Den Next Design Challenge
Moderator: Moderators
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Den Next Design Challenge
Here's a challenge:
Write a micro RPG using the same management philosophy that D&D Next is apparently using. Heck, let's steal the name too and call the game NEXT. This requires at least five different participants. Each of whom should write one of the following sections of this game:
1. Setting
2. Chargen
3. Combat
4. Adversaries
5. Running NEXT
To keep this short, let's go with a target range of say 400-1500 words for each section.
To make it as entertaining as the D&D Next development is, none of the participants should co-ordinate their efforts at all. Merely post to claim a section and then PM it to me once it's complete. When I have all 5 sections I will post them all and a MadLibs style hilarious RPG text will result. And hey, in the spirit of D&D Next, if more than one person writes the same section, then all will be included with the additional versions appended as "rules modules".
Any takers?
Write a micro RPG using the same management philosophy that D&D Next is apparently using. Heck, let's steal the name too and call the game NEXT. This requires at least five different participants. Each of whom should write one of the following sections of this game:
1. Setting
2. Chargen
3. Combat
4. Adversaries
5. Running NEXT
To keep this short, let's go with a target range of say 400-1500 words for each section.
To make it as entertaining as the D&D Next development is, none of the participants should co-ordinate their efforts at all. Merely post to claim a section and then PM it to me once it's complete. When I have all 5 sections I will post them all and a MadLibs style hilarious RPG text will result. And hey, in the spirit of D&D Next, if more than one person writes the same section, then all will be included with the additional versions appended as "rules modules".
Any takers?
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Indeed, something as simple as how saving throws, AC vs to hit, and HP/DR should be worked out in coordination.
Just the basics obviously, I'll design the monsters with no idea what an appropriate AC for level 10 PCs is, but still with some idea of at least how AC/saving throws work, so that I don't at some point say:
"Fort save X to resist." while someone else is using 4e saving throws and someone else is using Saga/4e Fort defenses.
Just the basics obviously, I'll design the monsters with no idea what an appropriate AC for level 10 PCs is, but still with some idea of at least how AC/saving throws work, so that I don't at some point say:
"Fort save X to resist." while someone else is using 4e saving throws and someone else is using Saga/4e Fort defenses.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Okay fine.
If you want, when you claim a section, you may post up to 5 buzzwords to describe the main selling point of your work. Examples would be 'The Math Just Works!", "Bounded Accuracy", "No more 5 minute workday" and so on and so forth.
If you want, when you claim a section, you may post up to 5 buzzwords to describe the main selling point of your work. Examples would be 'The Math Just Works!", "Bounded Accuracy", "No more 5 minute workday" and so on and so forth.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
I know you aren't actually this retarded.Josh_Kablack wrote:Okay fine.
If you want, when you claim a section, you may post up to 5 buzzwords to describe the main selling point of your work. Examples would be 'The Math Just Works!", "Bounded Accuracy", "No more 5 minute workday" and so on and so forth.
That has literally nothing to do with what anyone said.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
- Josh_Kablack
- King
- Posts: 5318
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: Online. duh
Exactly what part of "using the same management philosophy that D&D Next is apparently using" did you miss?That has literally nothing to do with what anyone said.
The point here is not to produce a playable game. We already know that multiple authors with no collaboration is doomed to failure. The point is to produce an *entertaining* failure that also pokes fun at the the mess that 5e is shaping up to be.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Except that they do coordinate, so you are just wrong. They do know if their are 3 saves on the Fort/Will/Ref, or 5 on the Breath/Spell/Wand/whatever, or the 1 of 4e.Josh_Kablack wrote:Exactly what part of "using the same management philosophy that D&D Next is apparently using" did you miss?
The point here is not to produce a playable game. We already know that multiple authors with no collaboration is doomed to failure. The point is to produce an *entertaining* failure that also pokes fun at the the mess that 5e is shaping up to be.
No one is making monsters with 3 saves while PCs have 1.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
- Duke Flauros
- Journeyman
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:28 am
Kaelik, you have assumed undue competence on the part of the WOTC designers.Kaelik wrote: Except that they do coordinate, so you are just wrong. They do know if their are 3 saves on the Fort/Will/Ref, or 5 on the Breath/Spell/Wand/whatever, or the 1 of 4e.
No one is making monsters with 3 saves while PCs have 1.
Thompson, in the bounded accuracy article wrote:Getting better at something means actually getting better at something. Since target numbers (DCs for checks, AC, and so on) and monster accuracy don't scale with level, gaining a +1 bonus means you are actually 5% better at succeeding at that task, not simply hitting some basic competence level. When a fighter gets a +1 increase to his or her attack bonus, it means he or she hits monsters across the board 5% more often. This means that characters, as they gain levels, see a tangible increase in their competence, not just in being able to accomplish more amazing things, but also in how often they succeed at tasks they perform regularly.
Mearls, in the monster creation article wrote:The minotaur’s AC is a good example of where we can introduce factors such as skill and natural armor on top of the ability scores. For the minotaur, its AC is 10 without armor due to its average Dexterity. We don’t expect the typical minotaur to wear armor, but it should have a tougher than normal hide and fur to protect it. I peg its AC at 16, average for a level 5 creature and the equivalent of chainmail in our revised armor tables. Thus, it has a base AC of 16 due to its hide and fur.
Mearls, in the monster creation article wrote:The ability scores form the basis of the minotaur’s attacks. Its 18 Strength gives it a +4 attack bonus, which is on target for its level. I settled on the greataxe as the default minotaur weapon. Since minotaurs are size Large, their weapons deal one more die of damage than normal size weapons. Thus, the minotaur attacks at +4 with its greataxe, inflicting 2d12 + 4 damage on a hit. Those are in line with its level and power rating.
Back when I was a mere lurker, the was some talk of making a new edition. What ever happened to it?MGuy wrote:Just sayin' that we, as a lil team should get to coordinate. Just because the people workin' on 5e don't know what they are talking about doesn't mean we have to. Also, I'm in if you can get 3 to 4 other people on board.
Last edited by Duke Flauros on Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Niao! =^.^=
Mike Mearls wrote:“In some ways, it was like we told people, ‘The right way to play guitar is to play thrash metal,’” “But there’s other ways to play guitar.” “D&D is like the wardrobe people go through to get to Narnia,” “If you walk through and there’s a McDonalds, it’s like —’this isn’t Narnia.’”
Tom Lapille wrote:"As we look ahead, we are striving for clarity in both flavor and mechanics.""Our goal with most of the D&D Next rules is that they get out of the way of the action as much as possible."
Mike Mearls wrote:"Look, no one at Wizards ever woke up one day and said 'Let's get rid of all of our fans and replace them.' That was never the intent."
No, saying that the numbers will be X, and having them instead be Y is not an example of no coordination, it's an example of bad coordination.Duke Flauros wrote:Kaelik, you have assumed undue competence on the part of the WOTC designers.Kaelik wrote: Except that they do coordinate, so you are just wrong. They do know if their are 3 saves on the Fort/Will/Ref, or 5 on the Breath/Spell/Wand/whatever, or the 1 of 4e.
No one is making monsters with 3 saves while PCs have 1.
If one of them was making Minotaurs that had a DC 24 save against Breath, while the PCs have the Fort/Will/Ref set up, that would be what I am talking about.
If one of them talks about PCs moving along the condition track, while the monsters actually can't move the PCs, that would be an example.
Number confusion is just an example of bad coordination. I'm perfectly fine limiting the coordination, but you need to agree on a core fucking mechanic.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Re: Den Next Design Challenge
Josh_Kablack wrote:Here's a challenge:
Write a micro RPG using the same management philosophy that D&D Next is apparently using. Heck, let's steal the name too and call the game NEXT. This requires at least five different participants. Each of whom should write one of the following sections of this game:
1. Setting
2. Chargen
3. Combat
4. Adversaries
5. Running NEXT
To keep this short, let's go with a target range of say 400-1500 words for each section.
To make it as entertaining as the D&D Next development is, none of the participants should co-ordinate their efforts at all. Merely post to claim a section and then PM it to me once it's complete. When I have all 5 sections I will post them all and a MadLibs style hilarious RPG text will result. And hey, in the spirit of D&D Next, if more than one person writes the same section, then all will be included with the additional versions appended as "rules modules".
Any takers?
This is the best thing that has ever happened. I choose #2: Chargen. In the spirit of this challenge, I will announce the buzzword announcements that I will endeavor to use. Those are:
- Every class from every PHB edition will make an appearance.
- Complexity dials up with themes.
- Skills are optional.
- Races and Classes make up the core math.
- Smaller damage and hit point numbers.
-Username17
Frank stopped bothering with it because too many posters would flip their poop about a design/flavour decision he made and would be relentless about trying to convince him otherwise. That poisoned the entire attempt by others, from what I could tell. Really, the main thing learned from that is that unless you get roughly five people on board and willing to work together with clear goals, things get too bogged down.Duke Flauros wrote:Back when I was a mere lurker, the was some talk of making a new edition. What ever happened to it?MGuy wrote:Just sayin' that we, as a lil team should get to coordinate. Just because the people workin' on 5e don't know what they are talking about doesn't mean we have to. Also, I'm in if you can get 3 to 4 other people on board.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
- Duke Flauros
- Journeyman
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:28 am
I'll trim the quotes down a little:Kaelik wrote: No, saying that the numbers will be X, and having them instead be Y is not an example of no coordination, it's an example of bad coordination.
If one of them was making Minotaurs that had a DC 24 save against Breath, while the PCs have the Fort/Will/Ref set up, that would be what I am talking about.
If one of them talks about PCs moving along the condition track, while the monsters actually can't move the PCs, that would be an example.
Thompson, in the bounded accuracy article wrote:Since target numbers (DCs for checks, AC, and so on) and monster accuracy don't scale with level, gaining a +1 bonus means you are actually 5% better at succeeding at that task, not simply hitting some basic competence level. When a fighter gets a +1 increase to his or her attack bonus, it means he or she hits monsters across the board 5% more often.
Mearls, in the monster creation article wrote:I peg its AC at 16, average for a level 5 creature
So, according to Thompson, monster accuracy and AC will not scale with level.Mearls, in the monster creation article wrote:Its 18 Strength gives it a +4 attack bonus, which is on target for its level.
According to Mearls, monster accuracy and AC will scale with level.
This isn't just bad coordination, they've contradicted each other on how the core design philosophy will work.
This isn't just an issue of number confusion. The 4e playtest packet was a fine example of number confusion, with monster entries in the adventure and the bestiary differing significantly.Kaelik wrote: Number confusion is just an example of bad coordination. I'm perfectly fine limiting the coordination, but you need to agree on a core fucking mechanic.
That fact that the minotaur has x armor and x attack isn't the issue- it's the fact that they've explicitly stated in one article that armor and attack would not be based on level and in another said that it would.
This isn't just a few guys posting their houserules online, and then sorting them out based on feedback. Mearls and Thompson are working for a large company and had several weeks to prepare each of their press releases. In Mearls case, he could have even looked Thompson's article to make sure that they were not contradicting each other. But he didn't. Apparently, every editor at WOTC has failed to catch that two major members of their design team have contradicted each other on how the product will function at its core- and nobody there has caught on, despite being a large website that receives thousands or Millions of hits per day, hundreds or thousands of comments, and the occasional telephone call.
Last edited by Duke Flauros on Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Niao! =^.^=
Mike Mearls wrote:“In some ways, it was like we told people, ‘The right way to play guitar is to play thrash metal,’” “But there’s other ways to play guitar.” “D&D is like the wardrobe people go through to get to Narnia,” “If you walk through and there’s a McDonalds, it’s like —’this isn’t Narnia.’”
Tom Lapille wrote:"As we look ahead, we are striving for clarity in both flavor and mechanics.""Our goal with most of the D&D Next rules is that they get out of the way of the action as much as possible."
Mike Mearls wrote:"Look, no one at Wizards ever woke up one day and said 'Let's get rid of all of our fans and replace them.' That was never the intent."
Dibs on #5.
Key Design Implements (KDI's, or as we call them, kiddies. If you don't make the kiddies happy, no one's going to be happy).
*Tight strategic grid-based tactics
*Free-form Gameplay with no gimmicks or frills.
*Seating Arrangements For Optimal Table Time
*Essential DM Tools To Add To The Game Experience
*How to Handle Players
Key Design Implements (KDI's, or as we call them, kiddies. If you don't make the kiddies happy, no one's going to be happy).
*Tight strategic grid-based tactics
*Free-form Gameplay with no gimmicks or frills.
*Seating Arrangements For Optimal Table Time
*Essential DM Tools To Add To The Game Experience
*How to Handle Players
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
The Running the Game section includes several things:MGuy wrote:Curious: What does the "Running NEXT" section include? If its something my simple mind can handle iIll do that and if its not I'll jump on the setting.
- A pretentious tirade about design goals.
- Some advice to DMs that ranges from "obvious" to "laughably bad".
- Encounter Guidelines. Possibly including non-combat encounter guidelines.
- Rewards
- Campaigns
-Username17
-
- Duke
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:21 am
I can do chargen. Do I just make up D&D-esque numbers and shit, or should I actually tell combat what to-hit bonuses are going to look like?
DSMatticus wrote:Again, look at this fucking map you moron. Take your finger and trace each country's coast, then trace its claim line. Even you - and I say that as someone who could not think less of your intelligence - should be able to tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Kaelik wrote:I invented saying mean things about Tussock.
It might be interesting to include some far-reaching goals in creating a setting, such as:
* A living campaign; a collaborative narrative that recognises the influences of distinguished authors like R.A.Salvatore. Notable achievements at sponsored convention games. As well as retconns of the most popular heroes, villains and themes from D&D's expansive history, for the benefit of a new generation of players.
* Top down-bottom up approach to integrating your game into the living campaign.
* flexible continuity, to enable participation in the living world at all levels of play, regardless of class, race or gender.
I dunno, maybe the game world can feature the construction of a highway or railroad between various Points of Interest or something.
* A living campaign; a collaborative narrative that recognises the influences of distinguished authors like R.A.Salvatore. Notable achievements at sponsored convention games. As well as retconns of the most popular heroes, villains and themes from D&D's expansive history, for the benefit of a new generation of players.
* Top down-bottom up approach to integrating your game into the living campaign.
* flexible continuity, to enable participation in the living world at all levels of play, regardless of class, race or gender.
I dunno, maybe the game world can feature the construction of a highway or railroad between various Points of Interest or something.
-
- Duke
- Posts: 1854
- Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 5:21 am
Ah, combat. OK, I'll do that. Frank, give me some chargen skeleton.
DSMatticus wrote:Again, look at this fucking map you moron. Take your finger and trace each country's coast, then trace its claim line. Even you - and I say that as someone who could not think less of your intelligence - should be able to tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Kaelik wrote:I invented saying mean things about Tussock.
- Duke Flauros
- Journeyman
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:28 am
http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dr ... th_Edition
In case anyone is suffering from writer's block, /tg/ has made some helpful suggestions.
In case anyone is suffering from writer's block, /tg/ has made some helpful suggestions.
Niao! =^.^=
Mike Mearls wrote:“In some ways, it was like we told people, ‘The right way to play guitar is to play thrash metal,’” “But there’s other ways to play guitar.” “D&D is like the wardrobe people go through to get to Narnia,” “If you walk through and there’s a McDonalds, it’s like —’this isn’t Narnia.’”
Tom Lapille wrote:"As we look ahead, we are striving for clarity in both flavor and mechanics.""Our goal with most of the D&D Next rules is that they get out of the way of the action as much as possible."
Mike Mearls wrote:"Look, no one at Wizards ever woke up one day and said 'Let's get rid of all of our fans and replace them.' That was never the intent."
There's a word limit. i don't know how much I can cover in 1500 words so I'm using buzzwords to give people making the other parts what they need. I assumed that's what Frank did so I'm following suit.Winnah wrote:It might be interesting to include some far-reaching goals in creating a setting, such as:
* A living campaign; a collaborative narrative that recognises the influences of distinguished authors like R.A.Salvatore. Notable achievements at sponsored convention games. As well as retconns of the most popular heroes, villains and themes from D&D's expansive history, for the benefit of a new generation of players.
* Top down-bottom up approach to integrating your game into the living campaign.
* flexible continuity, to enable participation in the living world at all levels of play, regardless of class, race or gender.
I dunno, maybe the game world can feature the construction of a highway or railroad between various Points of Interest or something.
So far, in the half an hour I mulled over it I'm thinking of some kind of 5 way splt power source wise for the setting. You have your mecha tech, biotech, magic, "chi", and supernatural stuff (gods, demons, ancestor spirits, etc).
Setting wise I'm thinking about having a bunch of marvels spotting the landscape. No direct real world analogue cultures. I'm gonna probably mine the board for good cultural/racial ideas. I'm gonna wait for Frank to give me a list of classes and races and o get a list of adversaries before I get specifics.