Another Sad Reality

[anarchangel23]

Rob Donoghue has had a lot of interesting things to say about 4e recently. Last month he posted about page 42, the most important rules in the current incarnation of D&D, those for stunts. Today he posted about his hopes for a streamlined D&D in the forthcoming Red Box.* Like him, I'm not holding my breath for something that would work for me

Comments

[grandexperiment]

On Rob Donoghue's comments:

I find Rob Donoghue's comment about hoping Dark Sun will have rules for less gear to be odd. From my understanding, these rules are already in the DMG2 (a book which Rob is listed as being an author of) and DS will just refer to them. In fact, if I were start any D&D4e game, I would go with the low magic item rules in the DMG2 for the same reasons.

Other than this, I would like to see feats removed or at least reduced drastically (perhaps by turning them into 10 class specific options chosen every 3 levels).

On Anarchangel's comments:

From what I have seen, I am pretty sure that the Essentials line will not see a reduction in the D&D4e combat system.

My position is that I really like the D&D4e combat system. IMO it beats hands down any roleplaying game, wargame or boardgame in terms of packing punch and bringing the fun, so I personally hope it doesn't get reduced very much.

When I first started with 4e, I also found myself with the perceived imbalance between combat and the story and adventure aspects of D&D. At the time, my solution was to pump up the later rather than reduce the former.

However, over time I have come to realise that story and adventure are already catered for in 4e and are easy to pump up through actual play experiences. In fact, I find that 4e facilitates story and adventure very: not through explicit rules and system, but through the zeigeist of its overall presentation and structure.

YMMV of course :)

[anarchangel23]

I don't really have any hopes for Red Box myself because I think my requirements are better catered elsewhere.

4e presents a different kind of action to my ideal type. I prefer more wuxia-style swashbuckling action than D&D caters for. I would be hard pressed to think of a game that does the type of action that D&D does better than 4e, but that type of action isn't really my bag at the moment.

I certainly don't think that 4e is "just a miniatures game", or "too much like WoW" or any of those complaints. There's plenty of room for story and roleplaying in 4e, I'd just like to be able to cram more fights into the same time than D&D allows. I'm sure a practiced group can speed it up and fit more in, but I don't have time for a learning curve.

In terms of punch and fun in a wargame, for me, DBA is hard to beat.

[grandexperiment]

The length of combat was raised on RPGnet recently. IMO I don't think length by itself is all that useful for me. What is important is that the combat feels exciting and meaningful all the way through. If an RPG provides for greater excitement for longer than that's more important than a quick combat. As such, I don't have an issue with 4e's 40 minute to 1 hour combats. In fact, I think that length is needed for them to be as exciting as they can be.

FWIW I am not saying that you are wrong by any means. Length of combat is a common complaint on 4e and many RPGs and I can understand that.

"In terms of punch and fun in a wargame, for me, DBA is hard to beat."

DBA?

[anarchangel23]

Yep, that's why if I'm going to play for a day (or, say, 6 hours), D&D is still a game I will consider (at that length, possibly the only game I'd consider!), but my group plays for 2-2.5 hours at a time, and not necessarily weekly, so a one hour combat really cuts into the other aspects of the game in a dissatisfying way.

DBA is a historical wargame using armies comprising 12 units from mostly preset ancient and medieval army lists which plays to a result in 30 minutes to an hour. It's regaining popularity in Christchurch, but I'm not sure how popular it is in Wellington.

[grandexperiment]

Cool. DBA sounds a little like Memoir 44 (and Battlelore) from its design objectives.

Gotta say that even as good as it sounds, playing my Changeling Swordmage ronin samurai sounds cooler :p

[anarchangel23]

One area in which D&D definitely rules the roost in my mind is in day-long play. Realistically, next time I break out the 4e manuals may well be for a 12+ hour gaming extravaganza! Good times.

[grandexperiment]

I can't help but feel that you are going down the wrong track here to some extent.

Sure a 4e combat will be 40 minutes to 1 hour long, but unlike previous editions of D&D I will do much less encounters. Some of this occurs simply through the way Encounters now have multiple layers, allowing for that aggregation.

In that sense, I have found myself having much less non-story orientated combat than in previous D&D. In fact, it often feels like "bringing down the pain". For any combat for which the PCs are invested in by way of story or subplots, I simply narrate them out or use a Skill Challenge.

I have also found myself writing adventures in a way that tell story through martial conflict. This has really helped me understand D&D as an action fantasy game and makes it very pulpy in play.

[anarchangel23]

I like (need, really) more of my story to come from the players than you do, so while I see the attraction of that style of play (and when I have more time, I do something similar myself), it doesn't work with my situation at the moment.

What do you mean "Encounters now have multiple layers"?

[grandexperiment]

The best example I can give was the Moathouse in Hommlet. I ran this in 1 hour in 4e. However, the Encounter combined a Skill Challenge to approach the moathouse (allowing for all kinds of non-combat ideas and creativity), giant frogs that emerged out of the swamp to attack the PCs as a result of that Skill Challenge, and dealing with the bandits in the moathouse itself. Though there was some time sequencing with the Skill Challenge first, they all occupied the same space in time and built on each other.

In AD&D1e the moathouse was some presented 7 or 8 seperate encounters. Converting to 4e, I removed all the chaff to get to the bare story bones of the encounter, then aggregate them to a single whole with multiple parts.

[anarchangel23]

Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah, that's cool, but it's more of a GMing technique that you could use with any system that has extended skill tests and combat rules, rather than something specific to 4e. No doubt the improvements to the monster manual helped save a lot of prep time though.

[grandexperiment]

I am not sure I agree :) The systems are all there and integrated, so they can provide exactly this kind of experience. The DMG advice is consistent with this kind of thing too. Most of all, 4e plays better the more dynamic and intense the combat experience, encouraging this type of play (though I admit not enforcing it).

Before I say more, I would like to say that I am not suggesting that 4e is the be all and end all of RPGs. It has really struck a chord with me, so I tend to see these things in a very positive light (yes, I also see the irony in me supporting 4e and you being doubtful of it :) ).

My experiences of combat in 4e are great (and almost uniformly so) from both a tactical and a character/story POV. However, what really makes 4e shine IMO is that I have found its mix has really supported some of the best adventure and story elements in a D&D game I have come across. Some of that will be attributable to my own personal intepretation of the system, but I don't think the system itself is in no way responsible for that either.

[mashugenah]

Yep, sounds like some of the stuff that's discussed explicitly in Fate 2.0.

[mashugenah]

What are you saying?

FWIW, I find your game to be hugely more combat focused than most of my 3/3.5 games were. It's working for me, but I can't quite untangle what you're saying about story v. adventure v. combat.

[grandexperiment]

Despite the heavy mechanical focus of 4e on combat, I find it caters for adventuring/story through other means. It is harder to point at exactly what these other means are as they arise from a range of things in 4e's presentation and structure, and very little from the mechanics.

[grandexperiment]

FWIW I am not saying anything specifically on quantity of story/adventure. I am talking more about how those elements are facilitated and supported.

[mashugenah]

Sure thing. I guess that's probably what I'm struggling with in your comments...