Monte Cook Back to Work

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Re: Monte Cook Back to Work

Post by shadzar »

hogarth wrote:Does anyone have an example of a game where the second edition fixed most of the problems with the first edition (while keeping new problems to a minimum)? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I'm just wondering if anyone has an actual game to point to.
AD&D....wherein you could ALL read the second edition and find things so the biggest problem was fixed. then after that it allowed you to see problems within other parts.

EX: starting ages for PCs...fluff is cute, but be careful how close you tie it to mechanics if that fluff is so arbitrary to make no sense. why does a longer living race mature slower? why do dwarves start out at age 40, while humans do so at age 15? do dwarves actually not have the ability to adventure at age 15 like humans, or are they...dwarves the cave dwelling master craftsmen working in forge communities, mothered for the extra 25 years before adventuring?

but this is parts of my revised 2nd edition, so people not likely to care what i am doing with it....
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
User avatar
tzor
Prince
Posts: 4266
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by tzor »

Seerow wrote:
Count Arioch the 28th wrote:Acid breathing sharks are freaking awesome. I consider that Rich Burlew's crowning glory!
They're frikkin awesome, but they make about as much sense as the venom eyed basilisk.

???? HUH ????? But that's like historical ...
In European bestiaries and legends, a basilisk (English pronunciation: /ˈbæzɪlɪsk/,[1] from the Greek βασιλίσκος basilískos, "little king;" Latin Regulus) is a legendary reptile reputed to be king of serpents and said to have the power to cause death with a single glance. According to the Naturalis Historia of Pliny the Elder, the basilisk of Cyrene is a small snake, "being not more than twelve fingers in length,"[2] that is so venomous that it leaves a wide trail of deadly venom in its wake, and its gaze is likewise lethal; its weakness is in the odour of the weasel, which, according to Pliny, was thrown into the basilisk's hole, recognizable because all the surrounding shrubs and grass had been scorched by its presence. It is possible that the legend of the basilisk and its association with the weasel in Europe was inspired by accounts of certain species of Asiatic snakes (such as the King Cobra) and their natural predator, the mongoose (see "Rationalized accounts" below).
The "gaze is likewise lethal" referrs to the excessive poison that it emits. (How poison can be transmitted by gaze is another matter. Medusa's stoning ability is likewise bizzare in an equal manner.)

Image
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Post by shadzar »

DragonChild wrote:
What good ideas has that guy even had? Has he innovated anything at all?
He was hugely involved in 3.0. From 2e to 3e was a MASSIVE improvement, even with 3e's flaws.
you realize that 3.0 is jsut a kludge of various options in 2nd edition and they arent really that many changes to those options except for putting them into core. the changes are small overall. the biggest detraction to those from 2nd that did NOT transfer was because they disliked those options that became 3rd edition...stuff from Player's Options books, etc.

3.0 edition really should have been called 2.75 edition AD&D.

it really is that way the same as Pathfinder being called 3.75, as the changes in Pathfinder compared to 3.5 are just as small as the changes from 2.5 to 3.0.....

collect a bunch of splats and throw in a few house rules and put them in core and you get Pathfinder from 3.5, and 3.0 from 2.5.
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Swordslinger wrote: Also, I'm not not trying to start an edition war. I'm not saying 4E is some fantastic game without flaws, because it's not. I'm saying that all the editions have their share of serious flaws. And more relevant to this thread, I'm saying Monte Cook is a talentless hack, because he is. If people here would take off their 3E beer goggles, they might realize that.
If there were no 3e, I'd play 2e over 4e or one of the many fantasy RPG clones because 4e is not a fun system to play in after about two games. I mean, I can do DnD-style games with Rifts really easily because at it's core it's a fun game despite any flaws.

Not being fun is the only truly important flaw, and everything else can be modified or houseruled. I mean, there can't be a Tome 4e because there is no system of fixes and tweaks that will make a boring game into a fun one.

As for Monte, he does come up with good ideas. For example, in his Arcana Unearthed system he added a notation to spells where they'd have a multiplier when made into magic items for the reason that some things are more powerful when you screw with duration or use limits.

That one tiny innovation basically converts the magic creation system from a group of rough guidelines that the DM has to fiat half the time into an actually functioning system.

Now, I can point to Arcana Unearthed and show you terrible ideas in action too, but that doesn't negate that there were good ideas. The bar for a designer is good ideas at all, and not the complete absence of bad ideas.
Last edited by K on Sun Sep 25, 2011 10:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Yep
NPC
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 3:38 am

Post by Yep »

It's pretty impossible to say no you would never have liked 4E it's always bad 100% of the time no your opinions would never have changed, because you're on a forum dedicated to making 3E playable past 8 with a massive set of revisions
Winnah
Duke
Posts: 1091
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:00 pm
Location: Oz

Post by Winnah »

I doubt if there is much Monte Cook can do to make 4e an enjoyable play experience, even with a massive set of revisions.

I have high hopes for 5e though.
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Post by shadzar »

Yep wrote:It's pretty impossible to say no you would never have liked 4E it's always bad 100% of the time no your opinions would never have changed, because you're on a forum dedicated to making 3E playable past 8 with a massive set of revisions
i would have never liked 4E, it's always bad 100% of the time, my opinion would never have changed.

that seemed less like impossible and more like very easy to do to me.....
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Yep wrote:It's pretty impossible to say no you would never have liked 4E it's always bad 100% of the time no your opinions would never have changed, because you're on a forum dedicated to making 3E playable past 8 with a massive set of revisions
The Tome revisions are not to make the game playable, but to make certain things that people wanted into playable concepts for a character. They literally revise about 5% of the game and add a lot of things that weren't being done before, and this is why Tome of Necromancy was the first (people love necromancers, but 3e had a lot of really weak necromantic concepts).

I mean, core 3.X DnD works great if you are a cleric or a druid or a wizard or even a rogue. Most days, people don't even notice that the monk fails at life because no one wants to play the monk, and the Tomes tried to fix things like that.

That being said, I was never going to like 4e. You could have rebranded it as some not-DnD game and I would have had the same reaction: glazed eyes as I realized that all your hundreds of choices of "powers" were some combination of damage dice and potentially one of eight unique effects, and a few story powers that will never come up in play except by NPCs. I didn't even need to playtest it to see that it was wickedly repetitive and lacked basic rules for interacting with the environment and setting.

Hell, even the Red Box had more unique effects and that ruleset almost defines the term "primitive" and "MtP play."

I don't give a fuck about brand loyalty. If there was a better ruleset for fantasy RPG than DnD 3.X, then I'd play that. As it stands, 4e DnD is maybe the 5th or 6th best option for fantasy RPG, and so falls well below my threshhold for systems I want to use. Other versions of DnD are actually better for fantasy RPG, then there are genre-neutral or genre-flexible games like Rifts or GURPs that do fantasy RPG better, then you get down to DnD 4e.
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Post by shadzar »

K wrote:
Yep wrote:It's pretty impossible to say no you would never have liked 4E it's always bad 100% of the time no your opinions would never have changed, because you're on a forum dedicated to making 3E playable past 8 with a massive set of revisions
The Tome revisions are not to make the game playable, but to make certain things that people wanted into playable concepts for a character. They literally revise about 5% of the game and add a lot of things that weren't being done before, and this is why Tome of Necromancy was the first (people love necromancers, but 3e had a lot of really weak necromantic concepts).
Yep (pun intended), from what i have read of them they are just more netbooks along the lines of ones gathered by Olik for AD&D, back when you couldnt legally write your own material, but could share the hell out of your houserules and custom content!

(the book of blades netbook is no longer stored with Oliks others though....)
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Swordslinger
Knight-Baron
Posts: 953
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:30 pm

Post by Swordslinger »

K wrote: If there were no 3e, I'd play 2e over 4e or one of the many fantasy RPG clones because 4e is not a fun system to play in after about two games. I mean, I can do DnD-style games with Rifts really easily because at it's core it's a fun game despite any flaws.

Not being fun is the only truly important flaw, and everything else can be modified or houseruled. I mean, there can't be a Tome 4e because there is no system of fixes and tweaks that will make a boring game into a fun one.
When you're writing 200+ pages of material, which includes class rewrites, you can absolutely add whatever things you deem interesting to the game. I'm aware 3E has a massive spell list, but how many of those do people actually use?

You can probably take 2-4 iconics from every spell level, and put them down as 4E spells. Create an at-will that's two attack rolls and an instant kill if you do both. Then graduate to instakilling on one attack roll or even none, similar to how 3E does it. It'd be crazy broken, but given the Tomes don't take much consideration for monsters vs. PC balance, I doubt anyone here would actually care.

There's no reason you can't create super deadly powers for 4E, along with utility spells that let wizards do almost everything. It's just instead of rewriting polymorph, you'd be writing polymorph. It's not really a huge deal.
As for Monte, he does come up with good ideas. For example, in his Arcana Unearthed system he added a notation to spells where they'd have a multiplier when made into magic items for the reason that some things are more powerful when you screw with duration or use limits.
Okay, admittedly, not a bad idea.
Now, I can point to Arcana Unearthed and show you terrible ideas in action too, but that doesn't negate that there were good ideas. The bar for a designer is good ideas at all, and not the complete absence of bad ideas.
I would set the bar at the idea that there's a preponderance of good ideas. Everyone is gonna have a few bombed ideas, but the majority of the stuff a good designer churns out should be good, at least for any kind of lead designer or author of rule books. Otherwise the guy is no better than some random person on a message board throwing out ideas. Anybody can throw out a bunch of ideas and see which ones stick, but they shouldn't be doing that for actual books in print.

The moment a designer produces a book of unplayable garbage like Monte's WoD, that's a giant blemish on the guy's record, because it shows he produces bad games as a whole. A few half-decent ideas aren't going to save him from that.

Sure, maybe you can use Monte as a consultant to get that one good idea out of 10 bad ones, but the guy shouldn't be writing anything other than flavor text.
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Swordslinger wrote:
K wrote: If there were no 3e, I'd play 2e over 4e or one of the many fantasy RPG clones because 4e is not a fun system to play in after about two games. I mean, I can do DnD-style games with Rifts really easily because at it's core it's a fun game despite any flaws.

Not being fun is the only truly important flaw, and everything else can be modified or houseruled. I mean, there can't be a Tome 4e because there is no system of fixes and tweaks that will make a boring game into a fun one.
When you're writing 200+ pages of material, which includes class rewrites, you can absolutely add whatever things you deem interesting to the game. I'm aware 3E has a massive spell list, but how many of those do people actually use?

You can probably take 2-4 iconics from every spell level, and put them down as 4E spells. Create an at-will that's two attack rolls and an instant kill if you do both. Then graduate to instakilling on one attack roll or even none, similar to how 3E does it. It'd be crazy broken, but given the Tomes don't take much consideration for monsters vs. PC balance, I doubt anyone here would actually care.

There's no reason you can't create super deadly powers for 4E, along with utility spells that let wizards do almost everything. It's just instead of rewriting polymorph, you'd be writing polymorph. It's not really a huge deal.
No one cares about deadly powers. At all.

The difference between a 3e and a 4e power is that a 4e power is a damage combination and maybe one of eight unique effects, and a 3e power is probably an entire rule subsystem.

Adding a 3e power to 4e is basically writing a new game because 4e is extremely locked down when it comes to actual subsystems. 4e powers fundamentally do the exact same thing, so writing new ones means you don't have to take anything into consideration or change any core assumptions.

So when you add magic jar to 4e, it can't be a paragraph of flavor text and a paragraph of effects text. You instead need to write out the five or six paragraphs the spell actually used and then rebalance all the other powers at those levels around the fact that some people are going to be running around in bodies that don't belong to them.

Add resilient sphere and you suddenly need to rebalance the effects at that level to account for the fact that now sometimes people are going to be able to drop out of the fight because they just surrounded themselves in an unbreakable force bubble and can be popping healing potions or going through power-up layering in the middle of an encounter. The whole game needs to be rewritten because someone popping that up in a corridor just blocked it off and level-appropriate enemies and players are going to need things like teleportation to counter it or bypass it.

Every 3e power you add needs a counter or the game breaks. Every 3e power adds in a new complication that needs new assumptions to deal with. Every 3e power means it affects other powers you've introduced (like teleportation lowers the power of resilient sphere and should show up at the same time so the game doesn't get boring).

In conclusion, you can't add 3e powers to 4e in any piecemeal fashion and still have a functioning game. At best, you can write 5e and take advantage of some of 4e strengths and some of 3e's strengths.

As for Monte, the fact that he has any good ideas at all makes him the best choice for the job considering the current crop has no good ideas at all. I mean, Skip Williams can write flavor text, but I wouldn't trust him with the DnD franchise if you paid me.

I stopped work on the Tomes for the simple reason that the next step to improving the game would be to write a whole new 300-page edition that would be completely incompatible with 3e. (Yes, that is less than the current page count for an edition, but that's only because they waste a lot of space on pointless things.)

Adding 3e fun to 4e would be a new edition, and I'm not writing a new edition for a game I already don't like.
Last edited by K on Mon Sep 26, 2011 1:12 am, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Post by shadzar »

well the new Director of Brand Marketing that is listed available as posted by Scott Rouse on a tweet, seems that would be the job telling Mearls Cook, and ANYONE else WHAT they are to do in regards with D&D...

http://www.linkedin.com/jobs?viewJob=&jobId=2004179
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

shadzar wrote:well the new Director of Brand Marketing that is listed available as posted by Scott Rouse on a tweet, seems that would be the job telling Mearls Cook, and ANYONE else WHAT they are to do in regards with D&D...

http://www.linkedin.com/jobs?viewJob=&jobId=2004179
It's a sales position. If the duties are any indication, they want you to find more ways to pull money out of the brand.

I figure that listening to marketing people is what probably tanked 4e. The whole game feels like what you would make if you were trying to sell it to computer game companies for licensing.
User avatar
shadzar
Prince
Posts: 4922
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:08 pm

Post by shadzar »

K wrote:
shadzar wrote:well the new Director of Brand Marketing that is listed available as posted by Scott Rouse on a tweet, seems that would be the job telling Mearls Cook, and ANYONE else WHAT they are to do in regards with D&D...

http://www.linkedin.com/jobs?viewJob=&jobId=2004179
It's a sales position. If the duties are any indication, they want you to find more ways to pull money out of the brand.

I figure that listening to marketing people is what probably tanked 4e. The whole game feels like what you would make if you were trying to sell it to computer game companies for licensing.
Create and drive overall brand strategy and positioning across product design, marketing and marketing communication.
* Foster the development of innovative digital and analog products targeting meaningful age groups and psychographics
* Grow profitably the brand by leading its regional expansion and category growth across a wide range of expressions (movies, TV series, books, games, licensed apparel, etc.)
the job duties sound like more than jsut marketing to me with just these 3 parts, especially the bolded one....

"create and drive...product design"

sure seems like this not being the same position Scott Rouse had as Brand Manager, but Director: Brand Marketing, will not only deal with promotions and sales, but also WHAT is marketed.

Walmart has similar positions wherein the position is called "marketing", but they are more in deciding WHAT to market, rather than getting existing things INTO the market.

i really dont think this is Rouse's old job.....
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Stubbazubba
Knight-Baron
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Stubbazubba »

I don't think that means what you think it means. "Create and drive overall brand strategy" is definitely a market expansion gig, and "positioning across product design, marketing and marketing communication" means you're in charge of coordinating those staffs, I would think. "Foster the development of" is not a developer's job description, or even an editor. "Grow profitably the brand by...expansion...across a wide range of expressions," is pure marketing.
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Stubbazubba wrote:I don't think that means what you think it means. "Create and drive overall brand strategy" is definitely a market expansion gig, and "positioning across product design, marketing and marketing communication" means you're in charge of coordinating those staffs, I would think. "Foster the development of" is not a developer's job description, or even an editor. "Grow profitably the brand by...expansion...across a wide range of expressions," is pure marketing.
That part sounds like you are the guy who wrangles the player surveys. It's not a big deal.

The Experience section is the most telling part. They want someone who knows computer gaming companies, and my guess is so that they can license DnD as video games.
Last edited by K on Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
Stubbazubba
Knight-Baron
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Stubbazubba »

K wrote:
Stubbazubba wrote:I don't think that means what you think it means. "Create and drive overall brand strategy" is definitely a market expansion gig, and "positioning across product design, marketing and marketing communication" means you're in charge of coordinating those staffs, I would think. "Foster the development of" is not a developer's job description, or even an editor. "Grow profitably the brand by...expansion...across a wide range of expressions," is pure marketing.
That part sounds like you are the guy who wrangles the player surveys. It's not a big deal.

The Experience section is the most telling part. They want someone who knows computer gaming companies, and my guess is so that they can license DnD as video games.
I was responding to shadzar, against my better judgment, perhaps.
Stubbazubba
Knight-Baron
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 6:01 pm
Contact:

Post by Stubbazubba »

shadzar wrote: Walmart has similar positions wherein the position is called "marketing", but they are more in deciding WHAT to market, rather than getting existing things INTO the market.
Walmart, for the most part, does not develop its own product lines. It's a distributor, not a producer. So when a Walmart manager decides WHAT to market, it's making a decision between a contract with X producer and Y producer, not making a decision between F in-house development idea and G in-house development idea.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

K wrote:The Experience section is the most telling part. They want someone who knows computer gaming companies, and my guess is so that they can license DnD as video games.
I don't think it's necessarily that. I think it's just that this point there's hardly anyone left to rebuild the D&D franchise. I was coming up with a list of people who've had credits in 3E D&D and 4E D&D that I would want on my team and I stopped at 10. The list being: Robert J. Schwalb, Monte Cook, Jonathan Tweet, Rob Heinsoo, Richard Baker, David Noonan, Kim Mohan, Gwendolyn Kestrel, Jeff Grubbs and... and shit, I guess that's it. Not even 10 people.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

K wrote:The Experience section is the most telling part. They want someone who knows computer gaming companies, and my guess is so that they can license DnD as video games.
I don't think it's necessarily that. I think it's just that this point there's hardly anyone left to rebuild the D&D franchise. I was coming up with a list of people who've had credits in 3E D&D and 4E D&D that I would want on my team and I stopped at 10. The list being: Robert J. Schwalb, Monte Cook, Jonathan Tweet, Rob Heinsoo, Richard Baker, David Noonan, Kim Mohan, Gwendolyn Kestrel, Jeff Grubbs and... and shit, I guess that's it. Not even 10 people.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Swordslinger
Knight-Baron
Posts: 953
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:30 pm

Post by Swordslinger »

K wrote: Adding a 3e power to 4e is basically writing a new game because 4e is extremely locked down when it comes to actual subsystems. 4e powers fundamentally do the exact same thing, so writing new ones means you don't have to take anything into consideration or change any core assumptions.

So when you add magic jar to 4e, it can't be a paragraph of flavor text and a paragraph of effects text. You instead need to write out the five or six paragraphs the spell actually used and then rebalance all the other powers at those levels around the fact that some people are going to be running around in bodies that don't belong to them.
This would be a good point... if 3E had taken those considerations into account to begin with. But we both know they didn't and pretending they did is a waste of time. Fighters aren't balanced with the idea that spellcasters are going to be using their abilities to their full potential. They're balanced based off spellcasters doing nothing but tossing magic missiles and fireballs.

I can't think of many monsters (in either edition) that could actively track down someone using a magic jar. Maybe incorporeals with lifesense that can fly around and search through walls if they're smart enough to know about it, but that's a rare exception. Otherwise it's just a room to room search for the helpless body of the guy using the magic jar.

Most of the 3E super spells were just ill thought-out copypasta from 1E where it was originally introduced as an NPC plot device of some kind. Most were never intended to be used in PC hands, because the rest of the game can't compensate for that. 3E isn't a game of carefully planned moves and countermoves, it's just about who can bust out the cheapest cheesiest tactic possible.
Add resilient sphere and you suddenly need to rebalance the effects at that level to account for the fact that now sometimes people are going to be able to drop out of the fight because they just surrounded themselves in an unbreakable force bubble and can be popping healing potions or going through power-up layering in the middle of an encounter. The whole game needs to be rewritten because someone popping that up in a corridor just blocked it off and level-appropriate enemies and players are going to need things like teleportation to counter it or bypass it.

Every 3e power you add needs a counter or the game breaks.
Most 3E powers didn't have counters in 3E either, at least not for most monsters or anything that wasn't a caster with the proper spell prepared. Even something as simple as flight or greater invisibility beat plenty of monsters flat out in 3E. If you wanted to beat a spellcaster, you had to be a spellcaster. If that isn't a strong enough indication that balance was way off, I don't know what is.

About the only real thing close to a universal counter was dispel magic and if you wanted to add that to 4E, it would be pretty trivially simple. Level+5 vs will attack with an area burst 2 that targets all creatures and freestanding magical effects. On a hit, active spells are removed on the target creature. If it's a target freestanding effect, it's dispelled. EZ PZ.

So yeah dude, gonna need to add counters either way, regardless of what edition you start with.
K
King
Posts: 6487
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by K »

Swordslinger wrote:m to room search for the helpless body of the guy using the magic jar.

Most of the 3E super spells were just ill thought-out copypasta from 1E where it was originally introduced as an NPC plot device of some kind. Most were never intended to be used in PC hands, because the rest of the game can't compensate for that. 3E isn't a game of carefully planned moves and countermoves, it's just about who can bust out the cheapest cheesiest tactic possible.
That's just not true.

Clearly, the spells and their level has evolved by a lot and anyone who has actually played all of the editions knows that. A lot of spells have been rewritten with better rules, and it's not a coincidence that Dimension Door and Resilient Sphere show up at the same time or that Protection from Evil shows up at the same time as Charm Person.

That's 1,000,000 hours of playtesting over four editions to put the spells where they are. Phantasmal Force used to be crazy powerful and while the name was kept, the actual spell was dramatically changed and it's one of the many spells that evolved over the editions, and that's just one example out of the hundreds. The fact that a few legacy effects never got the revision treatment is annoying, but definitely the exception and not the rule.

Now, monsters never played the counter game like players were. They have always been explicitly supposed to lose fights, even the puzzle monsters who were supposed to vex the players until the one right effect was found. It's always been known that the toughest fights were against mirror-match monsters like drow where they used actual classes, and that's because they were playing the counter game.

Trying to do that with 4e is to make a whole other game with different assumptions that only has the flaws of 4e as it's legacy mechanics. I mean, once you ditch all the powers and all the rituals, 4e is like 50 pages long and you'd need to add 200 pages of 3e crunch to replace what was taken away.

That's a new game. At that level of content, you are better off actually writing your own game and trying to make some money off it.

I mean, the Tomes are wicked big, but a lot of that is just PrCs and blah blah blah about setting stuff and other fluff and I can write 10K words a day in my free time if all I'm doing is that, but writing and playtesting 200 pages of crunch is a whole new game because it changes everything about the game from the potential settings to balance points to even the overall amount of fun you can have.

I mean, if 4e lived in some vacuum where no other RPGs lived, I'd still play a few sessions and then say to myself "gosh, I could so write something better than this on every level" and not think "this only needs 50 pages of fixes to make better."

There is literally that little that you'd want to salvage. Skills would go, powers would go even to the point of the random-generator titles, all the feats would go but you'd preserve the idea of feats, class names would stay but all the class powers would go, all the power and rituals would go, and all the monster powers and stats would go. A lot of the map assumptions would go for a less fiddly system. The whole idea of marking and bloodied and healing surges would go.

So what are you left with? The idea of feats, the idea of classes, the idea of HPs and stats and BAB.... yeh, at that point why even call it DnD since those things are universal across a lot of RPGs?
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

I think it's pretty clear that monsters evolved spectacularly over editions as well. And I'm not just talking about how in the change from 3e to 3.5, the fiends became much nastier melee bruisers but lost a lot of their powerful casting. I mean, Wind Walkers don't appear at all in 3e, and there is a reason for that: those monsters were bullshit and totally unfair. A few battle reports of that, and Wind Walkers simply got scrapped. Lots of other monsters got moved up or down in level. When was the last time you got killed by a horde of Stirges? They simply do not appear in the player killing numbers that they did in AD&D.

I admit that the evolution of monsters has mostly been one of spot nerfs to ones that were deemed unfair (like taking away the Vrock's mass charm and the Windwalker's everything about them), but that's still evolution by natural playtest selection. Same as the spells.

-Username17
User avatar
Kaelik
ArchDemon of Rage
Posts: 14832
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Kaelik »

I require a hilarious rant about the problems of Wind Walkers.
DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.

That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Wind walkers are creatures from the elemental plane of air, and on the material plane prefer to live high in mountains or in great caverns very far below the surface. Their approach is detectable at from 10"-30" as a whistling, howling or roaring depending on the number coming. These monsters are telepathic and can detect thoughts within 10"-30" (as they work in series to boost range).
The number appearing is 1-3, meaning that if there are more of them they are louder and you can hear them from farther off, but they can telepathically detect your presence from an arbitrarily equal distance, meaning that as soon as they show up on the board, both sides immediately automatically notice the other. It's also important to note that their move is 30", meaning that even if combat begins at the "long range", it's actually still in move-and-attack range for the fucking Wind Walkers.

They attack by wind force, each wind walker causing 3-18 points of damage per turn to all creatures within 1" of them who are hit.
[color]Is that a separate attack roll on each character in range? Is it a single attack roll that checks ACs separately? Is it just a template that automagically nails everyone without cover? Do you get a save? No one knows! But the key to remember is that even taking the most favorable possible interpretation, that is actually a fuck tonne of damage. A group of 3 Wind Walkers is handing out 9 dice of area effect damage in an era when most characters were lucky to have a Con bonus of +1 and people stopped getting hit dice after 9. They are listed as 7th level creatures.[/color]

Being ethereal, wind walkers can be fought only by such creatures as djinn, efreet, invisible stalkers, or aerial servants, or affected by spells such as control weather (unless save is made versus magic, the monster dies), slow (affects monster like a fire ball), and ice storm (drives them away for 1-4 melee rounds). haste does one-half damage to wind walkers, but it also doubles the amount of damage done by the wind walkers. Magical barriers will stop them, but wind walkers will otherwise pursue for 2-5 melee rounds minimum. They are subject to attack by telepathy. Wind walkers are sometimes forced into servitude by storm giants (for obvious reasons).
Here's where we get to the what the fuck part. We could start in one asking how the hell storm giants force them to do anything when despite all their neat wind and lightning effects they don't actually have a single fucking thing on their list that will actually affect a wind walker in any way. Or we could start in on harping about the fact that haste is doing "half damage" when haste does not actually do any damage to be halved. Or we could ask what the fucking hell is supposed to happen with control weather considering that that fucking spell is not instantaneous and actually lasts a fuck long time. But really let's just get down to the brass tacks of how totally fucked you are.
So there you are, you're a 7th level party. 2 wind walkers show up and immediately get to start face raping you. Now, they are invisible, meaning that you can't even target them with spells unless you have see invisibility or something similar up. They are also intangible, so even if you had something bullshit like echolocation it wouldn't help. Of your entire party, only the magic user can do anything at all, and they go almost 3 times faster than you and will pursue for longer than you have hit points. Their area effect attack is actually their normal attack, so if you try to run away they get to rape the whole party as their bonus attack for you trying to escape from melee.

Now let's talk about killing them. You aren't going to do it. They are 7 hit die monsters and have 30 fucking hit points. Their save against magic is pretty good. Even if for some reason you recognize the source of the invisible and intangible ass kicking you are receiving as wind walkers and remember that they are only affected by weather and time spells, remember that most of the weather spells actually aren't on their stupid fucking list at all, making them just as useless as the fighter's entire character. For example: Storm Giants have predict weather, call lightning, control winds, lightning bolt, and weather summoning, all of which are not on the list of arbitrary spells that do fuck all. But when it comes down to it: a 7th level slow is like 24 points of damage (save for half), and it won't actually drop a wind walker even if you have the see invisibility needed to target the fucker in the first place. Haste does some amount of undefined damage, but most people think we're talking a half strength fireball, so that's like 12 points (save for half), with a doubling of incoming damage every time you do that (meaning that isn't a solution at all).

Magical barriers are solid to them, but recall that they are fucking ethereal and can go through fucking walls. Also they are conspicuously Neutral and not summoned, which means that any magical barrier you can create at 7th level is either powerless against them on first principles or simply something they can fly over (or under because they are fucking ethereal). About the only chance you have is the ice storm, which you probably didn't prepare (hope you have it on a scroll), and which will make them lay off for a d4 rounds while you run like hell. Although you do have to cast an ice storm into melee in order to get that to happen, so good luck explaining that shit to the rest of the party. Also, did I mention that they will chase you for a d4+1 rounds at the minimum (whatever the fuck that means)? Oh yeah, they are still like three times faster than you, so they can probably catch up to a d4 rounds worth of running the fuck away in a single turn.

Water Weirds were unfair as fuck, but at least they basically stayed in one place and gave you a 2 turn head start to figure out what the fuck was going on and run like hell in the very likely event that you did not have purify food and water prepared.

-Username17
Post Reply