[5E] Is Mearls planning to snow Hasbro and the fanbase?

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:14 pm

Drachasor wrote:I do appreciate the concern (and your post was very amusing). I wouldn't worry too much about me as I do have a relatively thick skin. I was just trying to be diplomatic and hoping to encourage a more civil tone. That said, my diplomacy skill isn't very high.

Go fuck yourself.

My favorite part of the Den is that when some sanctimonious moron attempts to act all high and mighty you can call them on it without fear of banning.

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/ ... ic_Theurge

Doesn't happen here. If it does, its resolved a lot quicker.

wrote:they all got the idea that if they didn't have a special ability that let them do something, then it could not be done.

It was so bad that I even gave them all a once per encounter power to do anything thematic appropriate for their character. They could make it up on the spot and I'd use the page 42 DMG guidelines to handle it. It was a free ability above and beyond anything they already had. Even then it was difficult to encourage them to go beyond the apparent walls 4E set up for them. More than a bit frustrating.

Thats how rules work. That you had to house rule in some BS to do anything interesting (and apparently did it poorly) is not relevant to anyone discussing 4e. We don't know your (apparently shitty) house rules, and I doubt the majority of the RPG players do either.

That said, there were some aspects of 4E I really liked as a DM. The monster and minion rules generally were exceptional for combat purposes.

Which rules. The ones in the printed book where they literally erratted the entire book because they were shitty, or the post erratta ones that the entire WoTC forums are littered with fixes for because they are still shitty.

Drachasor · Post by **Drachasor** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:27 pm

Krusk wrote:
they all got the idea that if they didn't have a special ability that let them do something, then it could not be done.

It was so bad that I even gave them all a once per encounter power to do anything thematic appropriate for their character. They could make it up on the spot and I'd use the page 42 DMG guidelines to handle it. It was a free ability above and beyond anything they already had. Even then it was difficult to encourage them to go beyond the apparent walls 4E set up for them. More than a bit frustrating.
Thats how rules work. That you had to house rule in some BS to do anything interesting (and apparently did it poorly) is not relevant to anyone discussing 4e. We don't know your (apparently shitty) house rules, and I doubt the majority of the RPG players do either.

Actually Page 42 of the 4E DMG does go over how to handle creative ideas in combat. It was that system that I used for my house rule -- all I did was say "you can also make up some thematically appropriate for your character on the fly." If I made any mistake it would be that I had this encounter power be too powerful -- it was more potent than an normal encounter power. The page 42 rules are actually pretty solid overall. The DMG in general encourages the DM to be permissive (though I grant the skill challenge system sucked).

The PHB, on the other hand, discourages players from being creative. How the powers are written, how the skills were written, and how the combat section was written all worked together in a very negative way. It didn't help that a lot of out of combat stuff had no mechanics or mention. They really should have granted non-combat resources of various sorts to the classes.

The 4E experience overall impressed upon me that a good system needs writing to encourage player creativity. 4E had tools to enable it, but they weren't shown to the players and the writing stifled creative thought.

I'm not saying 4E was a good system. It just wasn't completely without merit and had some positive elements that are sometimes forgotten.

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:46 pm

"Make some shit up, we are lazy" is not a good rule.

Name some positive elements and go ahead and try to defend them. Almost every aspect was shitty.

Edit 1 WTF happened to the board, i can't get my post to appear in the right spot? is this due to his messed up quotes or am I retarded?
Edit 2 - It was his quotes.

Drachasor · Post by **Drachasor** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 9:58 pm

There, fixed it. Sorry about that Krusk. It seems there was an extra quote tag that had been hiding in my previous post.

Hmm, Strengths of 4E?

The monster creation guidelines and balance were extremely solid (at least for the first 10 levels where we played). They were extremely easy to use, the damage ranges we excellent.

The same is true of page 42 and the clear guidelines (with tables) on how to handle creative actions (like knocking over a pillar or the like). Not realistic perhaps, but very balanced and flexible.

I rather liked healing surges.

The flaws outweigh the few strong elements.

Skill challenges were awful.

Martials got more power and flexibility, but how powers changed as you leveled was a mess.

Powers in general were not a great system -- it made all classes too similar, when 3.5 actually demonstrates you can make radically different class mechanics balanced -- a Tier 3 game, for instance.

The ritual system never really achieved its full potential.

The writing, especially for players, stifled creativity.

Non-combat abilities were an afterthought at best.

Monster details were very lacking outside of combat.

Etc, etc.

So please don't mistakenly think I find 4E to be a great system. It isn't. Just because I don't think it is wholly without merit doesn't mean I think it is great or even ok.

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:12 pm

The monster creation guidelines and balance were extremely solid (at least for the first 10 levels where we played). They were extremely easy to use, the damage ranges we excellent.

The same is true of page 42 and the clear guidelines (with tables) on how to handle creative actions (like knocking over a pillar or the like). Not realistic perhaps, but very balanced and flexible.

I rather liked healing surges.
---------
Monsters = Super shitty and errated. Still so shitty everyone else hates them. Even if their math worked (it doesn't) players can't tell the difference between an orc archer and a kobold archer by mechanics alone. They also can't tell what abilities an orc archer might have by seeing one alone. Its a big long guessing game until it actually happens.

Page 42 = "Make some shit up" isn't a rule. By that logic my new RPG "Blow the DM" is the greatest RPG to date. Guess the only resolution mechanic.

Healing surges = You were the only one.

Ice9 · Post by **Ice9** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:23 pm

Krusk wrote:Healing surges = You were the only one.

Healing surges are a pretty good mechanic if you want to have daily attrition while still starting each fight at near full health. They also serve a useful purpose as a way to track non-damage exhaustion (from diseases, environmental conditions, life-drinking magic, etc). They also allow the "guy on death's door who can survive long enough to say something but then collapse, instead of being immediately healed up" scenario, which is something that had to be done by clumsy fiat previously.

As typical, people are overstating the terribleness of 4E. Overall, it failed, but many of the component parts either were good or could have been good with their settings adjusted. Don't worry, it can still be a lousy game in total without claiming that every single word in there was bad.

Drachasor · Post by **Drachasor** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:38 pm

Well Krusk, I don't feel a need to get into a belabored argument over 4E. So I'll agree to disagree. You can agree with me on that or I can just agree with myself. : )

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:29 pm

How are healing surges any better than "You magically get some free HP back". They are fiddly as shit, and a pain to use.

But whatever, maybe you like the concept for whatever reason.

Your surge value = 1/4 X + Y. You can do it A+B+Y times a day. Y = arbitrary BS that buffs it.

What is that shit. How about this. Your surge value is 15. You get X a day where X is a value given by your class. If you want to get real complicated its 15, 20 at paragon, 25 at epic.

Really though, the idea that 4e can be defended in pretty much any regard has been done often so I won't derail this thread anymore.
http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=52 ... sc&start=0
http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=49 ... sc&start=0

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:14 am

http://wizards.custhelp.com/app/answers ... castle-faq

If I’m not attending Gen Con, can I still get a copy?
No, unfortunately you can only pick up or purchase your copy at Gen Con 2013.

I can’t make it to GenCon – can GF9 ship me my copy?
Unfortunately no. You must be at Gen Con 2013 to pick up a copy. If you pre-ordered a copy and cannot make it to the show, you will be issued a full refund. Contact Gale Force 9 customer service for more information.

Can I purchase multiple copies of the book?
No, there is a limit of one book per customer for pre-orders and on the show floor.

Is there a PDF version of Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle or other ways to get those adventures?
At this time there are no plans to release Ghosts of Dragonspear Castleas a PDF or at retail.

Does this mean that the D&D Next rules are finalized?
Not yet. The content found in Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle represent an iteration of the rules developed during the massive public playtest. We still have much more design and development to do before finalizing the rules.

I hate these fucking fuckers.

They think that they've come up with a way to avoid the wrath of the Internet, but a combination of the Streisland Effect, SA spergs, and piracy will settle their hash.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 1:51 am

Lago PARANOIA wrote:
I hate these fucking fuckers. They think that they've come up with a way to avoid the wrath of the Internet, but a combination of the Streisland Effect, SA spergs, and piracy will settle their hash.

How so? They'll go home with a pile of money for fucking playtest rules, and a couple people on the internet will complain and cry, but they don't listen to those people anyway.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:00 am

Voss wrote:How so? They'll go home with a pile of money for fucking playtest rules, and a couple people on the internet will complain and cry, but they don't listen to those people anyway.

I just hate the idea of the 5E D&D design team being able to get away with this. They managed to come up in a way to dodge the bad publicity of vaporware for a major gaming event while also dodging the bad publicity of releasing a shitty ruleset. This was a total cowardly dick move and I loathe to think that Mike Mearls could actually pull it off. My hope is that some hero will upload the rules to the Internet in the form of a pdf or some shit and the Internet can tear it to shreds.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 3:23 am

CRPG time? where this time the C doesnt stand for computer but collectible, because that is all this will be. those idiots that just want to collect everything with the D&D logo stuck on it. i got a few iron on tranfers, those pencil things, and a frisbee with D&D logos on them i would sell for a couple hundred dollars each to these mindless morons.

maybe i should shed my spare core rules expansion that is still shrink-wrapped for about $500 next time someone offers to buy it? seems there are plenty of people out there with more brains than money.

"a fool and his money are soon parted" + "there is a sucker born every minute" = WotC marketing philosophy.

wotmaniac · Post by **wotmaniac** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:00 am

Does this mean that the D&D Next rules are finalized?
Not yet. The content found in Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle represent an iteration of the rules developed during the massive public playtest. We still have much more design and development to do before finalizing the rules.

I'm just going to go ahead and post this again: http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/thread/565

Previn · Post by **Previn** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:19 am

Side note: 1 more public playtest before they in theory stop the public playtest and finalize the rules for release.

wotmaniac · Post by **wotmaniac** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:32 am

Previn wrote:Side note: 1 more public playtest before they in theory stop the public playtest and finalize the rules for release.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:30 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote: I just hate the idea of the 5E D&D design team being able to get away with this. They managed to come up in a way to dodge the bad publicity of vaporware for a major gaming event while also dodging the bad publicity of releasing a shitty ruleset. This was a total cowardly dick move and I loathe to think that Mike Mearls could actually pull it off. My hope is that some hero will upload the rules to the Internet in the form of a pdf or some shit and the Internet can tear it to shreds.

I'm not sure I agree with your use of "get away with". It seems like once the rules get published and sold, it will be pretty obvious to the customers that the rules suck, and they will get complained about a lot.

You would think hope that after two editions of terrible rules, bad playtesting, and not listening to feedback would be the nail in the coffin for Mearls. Although, who knows. Maybe in three years, he'll impress terrify us in new and amazing ways with 6E: DND Nexter.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:56 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote:
Voss wrote:How so? They'll go home with a pile of money for fucking playtest rules, and a couple people on the internet will complain and cry, but they don't listen to those people anyway.
I just hate the idea of the 5E D&D design team being able to get away with this. They managed to come up in a way to dodge the bad publicity of vaporware for a major gaming event while also dodging the bad publicity of releasing a shitty ruleset. This was a total cowardly dick move and I loathe to think that Mike Mearls could actually pull it off. My hope is that some hero will upload the rules to the Internet in the form of a pdf or some shit and the Internet can tear it to shreds.

Some hero? They're going to do it themselves next month!

I doubt they next set of playtest rules will be all that different from the shit they sold.

Cyberzombie · Post by **Cyberzombie** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:18 pm

Lago PARANOIA wrote: I just hate the idea of the 5E D&D design team being able to get away with this. They managed to come up in a way to dodge the bad publicity of vaporware for a major gaming event while also dodging the bad publicity of releasing a shitty ruleset. This was a total cowardly dick move and I loathe to think that Mike Mearls could actually pull it off. My hope is that some hero will upload the rules to the Internet in the form of a pdf or some shit and the Internet can tear it to shreds.

Mearls specialty is being able to sell people over-hyped polished turds. He writes articles and talks about elegant sounding solutions that seem like they'll play out perfectly. He just hopes you never actually look at the stuff he's actually written down.

I do have to give Mearls some credit, as the man is a genius slacker. For most of his career he's been able to release unfinished products without getting blasted for it. The playtest has taken his laziness to new heights as he's figured out a way to continually milk his unfinished product. He gets a perfect excuse to sit on his ass and wait for more data to come in, as is takes time for people to read, then run the playtest packets he gives out. All the while he gets to sit on his ass and do nothing. Because why make splatbooks when you can keep collecting pay working on the same unfinished rules packet?

Even when he publicly mocks the game with his dwarf rapper in a steel tuxedo, he somehow manages to get away with it. I guess no Hasbro executives bothered to watch that, otherwise I suspect he'd have been fired on the spot. If Mearls is willing to do that in front of the public eye, you can only bet what he does and says behind closed doors.

I suspect he will continue to be bulletproof until D&DN launches, at which point the poor sales will get him fired. But the longer D&DN stays in development, the more unearned paychecks he gets to collect, so you can expect he'll stretch it out as long as possible.

Lexos · Post by **Lexos** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 3:36 pm

While I hate the steel tuxedo and "class undisclosed" bullshit, I worry there are a lot of gamers who just find that shit hilarious.

On another note, I just got back from Gen Con and on Sunday GF9 still had piles of the play test book. Either they underestimated how few shits people give about 5e or the policy of 1 per customer and no online orders was meant to reduce exposure.

Also, The WotC play area was pathetic compared to Paizo's, who have literally taken over the old RPGA room. I know there's not a ton of love for Pathfinder around here, and I don't personally enjoy PF Society, but the immediate perceptions I got from the con reinforce what I hear elsewhere:
1) Pathfinder is growing in popularity
2) The play test isn't drawing back in the hemorrhaged players
3) WotC is in a holding pattern until 5e is ready
4) ding dong, 4e is dead

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Mon Aug 19, 2013 5:03 pm

Cyberzombie wrote:I do have to give Mearls some credit, as the man is a genius slacker. For most of his career he's been able to release unfinished products without getting blasted for it. The playtest has taken his laziness to new heights as he's figured out a way to continually milk his unfinished product. He gets a perfect excuse to sit on his ass and wait for more data to come in, as is takes time for people to read, then run the playtest packets he gives out. All the while he gets to sit on his ass and do nothing. Because why make splatbooks when you can keep collecting pay working on the same unfinished rules packet?

Well, when you put it like that I have a grudging amount of respect for Mearls. He's like a combination of Wally sans nihilism and Kuroki Tomoki minus autism.

ScottS · Post by **ScottS** » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:32 am

...Session 2 of that failtest went up a couple days ago. (The deafening silence you hear is the Sound of Care.)

Spoilers: no Mearls and no MC Killzalot (not sure if this is permanent), but his replacement Bilsand is running a slightly less annoying "pirate" fighter named Blammo. So I guess even odds whether this is a running joke between the devs, or whether they authentically want to demonstrate that "people with bad humorsense that play DMFs" are welcome at the 5e table.

Also: they again spend more than half the session doing nothing except discussing/endlessly revising an attack plan and occasionally reading spell texts (so showing off the new subsystems remains a clear priority).

Also: they explicitly address the "aren't stat bumps always a better choice than feats?" question during the Q&A. (Guess what percentage of the party either took all +stats, or one else one feat and the rest +stats.)

Krusk · Post by **Krusk** » Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:44 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODYbqQNf ... 5AO0PlW4sg

I got like 30 minutes in and i couldn't handle it. They just mill about and RP some characters.

If it were anything but a playtest I could give it a pass, but this is a "playtest" at least show a mechanic or two.

Also, I love that mearls couldn't make it. Not "We rotated players to give a wide variety of experiences and show off tons of stuff" just "Mike texted me 15 minutes ago and can't make it. We found greg in the hall and he threw a pirate together."

Doesn't read any of the setting info, makes a totally inapproperiate for the setting PC, derails the game because of disruptive RP, openly antagnoistic to the DM and NPCs, and then flakes out on the second session. Player of the year or what?

DragonChild · Post by **DragonChild** » Mon Sep 09, 2013 11:12 pm

4e's monster creation guidelines were pretty much non-existent. ANY system that doesn't provide any actual fucking ability creation guidelines is useless - all they needed were a list of "standard" abilities, although having some would show how amazingly godawful their non-standardized monsters were (see: cyclops).

icyshadowlord · Post by **icyshadowlord** » Tue Sep 10, 2013 6:00 am

Wait, they HAD guidelines for monster creation in 4e?

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Tue Sep 10, 2013 7:02 am

icyshadowlord wrote:Wait, they HAD guidelines for monster creation in 4e?

They were essentially useless, but yes. There was an arbitrary list of monster "classes", and they gave you lists of how many hit points they were supposed to have, and what their attack and defense numbers were supposed to be at each level. But since that game was about 95% concerned with rider effects, telling us what the to-hit bonus of their basic attack was didn't amount to much.

Seriously, one attack caused an enemy to lose a square of movement next turn, and another attack caused all enemies to lose all their actions next turn, and the creature creation guidelines didn't feel this was important to even discuss. But there were big charts telling you how much damage these attacks were supposed to be doing at the same time.

Of course, even the math was FUBAR, and they did a full errata to the table at least twice and maybe three or four times.

-Username17