. I was browsing a store the other day and the sticker shock made me feel old.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:47

Kai Tave: Jul 2, 2012; Fallen Rib

fatherdog posted:

I'm pretty sure Mearls' thought process begins and ends with "The guys that post on ENworld are gonna think this is SO COOL."

Yeah, I absolutely believe that there's a huge part of Mearls that is all "oh man, I get to design my dream version of D&D, this is so awesome, I can't wait to show everybody."

# ? Apr 19, 2013 22:48

Mendrian: Jan 6, 2013

Kai Tave posted:

Yeah, I absolutely believe that there's a huge part of Mearls that is all "oh man, I get to design my dream version of D&D, this is so awesome, I can't wait to show everybody."

I refuse to believe this is anybody's dream version of anything. There's so much compromise and old-hat that there's nothing left in it that could be pronounced innovative. I doubt very much this is Mearls' ideal. I believe he is more creative than that.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 23:46

Kasonic: Mar 6, 2007; Tenth Street Reds, representing

Mendrian posted:

I refuse to believe this is anybody's dream version of anything. There's so much compromise and old-hat that there's nothing left in it that could be pronounced innovative. I doubt very much this is Mearls' ideal. I believe he is more creative than that.

Your worldview doesn't allow for the idea of Mearls being just as grognard as the fans he's catering to.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 23:51

Razorwired: Dec 7, 2008; It's about to start!

fatherdog posted:

iirc this was when he was running the Penny Arcade guys through some playtests and Gabe basically asked what it had to offer him as a guy who wasn't unsatisfied with 4th.

That whole episode was hilarious. Gabe also accidentally made a stupid powerful Wizard because his character is a magical douchebag. So instead of taking blaster spells 4e Wizards use he lucked into some "Me and the Cleric don't take damage" poo poo.

There was also a great bit in which they try to roll Wil Wheaton's character. Since the Avenger isn't in NEXT they bounced him between 4 classes. Then Mearls and Tycho went on fanboy rants about how sweet Clerics were until Gabe told them they already rolled that character and Scott from PvP revealed he had gotten bored and had been drawing for most of the podcast.

# ? Apr 19, 2013 23:55

Halloween Jack: Sep 12, 2003; I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Arivia posted:

Yes I meant 5e

That said, it just seems weird that a guy who was so in favour of modern and evolving design for D&D (through Iron Heroes and then his 4e work) would be glad to just send the game back to the Dark Ages, so to speak. I can't blame him either, but I just wonder if this is really what he wants D&D to be.

You weren't entirely wrong about Mearls being excited about 4e. Like, remember the "headlocking dragons" meme from 4e? Mearls specifically took that away from us in the new edition. He must be so stoked.

Kasonic posted:

Your worldview doesn't allow for the idea of Mearls being just as grognard as the fans he's catering to.

I'm in the process of going through all the L&L articles (which is frankly really boring) and 2011 Mearls is very different from 2013 Mearls who has become an anti-4e edition warrior. He knows that "shout healing" is not what the warlord's powers mean, and he is being an rear end in a top hat for...I don't know what reason. The paycheck? Because he decided he just wanted to recreate his favourite childhood edition after all? So ENWorld will take its glove off when it gives him a handjob? I just don't know.

Razorwired posted:

That whole episode was hilarious. Gabe also accidentally made a stupid powerful Wizard because his character is a magical douchebag. So instead of taking blaster spells 4e Wizards use he lucked into some "Me and the Cleric don't take damage" poo poo.

There was also a great bit in which they try to roll Wil Wheaton's character. Since the Avenger isn't in NEXT they bounced him between 4 classes. Then Mearls and Tycho went on fanboy rants about how sweet Clerics were until Gabe told them they already rolled that character and Scott from PvP revealed he had gotten bored and had been drawing for most of the podcast.

Please, please link me to this.

# ? Apr 20, 2013 00:04

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

I maintain that you guys give Mearls far more credit then is deserved for 4e. I really don't think this is some cynical marketing then - I believe he is being well and truly earnest about everything he's said so far.

When you look at Mearls' credits, the books he worked directly on were NOT well received in 4e and typically abandoned a lot of 4e's design features - like Heroes of Shadow. When you look at what happened when he took creative control of 4e, what you get is Essentials and a lot of back peddling. As far as I understood it, 4e was very much more Heinsoo's baby then it was Mearls'.

# ? Apr 20, 2013 00:30

MadScientistWorking: Jun 23, 2010; "I was going through a time period where I was looking up weird stories involving necrophilia..."

Where is the information about early 4E because I thought at one point I remember reading stuff that sounded more like Essentials designed classes than the AWED game design?

# ? Apr 20, 2013 02:42

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 26, 2024 11:10

Razorwired: Dec 7, 2008; It's about to start!

Halloween Jack posted:

Please, please link me to this.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.aspx?x=dnd/4pod/20120806 I believe that's episode 1 but I'm on my mobile.

ProfessorCirno posted:

I maintain that you guys give Mearls far more credit then is deserved for 4e. I really don't think this is some cynical marketing then - I believe he is being well and truly earnest about everything he's said so far.

When you look at Mearls' credits, the books he worked directly on were NOT well received in 4e and typically abandoned a lot of 4e's design features - like Heroes of Shadow. When you look at what happened when he took creative control of 4e, what you get is Essentials and a lot of back peddling. As far as I understood it, 4e was very much more Heinsoo's baby then it was Mearls'.

Wait, this is being headed by the guy behind loving Binders?! This ship was sunk before we set sail.

# ? Apr 20, 2013 02:54

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Imp Zone > 20 dex or 18 str

«‹›789 »