|
Splicer posted:Why? Genuine question. Speaking as an Eberron fan, its foundation relies on a D&D that looks like 3rd edition (where magic item creation is an assumed thing that people in the world can do but it's not Calvinball; where constructs don't need to breathe, rest or eat so warforged (i.e. the things that develop into a player option) actually look like they're worth the crown's money as a replacement for living soldiers; where psionics are something that can be engaged with so the Kalashtar and Riedra are player characters and credible threats that tie into the banished plane of madness, respectively), and 4th edition... sacrifices the warforged indomitability in the name of simplicity, and I'm fine with it there because it's a good game otherwise.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
How are psionics impossible to engage with in non 3rd editions?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:They got a continuation of Abomination Vaults coming out later this year, right? They have Stolen Fate, which runs from 11-20 (vs. AV's 1-10) and takes place on the same island as AV, so it would be a pretty natural follow up, but I don't think there's any formal followup to AV. When AV came out they released fists of the ruby phoenix as an 11-20 adventure, but it didn't make a super natural follow up, totally different themes and location.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2023 23:51
|
|
|
theironjef posted:How are psionics impossible to engage with in non 3rd editions?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
I don't know about 4e, but 5e's "psionics" is a trio of subclasses out of Tasha's Cauldron which give you some mind-themed powers. Which are okay for psi stuff that's just thrown in as flavor, but really underwhelming if you want to do something where like the Inspired of Riedra and the quori are really important.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
Psionics in 4e is... alright. It's just another power source and they try to work the power points into it for mixed results with 4e's mechanics. 3e's whole bespoke Psionics system is helped by the Expanded Psionics Handbook being one of the best 3e supplements and is an overall decent ruleset. Most of Eberron translated fine to 4e, really. Which I guess makes sense with 4e refining a lot of the ideas (about player agency and their role in the world) and mechanics (making action points a default rule, less rigid alignment rules) Eberron pushed. Personally, I think the thing that translated the worst were Dragonmarks. They would've made way more sense as Themes with the tiered advancement of Theme powers, but Themes weren't introduced until the Dark Sun supplements. I'm surprised nobody went back and reworked Dragonmarks around them for a Dragon Magazine article or something. (And Siberys marks should've been a specific Epic Destiny but they didn't even do that wtf.) Nuns with Guns fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:My takeaway is that on balance a significant proportion of folks in the Industry thread don't care if it goes off topic for a while. Who am I to try to force things otherwise? 4th edition does seem to engender quite a lot of discussion, almost all of it outside the 4e thread, and I think there's a variety of complicated reasons for that. It's wild because 4e is the JFK assassination of industry chat. It somehow managed to touch upon every industry issue, from missing stairs to the impact of piracy was present was abundantly present in some form. It was the beginning of sponsored Actual Plays, the pioneer of disastrous online tools, and the first time since World of Darkness that gamers even considered playing anything else. (Even if it was just D&D by a different name.) It's also the crossroads of batshit brand loyalty, semi-open licenses, peter principle, the first time inclusiveness was (apparently) prioritized and an unprecedented amount of gatekeeping. And it dropped like into an environment where Steve Bannon was weaponizing gamergate to radicalize nerds. And while you had every industry and hobby touchstone exploding on this stage, it was impossible to talk about any of it. Most discussion was inevitably shitbombed with low effort TABLETOP WOW LOL snipes and an insane amount of tribalism. Like, of course it still comes up here. This is the only place it even can. There's a story behind the LGS dude earnestly telling you that 4e is Communism instead of trying to sell you a copy. It's a wild loving story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:Psionics in 4e is... alright. It's just another power source and they try to work the power points into it for mixed results with 4e's mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
moths posted:It's wild because 4e is the JFK assassination of industry chat. It somehow managed to touch upon every industry issue, from missing stairs to the impact of piracy was present was abundantly present in some form. You're really not wrong! Honestly, design and industry are such inextricably linked things that dismissing it as a derail always felt weird to me. Especially when the divisive reception to the design behind 4E is directly responsible for two of the biggest tabletop RPGs in the medium's history (Pathfinder and, of course, 5E).
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
The Bee posted:You're really not wrong! Honestly, design and industry are such inextricably linked things that dismissing it as a derail always felt weird to me. Especially when the divisive reception to the design behind 4E is directly responsible for two of the biggest tabletop RPGs in the medium's history (Pathfinder and, of course, 5E).
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 00:56
|
|
|
M. Night Skymall posted:They have Stolen Fate, which runs from 11-20 (vs. AV's 1-10) and takes place on the same island as AV, so it would be a pretty natural follow up, but I don't think there's any formal followup to AV. When AV came out they released fists of the ruby phoenix as an 11-20 adventure, but it didn't make a super natural follow up, totally different themes and location. lol, I guess in a year or so when my group does complete AV i'll need to ask them if they want to go to Absalom for shenanigans or if they want to do one giant tournament episode.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 02:21
|
|
|
sweet geek swag posted:5e works fine after level 10, there's just no content designed for that level because WOTC has chosen the stupidest possible course of action for 5e releases. Some classes like Monk only start working properly at level 10, because it's only around then that you have enough ki points to do stuff. Can't agree on the monk at all; they were working at up to level five or six (depending on subclass) but their new abilities after that are flabby and Stunning Fist falls off hard as you get more large monsters with high Con saves. Of course a lot depends on what sort of cool stuff your subclass gives you; the shadow monks shadow teleports and Pass Without Trace means you are absolutely doing stuff on a limited budget. The monk comes back with a vengeance at level 14. Then we look at the fighter - no meaningful new abilities after level 11, just extra uses until the fourth attack. (Depending on the build the level 12 feat/ASI may be top tier synergy or may be something that wouldn't make your shortlist). The barbarian gets no good new class abilities after level 5 (the level 11 "can't die" looks good on paper but when you need it it's only a couple of hits) and its big thing of damage resistance falls away. And the rogue almost caps out at level 11. Level 11 is where the non-casters give up. moths posted:Sorta. The default setting leaned harder on the parallel shadowfel and feywild, changed the cosmology, and how a lot of things worked. Of course those changes were adopted wholesale into 5e - with the gloss of the Great Wheel appearing in the distance. 5e kept the Feywild and the Shadowfell, and kept the elemental planes in their proper place in the Elemental Chaos. Tuxedo Catfish posted:D&D 4E in many respects is a perfectly serviceable 3.75. Structurally, they're extremely similar games, just with a big difference in presentation. Philosophically on the other hand they are extremely different games in many ways; 3.5 with its "everything is a spell" and "all monsters are made the same way as PCs, feats and all" is trying to be effectively hard sci-fi while 4e goes all in on the space opera aesthetics - or 3.5 is attempting to be a physics engine and 4e is attempting to be a user interface. quote:The biggest "loss" going from 3.5 to 4E is that 3.5's massive spell compendium lends itself to a sort of Sierra adventure game-esque problem solving outside of combat which, even with Rituals, 4E doesn't much care about That depends when you are looking at 4e. 4e pre-essentials lacks a simple "I hit it" barbarian type which works well for some players. (And no, the PHB ranger doesn't quite fit - as well as not being very good at rangering). Essentials filled that niche extremely well. CitizenKeen posted:What's the elevator pitch for Exandria? Nentir Vale expanded to a detailed world with modern fantasy aesthetics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 03:13
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:That depends when you are looking at 4e. 4e pre-essentials lacks a simple "I hit it" barbarian type which works well for some players. (And no, the PHB ranger doesn't quite fit - as well as not being very good at rangering). Essentials filled that niche extremely well. not having one of those is a feature
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 04:09
|
|
|
Ranger is interesting because it really does feel more like a skirmish-y fighter than a ranger. But it also isn't like the regular DnD Ranger has a very strong identity, either, being a weird quasi-fighter quasi-rogue quasi-druid that somehow ends up worse than all of its constituent parts. Maybe it could've been a more interesting class if they waited until the Primal source, a la Barbarian, but I can see why people were bummed to not have those nature-y bits be as big of a part of the Ranger's essence as they used to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 04:14
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:4e pre-essentials lacks a simple "I hit it" barbarian type which works well for some players. pick Half-Orc as your race, for the +2 Str, Swift Charge, and Furious Assault. (a Goliath is also a possible good pick, to get +2 Str AND +2 Con, especially since the Barbarian class features will already give you Swift Charge, but you lose Furious Assault) pick Barbarian as your class. take the 18-14-11-10-10-8 array, and put the 18 into Str, and the 14 into Con ___ Feat Weapon Expertise would be the most optimal choice, but if the DM is a little more liberal in granting these "supposed to be baked-in" bonuses, then Power Attack (-2 attack for +2 damage) or Weapon Focus (+1 damage with a chosen weapon group) would also be good picks. The most "thematic" feat in this case would be Rising Fury; +2 damage until end of next turn whenever you reduce an enemy to zero HP ___ Class Feature pick Rageblood Vigor just because it's the thing that will synergize with Avalanche Strike for more damage ___ At-will power 1 Howling Strike: you can use this to make your Charges hit harder since it replaces the basic melee attack of a Charge, and it gives you an extra two squares of movement on Charges if you're already in a Rage At-will power 2 Devastating Strike: this is your most damaging At-will power available with [1W + 1d8 + Str] Encounter power 1 Avalanche Strike: this is your most damaging Encounter power available with [3W + Str] and then +Con since you picked Rageblood Vigor as a class feature Daily power 1 Bloodhunt Rage: this is your most damaging Daily power available with [3W + Str], and the on-going Rage benefit causes you to deal +Con damage if you or your target is Bloodied (where the other Daily powers either grant you temp HP, allows you to Shift, or lets you make cleaving attacks) ___ In practice: - if you're not in range of an enemy, use Howling Strike to charge at a target - if you're in range of an enemy, and Avalanche Strike is available, hit them with Avalanche Strike - if you're in range of an enemy, and Avalanche Strike has already been used, hit them with Devastating Strike - if any of the these three prior steps have hit an enemy, and Furious Assault is available, use Furious Assault for even more damage - if it's a particularly nasty enemy, then use your Bloodhunt Rage
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:Psionics in 4e is... alright. It's just another power source and they try to work the power points into it for mixed results with 4e's mechanics. 3e's whole bespoke Psionics system is helped by the Expanded Psionics Handbook being one of the best 3e supplements and is an overall decent ruleset. 3.5's Psionics were fine, but 3.0's Psionics Handbook was one of the most deranged books published from that edition(The Psion is more multiple-attribute-dependent than the Paladin. Each of the 6 Disciplines requires a different ability score). It's not surprising people memory hole it in favor of the much improved Expanded Psionics handbook. And also just ignore that Complete Psionics exists at all because woof.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 05:25
|
|
|
I was lucky enough not to have owned Complete Psionics way back in the day. Just... how bad was it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 06:21
|
|
|
The Ardent (Cleric:Wizard::Ardent:Psion) functions well enough, though they give up versatility for access to some unique spells. basically choosing a number of Themed Lists that dictate what spells you can *pick* from when you level up, no mantle has a spell of every level and some are incredibly front loaded. this isn't necessarily bad because you can use power points to boost, but still. The Lurk (Rogue:Fighter::Lurk:psychic Warrior) is bad because you're basically just venting power points into the void in order to both keep sneak attacking at all and to keep your sneak attack as powerful as a rogue's The divine Mind is the worst class ever constructed in a world where the Truenamer exists. They're limited in how they gain access to spells the same way the Ardent is, but can project Auras that buff themselves and the rest of the party. But that's basically all they do. They have 3/4ths bab progression, can only ever learn 9 powers, and cap out at 62 power points. They're basically the Dragon Shaman but worse, it takes them till level 11 to get an aura the same size the Dragon Shaman gets at level 1. Also what mantles you can choose from are limited by Diety. Most spreads loving suck, except for Kossuth that for some reason gets every single +damage aura. The only prestige classes that are any good are the ones for Soulknives. Also it nerfed a bunch of psionic powers because they were just too strong. Kurieg fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 06:45
|
|
|
As I understand it, CPsi was terrible and awful and made the game worse just for existing, because it reprinted key powers with nerfs (such as allowing astral construct to create only one astral construct at a time) and in doing so asserted that they were the canonical listings of those powers which overruled the original printings (a fraught topic that caused many a forums argument), and hosed with the lore by adding a divine association in the form of the divine mind and... godminds? e: Complete Psionic is also responsible for some of the most busted psionic material in the system; Linked Power, Metapower, and synchronicity primary among those. Torches Upon Stars fucked around with this message at 07:19 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 06:45
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:
Melee characters have the added complexity of figuring out how to efficiently place their body, and strikers also require some system mastery to actually perform their role, because merely picking new class powers isn't enough to keep up monster scaling, so a melee striker is probably one of the worst things to have a new player build. although it's arguably easy to pilot once built. If anything, the easiest class to play well is probably going to be a controller like Invoker, with no particular need to position yourself tactically to hit your Range 10 spells, no bad times to cast your horrifically overstatted powers, no obligation to do things besides "hit your spells," and no Immediate actions to distract you from checking your phone between turns, as well as one of the best at-will powers to fall back on in Hand of Radiance (Twin Strike hits twice? Hand of Radiance hits three things with not just an actual damage roll, but one with your main ability mod attached. If I had to be glib, the level 1 Invoker build is: Put 18 points in WIS and put the rest wherever. Play a human and put your +2 into WIS Take Staff Expertise and Cunning Stalker as feats (and Superior Implement Proficiency - Accurate Staff if Expertise is free), all to miss less. Take Thunder of Judgment as an encounter power and Hand of Radiance as an at-will. The rest can be whatever. Start every encounter with Thunder of Judgment on any 3 monsters that looked at you funny. Spend all the other turns casting Hand of Radiance on any 3 monsters that are still alive. If you miss anything, you can pop the human encounter power Heroic Effort to not miss. You can move closer to enemies if you'd like, but you probably won't need to, because both those powers have a range of "any 3 people anywhere in a ten-square, 50' radius." You can move away from enemies if you'd like, but you also don't need to, because Staff Expertise lets you cast without provoking Opportunity Attacks anyways. Invokers get Chain proficiency besides, which puts them in the "sub-par AC" bracket that's exactly one point below par. So the "I give them The Hand" Human Invoker character does an average of 22.5 damage every turn with an at-will, or 34.5 with an encounter power, with zero investment in damage, zero need to position tactically, and zero decision making. In contrast, Gradenko's barbarian is dealing, say, 17 damage on a charge, 19 damage at close-quarters, and 29.5 on an encounter power, and most of those powers also effectively lowers their own defenses and put it at risk to spontaneously implode to unwanted enemy attention. For reference, a level 1 standard monster should have 32 hit points, so the controller is effectively killing 2/3rds of a monster every turn, and an entire one with an encounter power, although it's spread over 3 targets. So there you have it. You can play a character that's simple to build and play, and you can play a character that Hits Things With Axe, but it's very exceedingly unlikely to play both at the same time. A controller can fill every single power slot with something that dazes, stuns or dominates, and probably do just fine, and they have some of the best at-wills as fallbacks besides. But I guess no one would have expected that the easiest class to play in 4e PHB1 would have been the Wizard of all things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 10:25
|
|
|
moths posted:It's wild because 4e is the JFK assassination of industry chat. It somehow managed to touch upon every industry issue, from missing stairs to the impact of piracy was present was abundantly present in some form. 4E and its knock-ons are so fascinating to discuss, but you really can’t. Its a civil war where the participants are still alive and active in the community. We still see the effects today. I know I took issue at the time with WotCs high handed behaviour towards Paizo during 4e, leading me to get on the Pathfinder side of the conflict, despite 4e being the more interesting game mechanically, but that’s apparently nothing compared to how prepared Paizo were for WotC to pull the same poo poo again. The ORC came across as something unearthed from a war chest labelled “WotC are at it again”
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 12:04
|
|
|
Iron Heart posted:As I understand it, CPsi was terrible and awful and made the game worse just for existing, because it reprinted key powers with nerfs (such as allowing astral construct to create only one astral construct at a time) and in doing so asserted that they were the canonical listings of those powers which overruled the original printings (a fraught topic that caused many a forums argument), and hosed with the lore by adding a divine association in the form of the divine mind and... godminds? It's really weird, even holding a copy of Complete Psionics fills one with negativity. The book is cursed or something, I should know, since I bought it on release. Even the new feats it brings for the soulknife can't save it, but the worst crime is that if you're looking to play a psion or wilder and want to look for new features to add to your class, this book has exactly nothing for you. You are better off reading Magic of Incarnum.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 12:43
|
|
|
HidaO-Win posted:4E and its knock-ons are so fascinating to discuss, but you really can’t. Its a civil war where the participants are still alive and active in the community. Everything lovely about the development of 5e, from the lovely fighters all the way up to the fawning courtship of pants making GBS threads serial abusers, can be directly tied back to Paizo weaponizing and signal boosting the absolute dregs of the hobby into public perception as the One True Way of D&D. As an advertising campaign. Splicer fucked around with this message at 13:22 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 13:06
|
|
|
Splicer posted:What makes Paizo bad guys here (not the bad guys, there's plenty of bad guys in this story) is where Paizo chose to focus their propaganda. They didn't go to war with WotC, they went to war with the concepts of rules clarity, class parity, rigorous design, and, let's face it, just the idea of change. Definitely not ideal, particularly with hindsight, but Paizo were put on deadly ground, it was carve out a good chunk of market share or almost immediately go out of business. It’s why it’s hard to talk about, disreputable acts spurred disreputable acts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 13:44
|
|
|
Then again, Paizo only bit the hand after building their entire business model around being fed. That's part of why it's such a fascinating topic - very little is clear-cut or unambiguous about any of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 14:58
|
|
|
HidaO-Win posted:We still see the effects today. I know I took issue at the time with WotCs high handed behaviour towards Paizo during 4e, leading me to get on the Pathfinder side of the conflict, despite 4e being the more interesting game mechanically, but that’s apparently nothing compared to how prepared Paizo were for WotC to pull the same poo poo again. The ORC came across as something unearthed from a war chest labelled “WotC are at it again” Paizo had almost a month of warning that it was coming since WotC reached out to content creators in December. Kyle Brink just confirmed that Paizo was on that list. And they’re great marketers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:2nd Ed
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Honestly, psionics felt like an attempt to bolt on a different magic resource system(which i actually like more than vancian) and then post-facto try to justify it as a whole different thing (which i didn't). Personally, I like GURPS' 12 different magic systems to choose from, of varying levels of actual completeness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 17:59
|
|
|
Did anyone ever try the spell points variant rule? I never ran 3e, but it looked a lot better than Vancian casting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:That depends when you are looking at 4e. 4e pre-essentials lacks a simple "I hit it" barbarian type which works well for some players. (And no, the PHB ranger doesn't quite fit - as well as not being very good at rangering). Essentials filled that niche extremely well. I have been playing RPGs for 30 years and I have never met this guy. I'm almost 100% sure it's a theoretical construct people use to insist that fighters need to suck. Same with the "little brother that just doesn't get it yet." Like literally every time I hear the argument in real life I ask "Oh, is that you? Are you that kind of player that wants to just hit stuff?" and the answer is always "No I am smart and play wizards." Scratch concern for simple player needs and uncover gatekeeping, every time. theironjef fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:30
|
|
|
I've met multiple people who prefer simple characters without a lot of decision space. Generally, it's people who are in it for the roleplaying and hanging out aspects and who don't care to learn all the intricacies of more complicated characters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:38
|
|
|
Serf posted:Did anyone ever try the spell points variant rule? I never ran 3e, but it looked a lot better than Vancian casting. I used it for a character in couple of darksun adventures (like literally two adventures at around level 3) and IIRC my impression was that it was just vancian with extra steps unless you didn’t mind your spells per day getting cut in half. Edit: I missed this was about 3e and for some reason thought it was about the 2e Player’s Option spellpoint rules. Berkshire Hunts fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:38
|
|
|
theironjef posted:I have been playing RPGs for 30 years and I have never met this guy. I'm almost 100% sure it's a theoretical construct people use to insist that fighters need to suck. Same with the "little brother that just doesn't get it yet." I will say that when I ran 4E I had one player who played a ranger who never did anything but basic attacks. Like he just flat out refused to engage with the system. The guy loves tactical games and went hard on board game night, but even after I explained his powers to him he just kept on using the basic attack. He never seemed to dislike it, he was fine doing his damage and moving on, RP'd with gusto, all in all a great player. I never did figure out what the problem was, though maybe that problem only existed in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
The closest I've seen are people who don't want to do math on any given turn, but this is in most versions of D&D best accomplished with a wizard. Though more realistically it's better accomplished with a rules system without changing bonuses and penalties to actions, or with a character build/math tracking electronic character sheet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
Serf posted:Did anyone ever try the spell points variant rule? I never ran 3e, but it looked a lot better than Vancian casting. It makes casters even stronger because they keep gaining more and more shots to cast their max level spells. It's definitely more convenient though. theironjef posted:I have been playing RPGs for 30 years and I have never met this guy. I'm almost 100% sure it's a theoretical construct people use to insist that fighters need to suck. Same with the "little brother that just doesn't get it yet." My last 3e character was a Fighter Archer that just dumped as many arrows into a target as possible, but it wasn't because I was so disinterested in the game['s mechanics] that I was looking for a simplistic character to play, it was because I wanted to see how far I could push the optimization in that direction, and it fit in with a group of Druid, Warlock, and Binder that had lots of control but was light on the damage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
theironjef posted:I have been playing RPGs for 30 years and I have never met this guy. I'm almost 100% sure it's a theoretical construct people use to insist that fighters need to suck. Same with the "little brother that just doesn't get it yet." I ran some demo Encounters games at the LGS, and one groggy as gently caress old dude came in, started by complaining that 4e odds dumbed down for babies, then played the entire session only using melee basic attacks. As the wizard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
The elementalist Sorcerer is probably the most little brother 'cast 'hurt' on 'guy' " class in the game but it's also real strong and fun if you want to get into the tactical layer of things and/or have a Lazylord.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:49
|
|
|
theironjef posted:I have been playing RPGs for 30 years and I have never met this guy. I'm almost 100% sure it's a theoretical construct people use to insist that fighters need to suck. Same with the "little brother that just doesn't get it yet." I think people conflate three different phenomena and try to make a single use-case that covers all of them. 1. Someone who hates or is bored by a game's premise so much they don't even want to engage with it. 2. Someone who wants to participate but struggles to keep up with a ton of complexity, especially all at once. 3. Someone who's just happy to be there and doesn't really care what they do. All of these people actually exist, but they don't need a one-size-fits-all solution to their problems (or "problems"). #1 should play a different game. I don't play fighting games with people who fundamentally dislike competition or Candyland with people who hate randomness and bright colors, so why would I play D&D with people who hate crunch? This is only an issue if for some reason one specific game has to be your social activity regardless of people's tastes or interests, and I don't rate any game that highly. #2 should get guidance, support, and patience from the rest of the table. This is probably the best argument in favor of having some form of simplified mechanics, but imo "class" is not the appropriate framework for it; they shouldn't be pigeonholed into a particular narrative or even mechanical concept in order to learn. Rather, it's probably best that every class have a little bit of flexibility in terms of how complex they are to play, or honestly you could not do it at a mechanical level at all and simply have rulebooks and a table culture that do a better job of tutorializing and welcoming people. #3 doesn't need a special class just for them, they'll be good either way. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
HidaO-Win posted:Definitely not ideal, particularly with hindsight, but Paizo were put on deadly ground, it was carve out a good chunk of market share or almost immediately go out of business. moths posted:Then again, Paizo only bit the hand after building their entire business model around being fed. Splicer fucked around with this message at 18:58 on Feb 7, 2023 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 02:30 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:It makes casters even stronger because they keep gaining more and more shots to cast their max level spells. It's definitely more convenient though. There's definitely an audience for games where most/all the system mastery happens at character creation but I think there are significant tensions between this design goal and tactical play, to the point where it's really easy for one or the other to end up invalidating each other. I also think TTRPGs are a really poor fit for the model (unless it's a game where character builds change constantly, either via making new characters or through some other dynamic). If I make a character in Diablo who's just gonna use Multishot or Zeal all day, sure, okay, Diablo is a loot game, you're potentially making charop decisions every time you identify an item. But a game where you make a character, plan out their build, and then proceed to play them for months or years of real time? I think in that context it's really hard to justify a game that weighs build decisions over in-the-moment tactical ones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2023 19:05
|
|