The "Brandon Don't Read This" Update Series, Part 2
Last night I didn't get through an entire section, but I did make progress through Chapter 2, which is really an introduction to the process of making a character, versus Chapter 1, which is just about the game in general. I have not yet finished it, as I said above, so keep in mind that some of my concerns may be addressed later in the section.
It begins running the reader through the steps of making a character, e.g. Pick a Race, pick a Class, choose Ability Scores, etc., and what chapters cover those topics. I thought it interesting that the book itself didn't quite follow this pattern (it presents Ability Scores before Race and Class), but I do think from a conceptual perspective, the books layout makes sense (it would be more useful knowing about ability scores before you found out how races affected them). It also mentions giving your character personality, but it doesn't go into much detail. However, I'm hoping this will be addressed later in the chapter.
The Ability Score generation methods are ones I firmly approve of. I hate rolling stats. Abhor it, really. The game emphasizes methods that give everyone an even starting advantage, and they even give guidelines on when to make people reroll if the DM does decide to go with the 4d6 stat generation method, preventing both grossly under- and over-powered characters. The abilities themselves are still mostly the same, though it goes through from the beginning and tells the player how each class favors each ability. They also modified how abilities affect saving throws (higher of Str/Con for Constitution, higher of Int/Dex for Reflex, higher of Cha/Wis for Will). It also uses higher Int/Dex for bonus to AC if a char is wearing light or no armor. I think this will help out a lot in combat, but it also makes it easier to min/max. I do like that it allows for more variety, though (one could make a Str/Int wizard without suffering too big a Fort save penalty, for instance), and Charisma isn't useless for non-Sorcerers and Bards! It also said that one's Con modifier was added to one's hit points at level one; it did not specify later levels. I'm sure this will be discussed later in the book, but if Con only affects the first level hit points, I firmly approve; Constitution was too ridiculously important last game.
In terms of Alignment, I like that they limit it, but it also feels skewed based on my past experience. They use Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil, and Chaotic Evil, and I appreciate getting rid of some of the ambiguity, but perhaps different names would feel more intuitive to old players, as they don't mean quite the same thing as they did in Third Edition by Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil. Mostly the same, yes, but they do seem to be drawing nuances of distinction; Good focuses on helping individuals, whereas Lawful Good focuses on bettering society. Evil means selfishness and a desire to one-up others, whereas Chaotic Evil lacks concern for anyone and embraces a willingness to actively destroy to get what one wants. Still, I'm happy to see the Alignment system trimmed down, even if it is going to take some getting used to; the Alignment issues of the last game were simply too much of a pain to work around sometimes, and getting rid of them in the old system wasn't much of an option with how ingrained they were into certain spells and effects.
The other topic I managed to get through before bedtime last night was the role system. They outline particular roles for classes: Control, Leader, Striker, and Defender. It makes a lot of sense from a strategy/MMORPG perspective, and I think it will make running combat easier for DMs, where an individual monster's role is already outlined for the DM. I think it also helps players get a feel for what areas classes are strong in, but I also fear that it might pigeonhole players' concepts. Just because a class is deemed a Striker doesn't mean the player can't try to shape it into a Defender, for instance (e.g. Rogue tanks in World of Warcraft), but at least players will know how to use a class to its strength even if they lack strategic inventiveness. And the PHB specifically states that not all roles are necessary for a successful adventure, so hopefully people don't get in the mindset that they must have all four present. I'm sure I'll learn a lot more about these roles in Chapter 4, so stay tuned for
further analysis.
In closing, I'm enjoying this exploration of the new system a lot. Is it better? Too early to decide. And it's probably a stupid question anyways, as better is a matter of opinion. But I do know that reading thus far has sparked a lot of good ideas for my next game, so definite good is coming from it.
It begins running the reader through the steps of making a character, e.g. Pick a Race, pick a Class, choose Ability Scores, etc., and what chapters cover those topics. I thought it interesting that the book itself didn't quite follow this pattern (it presents Ability Scores before Race and Class), but I do think from a conceptual perspective, the books layout makes sense (it would be more useful knowing about ability scores before you found out how races affected them). It also mentions giving your character personality, but it doesn't go into much detail. However, I'm hoping this will be addressed later in the chapter.
The Ability Score generation methods are ones I firmly approve of. I hate rolling stats. Abhor it, really. The game emphasizes methods that give everyone an even starting advantage, and they even give guidelines on when to make people reroll if the DM does decide to go with the 4d6 stat generation method, preventing both grossly under- and over-powered characters. The abilities themselves are still mostly the same, though it goes through from the beginning and tells the player how each class favors each ability. They also modified how abilities affect saving throws (higher of Str/Con for Constitution, higher of Int/Dex for Reflex, higher of Cha/Wis for Will). It also uses higher Int/Dex for bonus to AC if a char is wearing light or no armor. I think this will help out a lot in combat, but it also makes it easier to min/max. I do like that it allows for more variety, though (one could make a Str/Int wizard without suffering too big a Fort save penalty, for instance), and Charisma isn't useless for non-Sorcerers and Bards! It also said that one's Con modifier was added to one's hit points at level one; it did not specify later levels. I'm sure this will be discussed later in the book, but if Con only affects the first level hit points, I firmly approve; Constitution was too ridiculously important last game.
In terms of Alignment, I like that they limit it, but it also feels skewed based on my past experience. They use Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil, and Chaotic Evil, and I appreciate getting rid of some of the ambiguity, but perhaps different names would feel more intuitive to old players, as they don't mean quite the same thing as they did in Third Edition by Lawful Good and Chaotic Evil. Mostly the same, yes, but they do seem to be drawing nuances of distinction; Good focuses on helping individuals, whereas Lawful Good focuses on bettering society. Evil means selfishness and a desire to one-up others, whereas Chaotic Evil lacks concern for anyone and embraces a willingness to actively destroy to get what one wants. Still, I'm happy to see the Alignment system trimmed down, even if it is going to take some getting used to; the Alignment issues of the last game were simply too much of a pain to work around sometimes, and getting rid of them in the old system wasn't much of an option with how ingrained they were into certain spells and effects.
The other topic I managed to get through before bedtime last night was the role system. They outline particular roles for classes: Control, Leader, Striker, and Defender. It makes a lot of sense from a strategy/MMORPG perspective, and I think it will make running combat easier for DMs, where an individual monster's role is already outlined for the DM. I think it also helps players get a feel for what areas classes are strong in, but I also fear that it might pigeonhole players' concepts. Just because a class is deemed a Striker doesn't mean the player can't try to shape it into a Defender, for instance (e.g. Rogue tanks in World of Warcraft), but at least players will know how to use a class to its strength even if they lack strategic inventiveness. And the PHB specifically states that not all roles are necessary for a successful adventure, so hopefully people don't get in the mindset that they must have all four present. I'm sure I'll learn a lot more about these roles in Chapter 4, so stay tuned for
further analysis.
In closing, I'm enjoying this exploration of the new system a lot. Is it better? Too early to decide. And it's probably a stupid question anyways, as better is a matter of opinion. But I do know that reading thus far has sparked a lot of good ideas for my next game, so definite good is coming from it.