4E: what can we expect from SAGA and Bo9S?

[Manxome]

1187460139[/unixtime]]You see, the part of that quote which makes me uneasy is where the guy basically says, "I choose high Wis because at level 12 I'll be able to jump onto a better ability track when this one starts to dry up." Can I hit a dev with a stick and yell at them for this? Because this is sort of specifically one of the things that should be avoided.

Well, that sort of thing probably can work, provided that
(a) all low-level ability tracks dry up around the same time,
(b) the resources you invested into the low-level ability track could not have been spent on anything other than a low-level ability track, and
(c) "level" here means character level, not class level

If you managed all of those, then I think this would just mean that you have to adapt your schtick as you advance in level. I can see some people might not like the flavor of that, but I don't see an inherent balance issue. Unless I'm missing something..?

Of course, that doesn't mean that they'll actually meet those criteria...

1187464553[/unixtime]]Diablo 2 is a perfect example of what not to do in an RPG.

Seriously, I don't even know why people liked that game. It's pretty stupid. You take one ability, pump it up, then you just get in game and spam it. There aren't any tactics beyond the obvious. Your character is totally one-dimensional and boring. Not to mention you had no plot choices at all, and just went from point A to point B killing everything that moves.

God, that game sucked.

Well, it's not a traditional CRPG. Really, I think it's as much an action game as anything else, and lots of character options and tactics (let alone well-designed ones) are not actually required for a good action game.

Randomized content and a choice of which skill you pump up gives it better replayability than a lot of games, the UI is better than a lot of games, and it's got solid ongoing support.

And to be fair, CRPGs rarely offer meaningful plot choices or more complicated game objectives than "go to point B and kill anything that stands in your way;" that's hardly unique to Diablo. And the amount of non-interactive story stuff the typical player actually cares to sit through is a lot smaller when you've got an online multiplayer game, especially if a lot of players don't know each other and aren't on their first play through the game.

There are a lot of bad design choices in it, particularly from the perspective of character balance and flexibility, but there's also a lot of stuff in the game that's fairly well done.

[Catharz]

In defense of D2, it works as a computer RPG. In fact, my main complaint is that its equipment-driven nature coupled with uncommon items being significantly better leads to a serious grind.

But one-dimensional characters is not as serious of a problem as RT makes it out to be. Although certain combinations result in one-dimensional character (which is good for those who want them), other combinations like the 'fast cast whirlwind assassin' could lead to much more creative and engaging play.

Whether anyone would want to play a pen and paper RPG in which you do the same adventure three times and always have to play one of the same 6 or so pre-gen characters is another issue.

[Crissa]

ARGH.

Can we stop quoting their stupid extended character set, PLEASE? o-o

I really, really don't need random kanji in the text as my browser tries to understand what the text could possibly be since it's been stripped from the meta "I'm microsoft, stuff that standard in the trash." It's crappy that they're putting out unstandard characters that can't be read by accessible browsers, but it's pissing me off.

Retype it or sane it before you post it, okay?

-Crissa

[Jacob_Orlove]

1187419108[/unixtime]]
And at that point characters are going to not only get repeatedly shafted against the wall like they had Weapon Focus or Herpes

Did anyone else initially read that as "Weapon Focus: Herpes"? Because that would be an awesome character.

[josephbt]

I perform my Kiss of Itching maneuver!

[Prak]

I think the real question about 4e is who here's going to switch? I myself will take a look, but I'll probably continue to play a hybrid of 3.0 and 3.5, maybe toss 4e in if I like what I see and it's feasible... and, of course, Tome stuff thrown in to make all that shit playable...

[Leress]

I will look at it when all three core books are out, so I can see a fuller picture of the system changes.

[Koumei]

Yeah, I'll give it a look, and then either I'll like it and buy it, even getting the subscription (assuming employment) and fapping around with the online tools, or I won't like it, and will stick with 3.x and use the Tomes.

Chances are, even if I do convert to 4th, I'll still use the Tomes as much as possible.

[RandomCasualty]

1187472802[/unixtime]]
Well, it's not a traditional CRPG. Really, I think it's as much an action game as anything else, and lots of character options and tactics (let alone well-designed ones) are not actually required for a good action game.

Well, the problem is that it's not a great action game either. There's not a particularly large amount of skill required for D2. It's just a matter of using some attack skill and then drinking healing potions when appropriate, perhaps occasionally backing off to supplement the healing.

And to be fair, CRPGs rarely offer meaningful plot choices or more complicated game objectives than "go to point B and kill anything that stands in your way;" that's hardly unique to Diablo. And the amount of non-interactive story stuff the typical player actually cares to sit through is a lot smaller when you've got an online multiplayer game, especially if a lot of players don't know each other and aren't on their first play through the game.

Well, a lot of CRPGs give you the illusion that you're making plot choices, or at least let you say things in character. In D2, you really couldn't interact with any of the NPCs, and there weren't any solutions to any problem in the game beyond simply hacking it to pieces.

As far as CRPGs go, I found it incredibly boring.

[Koumei]

D2 reminded me of that SNES game where you swat mosquitoes on the screen. You know the one. Probably appeared for PC either for free or in one of those "over nine thousand games on one CD, one of these games is Castle of the Winds, one of them is Moraffe's World, and all of the other games suck" CDs. You just keep rapidly clicking everywhere.

That's pretty much the same as D2, from memory. Only now do I remember how much I hated it. Wow. Still, at least it had a source of humour: Swarms of bees that drop full plate when killed. Those are fucking strong bees.

[Draco_Argentum]

1187472144[/unixtime]]

"All characters have at will, per encounter, and per day uses they will have to keep track of. No more mages pulling out crossbows. You will never be penalized for doing what you do best – your clearly defined roles."

Hm. On the one hand, that sounds like trying to move toward a unified character resource model. On the other, instead of /day abilities going away, now everyone has to deal with them, apparently.

And I'm also interested in the sort of ways they want to ensure (/enforce) that classes be able to continue to act within their "clearly defined role".

Sounds good in theory. If I'm a fire mage I want to throw fire, not cast sleep then plink with a crossbow. If I'm a swordsman I want to sword things, not change to mace because a phat epic dropped. Also it would be nice if swordsman didn't become ass quite so early in the game.

[KauTZ]

1187518812[/unixtime]]Castle of the Winds

Fuck yes.

I'm also suprised so many people here actually think D2 is an RPG in any sense. Its a fucking action game. You play it because your bored out of you mind, and your dumbass friends also want to play it. Not because you want an immersive world where you take the role of the only douche who can save it. Its just mindless violence with 3 of your dumbest friends and your cookie-cutter builds.

1187506090[/unixtime]]I think the real question about 4e is who here's going to switch?

I want to see what the OGL is going to look like. Because if I can not pay a thing and still look at the mechanics, just like the current SRD, I'm not buying shit.

[Koumei]

1187534481[/unixtime]]

1187518812[/unixtime]]Castle of the Winds

Fuck yes.

I'm glad someone else remembers that game. 200% awesome, I guarantee it, and it had at least as much plot as Diablo 2 did! Granted, not as much as mos... as at least half the tabletop games, but still.

I want to see what the OGL is going to look like. Because if I can not pay a thing and still look at the mechanics, just like the current SRD, I'm not buying shit.

[Prak]

1187534481[/unixtime]]

1187518812[/unixtime]]Castle of the Winds

Fuck yes.

I'm also suprised so many people here actually think D2 is an RPG in any sense. Its a fucking action game. You play it because your bored out of you mind, and your dumbass friends also want to play it. Not because you want an immersive world where you take the role of the only douche who can save it. Its just mindless violence with 3 of your dumbest friends and your cookie-cutter builds.

1187506090[/unixtime]]I think the real question about 4e is who here's going to switch?

I want to see what the OGL is going to look like. Because if I can not pay a thing and still look at the mechanics, just like the current SRD, I'm not buying shit.

Quoted for fucking truth...

[Voss]

Switch? Probably. There isn't exactly a compelling reason to stay with the flaws of 3.X. Their subscription content can go screw itself, however. Didn't need Dragon or Dungeon as magazines, don't need half assed 'interactive content' or whatever stupid buzzword they've slapped that shit with.

As far as the weapon thing goes, the big flaw I'm expecting is that one weapon group/style/tree/ is going to be flat-out mechanically better than the others. If we are really lucky, there will be 3-4 that are better depending on the specific build you're going for. Like the fast (init bonus?) AC ignoring spear thing will be good for a sneak attack build; the multi-attack sword spam will be good for multiple attacks while having a shield and axes will be good for the huge damage output on a barb or buffed cleric.

Hopefully, even if there still is a caster/melee gap, there will be something for viable finesse warrior. But we will see.

And apparently we will see paladins of Asmodeus as part of the Core rules.

[Cielingcat]

The benefit of online content is that it'll be available for free much more readily than Dungeon or Dragon.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Ah, normally I don't do this, but I'm going to rant a bit. This morning I went to read a column on wizards. Yes, really. Sometimes they are good. Well, parts of them? anywho, this is how you get to their columns now:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://wiz ... r][br]From what I can tell, they have taken all archived content offline and attached a fee to access it. That's right, even stuff you could view just a few weeks ago. Check it out, maybe it is a browser error on my part (probably not if the WayBackMachine stores things in the same format). So, if you want the OLD, SHITTY content back (you remember the rulings like "illusions never do anything" "shadowcraft illusions cannot be 100% real" "maybe we should make "shoot through windows" a feat!" "well, that full plate is slowing your dwarf down"), you actually have to give them money. WHAT THE FUCK. Did they not see the forum posts about how each ruling/column was blatantly wrong?

Also, perhaps someone could tell me why the Monster Manual, Players Handbook, and DM Guide come out at different times. I have the image of a player in my head that goes out and buys a PHB and then sits on the floor saying "I wish I had a DM to run this.... or items to buy.... or monsters to fight...."

[cthulhu]

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dn ... ][br]Works for me direct. It looks like they've decided to revamp their webpage and have yet to relink the old stuff.

Edit: Or you could be right. I hate that layout.

[CalibronXXX]

Unless I see some major improvements to how certain core issues in the SRD, or an *ahem* "preview copy", I'm sticking to Tome style 3.5. I've spent too much time house-ruling and home-brewing to eagerly snatch at the next system WOTC shats out without a damned good reason.

[MrWaeseL]

I'm personally jumping at the chance to have a whole new D&D edition to shit on.

[Koumei]

I'm looking forward to the really dumb things that crop up - similar to Balor Mining or Phoenix Duplication or turning into sharks that can't breathe underwater. The stupid stuff.

[PhoneLobster]

I'll have the damn thing. Collecting rpg rules is a minor hobby of mine in its own right, its a, well, THE, big name and the core needs to be on my book shelf.

But I might not use it though. I might go back to the days of pure homebrew 2nd ed drove me into. I can only hope I have learned enough since then to do it better.

Anyway. It WON'T be OGL and if I don't get it how will I keep up with the chat around here?

[Username17]

As far as I can tell, all the Old Useless Bullshit is still up, but the Archive directory doesn't list anything that came out before August.

So you can actually get to most of it following internal article links, it's just really hard to actually find any particular segment because the archives won't tell you where that shit is.

Basically I think they are just "phasing it out". In a few months it will be virtually impossible to figure out how to get to Skip's article about how Fighters have the "advantage" of having a good Fort save. Hell, with a small enough body of people checking out the old secret content, they might even delete it from their servers.

-Username17

[Koumei]

1187620093[/unixtime]]In a few months it will be virtually impossible to figure out how to get to Skip's article about how Fighters have the "advantage" of having a good Fort save. Hell, with a small enough body of people checking out the old secret content, they might even delete it from their servers.

This is a bad thing how?

[Fwib]

1187621787[/unixtime]]

1187620093[/unixtime]]In a few months it will be virtually impossible to figure out how to get to Skip's article about how Fighters have the "advantage" of having a good Fort save. Hell, with a small enough body of people checking out the old secret content, they might even delete it from their servers.

This is a bad thing how?

Revisionist history?