The End of 4e D&D.

[Roy]

Ugh. Ignoring more herp derp from people who:

Cannot distinguish fantasy from non fantasy, and therefore think that high realism is something different from a lack of magic (you know, just like Earth, which is what people really mean when they say realistic) or a lack of advanced technology, relative to Earth. Hi Welcome Red Rob.

Cannot distinguish something they are doing merely to do something together from something they actually want to do, and therefore cannot tell the difference between something merely serving as a backdrop for what they really want, and playing the game being an actual goal in and of itself. Hi Welcome Ubernoob.

Are actually trying to propose author wank as an argument. There's a reason everyone hates Elminster and friends. Hi Welcome TheFlatline.

Cannot distinguish tabletop games from non tabletop games in a thread about tabletop games, and consistently brings up shit like 'Chess' and 'GTA' in contexts it has no relevancy in. Hi Welcome Ice9.

Unfortunately that only leaves one thing actually worth responding to.

The thing about any low magic or tech or whatever type setting is that they end up being shackled by realism. Just as Legolas and the rest of the LotR crowd is the worst thing to ever happen to D&D, saying 'low magic' or 'low tech' is functionally identical to saying 'low level cap'. And I don't mean E6, as a 6th level D&D character is a god compared to the upper limits of what is possible when you are shackled by realism.

Take a look at the world around you right now. Most of the things you can do are only possible as an extension of technology. Now imagine not having that. Exactly.

This is why no matter how good a gunslinger you are in the west, all it takes is to lose one draw or forget to lock your door and it's instant game over. And so on down the line. Because you see, most ordinary people react to danger by running away from it, yet your characters are not doing so.

[RobbyPants]

Okay. I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, Roy. Is your argument against realistic RPGs or low magic/tech RPGs?

It seems totally possible to run a wild west gunslinger RPG with levels built in, so the heroes are more survivable, but that's not realistic. Is that out of the purview of what you're discussing?

Also, I don't really see a problem with what Ubernoob or Ice9 said. I don't play D&D to escape. It's a good chance to hang out with my best friend, and I like the tactical aspect of combat. Sure, Ice9 wasn't talking about TTRPGs, but there's still a solid set of interest in "realistic" games where you get to play the Big Damn Hero.

[A Man In Black]

The thing about any low magic or tech or whatever type setting is that they end up being shackled by realism. Just as Legolas and the rest of the LotR crowd is the worst thing to ever happen to D&D, saying 'low magic' or 'low tech' is functionally identical to saying 'low level cap'. And I don't mean E6, as a 6th level D&D character is a god compared to the upper limits of what is possible when you are shackled by realism.

That's not inevitable at all. They're often linked by the sort of uncreative fucks who mean "GM authoritarian wankery" when they say "low magic", but there's no reason the lack of an ability to move mountains has to be inextricably linked with weak plot armor. Fantasy John McClane and fantasy Batman are acceptable low magic, strong plot armor character concepts.

[Roy]

Okay. I'm not even sure what you're arguing anymore, Roy. Is your argument against realistic RPGs or low magic/tech RPGs?

It seems totally possible to run a wild west gunslinger RPG with levels built in, so the heroes are more survivable, but that's not realistic. Is that out of the purview of what you're discussing?

Also, I don't really see a problem with what Ubernoob or Ice9 said. I don't play D&D to escape. It's a good chance to hang out with my best friend, and I like the tactical aspect of combat. Sure, Ice9 wasn't talking about TTRPGs, but there's still a solid set of interest in "realistic" games where you get to play the Big Damn Hero.

High magic (or any magic, really) is unrealistic because we don't have that on Earth. High tech, relative to Earth levels is also unrealistic, because we don't have that yet. When someone says unrealistic, they really mean like Earth.

Having more than low levels in a wild west RPG would result in something both unrealistic, and that did not accurately model the source material. Thus a Wild West setting is confined to low level stuff.

Like it or not, the niche of tabletop RPGs is 'escapist fantasy'. This is the only reason why everyone doesn't just play an MMO or a Diablo clone, which let's face it - those do the math better, if you just want something to do while your main goal is hanging out with a friend it does that just as well too. Since tabletop RPGs haven't been completely replaced by WoW yet, there's obviously people who recognize and accept this and plan their purchases accordingly. But 'I just want something to do with my friend' is not an argument, because if you picked any activity other than tabletop gaming, you'd still be doing something with your friend.

Non tabletop games are something else entirely. As such, the same standards don't apply. And I don't even want to fucking hear about any escapist fantasies regarding GTA. But see, everyone recognizes and accepts that too. They aren't playing GTA to roleplay being a criminal mastermind or whatever, they're doing it because they like driving around and doing all sorts of crazy ass shit to torment the town, and get chased by tanks. Or whatever. And the main point of Chess is to improve higher thinking abilities, not to pretend to be a general or whatthefuckever. Even wargames, where you technically are playing a general don't focus on pretending to be the general, they focus on you accomplishing your objectives and making your opponent not accomplish his own.

And then there's the people who still don't fucking get that author wank is not an argument. Because barring author wank, GM authoritarian wankery and low magic are one and the same. Such that if you ever hear one, you should expect the other, and if you're smart you'll recognize the warning signs and stay away from the summoner... I mean, the game.

[violence in the media]

That's not inevitable at all. They're often linked by the sort of uncreative fucks who mean "GM authoritarian wankery" when they say "low magic", but there's no reason the lack of an ability to move mountains has to be inextricably linked with weak plot armor. Fantasy John McClane and fantasy Batman are acceptable low magic, strong plot armor character concepts.

This is exactly it, but the bolded section is the crux of the problem. It's possible to have an awesome "low-magic" game that isn't, or doesn't devolve into, authoritarian stage-directing bullshit, but the likelihood is very low.

As far as "reasons to game" go, look at PL's thread in the Trenches and tell me that he's going through that primarily out of the joy of hanging out with his casual acquaintances. Sometimes, you just want to have fun playing a game. At those times, you really hope that the game will be fun and good. For example, PL mentioned that, as bad as that game is, that there are worse groups that he opted not to game with.

[RobbyPants]

Like it or not, the niche of tabletop RPGs is 'escapist fantasy'. This is the only reason why everyone doesn't just play an MMO or a Diablo clone, which let's face it - those do the math better, if you just want something to do while your main goal is hanging out with a friend it does that just as well too. Since tabletop RPGs haven't been completely replaced by WoW yet, there's obviously people who recognize and accept this and plan their purchases accordingly. But 'I just want something to do with my friend' is not an argument, because if you picked any activity other than tabletop gaming, you'd still be doing something with your friend.

I, for one, like the math. So, if I like hanging out with people, and I like playing a mathematical, tactical game, I don't see what the problem is. I don't see why that's not valid.

[ubernoob]

Like it or not, the niche of tabletop RPGs is 'escapist fantasy'. This is the only reason why everyone doesn't just play an MMO or a Diablo clone, which let's face it - those do the math better, if you just want something to do while your main goal is hanging out with a friend it does that just as well too. Since tabletop RPGs haven't been completely replaced by WoW yet, there's obviously people who recognize and accept this and plan their purchases accordingly. But 'I just want something to do with my friend' is not an argument, because if you picked any activity other than tabletop gaming, you'd still be doing something with your friend.

I, for one, like the math. So, if I like hanging out with people, and I like playing a mathematical, tactical game, I don't see what the problem is. I don't see why that's not valid.

You took the words out of my mouth, Robby.

@Roy: I've written more D&D material than you have. I totally don't like playing D&D at all. I just bear with it because my friends force me to play.
// sarcasm

[Roy]

Like it or not, the niche of tabletop RPGs is 'escapist fantasy'. This is the only reason why everyone doesn't just play an MMO or a Diablo clone, which let's face it - those do the math better, if you just want something to do while your main goal is hanging out with a friend it does that just as well too. Since tabletop RPGs haven't been completely replaced by WoW yet, there's obviously people who recognize and accept this and plan their purchases accordingly. But 'I just want something to do with my friend' is not an argument, because if you picked any activity other than tabletop gaming, you'd still be doing something with your friend.

I, for one, like the math. So, if I like hanging out with people, and I like playing a mathematical, tactical game, I don't see what the problem is. I don't see why that's not valid.

My point is that if your primary goal is 'hanging with friends' and your secondary goal is 'math' then LAN party or MMO > tabletop game. Because otherwise it will go more like math > hanging with friends, which is not what you want. If they're equal priorities you still get the math and the hanging with friends, you just get more of it because of automation. If the math is a greater priority then theorycraft away as you play.

Now if you're saying you also care about the escapist fantasy (aka, that roleplaying thing) then you have a reason to play tabletop. But see, you're not doing that. You're actively saying you don't.

[ubernoob]

I've played MMOs before. They bore the everliving shit out of me. Stop making generalizations like a fucktard, Roy.

[Ice9]

This board can be a great source of comedy sometimes. Because you get people who bust out some poorly thought-out statement and then defend it to the ends of the earth. Facts? Who needs that.

So apparently, we can ignore all the non-fantasy movies, books, video games, and even TTRPGs that people, by all accounts, claim to enjoy. Most of those people are apparently lying, and "non-godlike" is a tiny niche genre that only idiots like.

Because, of course, people only ever play RPGs for escapism. If you thought you were playing for other reasons, you were mistaken. And considering escapism, it turns out that being a rock-star, world leader, and whatever else is not good enough for Roy. Because you could still get shot. And apparently, the criteria for "worth fantasizing about" is "can get shot and shrug it off" - nothing else will do.

And this isn't just Roy's preference! No, "most people" feel this way, and it's only a tiny cluster of fools (like everyone else on this board) who think otherwise.


...
And now Roy will ignore my point, and claim I want all RPGs to be "Peasant: The Mud Farming".

[Juton]

Has anyone gotten a chance to look over the new red box? I was expecting miniatures not tokens, but that's a minor nit-pick. One would hope that they'd take this opportunity to make a bit more in the way of sweeping changes, dire rats still have 38 hp, 1st level characters still do the same piddly damage but at least the adventure includes more in the way of minions. I've only played a few games of 4e back when it was released and this looks like the game I played, I'd have thought they'd make some improvements.

[Ice9]

They seem to have bumped monster damage up a bit - tried that game-day module and several people did die. Monsters were still very durable, but it seemed like not quite as much - of course, that may be because they changed the Fighter to another (very mono-dimensional) striker.

They're really taking this "simplification ad nauseum" thing seriously. The 4EE Fighter is just painfully dull (makes the 3E Fighter look like a dynamo of tactics), the Rogue is slightly more interesting, but only because sometimes you have to think how to get CA, and the Wizard and Cleric are pretty much like the 4E versions but with some options pre-selected. Oh, and no rituals - because screw you, non-combat options!

[Shokatsuryou]

Ganbare Gincun already posted the entire interview, but here is the 4e CharOp reaction to what Mearls said about magic items:

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/ ... items?pg=1

I thought you guys might be mildly amused.

[Psychic Robot]

Only Mike Mearls could design a game in which magic items are shitty and boring because of the explicit design goal of making players not dependent on magic items and then have it turn out that the magic items were overpowered.

[Archmage]

There's actually one post so far in that thread that's actually managed to make a really good point: D&D can't decide whether magic items are a player resource (like feats) or a DM resource.

I find the idea of player resources versus DM resources interesting. There are some things you as a player have absolute control over (class, feat, and skill selections) and there are things you have less or no control over (magic items). Naturally, D&D is a poor framework for a game where you have no control over what magic items you get, and 4th edition is no exception.

Mearls etc. who are making the argument that magic items "need to feel special" again are really making the argument that magic items are only cool when they're presents from the DM. If the player chooses to have a character with a flaming sword, well, whatever. But if the DM gifts the player a flaming sword he couldn't otherwise acquire, somehow that makes the flaming sword a thousand times more awesome. Yeah, okay, whatever.

[Josh_Kablack]

The 4e math just does not hold up to having enhancment bonuses be solely a DM resource:

Say I want to play "an expert marksman archer type" - so I want max or very nearly maximum possible accuracy with a bow. As the game rises in levels, the difference between having a bow with the recommended enhancement bonus and not having that bow gets bigger and bigger - by mid paragon, having vs not having the recommended enhancement bonus is making a bigger difference in total attack bonus than feat selection and circumstantial modifiers. (Seriously, the difference a +4 or +5 weapon is bigger than having Proficiency with the weapon and Expertise with the weapon, and depending on level and weapon can be bigger than also having combat advantage or not.)

Therefore the "expert archer" concept becomes dependent on DM whim, because no matter how much I min-max, a character who only took archery as a sideline and didn't sink feats into it nor have a proficiency can have an equal (or higher) bonuses if they get the +N bow.

What cheeses me off is that this is pretty easy to design around. Pull out some of that RNG obviation that Lago hates and this becomes golden. Since recommended enhancement bonuses are a fucking linear formula (1 + FLOOR[(Level-1)/5], just give everyone level-appropriate enhancement bonuses and then either leave only the damage/speshul power part of items as a DM-only resource.

[hogarth]

The 4e math just does not hold up to having enhancment bonuses be solely a DM resource:

Say I want to play "an expert marksman archer type" - so I want max or very nearly maximum possible accuracy with a bow. As the game rises in levels, the difference between having a bow with the recommended enhancement bonus and not having that bow gets bigger and bigger - by mid paragon, having vs not having the recommended enhancement bonus is making a bigger difference in total attack bonus than feat selection and circumstantial modifiers. (Seriously, the difference a +4 or +5 weapon is bigger than having Proficiency with the weapon and Expertise with the weapon, and depending on level and weapon can be bigger than also having combat advantage or not.)

Therefore the "expert archer" concept becomes dependent on DM whim, because no matter how much I min-max, a character who only took archery as a sideline and didn't sink feats into it nor have a proficiency can have an equal (or higher) bonuses if they get the +N bow.

That's how it worked in AD&D (at least until Unearthed Arcana came out), except there was no such thing as "feats" or "circumstantial modifiers". If you were a fighter with 16 Strength and your buddy got a pair of Gauntlets of Ogre Power, you would just suck compared to him, end of story. That would be your cue to mope and whine and make puppy-dog eyes at the DM until he threw you a bone as well.

[Psychic Robot]

The 4e math just does not hold up to having enhancment bonuses be solely a DM resource:

Aren't plain +X magical items considered common or whatever and thus craftable?

[Orion]

Actually, I agree with Mearls. The most interesting and memorable items (and characters) were characters who found items that didn't mesh naturally with their idiom, but were nevertheless good enough to use.

We found an artifact spear so powerful that the party Sorcerer became an Eldritch Knight just so he could use it, an Instrument of the Bards that led our dour dwarven Fighter/Thief to take ranks in Perform, and a dragon-slaying sword that led to the Ranger acquiring a new title and reputation.

If players choose their items, they're just cookie cutter.

[Psychic Robot]

There's a difference between making magic items rare and making magic items awesome. As it stands now, a flaming sword in 3e is never going to be awesome, no matter how rare it is. Even if they never show up in the campaign except in the BBEG's hand, it's just not that great. +1d6 damage? Whoo.

[Ice9]

That's the thing that annoys me when people talk about "a +1 sword used to mean something when it was harder to get!". Some items just aren't that big a deal. A +1 weapon gives you a slightly better chance to hit that you may not even notice on any given roll, and an improvement in damage that ranges from "kinda handy" to "barely relevant", depending on the character. It's just not something to inspire awe.

Now sure, you could hype up the "backstory" of the sword, and have NPCs get impressed by the fact that it's +1, but honestly, that doesn't have anything to do with it being a magic item. You could take an ordinary non-masterwork rusty sword and make it a weapon of legendary significance in a given campaign. Doesn't mean that rusty swords in general are particularly amazing.

[xechnao]

A player should not be able to choose a magic item among other magic items without a sacrifice of some resource. If he is, his focus diverts to making the right mundane choice rather than the importance of each magic item. If magic items need to be impressive and important they should not be disposed to be freely chosen.

[Roy]

I started ignoring this thread because it was becoming too excessively retarded in a way that had already been addressed and corrected. Now it's becoming excessively retarded again, but in a different way.

Magic items are tools of the trade. Nothing more. You wouldn't make a firefighter go through any sort of bullshit to get his axe, would you? Fuck no, because you realize that an axe is a tool of the firefighting trade. He can't do his job without it. As D&D characters, your profession is adventurer. And all that shit that keeps you on the RNG, and that gives you necessary utility effects like Flight and Heavy Fort is your tools of the trade. I know a bunch of you fuckers are going to whine and flail about this just because my name is on the post, but too fucking bad.

You need to be able to seriously just walk into a decent sized town, pop down your money, and get your damn tools. A proverbial Mage Mart, if not a literal one. All the problems with such an approach are fluff related, and fluff is easily fixed to whatever you want it to be, so no one cares.

Naturally this means there is nothing special or interesting about magic items. And anyone who tries to pretend otherwise is likely just trying to trick you into taking vendor trash. See: The first few pages of Weapons of Legacy for examples.

After all this is Dungeons and Dragons, not Shoppers and Stealers. All that time wasting wank to get your tools is less time you are using them. Which means you're not accomplishing any goals or advancing the plot, you're just blowing the DM under the table while you waste everyone else's time. And the DM might like that sort of thing, but no one else does, least of all the guy actually sucking a barrel of cocks, to wit you.

'Magic items are special' only works in a system where they aren't necessary. It's too bad no such system actually exists, as every single one of them either treats them as standard RNG stuff, or as a standard resource (guy A has a lot of money, guy B has a magic sword, both had the same resource cost). And most of them aren't going to impress anyone regardless.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I don't mind magical items being mostly or even almost completely out of the PC's control when it comes to acquisition.

I just hate it when magical items are:

A) Mandatory to play the game.
B) Controlled mostly or entirely by the DM; the DM should not be able to withhold magical items, they only have permission to add more of them.
C) Able to be traded in for some other resource, usually other magical items.
D) Are only able to be used by some specific build/combo.
E) Create way too high of a volume of trash drops.
F) Are too common.

I would be totally cool with the idea of magical items being completely and utterly random. 4E magical items got on my bad side by doing EVERYTHING on that list. I would seriously rather switch to the Baldur's Gate model of magical items where the vast majority of swag got found, except for a few trinkets you could get at higher level that you could buy--like mithril plate armor.

How the fuck can you create a system that is so mindblowingly awful as 4E's I have no idea. For fuck's sake it makes me miss wealth by level. WBL and 4E's system is a pile of donkey dicks, but it doesn't get EVERYTHING wrong.

[Roy]

You know, I read that thread about the whole common/uncommon/rare thing. Their argument is basically 'Hey guys, we know most items are full of fail. But instead of making more items worth a damn, we're just going to make the items you care about not accessible by normal means. That way you have to take the vendor trash and use it, because you have no other choice.'

This naturally is a very strong argument against random drops, as it allows fuckers who can't work their itemization properly to get away with not doing their job, therefore fucktards will hide behind it.

Even games like Diablo 2 where finding stuff randomly was the only way you can do it, and the stuff you cared about was rather rare still had more variety in the viable items than 4th edition. It also doesn't set the bar very high, so if your Sorceress doesn't find a Shako and a Vex rune for HotO she is still more than capable of completing the game. Now there's other problems with this system, namely that items are too rare, requiring like 9,000,000 farming runs to get and the game randomly becomes very easy if you do luck out and get a uber item similar to 2nd edition but this is still a vast improvement over 4th edition.

If they simply made more items worth using, they would not have this problem. Everyone uses the same stuff not because that stuff is good, though it is, but because there's no real competition.

3rd edition was also vastly better about this. Yes, everyone had their RNG stuff, in a slotless form thanks to MIC. And everyone had Heavy Fort on their armor or shield, and Animated on their shield, and a Ring of Entropic Deflection + an item that gives an enhancement bonus to speed. But with every other property and slot you had some variety.