The Gaming Den

OgreBattle wrote:

CapnTthePirateG wrote:or that stupid shit in Final Fantasy where there are 50 status effect spells and none of them work on anything you care about?

Final Fantasy XIII corrected that, with there being a manageable amount of status effects that make a huge difference in battle, boss fights included.

Final Fantasy XIII was shit. The only thing it did right was look pretty.

Has this been mentioned around here yet?

TOZ wrote:Has this been mentioned around here yet?

That is AWESOME.

Somebody needs to hire that guy as a seer/oracle.

Correctly predicting things about 5E before 4E is even out? Pure genius.

Wow. That guy won the internet.

I cry at night because 5e is going to suck so bad.

It would be hilarious if someone took a big shit on Mike Mearls desk at the WotC offices. That's the least he deserves, for taking such a huge shit on the D&D brand with his shitty 4e game.

It won't get any better.

Wonder what will happen to WoTC when this inevitably fails?

CapnTthePirateG wrote:It won't get any better.

Wonder what will happen to WoTC when this inevitably fails?

Nothing. Remember MtG still makes a retarded amount of money. When/if 5e fails Hasbro may license it out to a different company, or it could just sit on it for the future. If they did license it to someone else, Paizo would probably get it. So any way you slice it, for this decade D&D is doomed.

Juton wrote:

CapnTthePirateG wrote:It won't get any better.

Wonder what will happen to WoTC when this inevitably fails?

Nothing. Remember MtG still makes a retarded amount of money. When/if 5e fails Hasbro may license it out to a different company, or it could just sit on it for the future. If they did license it to someone else, Paizo would probably get it. So any way you slice it, for this decade D&D is doomed.

I believe the general difference as far as Hasbro is concerned is that if D&D is 'successful' in the amount of profits it makes, it gets additional funding for R&D, Marketing and what not from Hasbro. If it is not 'successful' then it has to rely on it's own sales for such things.

Backgrounds and Themes: A Closer Look
http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/bl ... loser_look

now jsut saying background and themes are like 2e secondary skills, that come with preloaded feats and skills, you are expected to completely swap out, making the idea of secondary skills so you dont choose, pointless.

A little while ago, I pulled back the curtain so I could show you what we were thinking about for backgrounds and themes, and how they act as a delivery system for skills and feats by condensing all the little choices into two bigger choices. Before I get any further, we fully expect players to customize by either swapping out a skill or feat from a background or theme, or by working with their Dungeon Master to create altogether new backgrounds and themes (even if working with the DM means “Do whatever you want!” ).

so they are spending money figuring out how to group things, and then tell you to ignore the groupings. this doesnt even help new players since skills and feats in general are traps that get people to always want to look at the character sheet, rather than think for themselves, and play automatically.

2e PHB wrote:Once a character has a secondary skill, it is up to the player and the DM to determine just what the character can do with it. The items in parentheses after each skill describe some of the things the character knows. Other knowledge may be added with the DM's approval. Thus, a hunter might know the basics of finding food in the wilderness, how to read animal signs to identify the types of creatures in the area, the habits of dangerous animals, and how to stalk wild animals.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

not unlike the player knowledge idea, that lets the player function as himself "mentally" in the game world

2e PHB wrote:One way to answer this is to pretend that your character knows most of the things that you know. Do you know how to swim? If you do, then your character can swim. If you know a little about mountain climbing, horseback riding, carpentry, or sewing, your character knows these things, too.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

i would still rather play the game with MY choices, than those created solely by the DM or the designers. i know myself better than they do, as well as what i enjoy, and will know what i intend for my character to do better than them. the least amount of influence they have in what choices i can make DURING play, the better.

For both 3rd and 4th Editions (and even to some extent in earlier editions with nonweapon proficiencies), class delivered the skills as a smaller menu from which you chose skills.

2e PHB wrote:Chapter 5:
Proficiencies (Optional)

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

can we put an end to this bullshit set of lies about pre-WotC editions in regards to that feat and skills garbage?

does the entire chapter being marked "optional" mean nothing?

does 1st edition stating that weapon proficiencies are optional, mean nothing?

not everyone wants your kiddy menu to select from, but are grown up and can go shopping for the ingredients to cook for themselves. keep enjoying the Happy Meal your mommy buys for you, and PLEASE let the grown ups have their time to enjoy something. your mommy will tuck you in later tonight Rob.

Divorcing skill choices from class means players have a greater degree of customization

and then you customize yourself into a corner and have no idea how to play the game when you want to do something not on your menu.

you sacrifice playability, for customization.

The same approach to backgrounds also applies to themes. At heart, a theme is a feat-delivery system. Choosing a theme identifies the way you play your character.

no the fuck it doesnt it is just another kiddy menu, you are only offering the desert choices for the Happy Meal now.

I imagine some of you might be thinking that this system does not lend itself to using themes as they were presented in 4th Edition

did you imagine some people dont give a flying fuck about 4th edition or themes at all?


http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx ... l/20120409

Goal #1: Reunification through Common Understanding

As part of the design process, the R&D team must boil down the RPG into its most basic component parts. Using those rules elements, the team must then build an easy to understand game system that incorporates the most iconic elements of D&D in prominent roles. Anyone who has ever played any version of D&D must recognize and understand its most important elements.

feats and skills are NOT prominent, NOT iconic. D&D is a class and level based game system, not /b] a skill based game system.

I’ve been thinking about party backgrounds as an optional system.

how about someone having the balls and intelligence to say the entire thing skills/feats is optional, and do NOT build the system around them being present.

if you build the system that works without skills and/or feats, then have the skills/feats system balanced properly, it can easily be plugged in as a module later for those that want to order from the kiddy menu.

if you build the feats/skill as required, you can NOT remove them from the game without everything falling apart because they become a part of the foundation.

take the backgrounds and themes and throw them away. it was said 5e is 20% done, well this optional nonsense like skills and feats, in order to be added not built around, needs to wait until about the final 20% to prevent from building it into the entire system like ECL/WBL/etc.

and coming form me using bad parts of 3.x, being that i think ALL 3.x sucks; means you are REALLY doing it wrong since i know about the ECL/WBL problems and CAN relate them to the feats/skills or backgrounds/themes system you are talking about.

Well, backgrounds and theme sound like a fantastic way to fill pages in splats. Now they not only get to write fluff for each skill, but they can sort them into groups of four and write fluff blocks for those too. Complete Psionicist's Handbook: 16 new backgrounds including the Mesmer and Gemcutter! They get the same Bluff and Craft skills you could have taken anyway but it's new! New I tell you!

That said, I think I actually like where they're going with this. In 3e when the PCs start fighting the town guard I have to pull their skills and feats out of my ass, which means I either need to stop the game and do that or accept that all of their numbers are bullshit I made up as it became relevant. (And before someone brings up 4e monsters, in 4e I'd still have to asspull all their skills AND asspull all their derived stats, so I'm still either stopping the game or winging it / cheating.) If I could just know that town guards have the Soldier theme/background then they're essentially already statted. Just pick an ability score array, give them the equipment I already described them having, and go.

I don't really know what a 4E theme is in the first place, so I can't say much about it. I suspect you're right when you say that they'll be popular space-fillers, though (not unlike 3E's prestige classes or Pathfinder's archetypes in that regard).

hogarth wrote:I suspect you're right when you say that they'll be popular space-fillers, though (not unlike 3E's prestige classes or Pathfinder's archetypes in that regard).

You know, that blazes my balls about 3.5E/4.0E D&D. The Psionics Handbook, piece of shit that it is, still has more content than Book of Nine Swords -- the books are about the same page length. The Adventurer's Vault, piece of shit that it is, has three times as many magical items in it as the Mordenkainen's Magical Emporium and both have about the same page length.

I wonder what it will take for the ass clowns working on TTRPG products to realize that even if they have a decent product, filling it up with a bunch of Shit We Don't Care About is a great way to prematurely sink a line.

ModelCitizen wrote:Well, backgrounds and theme sound like a fantastic way to fill pages in splats. Now they not only get to write fluff for each skill, but they can sort them into groups of four and write fluff blocks for those too. Complete Psionicist's Handbook: 16 new backgrounds including the Mesmer and Gemcutter! They get the same Bluff and Craft skills you could have taken anyway but it's new! New I tell you!

at this bpoint and for over a decade, that is basically what people have said and explains the edition grind/treadmill. what more is there to design with ALL the material existing already?

designers have to have something to design, so they redesign the system so they can redesign everything that existed before just so the designers have a job.

HASBRO would be smart to get rid of all the "designers", reprint all the editions of the games core books, and just have writers and playtesters (taken from other department) to design adventures... GOOD adventures.

no more settings are really needed. eBerron is just a mixture of Birthright and something else.

1. OD&D
2. 1st D&D (holmes)
3. 2nd D&D (moldvay/cook)
4. 3rd D&D (mentzer)
5. 4th D&D (RC)
6. 1st AD&D
7. 2nd AD&D
8. 3.x Bastard-D&D Snow
9. 4th Bastard-D&D Snow

there is enough editions, nothing more needs designing as players are often just as good or better than those "professionals" to make new stuff for them.

the board games is the only thing that needs designing. come up with something fun that isnt going around the board clockwise.

if they want to keep RPG designers employed, they should design a totally new RPG and NOT put D&D on it, or they will hurt themselves worse than 4th did. look at the ex-TSR and ex-WotC people makign their own RPGs..well the ex-TSR making their own RPGs, the ex-WotC are making OGL RPGs.

how many spells exist published for D&D?
how many monsters? (about 8,000 for 2nd AD&D)

this is why they had to create 4th with powers, to have something to design.. the powers
likewise why they had to make 3rd with feats...to be able to design feats.
2nd was for designing settings.

1st and back "designed" adventures. $10 products you could use once and happily buy the next one.

why else is it after a new edition comes out the lead designer is laid-off. because he served his purpose and has none left. while adventure designers are kept employed. its why noonan and tweet are gone, but wyatt is still there.

Behold the dread power of Mearls and despair!

In which we lay out 4 design goals, but then the 5th design goal invalidates all of the above, making our column contradictory and a waste of space!

Cleric Design Goals
Legends and Lore
Mike Mearls
http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx ... l/20120423

The class should be recognizable to anyone who has played D&D. No matter what edition you've played, you should be able to identify the class based solely on a summary of its abilities.

except 4th edition isnt D&D... so just throw it out. nothing in 4th is recognizable alongside ANY other edition. the powers, healing surges, "implements"...your design goals have failed since you can NOT see the same thing when looking at a 4th edition anything and ANY previous edition of the same class. you fucked up putting the D&D name on 4th edition. sorry, just accept it, and let the wannabe D&D die.

if people wanted 4th bad enough, you wouldnt be working on 5e already.

The class should have an element that makes it unique. Playing one class should feel different from playing another one.

you should have thought of this goal BEFORE making 4th and calling it D&D.

The class should relate in some way to archetypal characters, stories, legends, and myths that form modern fantasy. Someone who has never played D&D should understand what the class represents within the fantasy genre.

no. D&D isnt generic fantasy genre. when you learn that, then and ONLY THEN will you be able to make a D&D that works. clerics arent Friar Tuck, nor are they Jesus Christ. they are just people that take power form the deities in order to affect the world around them and spread that deities name. (see Dragonlance and the time when the gods had left the world and there was no true clerics to be found.)

I doubt that those three points will be outlandish or strange to anyone.

have you heard nothing about the way people talk about 4th edition while you are closed away in your ivory tower? wasnt it you that said that designers need to get away from the ivory tower design method? thinking they know what is best in the vacuum of the WotC offices?

1. The Cleric Is a Healer

This one should seem obvious, but it's worth making it clear that we assume that clerics can heal and that their abilities should reflect that. A player new to D&D who creates a cleric could focus on keeping the rest of the characters on their feet, and the mechanics would make that easy to understand and do.

congrats, you are about to create the walking first-aid kit class all over again. the cleric is a PRIME source of healing because of divine intervention through his abilities, but that doesnt mean that is all there should be. you have to make it clear that a cleric is MUCH more than a healer or you have failed at designing the class.

2. The Cleric Is a Divine Spellcaster

The cleric is our divine spellcaster, the iconic wielder of the gods' power. There might be other types of divine magic-users in the world of D&D, but the cleric is the most common such spellcaster among adventurers. The cleric's spells form the most prominent portion of his or her capabilities.

why? why would you have another divine caster? what can they do that the cleric cant?

i am going to bet you say the same when its the fighters turn at bat and call him the best at swinging a sword, and then claim there will be other classes devoted to swinging a sword. why are you trying to recreate the wheel.

druid needs nothing more than to be a name someone calls their cleric, and the list of spells great enough for someone to specialize in "nature-y" divine magic, or arcane magic even for that matter. which in turn negate the idea that the cleric is the party healer. he is more the EMT, and should be for emergency use only, not for every ass rash and crotch itch the adventurers get.

3. Divine Magic Is Subtle and Indirect

Divine spells are rarely naked displays of power meant to smite and blast the cleric's enemies.

really? promoting the walking first-aid kit to the fullest huh?

2e PHB wrote:By calling upon his deity, the caster of a spiritual hammer spell brings into existence a field of force shaped vaguely like a hammer. As long as the caster concentrates upon the hammer, it strikes at any opponent within its range, as desired.

A bright flame, equal in brightness to a torch, springs forth from the caster's palm when he casts a produce flame spell. The flame does not harm the caster, but it is hot and it causes the combustion of flammable materials (paper, cloth, dry wood, oil, etc.). The caster is capable of hurling the magical flame as a missile, with a range of 40 yards (considered short range).

When the priest evokes a flame strike spell, a vertical column of fire roars downward in the location called for by the caster. Any creatures within the area of effect must roll a saving throw vs. spell. Failure means the creature sustains 6d8 points of damage; otherwise, the damage is halved.

The wall of fire spell brings forth an immobile, blazing curtain of magical fire of shimmering color--yellow-green or amber (different from the 4th-level wizard version). The spell creates an opaque sheet of flame up to one 20-foot square per level of the spellcaster, or a ring with a radius of up to 10 feet + 5 feet for every two levels of experience of the wizard, and 20 feet high.

The fire seeds spell creates special missiles or timed incendiaries that burn with great heat. The spell can be cast to create either fire seed missiles or fire seed incendiaries, as chosen when the spell is cast.

When this spell is cast by a priest, a local tremor of fairly high strength rips the ground. The shock is over in one round. The earthquake affects all terrain, vegetation, structures, and creatures in its area of effect.

When a fire storm spell is cast, the whole area is shot through with sheets of roaring flame that equal a wall of fire spell in effect. Creatures within the area of fire and 10 feet or less from the edge of the affected area receive 2d8 points of damage plus additional damage equal to the caster's level (2d8 +1/level).

bringing the wrath of the gods is often something a cleric does and are EXACTLY naked displays of power. (see Ori in SG1)

4. The Cleric Is an Armored Warrior

The cleric is a warrior, though not as skilled as a fighter and typically armed with weapons linked to his or her deity. Clerics fight to defeat their gods' enemies, to enforce their ethos, and to root out heresy or threats to the faithful. Clerics use their magic to support and strengthen their allies

what fiction do you read exactly? obviously only ones where a cleric is hired to travel with a group of people, not ones in which a "cleric" is traveling alone, or has a band of people seeking to follow him. those do not both with just buffing those that follow, or healing them.

you are VERY misguided in what you think a cleric is throughout D&D to narrow it down in such a modern way....as the bad players that see a cleric as only a walking first-aid kit got the idea around such that it wont die now and keeps getting used that way.

"fortune favors the faithful".. a cleric will help those of his own faith first, not just blindly help anyone. but since you, Monte, and Gary all get hard-ons for wizards, you need the cleric as a support character so your squishy can survive.

5. Clerics Reflect the Gods

A cleric of the god of shadows should have different abilities than a cleric of the god of storms.

stop, just fucking stop! you realize that until WotC there was no pre-defined "gods" in D&D, but settings had them. outside of settings there is nothing. the setting dictates these things, so you should NOT be designing default gods for the game else you prevent the ability of people being able to create their own.

the base game should have NO defined gods, and if you think new players will need them, there should be a beginner setting that just fleshes out enough of a world to be able to play and get an idea, but that setting shouldnt be a part of the core game. this is why even spell names were suggested to be changed for the game so that if you never had a Bigby, you could still have those spells, or i am sure that the names could easily be removed to where you just have Acid Arrows, not Melf's.

going any further into your train of thought is becoming less a free-form TTRPG, and more some special world MMO. dont even add things that people would prefer to create themselves, for the core game.

Keep in mind that these goals are guiding principles for the typical expression of a class. One of the concepts we've embraced is the idea of creating starting points, but then allowing a lot of room to maneuver for players who want to tinker with mechanics or who prefer to craft their character's story first, then find mechanics to match that story second. As I mentioned at our PAX East seminar, our battle cry is "Don't get in the way." The basic idea behind that approach is that we create a starting point, but then give players the options and tools to modify their characters as they see fit.

but YOUR typical expression does not fit with D&D. the starting point should suggest ideas to both player and DM that a cleric CAN be different based on a selection of deities, but should stop there. let those that want to create their own do so, and others to seek out "Cleric Ideas Supplement" to buy.

you dont start with a chocolate cake and have the ability to turn it into a strawberry one. you start with a chocolate cake MIX, and then change the ingredients to a strawberry one. know when to say when. learn when to stop designing things.

again the job security of an RPG system designer is 1 RPG system. (see Tweet, Noonan, Monte Cook, Gygax, Zeb Cook, Steve Winter, etc)

At the end of the day, our design goals represent the primary goals for the archetypal expression of a character class. They're the starting point that we're aiming to bring to life while leaving room for players to tell their own stories and craft their own unique characters.

and sadly you FAIL on many level because you try to design too much stuff. you let people fall into the trappings of not creating things for themselves. why did Dragon take submissions? for people to share their ideas and creations. how many submissions of such things does Dragon take now? how many people WANT to create with current editions where everything is spoonfed to them?

by creating something for beginners right up front to be able to jump in with experienced players, you leave those things there such that a good number of experienced players dont bother creating their own things, then it trickles down or spreads like a virus. people begin to think if it isnt made by the company it isnt worth using, or they feel they are not good enough to make their own, and the rules-lawyers increase.

again know when to say when, and when to stop designing things. want to put out something for beginners, then do it AFTER the core is out so those people can start with those things. NEVER did a beginner version come out at the same time as the core, because it didnt want to stifle the creativity of people by throwing beginners version stuff in with experienced players, because of the conflicts that can create.

make sure your starting point, doesnt have it appear that it is fully fleshed out, or you have gone form starting point to end point in the blink of an eye.

CapnTthePirateG wrote:Behold the dread power of Mearls and despair!

In which we lay out 4 design goals, but then the 5th design goal invalidates all of the above, making our column contradictory and a waste of space!

I didn't find anything particularly contradictory about the idea that different gods have different clerics.

I agree that his example of an elf cleric who basically acts like a ranger (with cleric spellcasting) is stupid, either because the PC does a shitty job at ranger-ing (and therefore is a waste of space) or because the PC is pretty good at ranger-ing (and therefore is making a real ranger feel small in the pants).

The 5th goal contradicts the first four because they will negate the others at varying points. The Cleric of Storms is not a subtle and indirect cleric. The Cleric of Wizards is toeing all sorts of lines out of divine magic. The Cleric of Decay & Suffering & Murder won't be known for its healing touch. The Cleric of Monks or Peace (or peaceful monks) is not going to be known for cladding themselves in steel and beating people up.

The conceit is that you'll have clerics are of a distinct and recognizable nature that can do anything.

hogarth wrote:I agree that his example of an elf cleric who basically acts like a ranger (with cleric spellcasting) is stupid, either because the PC does a shitty job at ranger-ing (and therefore is a waste of space) or because the PC is pretty good at ranger-ing (and therefore is making a real ranger feel small in the pants).

That's bullshit. Character classes are a means to an end, and that end is "Playing the character I want to play". If I want to play a character who lives in the forest and hunts shit for a living, it should conceptually be just as valid to go in through Cleric of Obad-Hai as it is through Ranger. Once I make that decision, you can talk to me about how well the class models what I want to do, but this idea that a class' traditional role is sacrosanct and never to be touched is actively harmful to the hobby and needs to trip headfirst into a bonfire.

Desdan_Mervolam wrote: Once I make that decision, you can talk to me about how well the class models what I want to do, but this idea that a class' traditional role is sacrosanct and never to be touched is actively harmful to the hobby and needs to trip headfirst into a bonfire.

If you don't like class roles, why would you play a game with classes?

virgil wrote:The 5th goal contradicts the first four because they will negate the others at varying points. The Cleric of Storms is not a subtle and indirect cleric. The Cleric of Wizards is toeing all sorts of lines out of divine magic.

I don't know what to tell you. In every version of D&D so far, a cleric of the storm god has something like 80% clerical magic and 20% storm magic (at best). I doubt that the ratio is suddenly going to change in 5E. Likewise for your cleric of the wizard god.

virgil wrote: The Cleric of Decay & Suffering & Murder won't be known for its healing touch. The Cleric of Monks or Peace (or peaceful monks) is not going to be known for cladding themselves in steel and beating people up.

"You can heal" or "you can wear armor" is not the same as "you must heal" or "you must wear armor", obviously.

hogarth wrote:

virgil wrote: The Cleric of Decay & Suffering & Murder won't be known for its healing touch. The Cleric of Monks or Peace (or peaceful monks) is not going to be known for cladding themselves in steel and beating people up.

"You can heal" or "you can wear armor" is not the same as "you must heal" or "you must wear armor", obviously.

Except there remains a contradiction. The Cleric of Flamboyantly Peaceful Nudist Wizards WILL ignore one or more design goals. Choosing not to wear armor, when it's one of the core foundations of the class, is like choosing not to ever shapeshift with a D&D druid.

virgil wrote:Except there remains a contradiction. The Cleric of Flamboyantly Peaceful Nudist Wizards WILL ignore one or more design goals.

So will the wizard who refuses to cast spells, or the fighter who refuses to use weapons, or the rogue who refuses to sneak attack. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

Desdan_Mervolam wrote:If I want to play a character who lives in the forest and hunts shit for a living,

so you want to be a fighter, ok. seriously, what does this character concept have to do with ANY class?

The price of tea in China was of such importance that sparked the Opium Wars, which are central to Britain's more recent history of imperialism. Tolkien was deeply influenced by his country's history, and his work in turn deeply influence the setting of D&D and its use of fighters, rogues, & wizards.

Either way. The important distinction here is that the article stated what the cleric IS, which includes reflecting the nature of a god that may directly oppose part of what they are. The only way to have all five goals met is to make the Gods of Explosions, Monks, Arcane Magic, & Undeath/Anti-Life be unable to have clerics.