|
whydirt posted:I don't inherently mind the fighter killing the warlord and taking its stuff because "guy who hits stuff" is a comparatively boring and narrow role. EDIT: Also remember they are giving the Warlord's class mechanics to the bard. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Mar 6, 2013 |
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
whydirt posted:I don't inherently mind the fighter killing the warlord and taking its stuff because "guy who hits stuff" is a comparatively boring and narrow role. What is an issue for me is that they're doing that while still leaving other legacy alt-fighters with their own specific niches and still allowing wizards to have mastery over all types of magic. I don't know what stuff belonging to the Warlord the Fighter will actually be taking, considering 'inspiration and tactics' defines the totality of the Warlord's kit. Edit: It'd be like if they said Paladin would become a Fighter theme and bits about healing, protection, and holy warriors were being handed off to the Cleric, where it would be more appropriate. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Mar 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:I come from the land that makes chocolate gravy, and even I agree with this. You mean chocolate sauce or hot fudge? Darwinism posted:I dunno, I've made some burgers that just fall apart partway through cooking them, so I can see the appeal of having a little bit of binder in there. Plus I'd imagine it would help if you wanna get all fancy and add a chunk of gorgonzola or something in the middle. If I am eating a bowl of red by its lonesome, I am pro bean. If it is being used as a topping or condiment (like on hot dogs or burgers) I dislike beans. Also chili mac should have beans. Chili mac is like the ultimate dollar stretcher, really.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:If I am eating a bowl of red by its lonesome, I am pro bean. If it is being used as a topping or condiment (like on hot dogs or burgers) I dislike beans. This is a good point. While I am generally pro-bean and only make chili with beans, I don't want beans on my chili-dogs. MadScientistWorking posted:That is rather irritating given that the Warlord is probably the strongest archetype to ever come out of D&D. It probably was a fluke given that the best example of the iconic warlord comes from Shakespeare's plays but still that its a strong archetype. The warlord was straight up Tanis from Dragonlance. Why no one at WotC ever realized this or made use of it to sell the class to grogs still completely baffles me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 18:37
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:The warlord was straight up Tanis from Dragonlance. Why no one at WotC ever realized this or made use of it to sell the class to grogs still completely baffles me. Grogs, at least a certain class of grogs, hate Dragonlance. It represented a shift toward modules with an overarching plot and away from modules that were just locations to go explore and have adventures in. (Even the GDQ series only had the vaguest semblance of a plot, which could be completely ignored if you liked.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Selachian posted:Grogs, at least a certain class of grogs, hate Dragonlance. It represented a shift toward modules with an overarching plot and away from modules that were just locations to go explore and have adventures in. (Even the GDQ series only had the vaguest semblance of a plot, which could be completely ignored if you liked.) That's a good point, but I don't think they make up a significant portion of the grog populace. I always get the impression that most grogs are actually rather new to the hobby and only got started with 3E, and thus are easily swayed by simple appeals to any previous period of D&D.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
I'm in whydirt's camp in that I don't inherently mind the idea of someone taking all the good bits of the Warlord and rolling them into the Fighter provided that you can actually make something like a Warlord simply by turning the appropriate dials in the right direction instead of "here, you can give someone 1d6 temporary hitpoints 1/fight, now what do you have to complain about?" But it doesn't sound like they're actually interested in doing that, and if they're giving "inspiration and tactics" off to some other class and you're nixing martial hitpoint restoration then you don't really loving have a Warlord, now do you? But I guess the Warlord had to get rolled up and distributed into other classes in the spirit of "compromise," and I'm sure that any day now we'll be seeing them do the same with classes like the Paladin, Ranger, and Barbarian. Any day now. I agree about chili and beans, I'm not really sure I can imagine sitting down to eat a bowl of only-meat chili because while only-meat chili is tasty it doesn't strike me as a very satisfying meal on its lonesome. On the other hand, if I have a good batch of chili with beans cooked up and I get a hankering for a chili-dog I'm not gonna balk at tossing some of that on top.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Clearly the Warlord's focus is too narrow. Now, shirtless angry fightguy? That's a broad concept man. It's so broad I can drive a truck through. The truck basically just says "Conan" on the side of it, but it's still a pretty big truck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'm in whydirt's camp in that I don't inherently mind the idea of someone taking all the good bits of the Warlord and rolling them into the Fighter provided that you can actually make something like a Warlord simply by turning the appropriate dials in the right direction instead of "here, you can give someone 1d6 temporary hitpoints 1/fight, now what do you have to complain about?" But it doesn't sound like they're actually interested in doing that, and if they're giving "inspiration and tactics" off to some other class and you're nixing martial hitpoint restoration then you don't really loving have a Warlord, now do you? The hell of it is 3.5 already figured this out with the maneuver system in the Tome of Battle. Warblades, the versatile fighter analogue, had access to a berserking maneuver set, a being really good at swording set, an extreme discipline and defense/counter set, and yeah, a set of maneuvers based on helping their allies position and attack in a very Warlord way. (Crusaders, the paladin type dudes, had the warlord school as well as the one for tanking and healing.) Any warblade could access any school; the only restrictions were some prerequisites that were there to make you invest in a school's basic maneuvers to get the higher level stuff. Still, the scaling was grog poison - the White Raven capstone was enabling all of your allies to charge one dude at the same time, physical space be damned, and overrun him in a human wave.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 19:48
|
|
|
Yeah, but people bitched mightily about the Tome of Battle in pretty much the same fashion they wound up bitching about 4E. The word "anime" was used a lot, as I recall, possibly "weeaboo" as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
It's not true grog unless you are randomly insulting to another culture/race/gender/sexual orientation in the process! I always really hated that line of insult used and ToB because that was my favorite 3.5 book. I didn't even give a very in depth look into the other two classes when I made characters from it, I just used the Warblade because I literally just wanted "a fighter who could do things".
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
whydirt posted:I don't inherently mind the fighter killing the warlord and taking its stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
I played a Crusader and was basically owning the battlefield. It was probably the most fun I had playing 3E (if you don't count a few battles were my rogue worked or when I was extremely lucky). Personally I don't mind if my Warlord's character sheet actually says "Fighter (warlord build)". My only problem is if the result would be mechanically viable. Ability scores will definitely be a problem, as I don't imagine that they will let you fight your enemies using charisma or intelligence or warlord your allies with your strength and constitution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I played a Crusader and was basically owning the battlefield. It was probably the most fun I had playing 3E (if you don't count a few battles were my rogue worked or when I was extremely lucky). One of the dudes on the podcast goes on at some length about how William Wallace didn't grow peoples' limbs back or stuff their guts back in their bodies by shouting at them, so that should be all the answer you need to tell you whether the Next design team would be cool with martial attacks running off of things like Intelligence or Charisma.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:One of the dudes on the podcast goes on at some length about how William Wallace didn't grow peoples' limbs back or stuff their guts back in their bodies by shouting at them, so that should be all the answer you need to tell you whether the Next design team would be cool with martial attacks running off of things like Intelligence or Charisma.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
Rexides posted:Personally I don't mind if my Warlord's character sheet actually says "Fighter (warlord build)".
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:One of the dudes on the podcast goes on at some length about how William Wallace didn't grow peoples' limbs back or stuff their guts back in their bodies by shouting at them, so that should be all the answer you need to tell you whether the Next design team would be cool with martial attacks running off of things like Intelligence or Charisma. "HP don't always represent physical wounds. Or like, maybe half of them do. Or maybe they do now, I don't know, whatever, gently caress you." This is what I hear whenever I hear one of these design guys talk about HP and what they represent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:What is really weird about that is there is definitely a podcast from the 4E days where some of the developers kind of emphatically stated that this mentality is kind of dumb. I wouldn't know for certain not having any names to go by but there's a pretty strong chance that whoever those guys were, they aren't working for WotC anymore. I don't mean they were driven off in some sort of ideological PURGE THE NONBELIEVER sort of deal, but how many layoffs/how much turnover has there been in the WotC RPG department since 2008?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I wouldn't know for certain not having any names to go by but there's a pretty strong chance that whoever those guys were, they aren't working for WotC anymore. I don't mean they were driven off in some sort of ideological PURGE THE NONBELIEVER sort of deal, but how many layoffs/how much turnover has there been in the WotC RPG department since 2008? http://media.wizards.com/podcasts/DnD_Episode31.mp3 MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Mar 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Me either, but from what they're saying the only way you'll actually be able to play like a Warlord is in the form " The day Leonidas of Sparta, Vercingetorix, and King Arthur have to be represented by some kinda weird Bard/Cleric hybrid is a bad day. Unless they're going to put all the "You get an Army and a Castle and Land" stuff back into the Fighter's "special abilities" table.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:It was Mearls and the discussion happens mid podcast. Oh. Well then, never mind 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:One of the dudes on the podcast goes on at some length about how William Wallace didn't grow peoples' limbs back or stuff their guts back in their bodies by shouting at them, so that should be all the answer you need to tell you whether the Next design team would be cool with martial attacks running off of things like Intelligence or Charisma.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:It's refreshing to see this "shouty battle heal-screaming" sort of edition warring coming from within the Next development team instead of just random dudes on ENWorld. I mean pfft, isn't that stupid? Who would design a game like that? I want to know where in the WotC playbook is says, 'poo poo all over previous editions of the game we designed.' What other company references their own older products this way?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?! Stranger still, if I don't get that heal, I will continue to fight goblins at 2hp with LITERALLY my guts dragging on the floor?! Mearls, are you serious?!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?! Edit: Also, even the most grievous of injuries, including having your arm chopped off, can be healed with sufficient bed rest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?!  2. Yes, because tradition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?! How else are you supposed to strangle them with your entrails and use your organs as ranged weapons? Wait, do you have proficiency with your own organs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:I mean pfft, isn't that stupid? Who would design a game like that? I think a new edition of a game is always going to be in part a reaction to what the design team perceived as not working in the previous edition. This seems to be the "listen to the lost fanbase" edition, so the vocal outcry among that segment for the perceived death of verisirealievability in 4e is something they're looking to fix this time around. Honestly at this point between Kickstarter and several other companies putting out top quality games (notably FFG) I think we're basically spoiled for choice in RPGs, so I'm mostly just waiting for this to release to see how it actually plays out. If it's a success then hey, good for them, they called it right (and 4e fans may just have to swallow the same advice we gave to everyone else last time around: not every game is right for everyone). But if not, it'll be interesting to see what their next play is. Do they take a leap and innovate? Or do they stagnate into irrelevancy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Wait, wtf. When i take 10 damage and te cleric heals me, my guts are miraculously returning to my body?! Not to be the grognard, but doing miraculous things is the Cleric's shtick. Of course, getting your HP back should NOT be a miraculous event in a game where HP are the main metric of success or failure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
Winson_Paine posted:You mean chocolate sauce or hot fudge? Rexides posted:Not to be the grognard, but doing miraculous things is the Cleric's shtick. Of course, getting your HP back should NOT be a miraculous event in a game where HP are the main metric of success or failure. Yes, but the point is that the cleric is no more magicking the guts back into your body when they restore HP than the Warlord was, because if you describe HP losses in terms of dismemberment, you've got bigger verisimilitude problems on your hand than anything a Warlord can bring.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
Isn't the Magical Arm-Regrowing HPs the same truck as the Fireball-is-verisimilitude, rolling-dice-to-see-if-you-hit is Gamey? I wish modern game design wasn't led from the hate-diamonds of the toxic fanbase. I got a slow-cooker for Christmas and its gathering dust. What should be my first meal out of it, assuming two people where one hates onions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 00:45
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:It's refreshing to see this "shouty battle heal-screaming" sort of edition warring coming from within the Next development team instead of just random dudes on ENWorld. Given that many D&D Next articles could have been copied and pasted directly from ENWorld AND it's the only website where mearls posts, I'm not sure why this is a surprise. D&D Next has always been ENWorld Edition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 00:48
|
|
|
Gerund posted:I got a slow-cooker for Christmas and its gathering dust. What should be my first meal out of it, assuming two people where one hates onions? You should make something terrible to alienate the person who doesn't like onions, then make a new friend who does. Onions are the best. If this is not an option, grab a roast and some potatoes and garlic and whatever vegetables you like. Put all of it in the pot and then forget it exists for 8 hours or so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Mikan posted:You should make something terrible to alienate the person who doesn't like onions, then make a new friend who does. Onions are the best. All of this. Slow cooker roast is the way to go. Remember, low heat over a long period instead of high heat over a short period unless you like grey, tough meat. Also you can make really good meatballs and red sauce for meatball hoagies in a slow cooker, it gets them nice and tender.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:D&D Next has always been ENWorld Edition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
Asimo posted:Ahahaha, okay yeah I missed that part. I guess that explains why the 5e devstaff seems to be operating from an echo chamber of "everything 4e is bad!!", if that's some of the fan commentary they're seriously listening to. I'm honestly not sure how much commentary they are listening to. All the polls and such on the WotC website basically come across as puff pieces instead of any serious attempt at gathering data, and several times now they've put out a "playtest packet" while simultaneously saying that the most recent packet doesn't reflect the rules that they're currently messing with internally, which would mean that "playtesters" aren't even playtesting the most current iteration of the system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'm honestly not sure how much commentary they are listening to. All the polls and such on the WotC website basically come across as puff pieces instead of any serious attempt at gathering data, and several times now they've put out a "playtest packet" while simultaneously saying that the most recent packet doesn't reflect the rules that they're currently messing with internally, which would mean that "playtesters" aren't even playtesting the most current iteration of the system. Again, at least one moderator on ENWorld has playfully commented that a few articles from WotC could have come straight from ENWorld, and Mearls posts on one and only one set of forums, and those are ENWorld. ENWorld also got some exclusive backstage info on 5e before it came out. They are listening to commentary. But it's not RPG.net, or SomethingAwful, or Penny Arcade, or Dragonsfoot, or Paizo's website. D&D Next has simply always been ENWorld edition. And so very, very much about it and it's weird 3e-AD&D hybridness makes sense when you take that into account.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Again, at least one moderator on ENWorld has playfully commented that a few articles from WotC could have come straight from ENWorld, and Mearls posts on one and only one set of forums, and those are ENWorld. ENWorld also got some exclusive backstage info on 5e before it came out. That doesn't mean that they're listening to ENWorld's commentary, eager for their words of wisdom, though, it could simply just mean that Mearls' tastes in pretend-elf happens to line up with the greater ENWorld forumgoers' tastes. I guess what I'm saying is that it seems more likely to me that Mearls and the Next dev team are simply making the game that they want to make because they think it's cool and their vision happens to mesh with ENWorld's, not that ENWorld has the ear of Mike Mearls and is steering his hand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 17:07 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:That doesn't mean that they're listening to ENWorld's commentary, eager for their words of wisdom, though, it could simply just mean that Mearls' tastes in pretend-elf happens to line up with the greater ENWorld forumgoers' tastes. I guess what I'm saying is that it seems more likely to me that Mearls and the Next dev team are simply making the game that they want to make because they think it's cool and their vision happens to mesh with ENWorld's, not that ENWorld has the ear of Mike Mearls and is steering his hand. I think it's a bit of both. 5e certainly has a lot of stuff that comes down to "Mearls wanted this to be in the game, so it is." At the same time, I think in both general design philosophies and specific examples, they're taking inspirations from ENWorld. They're not flat out reading the forums at the edge of their seat to copy it up, no, but I think there's a lot of go between there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2013 01:50
|
|