You must be this tall to ride this Ogre.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:18 am

Tiers of Play
By James Wyatt

. http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx ... d/20140205 .

Levels of levels for subclasses of classes, in archetypes of themes, ....

ENOUGH!

Article summary: ONETRUEWAY to play D&D!

Groups of 4~6 levels, that play through at different grind rates in order to make sure everyone gets to play D&D the Wyatt way!

Problems:

1. Again, people do not want your hard-coded speed of playing. Some want to get to level 2 after a single sitting, others want to take their time. Level advancement speed is not something ANYONE playing the game needs, because all players have their own speeds. RPGA and Mentzer foolishness strikes again, continuously! It works for a tournament environment where you need to keep strict time of play, but NOT for home games where the MAJORITY of D&D is played.

2. Levels of levels. WHAT THE FUCK! you already have levels, why do you need to group them? People have made remarks to BECMI, but that doesn't really follow this example because BECMI didn't have these "tiers", what it had was a loose association. adventures could be for 1st through 5th levels, from 3rd to 8th levels... even from 2nd to 4th levels. It was all based on WHAT the adventure held within it. The upper range is where the adventure begins to no longer give "threats" consistently to continue using it or the environs in it. these "tiers" are really jsut saying the game only has 4 levels, that are broken up into segments of play.

3. Speaking of segments of play as the actual level numbers to the 4 true levels called "tiers", they are based on real time play. D&D is not an MMO with fear of the servers being shut down. There is NO time limit that should be forced by the games design in order to get people through the game to enjoy "all" of their purchase. A player could die tomorrow and never make it to the next level with his character due to being hit by a bus, or could be the next 120 year old person. The edition of D&D should allow them to play until the PLAYER'S death, not the next hurdle on the edition treadmill.

4. D&D is not a board game. You cannot do what 4th did and group monsters to be fought at the "tiers" and deny them to other "tiers". this is how 4th worked, or rather didn't work because ya know, IT FAILED AND IS GONE! the GREATEST PLAYER AGENCY comes from the world having monsters of all "tiers" or levels, everywhere, and the PLAYERS getting to choose what risk they wish to take with their character while playing it. Diablo, HeroQuest, they are fun board games (yes Diablo could easily be a board game just like the HeroQuest dungeon controlled by Zargon). Sure AD&D set up an idea that you could place mosnters lower in the dungeon because they are tougher so require more XP to be able to get them, and explain the relationship to monster power to dungeon level, but D&D has GROWN beyond just a single dungeon for the entire life of a character. Gary himself did this and broke his own design. But that is a good thing as it left behind the wargame by being more than just a dungeon-crawl game and put something other than just dungeons into the game, like WORLDS. You can play OUTSIDE THE DUNGEON, and when you play outside the dungeon, you cannot color code areas like early MMOs where the zone cannot be entered or passed through if you are not high enough level. This again is board game nonsense not making it see like an actual WORLD the characters are living in, but a game board for the players to play on. You might as well be playing Warhammer with an Armourcast, Finecast, or Forge army painted WYSIWYG with minimum of 3 colors.

OH WAIT! this is D&D, not GAMES WORKSHOP! no wonder the two have existed since the 70's are different companies because people want different things! stop trying to make Warhammer RPG, they have that already, so let people play the board game there and learn what D&D is!

when you make these hard-coded "tiers" and define what type of play each should have, then you REMOVE the greatest thing D&D ever offered; player choice as opposed to publisher demands.

Wyatt, learn that D&D does not belong to you. It is NOT solely yours. You may play it any way you want to, so shouldn't you make a game that allows others the same right to play it the way THEY want to? If you want to make a D&D based board game, then switch to it, but STAY OUT OF THE RPG! You are as big a problem to D&D as Elminster is to FR. Both need to be removed in order for a better play experience for ALL.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:21 am

Regarding the thread title: the rules say that while it is technically possible to ride an Ogre, "you will not get the infantry to go along
with that idea."

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:33 am

well the title was in part reference to the cartoon show since i remember the sign for the ride in it being an ogre, and somehow Bobby got on the ride. would have to find the first episode again to check, and i may be wrong, but that was 30 years ago since I saw the first episode to really see the whole ride outside of the intro snippets offered.

when does infantry EVER want to ride an animal anyway? they are infantry because they do not know HOW to ride and cannot afford a mount either way.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:23 pm

Ah, I was talking about an Ogre cybertank. For a moment I had completely forgotten that it was far more likely that you were talking about a D&D ogre.

(Ogre is a Sci-Fi game, so the circumstances are somewhat different)

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:40 pm

From the article:

But that's advice, not rules. We're not looking at any rules tied to the tiers, like paragon paths and epic destinies in 4th Edition.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:50 pm

Honestly, this sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea. There should be a discussion of the difference between the game at 1st level and at 5th level, because the game does change and the MC needs to know how. Admittedly, they're probably going to fuck it up with terrible advice, but the basic idea that there should be advice about this at all in the DMG is a good one.

Longes · Post by **Longes** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 3:20 pm

4. D&D is not a board game. You cannot do what 4th did and group monsters to be fought at the "tiers" and deny them to other "tiers". this is how 4th worked, or rather didn't work because ya know, IT FAILED AND IS GONE! the GREATEST PLAYER AGENCY comes from the world having monsters of all "tiers" or levels, everywhere, and the PLAYERS getting to choose what risk they wish to take with their character while playing it.

-The PARTY OF ADVENTURERS (level 1) ventures outside of PALETTE town. You see A HORNED MAN robbing a MAIDEN. Religion check: y/n?
-y
-roll 1d20. You fail. You can't recognize A HORNED MAN.
-Attack A HORNED MAN.
-A HORNED MAN resists all damage.
-A HORNED MAN attack PARTY for $Texas damage. You are dead. Roll new characters.

Is this fun? No. No, it's not fun. Outside of metagaming PCs have a few ways of knowing if the threat is level appropriate, and if they can take it. To follow your advice ("PLAYERS getting to choose what risk they wish to take with their character while playing it") DnD needs a reliable way of measuring monster level, and a reliable way of running away.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but when people play DnD, they usually don't play "Open-world murderhobo simulator: Skyrim edition". There are usually plot, quests and goals. A DM, generally, expects you to succeed at completing these goals, and as such, makes the challenge level appropriate. If the goal of the game is "As lvl1 fighters go into the cave of Zordon and retrieve the Orb of Rita" and the cave is populated by 100500 Level 20 sorcerers, then you can't win. Why the fuck are you playing that game?

Finally, levels and tiers help in organization. If you are playing in an open-world game, the DM isn't bound by law to populate it with lvl1 rats, but, from a DM's point of view, having a classification system for monsters is good. It allows to look at monster's tier and make a guess if the party can take it.

Wiseman · Post by **Wiseman** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 3:46 pm

Is there going to be one of these every time a there's a new article?

Scrivener · Post by **Scrivener** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 3:52 pm

Shadzar is there anything Wyatt could say, aside from "use OD&D", that wouldn't anger you?

You've rallied against any suggestion that DMs and players should be have a common understanding of what threats they might face, what the characters are capable of, what common creatures are, and a basic grasp on how the universe works. None of these seem like outrageous ideas, why does this incense you so?

Leress · Post by **Leress** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 7:10 pm

Longes wrote:

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but when people play DnD, they usually don't play "Open-world murderhobo simulator: Skyrim edition". There are usually plot, quests and goals. A DM, generally, expects you to succeed at completing these goals, and as such, makes the challenge level appropriate.

To be fair both are fine ways to play the game, but it seems that Shad doesn't want people to play with plot, goals, and whatnot because that is making a "mini novella" for your "pet character" and that is not playing "D&D".

fectin · Post by **fectin** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 7:20 pm

D&d is the DM's story. Not yours, you entitled shit.

Heisenberg · Post by **Heisenberg** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 8:29 pm

Discussing the article without entering the fetid pit of crazy that is everything that comes out of shadzar's fucking mouth...

Anyone else notice how the milestones/benchmarks/delineations he uses are pretty much entirely caster centric, with no discussion of how low, mid, and high-level play might differ for non-magic-user characters like fighters and rogues besides like, maybe a wizard could cast invisibility on them now or a cleric could heal them better? I have this horrible sinking feeling that this man is MISSING THE POINT ENTIRELY.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 9:53 pm

Level 5: "I can leap tall buildings in a single bound."

Level 10: "I can now jump ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, in a single {b/r}ound, and DYNAMIC ENTRY through anything less than 40FT OF SOLID STONE! At level 13, I can CARRY THE WHOLE PARTY WITH ME!"

Level 15: "I can now jump TO OTHER WORLDS!"

malak · Post by **malak** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:11 pm

Heisenberg wrote:Discussing the article without entering the fetid pit of crazy that is everything that comes out of shadzar's fucking mouth...

Anyone else notice how the milestones/benchmarks/delineations he uses are pretty much entirely caster centric, with no discussion of how low, mid, and high-level play might differ for non-magic-user characters like fighters and rogues besides like, maybe a wizard could cast invisibility on them now or a cleric could heal them better? I have this horrible sinking feeling that this man is MISSING THE POINT ENTIRELY.

Why?

Non-casters stay in the first tier as usual.

Don't act surprised.

RadiantPhoenix · Post by **RadiantPhoenix** » Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:31 pm

Repost:

Super Jump [Skill]
You can jump really well
Benefits: This is a skill feat that scales with your ranks in Jump
0: You do not suffer an armor or weight penalty to Jump checks. In addition, as long as you can move, you may ignore speed reductions for purposes of determining your Jump modifier, and are always treated as having a running start.
4: Divide the DC of any Jump check you make by your level.
9: Double-Jump (Ex): You are able to jump while already in the air. The height and length of any Jump you make may be doubled, at your choice, and you may turn corners and other such things while jumping.
14: Sky Jump (Ex): You can Double-Jump as many times as you want: you gain a fly speed of 30ft +10ft/level +10ft/rank (Average).
19: Dimension Jump (Su): You can Jump anywhere in the multiverse as a standard action if you know where it is.

codeGlaze · Post by **codeGlaze** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 12:16 am

RadiantPhoenix wrote:Repost:

Super Jump [Skill]
You can jump really well
Benefits: This is a skill feat that scales with your ranks in Jump
0: You do not suffer an armor or weight penalty to Jump checks. In addition, as long as you can move, you may ignore speed reductions for purposes of determining your Jump modifier, and are always treated as having a running start.
4: Divide the DC of any Jump check you make by your level.
9: Double-Jump (Ex): You are able to jump while already in the air. The height and length of any Jump you make may be doubled, at your choice, and you may turn corners and other such things while jumping.
14: Sky Jump (Ex): You can Double-Jump as many times as you want: you gain a fly speed of 30ft +10ft/level +10ft/rank (Average).
19: Dimension Jump (Su): You can Jump anywhere in the multiverse as a standard action if you know where it is.

Yes.

Neurosis · Post by **Neurosis** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 12:18 am

Mario?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 12:49 am

While you could be medium size and ride an ogre, it's preferable for you to be small. And green. With pointed ears.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 6:30 am

I think if they just shut the hell up with their meta-game terminology out here in subscriber-land and told us that the Swamps are more dangerous than the Farmland, we'd all be totally unsurprised, even Shadzar. Ye olde OD&D dungeons did just have different charts for the monsters to be found on each dungeon level, so that's been a thing forever.

Which I'm pretty sure is all they're trying to say, just with design-meeting-words. Eventually the level 1 montsters need to go away because they're just not interesting any more. And then you go all Tucker's Kobolds and bla, bla, bla, nobody does that, it's too hard, and it was always just a weird variant anyway.

shadzar · Post by **shadzar** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:43 am

RadiantPhoenix wrote:Ah, I was talking about an Ogre cybertank. For a moment I had completely forgotten that it was far more likely that you were talking about a D&D ogre.

(Ogre is a Sci-Fi game, so the circumstances are somewhat different)

Orge is also a Herc/Mecha type as well as many other things, none of which were what i meant. Wyatt would probably fuck them all up also by reducing the number of hard points available to make it into a banshee or something that is fast and light armored instead of slower, heavy armored, and high damage output.

actually meat-grinder style dungones have always been fun. in terms of "resource depletion" to create the challenge, it doesnt matter if it is Tucker's kobolds or just a bunch of orcs. war of attrition is a valid play style and challenge.

i jsut think the whole "keywords" and other stupid terms do get in the way of them being able to understand WHY they are trying to make these "tiers", and then the tier itself becomes the focus rather than the reason it was made. they jsut need to stop trying to reinvent the wheel and accept hat people know that a group of 5 goblin bandits on the road that try to ambush a level 8 party of 6 is jsut going to be a fly swatted rather than an actual challenge. and those goblins being there are the EXACT thing that makes the game not exist in board game space, because EVERYTHING is not just the proper level for the playing pieces to fight to be able to advance to the next level.

every fight doesn't have to guarantee XP return on resources depleted. that is why PLAYERS must still chose which fights to take part in and HOW to manage their resources so as not to waste 3 spells, 20 arrows, and whatever else fighting those 5 goblin bandits.

what is the claim of 4th? the combat ranges on as a sure win, it just takes time whittling down the enemy for the PCs to be able to advance? when the enemy the PCs are facing can whittle down the PCs like that, then they still are a threat. when the enemy dies before the PCs have not lost really any resources, material or abstract (HP), then it was not a threat, so don't give XP.

that is ALL the tiers and other such implications are all really about. learning when to give XP, not about whether a goblin should appear in a dungeon made for level 15 characters. just to tell that you don't get XP for that goblin alone as he wasnt a threat to the PCs in the first place. same thing ECL/CR was made to do, tell you what you would get XP from, same with 4th and encounter budgets... it is all about the DM knowing what amount of XP to give based on threat level of the encounter. this is ONLY needed because of unified XP tables, and older editions would work with getting XP all the time as the level range of a party with the same 3500 XP each, would vary so that even goblins could be a threat to the PARTY or enough of it to award XP to all for defeating it.

another thing 3rd edition broke because people didnt understand the game well enough to design for it.

ishy · Post by **ishy** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 9:48 am

So, question about the poll in the article.
Why do people consider "Keep the plotters from overthrowing the sovereign!" to be a high level adventure?

Seems to me you could perfectly do that at level 1?

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 10:31 am

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 11:24 am

Except you don't literally get a red dot on the map that needs killing, you might have to actually figure shit out. And needing to think means it's high level because... reasons.

This is the best I can get. "It can quite easily be a simple issue itself, but requires a greater time investment and some thought to figure out who the baddies are, unless you can just solve it with some high(er) level spells. And the time investment and complexity is mistakenly equated with being a challenge that you need to be higher level to do."

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Fri Feb 07, 2014 11:42 am

Oh, crap. I just took the time to read the article instead of being an assumer.

They've gone with

Apprentice 1-4. "Facing minor threats."
Expert 5-10. "Actions have wider consequences."
Paragon 11-16. "Above the ordinary populous."
Epic 17-20. "Almost superhuman."

Because ... whut? 5-10 is superhuman. With math and stuff. You can wrestle elephants and do almost everything that comic-book superheroes do. A room full of Ogres is LOL, not even a speedbump.

1-4 is your actions having wider consequences than the fucking NPCs ones do, because you're already much better than them. 11-16 is above superheroes, you're the green lantern or the silver surfer to everyone else's X-Men, facing down existential threats.

17-20 is crazy-town and the game has never worked there, other than to be Elminster and telling wank-stories about putting your dick in everything that moves in any dimension and throughout all history and all possible futures, while smoking weed with Bigby from Greyhawk, because why the fuck not. Being the existential threat if you want to be.

That's D&D. Embrace that shit. Stop telling a Fighter he might finally be able to jump more than 25 feet now he's 20th level. Bastards, he's a God, let him fuck shit up.

Sakuya Izayoi · Post by **Sakuya Izayoi** » Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:53 am

I wouldn't say 4e failed. Terrible post-launch support, incoherent splats and expansions, and a reliance on PC character builders with always-on DRM making it one of the least retro-playable editions. But "failed" is a very binary term that requires some threshold, some bar be clearly established.

If Vince Baker saw the kind of sales 4e had at launch, Pundit would die of buttmad.