Home ›
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
D+D Fourth Edition
No joke, it's fucking coming. It was inevitable. It will obviously be the Tuesday news.
All I can say is Burning Wheel motherfuckers!
All I can say is Burning Wheel motherfuckers!
Comments
I mean, I only bought a 3.5 PHB to replace my ruined 3.0 PHB.
I imagine they're going to change enough little rules and modifiers in enough places to make it nontrivial to simply adapt from third edition, much like they did with 3.5. They'll probably add more complex actions to combat, and probably change the way spells work. I imagine they'll make a bunch of new feats and skills, and probably add a positive/negative trait system. They'll flesh out the item creation system more, probably by releasing it as a seperate book entirely
They won't change the 3-18 ability score metrics. They won't drop the d20 system. I doubt they'll go back to hexes. They won't remove any standard classes, though they might add a couple. They'll rework prestige classes, possibly making them easier to jump into and out of.
Of course, I'm just guessing.
As for adding more standard classes, it might be surprising to see what they can pull off. I think that we pretty much have everything you could possibly think of as a class/prestige class out there.
I'll certainly look at it and see what they're doing, though.
The article did say they were making changes to make games go faster, so maybe they're going to try to tighten things up a bit. Also, it sounded like the online thing might actually be useful, though I imagine it will have a subscription fee. There are already free programs that do that, so why bother?
If they tighten up the mechanics end of things, though, that could leave you more free to add in more roleplaying elements as well. We'll just have to see what they wind up doing.
For me, D&D just kind of straddles the line between these two types of games, providing neither the most fun set of tactical experiences or really encouraging collaboration. It's the spork of tabletop gaming.
Being a hybrid is hardly an inherently bad thing. The market decides when it is best to combine things and when it is best to specialize. Sometimes the thing that straddles the line proves more successful than the combination of the two specialized things.
Of course, if you're a fan of tactical miniatures games, by all means, play something else. The same goes for pure roleplaying. Long before Burning Wheel, there were many systems that focused far more on roleplaying than on combat and other objective encounters. Hell, that is the very essence of LARPing.
Personally, I tried those systems, believing my preference for roleplaying would make those systems more enjoyable. In the end, I found the loss of objective goals to sap the purpose out of the game. As a writer, I can easily put to paper scripted dialogue that is far more entertaining than what a bunch of nerds doing improv theater. Is it more fun? Perhaps not the same kind of fun, and it isn't a group activity, but if that's what you're looking for, take out the middleman (the rulebooks) and just try out some actual improv theater.
I don't think Burning Wheel is a specialist system either. It certainly isn't a hardcore tabletop wargame, but it also isn't improv theater either. It's a hybrid, like D&D, that simply endeavors to do the same job better, by removing the hassle of rules where it was overburdening and adding some rules where they were sorely needed. Because it allows for a better collaborative storytelling experience, that doesn't mean it doesn't also offer improvements in combat and objective encounters. For me, I need both for either to make sense.
1. The online component is being designed with a subscription model. The idea is to mash up the old Core Rules CD-ROM with a client like GRiP to allow people to play the table top game online with people far away. The other aspect is to make battles easier by allowing for a 3-D battle board on line. Yeah, it's all going back to Chainmail!
2. Scott's Burning Wheel reference is more apt than you may realize. D&D is going further and further from being a game where the DM and player's play adversarial roles to a story telling game. Fudging of dice rolls to insure the "story" gets told are being folded into the rules.
I do not find story telling games to my liking. If the story has a railroad plot you can just email the story to me and I'll read it over lunch or something. Why waste my time playing a "game" that is just a story telling session?
One of the mistakes of Second Edition was the removal of Demons and Devils from the game. You are only as heroic as the creatures you overcome are evil. No one will give you respect for knocking a couple of high school bullies around but, if you can knock out a mob boss and take out his whole organization you gain respect.
I still feel the 3E turned D&D into a video game on paper. 4E Is continuing the decline by turning it into a a story telling game where you can never lose because the story is the most important thing.
EXAMPLE: If the players want to have a session where they slay a dragon it is up to the DM to insure the players do slay a dragon and no characters die.
Oh, and if you don't think BW is adversarial, you haven't played Burning Empires. Ohmans.