Principia Discordia

 :lulz: :argh!: :kingmeh:

(The NYT aparently broke this story before they should have.. as it was 'under embargo' until this morning.......)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/arts/video-games/dungeons-dragons-remake-uses-players-input.html

More on this here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt/2012/01/09/wizards-announce-new-dungeons-and-dragons-an-inside-look-at-the-game/

And some interesting insights on this whole development over @ EN World:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/316036-off-see-wizards-day-wizards-coast-showed-me-d-d-5th-edition.html

Comments on the dev of 4E (& what got fucked up):
http://www.enworld.org/forum/news/315975-wizards-coast-dungeons-dragons-insider-d-d-4th-edition-hasbro-some-history.html


Thought you all would appreciate those latter links.

 :lulz:

If WotC asks for D&D fan feedback on how to make 5th Edition, all they're going to wind up with is a massive pile of weird crap that was never intended to work as a game. The fanbase will guide them to create The Ultimate Nerd Rage Target, so that they can spend hours, days, grognarding to their heart's content.

And the rest of us will keep playing the games we want to play, be it Pathfinder, 4E, or Uncle Jimmy's Roundabout Rumpus Rodeo.

Interesting. If you've been following the Legends and Lore columns on DDI, you can tell they've been talking about 5e backstage quite a bit.  So I'm not entirely surprised.

I do look forward to seeing what they're cooking up. The R&D team's main task these days is to reunite tabletop RPG consumers, and find out how to make a buck in the new [digital] world of publishing.

I've been playing 4e since its release, and I've loved it. To me, it's different than previous editions in a really good way. It actually annoyed me most that the D&D R&D team is married to the 1970s - a lot of their content and errata is focused on recreating the experiences people had Back In My Day when Mages didn't have to roll to-hit, and you had to save versus death or go back to level 1. (somebody brought a copy of the "classic" adventure White Plume Mountain over to my place last week... now that I've read it ... it doesn't sound fun at all! module quality has come a long way since then)

The rumors we've been hearing is that 5e is a very modular system. Like they'll treat combat, feats, skill challenges, etc, as separate systems that you can choose to include -or not- in your game. For example, if you want that Original D&D experience, you can toss out the social skills like bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate and just roleplay those encounters without the die rolls. Or if you want a nautical themed campaign, there'll be a suite of nautical races and feats in its own publication, rather than having a little of every theme in every publication. Interesting idea.

And you can see why they're approaching it this way --- WotC's publishing strategy in the last two years has been kind of schizophrenic. The Essentials line is aimed squarely at newcomers, and the core product line is getting overwhelming with how many choices they give you. It's kind of cool to have that forked approach though. When a new player joins my campaign, I push them towards an Essentials build if they don't have a lot of RPG experience, or a core build if the already know how things like hit points and armor class works. So we can have newcomers at the table with simple characters, and vets with very complex characters, and neither overpowers the other.

My 4e career have taken me from level 1-10 several times. The group I DM for is level 14, which is the highest level I've seen in D&D 4e. IMO it's WAY easier to write for a 4e party than a 3e party. A fellow D&D grognard told me he recently switched from his epic tier D&D game back to pathfinder. He said, "You know, I kinda thought 4e PCs were overpowered at epic level... until pathfinder made me remember how broken 9th level spells are." I can attest to that!

In 4e's favor, I think it's the easiest version of D&D to learn. I've seen a much shorter learning curve than any other edition I've played. That being said, combat does get really slow at times. PCs have 3 actions per round, and there's a lot of choices for EACH of those actions, which can lead to a sort of deer-in-headlights paralysis when your turn comes up if you're not prepared. (you know how it goes... at my table, 4 of the players can do their turns in two minutes, the others take 5-10 minutes. Take a smoke break, come back, and they're still adding up the dice)

A few of the Legends and Lore columns riff on that note... like Mearls suggests that we might need FEWER actions per turn, then the combat would speed up considerably.

What I don't want to see lost is the emphasis on strategy and tactics. Speaking as a DM, I've found D&D 4e combat way more interesting and exciting than previous editions. Things play out like a chess match - people moving and checking each other, sliding around zones, using the terrain... the dynamic elements of battle are build into the system more smoothly and organically than in 3e.

Another thing I don't want to lose is system-wide balance. all previous editions had a big problem with Linear Fighters Quadratic Wizards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards). And at high level, you have to really know the system or you can fuck up your character permanently. I recall a mid level 3.5 campaign where the party rogue tried to become a priest of the trickster god, and ended up as both a shitty rogue and a shitty cleric. Or if you stacked the right combo of prestige classes, you could get absurd class features that left everybody else in the dust.

Well, Pathfinder works for me, so I'm sticking with it.  Also, I see no need to replace a couple of grand of shit every time Hasbro's sales start slacking off.

@Cram:  Yeah, the 70s/80s modules sucked 99% ass.  No argument there...And yeah, they've DONE the "return to <insert hackneyed adventure> to DEATH.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 09, 2012, 04:51:11 PM
Well, Pathfinder works for me, so I'm sticking with it.  Also, I see no need to replace a couple of grand of shit every time Hasbro's sales start slacking off.

@Cram:  Yeah, the 70s/80s modules sucked 99% ass.  No argument there...And yeah, they've DONE the "return to <insert hackneyed adventure> to DEATH.

That's how I feel. It wasn't bad when 3rd game out because I only had the core books for 2nd at the time. When 3.5 came out I was more than slightly pissed. When I looked at 4th and noticed the lack of half-orcs and barbarians in the PHB I was put off by that and the "LOL EVERYONE HAS COOLDOWN ABILITIES"(which is actually a good idea), along with the fact that in order to play a half-orc barbarian I would need two more books at $29.95 each.

I see this has a way for them to try to continue milking their dwindling fanbase.

Well, I just recently started gaming on the regular again, and I've been enjoying 4e so far. Of course this new "modular" system seems like it's just a money-making scheme, but I don't think that surprises anyone.

I am somewhat intrigued by it though, as I've always been a fan of customizing systems, so I'll probably give a look at the very least.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 09, 2012, 04:45:26 PMAnother thing I don't want to lose is system-wide balance. all previous editions had a big problem with Linear Fighters Quadratic Wizards (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LinearWarriorsQuadraticWizards). And at high level, you have to really know the system or you can fuck up your character permanently. I recall a mid level 3.5 campaign where the party rogue tried to become a priest of the trickster god, and ended up as both a shitty rogue and a shitty cleric. Or if you stacked the right combo of prestige classes, you could get absurd class features that left everybody else in the dust.

I mostly played 3.0 myself, but this is probably one of the things I liked least about the system.

Especially as you play a party for many levels starting at 1, the DM has to pull all sorts of tricks (magic items etc) to keep the party power level somewhat equal, because there's always someone with not as much knowledge of the system that made some bad choices (or perhaps they even dug into the books and chose some things they thought would kick ass but they turn out to be a lot less good in practical situations).
And on the other hand there was the ambidextrous ranger/barbarian that min/maxed all their battle stats, doing massive damage and beware if you let him get near some expansion book (that the DM used to pick some feat to help the unlucky player).

Myself, I played a wizard (what you'd expect?) so while I kinda sucked at early levels, like you say later on I became kickass without much problems. Also during first level, the Sleep spell actually did make me a useful party member. It was more levels 2,3 and maybe 4 that were hard. But at 5th you get Fireball and it just gets better from there :)

If they make DnD modular I might actually look at it again.

I couldn't convince my regular groups to even consider DnD 4th because of a backlash against the way the entire thing was handled and marketed. We don't do much 'traditional' gaming anyway, so DnD 3rd was always a hard sell over anything else. I briefly flirted with Pathfinder, then got Anima and we pretty much love that system for our style. There's no real reason to look at other games.

But DnD tends to be the first thing people think of when they think RPG, so it is important you are at least aware of what it is like if you want to bring in outside gamers or people who haven't had much experience with the hobby. We've got two kids (16-ish I think) in our regular group at the moment, and I had to look up how DnD 4th works purely so I could explain the Anima system to them in terms of how it isn't that.

I would like DnD to be non-awful again so that I might actually be tempted to use it, but I enjoy systems and comparing/contrasting and modifying and tinkering and seeing where the break points are. I actually loved that in DnD 3rd, the few times I got to play it. 4th needed a lot more cooperation amongst the group, but most of my games tend to have the people at the table working for their own purposes, and as a result sometimes at crossed purposes with other party members. That isn't the kind of story you can really tell easily with 4th, though you could with 3rd.

Plus almost everyone I know is absurdly sick of alignment systems because they tend to turn things into a caricature rather than a character.

'BUT I'M LAWFUL GOOD SO I HAVE TO KILL THE GOBLIN CHILDREN'  :argh!:

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 10, 2012, 08:48:18 AM
4th needed a lot more cooperation amongst the group, but most of my games tend to have the people at the table working for their own purposes, and as a result sometimes at crossed purposes with other party members. That isn't the kind of story you can really tell easily with 4th, though you could with 3rd.

That's true, if you follow the DMG to the letter, 4th edition is a game about party cooperation. Without cooperating, there is no way to beat some of the game's challenges.

QuotePlus almost everyone I know is absurdly sick of alignment systems because they tend to turn things into a caricature rather than a character.

'BUT I'M LAWFUL GOOD SO I HAVE TO KILL THE GOBLIN CHILDREN'  :argh!:

A hundred times this!

I was so sick of alignment. I LOVE that the alignments are more vague now. I don't know a single person IRL that acts within one alignment all of the time. Previous incarnations of the alignment system punished you (often in terms of XP) if your character developed beyond his dogma. So it's hard to tell a story about a moral dilemma, or doing something you'll later regret, because the system (as written) slaps your hand if your character violates his code of conduct.

I'm so glad you can be "Unaligned" now. Like, No, I don't think that there needs to be a balance between good and evil, I don't give a shit about good and evil, I just care about protecting my family. Or making money. Or getting my buddy into the throne. Or whatever else the story is about that isn't Light and Darkness.

Grab your +3 pitchforks! The edition wars have begun! 

:angrymob:

Battlefield: The WOTC Future Release subforum (http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75882/135766/future_releases)


ETA: 5 minutes of reading those threads will underscore how impossible it is to please the community. A modular game that could theoretically include WILDLY different gaming styles is the only way to do it.

I like different systems. Sometimes its based on the kind of story that's being told, sometimes just on changing up the mechanics for variation.

Our group played 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, Vamprie, Shadowrun (old and new), Savage Worlds, Discordia!, Call of Cthulhu (old and d20 edition), Cthulhutech and a couple homegrown ones. They all had drawbacks and some cool features, but it seems to me that the success or failure of the game depends much more on the cohesion of the group playing the game than the rules.

Our group for example, played by the rules until we decided that a rule was dumb, broken or took up too much time to deal with. So we'd agree on a specific house rule, document it and continue the story. If the new system is more modular it might encourage that sort of behavior.

In the end its a business and its trying to make money. I, personally, would have preferred to see them profit from a brand new system, rather than rehashing the old one again.

Anything, though, that encourages imaginative gaming is a plus in my book.

QuoteFirst off, it's not 4.5! It's not! It's just a new starting point for new players and a reworking of the core classes in the game to make them easier to manage and allows for a more classical structure to class builds. These products will be evergreen, ie. reprinted as needed. They have a lower cost per book and are a solid ground level to get inexperienced players into the game. They will dominate the 2010/2011 product line up and then we'll get into newer material. They still use the same 4E system we've come to love. Nothing 'mechanically' is different about how they work in the rules, it's just new ways on building the classes.

Well that's an interesting twist.


http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19598650/TLCs_Future_Release_Newbie_GuideFAQ_-_aka._The_what_happened_to_X_thread.

Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on January 10, 2012, 03:17:59 PM

QuoteFirst off, it's not 4.5! It's not! It's just a new starting point for new players and a reworking of the core classes in the game to make them easier to manage and allows for a more classical structure to class builds. These products will be evergreen, ie. reprinted as needed. They have a lower cost per book and are a solid ground level to get inexperienced players into the game. They will dominate the 2010/2011 product line up and then we'll get into newer material. They still use the same 4E system we've come to love. Nothing 'mechanically' is different about how they work in the rules, it's just new ways on building the classes.

Well that's an interesting twist.


http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19598650/TLCs_Future_Release_Newbie_GuideFAQ_-_aka._The_what_happened_to_X_thread.

They're talking about Essentials, the line of D&D products they released in 2011, not 5th edition.

I think that Essentials will give us some clues about 5th edition, sort of like how the Book of Nine Swords and Dungeonscape, published at the end of D&D 3.5, gave us some clues about what 4th ed would look like.

The idea of Essentials was to give newcomers an entry channel into the game. Essentials characters look a lot more like 3rd edition characters - instead of choosing a new encounter or daily power at (almost) every level like a 4e character, they get a few at-will abilities, and when they level up, those abilities get better, or get more features. It's supposed to be easier to manage, because at high level you only have to worry about like 5 powers instead of 20.

A lot of the Essentials character builds are centered around streamlining speed of play. For example, the "classic" 4e fighter gets to mark an adjacent opponent as a minor action (that means the creature has -2 to hit anybody except for the fighter).

The "essentials" fighter has a similar feature - anybody he's adjacent to gets -2 to hit anybody except the fighter. So it's like a mark, but you don't have to declare it, it's automatically applied to anybody you stand next to. It's just one less thing you have to keep track of.

The real meat of Essentials is that they wanted a "D&D for newcomers"  (like they've done many times in the past) that can be seamlessly integrated into an existing 4e game. So you can have 20-year players playing an epic level campaign (the deep end of complexity) at the same table as a first-timer, and one isn't overpowering the other.

Quote from: Bebek Sincap Ratatosk on January 10, 2012, 03:08:19 PM
I like different systems. Sometimes its based on the kind of story that's being told, sometimes just on changing up the mechanics for variation.

Our group played 3.0, 3.5, 4.0, Vamprie, Shadowrun (old and new), Savage Worlds, Discordia!, Call of Cthulhu (old and d20 edition), Cthulhutech and a couple homegrown ones. They all had drawbacks and some cool features, but it seems to me that the success or failure of the game depends much more on the cohesion of the group playing the game than the rules.

Our group for example, played by the rules until we decided that a rule was dumb, broken or took up too much time to deal with. So we'd agree on a specific house rule, document it and continue the story. If the new system is more modular it might encourage that sort of behavior.

In the end its a business and its trying to make money. I, personally, would have preferred to see them profit from a brand new system, rather than rehashing the old one again.

Anything, though, that encourages imaginative gaming is a plus in my book.

I wonder if there's a place for a 'free to play' model in the games marketplace.

Most MMOs are moving over towards a system where the 'core' game is free and then people pay for addons - equipment, shiny icons, more selections etc etc.

I wonder how porting that over to the RPG market might look. A totally free PHB, DMG and MM but then you need to pay if you want artwork, or the Big Book of Shiny Swords, or non-standard classes...

RPGs are easier to pirate than those MMOs are, though, and the more I think about it the more it is like the old license DnD operated under, where all the core content was basically free so the advantage of buying the book was you got the book and the artwork. I assume that as that model collapsed, it wasn't making them the money they needed.

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 10, 2012, 03:31:46 PMI wonder how porting that over to the RPG market might look. A totally free PHB, DMG and MM but then you need to pay if you want artwork, or the Big Book of Shiny Swords, or non-standard classes...

That was one of the goals of the Open Gaming License. The d20 SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) (the game's core rules, along with the basic classes and spell lists) was public. Then they let third parties publish material for it - that's how Pathfinder got started. It was a great idea, I was bummed that they jettisoned it when they kicked up 4e.

QuoteRPGs are easier to pirate than those MMOs are, though, and the more I think about it the more it is like the old license DnD operated under, where all the core content was basically free so the advantage of buying the book was you got the book and the artwork. I assume that as that model collapsed, it wasn't making them the money they needed.

This is an industry-wide problem in publishing. Dead-tree format books are a dwindling format. D&D Insider hit on the right idea - you can get all the crunchy content from their printed books (but none of the fluff or art), as well as about 15-20 magazine articles, for like $11/month.

I don't know what I'd do without it! Their online tools are awesome for building characters and monsters, and the compendium is much faster than leafing through 10 different books. If the content is really cool, I'll buy the book anyway (because I'm a spag like that) but lots of groups operate without any hard copies.

One of my friends did some training up at the head office of Games Workshop. Whilst there he talked with the Forgeworld people. For those not in the know, Forgeworld models are significantly more expensive than even the ridiculously overpriced core line stuff, as they are much higher quality. They also produce very expensive campaign books of the very highest production values, which are essentially new rules to playing Games Workshop games for particular periods at an equally insane price (I believe £100+ per book).

They are one of the more profitable arms of the company, and they operate on the basis that it is their job to make luxury products aimed at the hardcore market; people aged 21-40+ who have thousands of pounds of disposable income and love their gaming.

I suspect that over the next few years games will move into three core markets; the DnD 5th 'modular' business model, the 'F2P'-inspired business model, and the Forgeworld-style business model. Fantasy Flight are probably the closest to the last currently on the market.

Then around the edges you'll have the independents who are largely operated as a sideline by people who have a 'day job'.

I would like to see someone try the F2P model again at least. A lot of good stuff came out of the d20 SRD, and it'd be awesome if someone like White Wolf decided to open that up so Genius: The Transgression or Princess: The Hopeful could be released legally as game lines in their own right. (Even if I have a personal burning hatred for the storyteller system which defies all logic).

The only way i would be tempted to pick up a modular DnD is if the rule modules were less than $15 a pop, as it is, I can see WOTC making the modules $20-$30 a pop for a hardbound 150 pages of optional rules and pretty pictures.

I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:24:15 PM
I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

I like them because I want my good guys good and my bad guys fucking evil.

Also, people DO have - mostly - consistent behavior patterns.

In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots. 

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:25:29 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:24:15 PM
I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

I like them because I want my good guys good and my bad guys fucking evil.

Also, people DO have - mostly - consistent behavior patterns.

I broke alignment once. I was playing an elf or something and we weren't sure if these mushrooms were poisonous so I fed one to a deer. It tripped balls and died.

The experiment was fruitful. I later used a sling shot to fire one into an orc's mouth.

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 06:30:24 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:25:29 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:24:15 PM
I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

I like them because I want my good guys good and my bad guys fucking evil.

Also, people DO have - mostly - consistent behavior patterns.

I broke alignment once. I was playing an elf or something and we weren't sure if these mushrooms were poisonous so I fed one to a deer. It tripped balls and died.

The experiment was fruitful. I later used a sling shot to fire one into an orc's mouth.

I am told by Freeky - while she's DMing - that there is no such alignments as "Lawful Violent" or "Larcenous Neutral".

:(

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:33:09 PM

Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 06:30:24 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:25:29 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:24:15 PM
I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

I like them because I want my good guys good and my bad guys fucking evil.

Also, people DO have - mostly - consistent behavior patterns.

I broke alignment once. I was playing an elf or something and we weren't sure if these mushrooms were poisonous so I fed one to a deer. It tripped balls and died.

The experiment was fruitful. I later used a sling shot to fire one into an orc's mouth.

I am told by Freeky - while she's DMing - that there is no such alignments as "Lawful Violent" or "Larcenous Neutral".

:(

WHAT!? This is an outrage, as those are clearly the most prevalent alignments in D&D players.

Quote from: Doktor M. Phox0 on January 10, 2012, 06:35:16 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:33:09 PM

Quote from: Billy the Twid on January 10, 2012, 06:30:24 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:25:29 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:24:15 PM
I like alignments.  Just because players are retarded and don't know anything....

I like them because I want my good guys good and my bad guys fucking evil.

Also, people DO have - mostly - consistent behavior patterns.

I broke alignment once. I was playing an elf or something and we weren't sure if these mushrooms were poisonous so I fed one to a deer. It tripped balls and died.

The experiment was fruitful. I later used a sling shot to fire one into an orc's mouth.

I am told by Freeky - while she's DMing - that there is no such alignments as "Lawful Violent" or "Larcenous Neutral".

:(

WHAT!? This is an outrage, as those are clearly the most prevalent alignments in D&D players.

troof

In case you're curious, wizards has an article about their revised alignment system here (http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4ex/20080602a). There's still good and evil, of course, they just don't split as many hairs about the different types of it.

Personally, I always found the old alignment system limiting. Back in 3e, I stopped using it entirely (and replaced it with a quick discussion with the DM about their character's concept and motivation.. which did get sticky at mid levels when spells can target certain alignments). I like it when a character has to think about a situation and can't just check an abbreviation on his character sheet to see how he should react--- and for a lot of players, that's what alignment does.

I like my badguys to have interesting motivations. The bad-guy empire in my game isn't "evil", it's actually multicultural and tolerant to an abhorrent level. (to the point where more clearly evil races like drow can become nobles, and the elves are restricted from rising against them due to "tolerance laws"). They're the bad guys because their imperialism threatens the players way of life, which is complicated because they're also the bastion of civilization right now... it's a tangled issue, and that's not something you can sort out by casting Know Alignment.

There are evil things in my game too, because that's D&D's tone, but they're not as interesting IMO.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
Personally, I always found the old alignment system limiting.

That's why I use it.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
I like my badguys to have interesting motivations.

Sure.  Even evil people think they're doing the right thing, most of the time.  It's the means employed and/or how far someone will go to accomplish their goal that determines whether or not someone is actually evil.

I mean, let's face it:  the classic D&D party is just a pack of grave robbers anyway, right?   :lulz:

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 07:09:51 PM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
Personally, I always found the old alignment system limiting.

That's why I use it.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
I like my badguys to have interesting motivations.

Sure.  Even evil people think they're doing the right thing, most of the time.  It's the means employed and/or how far someone will go to accomplish their goal that determines whether or not someone is actually evil.

I mean, let's face it:  the classic D&D party is just a pack of grave robbers anyway, right?   :lulz:

Or homicidal hobos.

Quote from: Don Coyote on January 10, 2012, 07:41:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 07:09:51 PM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
Personally, I always found the old alignment system limiting.

That's why I use it.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 06:49:18 PM
I like my badguys to have interesting motivations.

Sure.  Even evil people think they're doing the right thing, most of the time.  It's the means employed and/or how far someone will go to accomplish their goal that determines whether or not someone is actually evil.

I mean, let's face it:  the classic D&D party is just a pack of grave robbers anyway, right?   :lulz:

Or homicidal hobos.

Well, here's the thing.  My group - especially me - uses D&D as almost a form of therapy.  We live in a fairly grey-ish world where people have murky motives and there's almost never an easy answer to anything.

Some people deal with that by playing roleplaying games with GOOD GUYS and BAD GUYS, and you can solve all of life's problems with a great sword.

Other people join the republican party, which also offers easy answers to complex problems, and you can solve all of life's problems by attacking brown people.

Neither one reflects reality, of course.  But it helps you get through the week.

this has nothing to do with the thread, but I wanted to post it anyway because it sounds like one of Roger's encounters:

(http://www.d20monkey.com/comics/2011-10-24-20111024.png)

from http://www.d20monkey.com




also

(http://www.d20monkey.com/comics/2011-10-10-20111010.png)

 :lulz:

 :lulz:

Recently, I had the party in front of one of my Hideous Megatraps O' Doom.  It was basically a portcullis in front of an alcove with a chest in it, in a dungeon that regularly flooded with 6 inch deep water.  Being a fair man, I leave clues.  Being total cheating bastards, they follow up on those clues.

Frank the Bastard:  Um, could you describe the portcullis?

Me:  It's black iron.  Looks normal.

Frank:  No rust?

Me:  No, now that you mention it.  It looks new.

Frank:  In this place?  I get out my dagger and very carefully scrape it.

Me:  Paint scrapes off, revealing a glass tube which appears to have some sort of green gas in it.

Frank:  I leave the room and throw a rock at it.

Perfect trap...RUINED!  All the poison gas dissipates, and THEN the fucker finds the crushy wall trap and the mirror of opposition in the lid of the chest.

:crankey:

That's awesome!  :lulz: Your players must be paranoid as fuck. One of my favorite DM voices is asking them if they're really sure they want to do that.


DM: So .... you open the chest??
PC1: Uhhh.... wait a sec. Can somebody search this thing again?
PC2: We didn't find any traps, just open it you pussy
PC1: Okay I guess I open it.
DM: ...Are you SURE you want to do that?
PC1:  :tinfoilhat:

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 08:16:45 PM
That's awesome!  :lulz: Your players must be paranoid as fuck.

One time, I had a hook in the ceiling with a rope tied to it, which in turn held up a wagon wheel with wires tied to it, that hung down another 3 inches.

They couldn't figure it out, so they refused to go through the room.

It was just a wagon wheel.  It did nothing.

TGRR,
Not ashamed to rip off Archimedes.

 :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: that's fucking hysterical




okay I wasn't going to post another one of these, but it has :cramulus: Brimley in it
(http://www.d20monkey.com/comics/2011-05-20-20100520.png)

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 08:16:45 PM
That's awesome!  :lulz: Your players must be paranoid as fuck. One of my favorite DM voices is asking them if they're really sure they want to do that.


DM: So .... you open the chest??
PC1: Uhhh.... wait a sec. Can somebody search this thing again?
PC2: We didn't find any traps, just open it you pussy
PC1: Okay I guess I open it.
DM: ...Are you SURE you want to do that?
PC1:  :tinfoilhat:

I had done a similar thing to my last group. They got so paranoid they refused to use anything they found. The best part was when the guy doing all the trap checking finally got fed up with finding no traps. he boldly ran into the one and only pit trap in the dungeon.

Quote from: Don Coyote on January 10, 2012, 08:37:25 PM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 08:16:45 PM
That's awesome!  :lulz: Your players must be paranoid as fuck. One of my favorite DM voices is asking them if they're really sure they want to do that.


DM: So .... you open the chest??
PC1: Uhhh.... wait a sec. Can somebody search this thing again?
PC2: We didn't find any traps, just open it you pussy
PC1: Okay I guess I open it.
DM: ...Are you SURE you want to do that?
PC1:  :tinfoilhat:

I had done a similar thing to my last group. They got so paranoid they refused to use anything they found. The best part was when the guy doing all the trap checking finally got fed up with finding no traps. he boldly ran into the one and only pit trap in the dungeon.

I prefer traps that scream "TRAP".  That way, they can have the Indiana Jones fun, and not bog down the entire session searching every foot of the dungeon.

So the traps are OBVIOUSLY not kosher, and the question is "how badly do they need to get through that room?"

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 08:39:04 PM

Quote from: Don Coyote on January 10, 2012, 08:37:25 PM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 08:16:45 PM
That's awesome!  :lulz: Your players must be paranoid as fuck. One of my favorite DM voices is asking them if they're really sure they want to do that.


DM: So .... you open the chest??
PC1: Uhhh.... wait a sec. Can somebody search this thing again?
PC2: We didn't find any traps, just open it you pussy
PC1: Okay I guess I open it.
DM: ...Are you SURE you want to do that?
PC1:  :tinfoilhat:

I had done a similar thing to my last group. They got so paranoid they refused to use anything they found. The best part was when the guy doing all the trap checking finally got fed up with finding no traps. he boldly ran into the one and only pit trap in the dungeon.

I prefer traps that scream "TRAP".  That way, they can have the Indiana Jones fun, and not bog down the entire session searching every foot of the dungeon.

So the traps are OBVIOUSLY not kosher, and the question is "how badly do they need to get through that room?"

Bear in mind I did NOTHING to create their paranoia. :lulz:

Once in a while, I'll use step & die traps, but only where the PCs should have an idea that things aren't right.

The best way to do that is to have the first trap malfunction, or have it already set off by some luckless schmoe earlier, so the PCs see his mangled body and know that something isn't right.

Man. That makes me want to play again.  :sad:

I have been asked to run on Wednesdays because the groups GM hasn't had a break in the last five years. And I got roped into running on Thursdays because every person in the group systematically shot down every other option.

Roughly half the people in my gaming circle simply refuse to play classically heroic characters. They get their kicks by being morally ambiguous, self-interested types. One guy has actually haughtily complained in the past that he 'Cannot comprehend the heroic mindset'.

People were talking about stupid players earlier? Yeah.  :argh!:

It takes a lot of the work off my plate because they spend a lot of time running around trying to meet their own objectives. It does limit the stories that tend to get told, though. And it means I'm going to need a whole new group if I'm ever going to run the epic heroic fantasy game I want to run.

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 10, 2012, 09:02:34 PM
They get their kicks by being morally ambiguous, self-interested types. One guy has actually haughtily complained in the past that he 'Cannot comprehend the heroic mindset'.

Great.  Tell them you'll run it, but they all have to play lawyers and hedge fund managers.

And kick that last guy in the arse.  He has to role play the CEO of Tycho.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 09:04:10 PM

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on January 10, 2012, 09:02:34 PM
They get their kicks by being morally ambiguous, self-interested types. One guy has actually haughtily complained in the past that he 'Cannot comprehend the heroic mindset'.

Great.  Tell them you'll run it, but they all have to play lawyers and hedge fund managers.

And kick that last guy in the arse.  He has to role play the CEO of Tycho.

He would enjoy that far too much.

He's an accountant.

I hate "gotcha" traps. The one time the rogue forgets the boilerplate "I search the door for traps", that's the time you fall into a pit of acid. It's lame, it only rewards chanting "I search for traps" over and over again throughout the dungeon. I like it when the traps are part of another encounter.

One of my favorite encounters takes place in a 10x10 room. At the start of each round, you roll 4d10. Each die indicates in which row or column an energy wall pops up. These deal flame, ice, lightning, or poison damage, and they appear in a new position at the top of each round. The room should have random boxes and statues and other things you can climb to help jump over each wall. Each energy wall has a control panel so that you can disarm the thing and get a clear shot at the monsters. There's a good chance a wall will pop up between you and the cleric, or you and the monster, at just the wrong time.


My favorite trap-room as of late is from this adventure called Crucible of the Gods (http://slamdancr.com/wp/2011/08/c1-crucible-of-the-gods/). It's a situation where there is no "safe" place to stand, the encounter is an exercise in managing risk.

The room is rectangular, and has six 10 x 10 protrusions along the north and south walls, each labeled with a roman numeral. The room has four pit traps spread out in it, and there's a giant brass golem which is attacking you. (if you note where he moves, it gives clues about the pit traps).

The center part of the room (everything except the 10x10 protrusions) gets blasted by these flame jets in the ceiling. You can avoid the flame jets by ducking into one of the 10x10 cubbies.

But right after the flame jets fire, a crushing-ceiling trap slams down in a randomly-determined cubby. It deals a shitload of damage.

So the dance here is that you can take the constant light flame damage by staying in the center, or you can gamble by hiding in one of the cubbies. There's a 5/6 chance it'll miss you, and a 1/6 chance it'll flatten you like a pancake.

The other complication is that each of the crushing ceiling traps has a skull mounted on the outside -- which fires a death ray at the closet adventurer. Three hits from the death ray will kill you. Each skull only has 1 hit point, but you'd have to decide if it's worth attacking because there's only a 1/6 chance (each round) of that skull being active again.

There's a trap door in the back of each cubby. Two of the cubbies have the magic torches the party is looking for, the other four cubbies have duds. A nearby tapestry is actually a clue about which cubbies have the solution. There's a brazier on the far side of the room, and if you light it with the correct torches, the exit appears. If you light it with one of the wrong torches, it explodes as a fireball centered on you.

Really insidious room! I mean, there's five different things to worry about in there - excluding the puzzle. When we finished that encounter, the players were all out of breath. feckin awesome.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 09:08:35 PM
My favorite trap-room as of late is from this adventure called Crucible of the Gods (http://slamdancr.com/wp/2011/08/c1-crucible-of-the-gods/). It's a situation where there is no "safe" place to stand, the encounter is an exercise in managing risk.

The room is rectangular, and has six 10 x 10 protrusions along the north and south walls, each labeled with a roman numeral. The room has four pit traps spread out in it, and there's a giant brass golem which is attacking you. (if you note where he moves, it gives clues about the pit traps).

The center part of the room (everything except the 10x10 protrusions) gets blasted by these flame jets in the ceiling. You can avoid the flame jets by ducking into one of the 10x10 cubbies.

But right after the flame jets fire, a crushing-ceiling trap slams down in a randomly-determined cubby. It deals a shitload of damage.

So the dance here is that you can take the constant light flame damage by staying in the center, or you can gamble by hiding in one of the cubbies. There's a 5/6 chance it'll miss you, and a 1/6 chance it'll flatten you like a pancake.

The other complication is that each of the crushing ceiling traps has a skull mounted on the outside -- which fires a death ray at the closet adventurer. Three hits from the death ray will kill you. Each skull only has 1 hit point, but you'd have to decide if it's worth attacking because there's only a 1/6 chance (each round) of that skull being active again.

There's a trap door in the back of each cubby. Two of the cubbies have the magic torches the party is looking for, the other four cubbies have duds. A nearby tapestry is actually a clue about which cubbies have the solution. There's a brazier on the far side of the room, and if you light it with the correct torches, the exit appears. If you light it with one of the wrong torches, it explodes as a fireball centered on you.

Really insidious room! I mean, there's five different things to worry about in there - excluding the puzzle. When we finished that encounter, the players were all out of breath. feckin awesome.

not sure if that description made sense, here's a shitty diagram

(http://i.imgur.com/NDPSf.jpg)

(http://www.d20monkey.com/comics/2011-04-01-20100401.png)

I know what a real Grognard was.

What does their version refer to?

I've always known it to refer to grumbly older gamers who are attached to the style of game they first played, and think everybody playing today is a munchkin.



oh here we go------

Wictionary (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/grognard) says Someone who enjoys playing previous editions of roleplaying games when new editions of the game are available.

I can't keep up with the slang these days. Damn kids!

Quote from: Cramulus on January 10, 2012, 09:41:47 PM
I've always known it to refer to grumbly older gamers who are attached to the style of game they first played, and think everybody playing today is a munchkin.



oh here we go------

Wictionary (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/grognard) says Someone who enjoys playing previous editions of roleplaying games when new editions of the game are available.

I can't keep up with the slang these days. Damn kids!

HAH!

When I STARTED gaming, with the manilla paper books & Chainmail rules, I'll have you know that we didn't have dice.  We didn't even have those numbered chits.  We slammed our heads against the edge of the table and then counted the blood droplets.  You had to WANT your crits, back then.

And there was nothing of this sissified "saving throw" business.  Damn game's going straight to hell, I tell you!  STRAIGHT TO HELL!

Actually, everything from 2E back pretty much sucked, but was better than nothing.  The game didn't really allow anything resembling individual characters until 3.0, and we've settled on Pathfinder, just because we like the feel, and because we hate what Hasbro's done with the game from a merchandizing POV, and we don't want to give them any money.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

I TRYnot to get grabby.  But it's so shiny!

So very shiny.  O____O

Traps I make tend towards puzzle, or not an immediately immenently dangerous one. 

My favorite was this trap which was, all in one go, three encounters, a lock, PHAT LOOT, and 2 separate traps. 

(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y153/Meiintas/howdoesthepuzzlework.jpg)

This essentially was a lot of XP for not a lot of danger, except for the brown mold hanging over the lava.  You had all the time in the world to figure it out, because at the time I didn't know how to run a living dungeon as opposed to a static one.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 09:46:20 PM

Actually, everything from 2E back pretty much sucked, but was better than nothing.  The game didn't really allow anything resembling individual characters until 3.0, and we've settled on Pathfinder, just because we like the feel, and because we hate what Hasbro's done with the game from a merchandizing POV, and we don't want to give them any money.

Truth.

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 10, 2012, 10:09:27 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

I TRYnot to get grabby.  But it's so shiny!

So very shiny.  O____O

Oh, no sweat.  Just try not to get mad when Ross thinks the same way.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 11:29:16 PM

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 10, 2012, 10:09:27 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

I TRYnot to get grabby.  But it's so shiny!

So very shiny.  O____O

Oh, no sweat.  Just try not to get mad when Ross thinks the same way.

It isn't that he thinks the same way.  It's complicated and vague.

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 11, 2012, 12:04:14 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 11:29:16 PM

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 10, 2012, 10:09:27 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

I TRYnot to get grabby.  But it's so shiny!

So very shiny.  O____O

Oh, no sweat.  Just try not to get mad when Ross thinks the same way.

It isn't that he thinks the same way.  It's complicated and vague.

WHICH, of course means "It's the same thing, only not me doing it."

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 11, 2012, 12:13:57 AM

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 11, 2012, 12:04:14 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 11:29:16 PM

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 10, 2012, 10:09:27 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 10, 2012, 06:32:12 PM

Quote from: Cain on January 10, 2012, 06:28:46 PM
In addition to all those valid points, if you read the material on them for more than five seconds, it is pretty clear what kind of behaviour is expected from each one.  So you can use them to screen your players for stupidity, using the good old "kobold and goblin children" test.  Then you can never invite the ones who fail said test back to the table again.

Everyone's a winner.  Except idiots.

Actually, my acid test for who comes back to the table is "which ones make the game fun?".

Right now, I have two grabby bastards at the table, and it amuses me to no end.  They're both good players, but if I throw a decent magic item out, I make sure I have popcorn first.

I TRYnot to get grabby.  But it's so shiny!

So very shiny.  O____O

Oh, no sweat.  Just try not to get mad when Ross thinks the same way.

It isn't that he thinks the same way.  It's complicated and vague.

WHICH, of course means "It's the same thing, only not me doing it."

:crankey:  NUH UH

Heh, I've only ever played one D&D game, set in the 4e  Dark Sun setting. I am playing an Elven Druid. We hit level 8 tonight. None of the party have chosen any alignment, in fact the DM specifically avoids it. Tonight we were crawling through the dungeons of a palace of the Sorcerer Queen, and we come across this room with her fancy psionic bird on a magical tree of life in it. Earlier I had found a very expensive herb that boosted psi abilities, and the Ardent (psionic healer) who I had given it to... FEEDS THE FUCKING BIRD WITH THE VESPA WEED, after it just asked "food?"

The bird then psychically demands more, the monk steps forward to attack the bird and both him and the Ardent take a load of damage. while I'm fuming about the fact that the herb AND the bird were 1) valuable 2)I'm pissed that they didn't FREE the bird or at least consider its financial value for resale, and 3)they fed it something that if they had asked me with my 21 WIS and Nature skill up the wazoo, would have told them that it was a Bad Plan. The monk then STUPIDLY KILLS THE FUCKING BIRD, which lets out a psionic alarm which brings about 8 guys in the employ of the sorcerer queen belting down the corridor baying for our blood. To top this, tho, is the fact that the Fighter in our party has the randomly allocated "wild" psionic ability to communicate psychically. So we COULD have quite happily stolen the bird, used it as an ally and then sold it or freed it. I did wander off with a cutting of the magical tree, to see if i could make a funky potions from it once I get back to my garden.  My party is not going to hear the end of this beef from me for some time. Bastards.

Sounds like you have some Bad Players (serious idiots) in your group.  Your druid should do something about that.

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 11, 2012, 08:04:14 PM
Sounds like you have some Bad Players (serious idiots) in your group.  Your druid should do something about that.

Like eat them.

(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-xTWHDNT/0/L/i-xTWHDNT-L.jpg)

Quote from: Don Coyote on January 11, 2012, 08:07:30 PM

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 11, 2012, 08:04:14 PM
Sounds like you have some Bad Players (serious idiots) in your group.  Your druid should do something about that.

Like eat them.

Oh if the Monk does anything that stupid again I'm going to pounce on him in my six legged tiger form and hold his throat between my teeth.  :lol:  As a group we have a good team, really, and are usually quite loyal to each other because of the whole escaping slavery and death origin. Druids are incredibly rare in Dark Sun, mind, and I don't think they have quite gotten over the first time I shapeshifted. Or the fact that my Predator druid has collected some seriously odd stuff from the hostile monsters that have attacked us as stuff to build my own totem. But she has a thing about not attacking creatures that didn't start the fight. By Tooth And Claw survivor, for sure, killing to survive or hunt is fine, CHAINED BIRDIES ARE NOT.

As a group, most of our adventures are in service to people who want to fuck us over. We have done some shitty things just to survive, as befits a desert setting. We once butchered a man and his son just to steal their water in the desert.  We figured it was better than letting them die though dehydration. As a character Katza is pretty essential to helping the rest survive in the desert. Everyone in the party is kinda scared of me, except the half-giant fighter.

Yeah, you should eat their faces, so they get the point.  You have to be firm with these degenerates.

(http://www.d20monkey.com/comics/2012-01-11-20120111.png)

I love it when they draw Monte Cook and Mike Mearls






ETA:
the joke on Monte's shirt - might be too small to read - Monte writes a column called "save my game. In this comic, his shirt reads:

          Monte
[ ] saved [ ] ruined
          my game

#dnd 5E Rumors: Because the DMG2 for each system has been more popular, 5E will skip the DMG completely and start with the DMG2.



#dnd 5E Rumors: To speed character generation and minimize need for rules mastery, PHB will consist entirely of 315 pregenerated characters.


#dnd 5E Rumors: Monster groups will scale up or down for every 0.2 additional players.


#dnd 5E Rumors: After intense statistical analysis of gaming demographics, the game will expect (and run best for) one DM and 3.7 players.

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:21:38 AM
#dnd 5E Rumors: Because the DMG2 for each system has been more popular, 5E will skip the DMG completely and start with the DMG2.



#dnd 5E Rumors: To speed character generation and minimize need for rules mastery, PHB will consist entirely of 315 pregenerated characters.


#dnd 5E Rumors: Monster groups will scale up or down for every 0.2 additional players.


#dnd 5E Rumors: After intense statistical analysis of gaming demographics, the game will expect (and run best for) one DM and 3.7 players.

:lol:

My buddy that runs the gameshop (Hat), Frank the Bastard, and I will be doing a short series of podcasts on the apparent intentional suicide of WOTC, Paizo, and Kenzer & Co.

If you guys want, I'll link to them.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 13, 2012, 12:26:58 AM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:21:38 AM
#dnd 5E Rumors: Because the DMG2 for each system has been more popular, 5E will skip the DMG completely and start with the DMG2.



#dnd 5E Rumors: To speed character generation and minimize need for rules mastery, PHB will consist entirely of 315 pregenerated characters.


#dnd 5E Rumors: Monster groups will scale up or down for every 0.2 additional players.


#dnd 5E Rumors: After intense statistical analysis of gaming demographics, the game will expect (and run best for) one DM and 3.7 players.

:lol:

My buddy that runs the gameshop (Hat), Frank the Bastard, and I will be doing a short series of podcasts on the apparent intentional suicide of WOTC, Paizo, and Kenzer & Co.

If you guys want, I'll link to them.

YES!!!!

((attrib: those #dnd rumors were from TheAngryDM btw))

QuoteIf you guys want, I'll link to them.

hellllll yes

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:51:09 AM
((attrib: those #dnd rumors were from TheAngryDM btw))

QuoteIf you guys want, I'll link to them.

hellllll yes

We're getting our predictions in now so we can gloat later.

Personally, I have enough Pathfinder stuff to last me forever, so I'm good.  Also, we will be reviewing some of the recent stinkers (Pathfinder Bestiary 3, for example, which sucked more than I can really explain in text).

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 13, 2012, 12:53:18 AM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:51:09 AM
((attrib: those #dnd rumors were from TheAngryDM btw))

QuoteIf you guys want, I'll link to them.

hellllll yes

We're getting our predictions in now so we can gloat later.

Personally, I have enough Pathfinder stuff to last me forever, so I'm good.  Also, we will be reviewing some of the recent stinkers (Pathfinder Bestiary 3, for example, which sucked more than I can really explain in text).

The presence of a Spider-Man villain on the cover really doesn't bode well.

Quote from: Uncle Wallified on January 13, 2012, 04:47:26 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 13, 2012, 12:53:18 AM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:51:09 AM
((attrib: those #dnd rumors were from TheAngryDM btw))

QuoteIf you guys want, I'll link to them.

hellllll yes

We're getting our predictions in now so we can gloat later.

Personally, I have enough Pathfinder stuff to last me forever, so I'm good.  Also, we will be reviewing some of the recent stinkers (Pathfinder Bestiary 3, for example, which sucked more than I can really explain in text).

The presence of a Spider-Man villain on the cover really doesn't bode well.

What?  Who?

I predict that a truly awful computer game will be made to try and promote D&D 5E.

Obviously, this wont be released until at least a year after the rule decisions are finally made.  However, I predict it will be terrible, cliched, inconsistent in its rules and subpar in its graphics, and will do even more to turn people off the 5E than what actually happens between now and then.

Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on January 13, 2012, 04:55:23 AM

Quote from: Uncle Wallified on January 13, 2012, 04:47:26 AM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 13, 2012, 12:53:18 AM

Quote from: Cramulus on January 13, 2012, 12:51:09 AM
((attrib: those #dnd rumors were from TheAngryDM btw))

QuoteIf you guys want, I'll link to them.

hellllll yes

We're getting our predictions in now so we can gloat later.

Personally, I have enough Pathfinder stuff to last me forever, so I'm good.  Also, we will be reviewing some of the recent stinkers (Pathfinder Bestiary 3, for example, which sucked more than I can really explain in text).

The presence of a Spider-Man villain on the cover really doesn't bode well.

What?  Who?

Check it out:
(http://paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1120_500.jpeg)

(http://dailypop.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/rhino.jpg)
Coincidence? :fnord:

Holyshit, are those kappa ninja turtles? And the dude from MediEvil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediEvil)?


:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

Quote from: Cain on January 13, 2012, 06:43:59 AM
I predict that a truly awful computer game will be made to try and promote D&D 5E.

Probably true! But luckily, WotC has jettisoned Atari, which couldn't seem to do anything good with the license. I wonder who they'll get next?

Knowing WOTC, they'll probably use The Game Company or someone else known for their incompete, shoddy, glitchy and cheap exercises in money making and blatant lying to customers.

Quote from: Telarus on January 13, 2012, 10:34:36 AM
Holyshit, are those kappa ninja turtles? And the dude from MediEvil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediEvil)?


:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:

Kappa and a Grave knight, I think, yes. 

But :lol: funny pictures.

A grave knight?



Why so serious?

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 13, 2012, 07:25:14 PM
A grave knight?



Why so serious?

You made me giggle like a loon.  :lol:

Quote from: Uncle Wallified on January 13, 2012, 08:05:34 AM

Check it out:
(http://paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1120_500.jpeg)

(http://dailypop.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/rhino.jpg)
Coincidence? :fnord:

It's a cyclops!  So yes, Coincidence.

Fuck. Soo funny. Dieing.

Dungeon Bastard: Edition Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRZ1CYYIsCg

Quote from: Telarus on January 18, 2012, 06:12:24 AM
Fuck. Soo funny. Dieing.

Dungeon Bastard: Edition Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRZ1CYYIsCg

:lulz:

Quote from: Telarus on January 18, 2012, 06:12:24 AM
Fuck. Soo funny. Dieing.

Dungeon Bastard: Edition Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRZ1CYYIsCg

that fucking ruled!

BUMP because WOTC is working on a new edition. :lulz:

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 08:10:59 PM
BUMP because WOTC is working on a new edition. :lulz:

WHAT?

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 06, 2012, 09:53:21 PM

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 08:10:59 PM
BUMP because WOTC is working on a new edition. :lulz:

WHAT?

http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75882/135766/DD_Next_General_Discussion
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnDNext.aspx

I've got a copy of the playtest rules, and it looks like really old DnD with new DnD conceits in it, and not much in the way of 4eisms......so far.

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 09:59:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 06, 2012, 09:53:21 PM

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 08:10:59 PM
BUMP because WOTC is working on a new edition. :lulz:

WHAT?

http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75882/135766/DD_Next_General_Discussion
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnDNext.aspx

I've got a copy of the playtest rules, and it looks like really old DnD with new DnD conceits in it, and not much in the way of 4eisms......so far.

Fuck 'em anyway.  Hasbro gets none of my money.

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 06, 2012, 10:03:52 PM

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 09:59:57 PM

Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 06, 2012, 09:53:21 PM

Quote from: American Jackal on October 06, 2012, 08:10:59 PM
BUMP because WOTC is working on a new edition. :lulz:

WHAT?

http://community.wizards.com/go/forum/view/75882/135766/DD_Next_General_Discussion
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/DnDNext.aspx

I've got a copy of the playtest rules, and it looks like really old DnD with new DnD conceits in it, and not much in the way of 4eisms......so far.

Fuck 'em anyway.  Hasbro gets none of my money.

My feelings exactly.

1. fuck tiny ass splats that cost $35
2. fuck not being able to play what I wanted out of the box in 4e and having to use 3 different books for that
3. fuck everyone being a wizard of some kind.

I abandoned WotC's products in disgust when 4e came out. Every good thing the Hasboro corporation touches eventually turns to shit

for what it's worth, the D&D Next rules kick ass

still need some stuff ironed out, but I love the direction they went.

Quote from: Cramulus on November 14, 2013, 03:53:05 PM
for what it's worth, the D&D Next rules kick ass

still need some stuff ironed out, but I love the direction they went.

Can't be worse than 4th ed <--- personal preference, of course.

Still, I am a grognard, and I shall stick with Pathfinder.

4e convinced me to give GURPS a chance.

you guys tempt me to write out my opinions of 4th ed... but then I realize we already did that earlier ITT, and it's generally a waste of time trying to convince people on the net that your favorite RPG isn't trash.

I tried GURPS for the first time this summer... LOVED the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle RPG. Aside from that, didn't like the system much. Probably wouldn't play it again unless we revisit TNMT. I didn't realize tabletop combat could actually move slower than 4th edition.  :p

Anybody actually tried the D&D Next rules? Would be curious to hear people's reactions. We played with it a bunch a few months ago at a variety of levels and everybody in my group seemed pretty satisfied. I will be happy if they can hold back from repeating their 3rd edition mistakes.

Quote from: Cramulus on November 14, 2013, 05:48:39 PM
you guys tempt me to write out my opinions of 4th ed... but then I realize we already did that earlier ITT, and it's generally a waste of time trying to convince people on the net that your favorite RPG isn't trash.

I have - since that time - rethought my position.  I don't think it's trash, I just don't like it personally.

QuoteI tried GURPS for the first time this summer... LOVED the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle RPG. Aside from that, didn't like the system much. Probably wouldn't play it again unless we revisit TNMT. I didn't realize tabletop combat could actually move slower than 4th edition.  :p

GURPS is best done without figs, etc.  And it is a lot of clunk.

QuoteAnybody actually tried the D&D Next rules? Would be curious to hear people's reactions. We played with it a bunch a few months ago at a variety of levels and everybody in my group seemed pretty satisfied. I will be happy if they can hold back from repeating their 3rd edition mistakes.

I'm not going to for 3 reasons:

1.  I have too much invested in Pathfinder (if they ever are so foolish as to launch a 2nd ed, I already have enough gaming material to last me about 300 years, and I'll just stop buying new stuff).

2.  Pathfinder does everything I need it to do.  The game system is actually irrelevant to the quality of a campaign, if you think about it.  I just want a system that I am comfortable with, so I can concentrate on the campaign, rather than worrying about learning a new ruleset.

3.  My players would hang me higher than Haman.

Quote from: Cramulus on November 14, 2013, 03:53:05 PM
for what it's worth, the D&D Next rules kick ass

still need some stuff ironed out, but I love the direction they went.

HWiGS really wanted in on that, but they were giving him the run-around and all kinds of bullshit, then his car went up and the stuff he needed was inside, and he couldn't be part of it anymore.  He probably won't be selling much of it when it really hits the street next year, because two of his competitors have already got beta groups and people know to go there instead. 

Quote from: Cramulus on November 14, 2013, 05:48:39 PM
you guys tempt me to write out my opinions of 4th ed... but then I realize we already did that earlier ITT, and it's generally a waste of time trying to convince people on the net that your favorite RPG isn't trash.

I tried GURPS for the first time this summer... LOVED the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle RPG. Aside from that, didn't like the system much. Probably wouldn't play it again unless we revisit TNMT. I didn't realize tabletop combat could actually move slower than 4th edition.  :p

Anybody actually tried the D&D Next rules? Would be curious to hear people's reactions. We played with it a bunch a few months ago at a variety of levels and everybody in my group seemed pretty satisfied. I will be happy if they can hold back from repeating their 3rd edition mistakes.

I'm not opposed to 5e, but I will not be giving WotC my money for a game product that as as I have seen does nothing new or interesting enough to warrant supporting WotC and Hasbro. I'm much more inclined to give them my money in exchange for reprints of modules and supplements for older editions. But more importantly I'd rather my gaming dollars go to support smaller companies that are producing much more interesting things, or at least things I find much more interesting.

And D&D 5th Edition is a go.

First product available mid-July.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/starterset

Quote from: PopeTom on May 19, 2014, 07:13:37 PM
And D&D 5th Edition is a go.

First product available mid-July.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/starterset

6th edition betas in mid-August.   :lulz:

I'm psyched. Been loving 4e, but it's getting a bit threadbare. And I can't go back to 3.5/pathfinder.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd Pathfinder 2.0 - which they SWORE would never happen - hits next month.  It is different enough that the two full size bookshelves of Pathfinder I have are not compatible.

I have some 1.0 stuff to pick up at the game store, and then Paizo never gets another dime out of me.  I have enough stuff forever, anyway.

Besides, we're kind of getting into Savage Worlds.  It also has an edition creep issue, but so what?  It's maybe two books, total, ever.

I actually read the 5E players handbook for the first time the other week and it seemed alright.

Until I saw Drow in it as a subrace option.

(https://i.imgur.com/3V2PuDB.png)

Quote from: Cain on August 25, 2018, 10:20:47 PM
I actually read the 5E players handbook for the first time the other week and it seemed alright.

Until I saw Drow in it as a subrace option.

(https://i.imgur.com/3V2PuDB.png)

We played through the Elemental Evil thing and it was okay, mechanics-wise.  Beer & pretzels, but okay.

That being said, the module expects you - on no clues whatsoever - to do the top level of each of the temples, in order, then go back and do the second levels, then the third, etc.  We got surprisingly far, and then got TPK'd by mooks in an area that was intended to be run 4 levels higher than we were.

Yeah one thing I have heard from DMs is that the devs themselves haven't been at all clear on their vision of campaign design and how to actually go about doing things.  More campaign books would probably help.

Their campaign books are all over the place--very different styles in each one. Like I hear Out of the Abyss is more of a sandbox campaign, where PCs can wander all over the map with little guidance. Whereas Tyranny of Dragons is much more linear. We played through Curse of Strahd -- probably the best pre-packaged campaign I've ever played, owing in part to an awesome group who really got into the story.

When we were running the old playtests, I was really struck by how old 1970s D&D design didn't tell you how to run your game, it mainly just gave the DM tools to run their own story. Like, Caves of Chaos has no inherent story, it's just a sprawling map with different monster factions. The DM has to figure out how the factions relate to each other, and what stories could take place in this setting.

Personally, I found that super empowering. Like, when you run most pre-printed modules, you're just following the instructions. If the players had fun, it was a good module. But with Caves of Chaos, I got to do some authoring. When the players had a good time, I felt some ownership of it, like my ideas are being celebrated too.

And a lot of the campaign books seem like they follow this format... they don't tell you how to run your game. They give you a framework and you figure out how to implement it for your group. When I hear other people talk about Curse of Strahd, their experience is totally different. It was a good module, but our DM made it great.

The flipside of the coin is that it also means that the DM has the responsibilty to make the module work for your group. During Curse of Strahd, there's a lot of places where our DM tossed the pre-written suggestions and came up with his own scenario. It took more prep than a lot of pre-written mods I've seen.

Yeah, for sure, that kind of freedom can be pretty empowering.  I'm more of a fan of open-ended campaigns myself.

I do think it makes things a bit trickier for new DMs and those getting used to the new system, however.  Something that explains how the 5E developers were thinking and what they were looking at when they came up with the current rules can give people a starting point to say "oh, that's why assume you will go into an encounter fully healed" (for example, though that one's pretty obvious).  And from that you can work at tweaking your own campaigns and encounters, because you see the assumptions that underpin the system more.

But I'm not a DM, so I could just be talking out of my arse here.

The nice thing about pathfinder 1 is that it's open source, so while Paizo may not be supporting it any longer anyone else is welcome to do so.

I really enjoyed GURPS with figs withHowl and his gaming crew. (Spotted his comment about it being best without them)

Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 25, 2018, 03:36:14 AM
Annnnnnnnnnnnnnd Pathfinder 2.0 - which they SWORE would never happen - hits next month.  It is different enough that the two full size bookshelves of Pathfinder I have are not compatible.

In thst case screw them.

I've never played Pathfinder, but I understand it to be rooted in D&D 3.5

What are the new bells & whistles in the new pathfinder? How does it compare to D&D 5?

Quote from: Cramulus on September 04, 2018, 05:52:40 PM
I've never played Pathfinder, but I understand it to be rooted in D&D 3.5

What are the new bells & whistles in the new pathfinder? How does it compare to D&D 5?

It doesn't.  It's Pathfinder 1 with all the complexity stripped out to add new and different complexity.

Also. It's ugly as fuck.

So, I walked into Barnes & Nobel bookstore last weekend, and the gaming section contained a bunch of paperbacks for Pathfinder 1E, a single book for Pathfinder 2E, and NO D&D at all.  Not one book, in any edition. Prior to 5th, there was a metric shit ton of material, then 5th started out okay, but strangled themselves with gigantic hardcover adventures.

I am thinking the original franchise should be declared dead.  Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Descent into Avernus should have been released a month or two ago. But they are taking a very relaxed publishing schedule, yeah.

Quote from: Doktor Howl on November 01, 2019, 07:57:37 PM
So, I walked into Barnes & Nobel bookstore last weekend, and the gaming section contained a bunch of paperbacks for Pathfinder 1E, a single book for Pathfinder 2E, and NO D&D at all.  Not one book, in any edition. Prior to 5th, there was a metric shit ton of material, then 5th started out okay, but strangled themselves with gigantic hardcover adventures.

I am thinking the original franchise should be declared dead.  Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Dead? it's still doing better than it ever has.

Barnes and Nobel is hit or miss on carrying RPG stuff, it seems kinda regional I think.

Mass market brick and mortar stores are the only true metric of success

Quote from: Don Coyote on November 02, 2019, 04:50:56 PM
Mass market brick and mortar stores are the only true metric of success

Yes.  Your modern world is made of dildos and fail.

IT'S STILL 1979 HERE.

It's still 1979 everywhere, we just added a bunch of unnecessary garbage to it.

Proof: the first Alien movie is still the best one. 50s chic is still a fucking thing somehow. Despite having cellphones, you still can't get a hold of anyone unless they're home. Russia is still our enemy and still causing trouble in the Middle East.

Really, the main difference is that everything is worse, faster and more idiotic.

I'm pretty surprised D&D books were gone. I can only assume tehy were sold out--the one by our place has a good balance of both. But, if sold out, it means they paid Barnes and Noble prices...which...sorry, fucker.

FUNKO POPS have V O R E D so much "nerd/geek" space in retailers.

If I go into another comic book or gaming store and get greeted with a wall of funko pops I might start shitting right then and there, on the carpet

I had to google that.

My life is not improved.

How the fuck did you have to Google Funko Pops, do they not have the goddamn things in the exclusion zone???

Hot damn Tucson is suddenly sounding REAL GOOD

Yes I get spaghettified by the tremendous gravitational gradient, get melted by the sun  into flesh-goo like a vampire, die of thirst due to the nanorobotic plague scavenging all my body's water, and finally get turned into road-jerky by the traffic curse, but if I make it mostly intact to the comic book store there's not literally HALF THE STORE devoted to FUCKING funko pops

If I buy a Funko Pop, do I at least get a permanent stat or skill increase?

Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2019, 10:58:41 AM
If I buy a Funko Pop, do I at least get a permanent stat or skill increase?

You get a 5 point penalty to Charisma as long as you're holding it.  Certain NPCs may become hostile.

Quote from: nullified on November 04, 2019, 07:18:12 AM
How the fuck did you have to Google Funko Pops, do they not have the goddamn things in the exclusion zone???

Hot damn Tucson is suddenly sounding REAL GOOD

Yes I get spaghettified by the tremendous gravitational gradient, get melted by the sun  into flesh-goo like a vampire, die of thirst due to the nanorobotic plague scavenging all my body's water, and finally get turned into road-jerky by the traffic curse, but if I make it mostly intact to the comic book store there's not literally HALF THE STORE devoted to FUCKING funko pops

Mama Tucson loves us.

Having gone and looked it up, D&D is up 30% in sales this year.

Quote from: nullified on November 04, 2019, 07:18:12 AM
How the fuck did you have to Google Funko Pops, do they not have the goddamn things in the exclusion zone???

Hot damn Tucson is suddenly sounding REAL GOOD

Yes I get spaghettified by the tremendous gravitational gradient, get melted by the sun  into flesh-goo like a vampire, die of thirst due to the nanorobotic plague scavenging all my body's water, and finally get turned into road-jerky by the traffic curse, but if I make it mostly intact to the comic book store there's not literally HALF THE STORE devoted to FUCKING funko pops

When I went to comic book stores in Tucson they were indeed half full of funko pops...

Quote from: Pergamos on November 05, 2019, 07:47:36 PM

Quote from: nullified on November 04, 2019, 07:18:12 AM
How the fuck did you have to Google Funko Pops, do they not have the goddamn things in the exclusion zone???

Hot damn Tucson is suddenly sounding REAL GOOD

Yes I get spaghettified by the tremendous gravitational gradient, get melted by the sun  into flesh-goo like a vampire, die of thirst due to the nanorobotic plague scavenging all my body's water, and finally get turned into road-jerky by the traffic curse, but if I make it mostly intact to the comic book store there's not literally HALF THE STORE devoted to FUCKING funko pops

When I went to comic book stores in Tucson they were indeed half full of funko pops...

We're talking about game shops.  Comic shops are an entirely different thing, and seem to be full of Utah and failure.

There's no distinction between the two in most of the US, except the comics are in the back or upstairs or otherwise kept in quarantine.

I just looked up what a "funko pop" was. I've spotted them before. I think they should include an armed complimentary poison needle trap.

I think some of them are fun.



I have two Groots, a Porg, and a Black Philip.

Quote from: LMNO on November 11, 2019, 06:26:53 PM
I think some of them are fun.



I have two Groots, a Porg, and a Black Philip.

I'm having a hard time finding one that tops Bob Ross:

(https://i.imgur.com/opY9c09.jpg)

Quote from: Bu☆ns on November 11, 2019, 09:20:21 PM

Quote from: LMNO on November 11, 2019, 06:26:53 PM
I think some of them are fun.



I have two Groots, a Porg, and a Black Philip.

I'm having a hard time finding one that tops Bob Ross:

(https://i.imgur.com/opY9c09.jpg)

Needs Hunter Thompson.

Where is your god now?

Holy shit

Quote from: LMNO on November 12, 2019, 01:04:20 PM
Where is your god now?

In a package, apparently.   :lulz: