Well if it didn't cause cancer before..., ...it does now. Options

[knasser]

People may have noticed that I've been a little absent from Dumpshock for some months now. Basically, I've been working my socks off and there's been a big gaming hiatus in my life. But I intended to come back to RP'ing and I had in mind a change of pace, going back to some high fantasy. That coincided with a certain other game coming out in a new edition so I'm afraid I took a look. It was the game, after all, that started me off in RPGs when I was just an odd little immigrant kid trying to make friends.

Bad. Or at least critically flawed. I guess the game was always an unrealistic and rather simplistic game, but I ran a pretty atmospheric campaign once, despite that. The new system has gutted itself of what shreds of believability and internal consistency it possessed, however. I will say that they've produced what looks like a very fun and fast paced small scale fantasy battle game. But I've seen enough elements of the new system now that set themselves against role-playing to believe that it would take significant effort to immerse yourself in a game in any character sense.

Why am I posting this here on Dumpshock? I don't know - just that I've hung out here a lot over the past year or so and want to share what I'm thinking with my friends. And because I think my distaste for that new edition is partly a result of having been spoilt by Shadowrun. The elegance of Shadowrun 4th vs. The Other Game 4th, is marked. SR4 compares favourably in terms of the Simplicity for Gain ratio of the rules. But more than this, the difference in flexibility and fine detail that the systems are capable of is staggering - especially when you consider page counts. The designers of Shadowrun are to be commended (so I'm commending them) for such a well put together and balanced system. Reading through the WotC forums, is like running through a ghetto of shit-flinging monkeys. Dumpshock feels like sitting quietly in a holy place after visiting there. One of the many dogmas in that place is a set of rules doesn't stop you role-playing if you want to. I find that not to be the case. The system of that Other Game actively hinders immersion in the world through character abilities that have no internal justification but only their coolness from a game-play angle; and also through it's active forbidding of realistic actions to preserve its abstract nature. Conversely, the Shadowrun rules seem to gently encourage role-playing through their fine granularity. And it's no more complicated to learn (imo).

I guess I wanted to say that I'm impressed with SR4. That despite my taste for occasional world saving, lich-battling valour, the latest serving of TOG looks like it'll cause some severe after-effects, compared to the nutritious soy of SR. I now know what sort of cancer TOG causes - bowel. If you want a slick miniatures game it looks good, but it's not much more than that, imo. If I could work out how to make mundanes balanced with the magic users without automatic weapons, I'd seriously contemplate running a fantasy game using the SR4 system.

So there you have it people. My thirst for adventure has been quenched, I have learnt my lesson and come back to where the Ex-Ex rounds might kill your PC, but at least the player wont be harmed.

There be dragons, chummers.

Khadim.

[Nigel]

I need to know one thing, that can be answered in PM if you really don't want to mention it out loud - what is The Other Game? I've seen it around quite a bit, and it seems like TSR's creation, later sold to WotC. Am I correct?

If so, I agree on all points. Especially the forums.

[Stahlseele]

that other game? only other 4th i am aware of might be DnD . .
But That Other Game usually is supposed to mean

[ Spoiler ]

Fatal

aka the game that shall not be named

[FrankTrollman]

I need to know one thing, that can be answered in PM if you really don't want to mention it out loud - what is The Other Game? I've seen it around quite a bit, and it seems like TSR's creation, later sold to WotC. Am I correct?

If so, I agree on all points. Especially the forums.

TOG is what we call Dungeons & Dragons here. 4th edition is probably going to be particularly reviled by this crowd because human fighters (NPC) and human fighters (PC) aren't even vaguely recognizable as similar creatures. Shadowrun players get into arguments quite frequently about whether or not it is OK for NPC mobs (and I mean that in the actual sense of "groups," not the MMO sense of "opponent") to use group Edge rather than having individual Edge like a Player Character or Named NPC.

Certainly 4e makes my head explode. While I can grudgingly be made to accept different rules and stat lines for NPC fighters vs. PC fighters; there are a number of design choices of 4e that I cannot reconcile myself with.

-Frank

[Faelan]

Have not gotten it yet, and will reserve final judgment until I have read the whole. Of course from what I have seen they are stepping in a big steaming pile of dog doo. If you want a good fantasy game, quick, and easy to play yet detailed try the new Runequest by Mongoose Publishing, or the soon to be released Chaosium Basic Rolpeplaying. Hell bust out Earthdawn, but whatever you do avoid the video game in question.

[JeffSz]

A really great fantasy RPG if you like the undead as your main enemy is All Flesh Must Be Eaten with the Dungeons and Zombies book. Just pick up the free Witchcraft PDF from the Eden website, or buy Armageddon, and you've got Magic in your fantasy world.

Also, Ars Magica looks really good, but I haven't played it yet.

I wouldn't touch D&D 4e with a 39.5 foot pole.

[Particle_Beam]

Seeing as this topic which is discussing about D&D 4th edition has nothing to do with Shadowrun, I would suggest that the moderators should place it somewhere else.

[hyzmarca]

I am very much of the opinion that the best D&D is the original. You know, the one where Elf, Drawf, and Halfling are Classes. Particularly the blue book with the bit at the end about how to create sentient Swords, which, being the only weapon creation rules available, result in a campaign with a rather large glut of sentient swords.

[fistandantilus4....]

It's connected, but as the focus is primarily on D&D 4th, this is being shuffled to General Gaming.

[knasser]

I'm pretty sure that the "blue book" was the Expert set of D&D Basic. And yes, I remember putting sentient swords in the game.

Yep - symmetry between PCs and NPCs is now broken. NPCs follow monster rules or are supposed to. That's another difference to Shadowrun and it's interesting to question whether this also contributes to a feeling of game over-riding immersion. On reflection, I think you have a very good point that I hadn't thought of. Shadowrun would feel significantly different if PCs had their own special rules. It would really make the game feel more hero-centric. I hadn't considered that.

Something else that is resulting in much fecal-projection over there is the idea that the game is no longer playable without miniatures. Some are saying that it is, but from what I've seen of the new rules, miniatures are pretty much compulsory. That's interesting because I've always run games without. Of course I break out pads of paper and sketch out maps, lots of x's marking security guards (a convenient symbol because they are easily transformed into little crucifix headstone markers). But I keep things running in a narrative fashion and I think using miniatures would make me feel constrained. The best combat ever took place half in a street below and half on the side of a tower block above where the gecko-gloved hunters (PCs) got into a running gun-fight with a wall-climbing Beast spirit. A three level warehouse shoot-out was probably one my other most ambitious combat settings and I'm not sure I wouldn't have toned down both of those encounters if I was using miniatures. I think Shadowrun feels a lot less constrained and I hadn't realised how much I appreciated that until I was going through the new rules for TOG.

[Aaron]

The blue box was Expert and the red box was Basic. I'm looking at copies of them right now.

Some friends and I will be playing through the Carcinogen 4th Ed. introductory adventure, "The Keep on the Shadowfell," over the next couple of months to see what it's like. If anybody's interested, I'd be happy to post my thoughts on the game as a player and link our DM's thoughts (as I am certain he will be posting some) here.

[Muspellsheimr]

I, even still, occasionally play That Other Game, because I like to play in a pure Fantasy setting sometimes. As such, once it is released in less than a week, I will be taking a thorough look at 4th edition, but suspect I will only be adapting some of the changes to the previous edition.

From what I have gathered on it so far, it has the advantage of far superior world building, but in addition to the primary problems of earlier editions (d20, class/level/hitpoints), it has the major mechanical failure of being too simple.

So, basically, d20 gives you cancer, and 4th still has potential to be better, but most likely, will be the greatest health-hazard of them all.

If I could work out how to make mundanes balanced with the magic users without automatic weapons, I'd seriously contemplate running a fantasy game using the SR4 system.

I have been trying to solve this problem for quite some time now, and so far only have half-assed solutions, as follows:
Everyone is Awakened: This removes the Magical vs. Mundane balance issues, but is incompatible with a mid/low-magic setting.
Every PC is Awakened: This removes the Magical vs. Mundane balance issues where it is most prominent, but has the problem of the PC's being far superior to any mundane NPC, causing potential difficulties developing a challenge outside of hack-n-slash monster hunt adventuring.
Magicians are the only Awakened: This requires you to provide a way for mundane characters to obtain Adept-like abilities, most likely a Karma cost based on the PP cost of the Adept Power in question. Some obviously magical abilities, such as Elemental Attack, would be unavailable. Magicians remain the same.

The major difficulty I have had is, if you want to balance the Magical vs. Mundane, Adepts are a problem for a few reasons:
If a mundane ability has roughly the same cost as an Adept power, the Adepts are superior simply because of a greater variety.
If a mundane ability is cheaper than the an Adept power, the Adept will select the mundane equivalent instead.
If a mundane ability is more expensive than an Adept power, balance issues are obvious.

If you can come up with a good reason why an Adept would be unable to learn a mundane technique (I cannot see any), then you could potentially balance the two in the same low-tech world. If you do, be sure to let me know what it is.

[Cantankerous]

I, even still, occasionally play That Other Game, because I like to play in a pure Fantasy setting sometimes. As such, once it is released in less than a week, I will be taking a thorough look at 4th edition, but suspect I will only be adapting some of the changes to the previous edition.

From what I have gathered on it so far, it has the advantage of far superior world building, but in addition to the primary problems of earlier editions (d20, class/level/hitpoints), it has the major mechanical failure of being too simple.

So, basically, d20 gives you cancer, and 4th still has potential to be better, but most likely, will be the greatest health-hazard of them all.

I have been trying to solve this problem for quite some time now, and so far only have half-assed solutions, as follows:
Everyone is Awakened: This removes the Magical vs. Mundane balance issues, but is incompatible with a mid/low-magic setting.
Every PC is Awakened: This removes the Magical vs. Mundane balance issues where it is most prominent, but has the problem of the PC's being far superior to any mundane NPC, causing potential difficulties developing a challenge outside of hack-n-slash monster hunt adventuring.
Magicians are the only Awakened: This requires you to provide a way for mundane characters to obtain Adept-like abilities, most likely a Karma cost based on the PP cost of the Adept Power in question. Some obviously magical abilities, such as Elemental Attack, would be unavailable. Magicians remain the same.

The major difficulty I have had is, if you want to balance the Magical vs. Mundane, Adepts are a problem for a few reasons:
If a mundane ability has roughly the same cost as an Adept power, the Adepts are superior simply because of a greater variety.
If a mundane ability is cheaper than the an Adept power, the Adept will select the mundane equivalent instead.
If a mundane ability is more expensive than an Adept power, balance issues are obvious.

If you can come up with a good reason why an Adept would be unable to learn a mundane technique (I cannot see any), then you could potentially balance the two in the same low-tech world. If you do, be sure to let me know what it is.

There are other balancing methods to keep magic from runaway status. The first is the simplest...active magic is RARE and the people who use it are distrusted and persecuted. Heavily persecuted, or have social or political status enough to keep from being persecuted. This keeps magic use very subtle and/or low key. The only problem with magic in a non-technological society is that the balnces have to be the mob. Robert E: Howard's Hyborian Age is a perfect example.

The other half of the equation deals with Conjuration. Again, the mob is part of the solution, but here it is only part. The other part is making dealing with these beings inherently dangerous. VERY dangerous. Keeping control should be much more strenuous than in Shadowrun as well, but with that taken care of, you're pretty much set.


Isshia

[knasser]

The blue box was Expert and the red box was Basic. I'm looking at copies of them right now.

Ah, I said the blue box was the Expert set of the basic series, where I meant "basic" as opposed to Advanced Dungeons and Dragons. I liked the blue box set because suddenly you could have adventures above ground. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

Some friends and I will be playing through the Carcinogen 4th Ed. introductory adventure, "The Keep on the Shadowfell," over the next couple of months to see what it's like. If anybody's interested, I'd be happy to post my thoughts on the game as a player and link our DM's thoughts (as I am certain he will be posting some) here.

I would be curious as to how it appeared to Shadowrun players. You could post in this thread as it's here?

@Muspellsheimr: Your other option for balancing the mundanes is to reduce magic's power, rather than increase the mundanes. The best way would probably be to increase drain, either by adding a set figure to all the drain codes or introducing some random element. This would bring magicians back into some similar "spell points" like style of play as they exhaust themselves through magic, requiring rest. But it doesn't alter the power of individual magic radically, so they still get their glory. I'm not sure it would play particularly well though as in a traditional TOG style adventure of Little Fight-->Little Fight-->Boss Fight the magician will play as Throws a Rock-->Throws a Rock-->Kills the Big Villain with a single spell.

[Dumori]

The more I hear about the 4th e Of D&D the more it become far form what got me into RPGs. I'm 16 and jumped into 3.5 2years ago but 4th just seams to fall flat lack the "magic" the way you could add that PC idea you like into game when you GM to play test it and the few other little thing that 4th would loses even the GM running a NPC bit like your to show you how to make the most of it if your starting out in that class and not playing very well. The differences from D&D in the red box i got it for free last year are not to big and to me just look like adding more ways to play and expanding the classes. But form what i know of the new ed it sound nothing like the two other versions I own.

I left classed based games now as the cramp my odd and inventive ideas for PCs and NPCs on a side note the 40k roleplay game is a good mix of class and not class in a way that can make the game very open as you can easy make new classes or what there called in the book. Point based RPGs are more balanced and allow for more unique PC due to who many options you have and how if things change in the group you can fill the role with a bit of luck.

[Zombayz]

4th ed DnD is a tremendous faliure. Where classes use to have oringinality and logic behind them, now it's cool for the sake of cool. And For the sake of Odin's hairy balls, WHY DID YOU HAVE TO RUIN THE GAME? The only thing that truly remained the same is the fact that it's d20. And even that's gone to hell. Plus, 30hp on a level 1 character is bullshit. I like my low level combat to be gritty as fuck. Now a friggin wizard, who has infinite magic missiles per day, has 24 hp, and probably has some spontaneus casting can go through kill 200+ orc fighters(NPC orc fighters, for that matter, who are totally diffferent from PC orc fighters), as long as he has concentration, a damn horse and some cross class ride. And jus to top it off: paying for errata. Yeah, I'm sorry, I didn't write something clearly or got a pile of typos, and I'm gonna charge you to see the corrections of my fuckups.

Thank you WotC, for turning the game that got me into RPGs, my religion (Asatru), and actually gave me something to think about, into a motherfuckin episode of Naruto.




Fake Edit: We now know why Gygax died. He saw the early bit of this bullshit.

[Aaron]

But Carcinogen 4e does have classes. Three of them: Tank, DPS, and Buffer.

At least, that's what I've gleaned from what I've seen so far. More detailed report in a week or three.

[Larme]

The one thing I really can't reconcile is how they've added tanking to DnD. In real life, buff people don't have special abilities that make the enemies attack them. 3rd ed handled it well by using attacks of opportunity - you could attack the wizard, but the fighter would swat you as you passed him, and then the fighter would turn around and flank you while you attacked the soft targets. The tactics were there, they didn't need to replace what they already had with MMO style garbage.

On the other hand, I listened to the Penny Arcade webcast of them playing 4th ed, and it still sounds like a game of D&D. In fact, it sounds just slightly more fun than a game of D&D... Yes, things are simpler. But is complexity what actually made D&D the game it was? The less complex it is, the worse it is? Then I guess 4th ed Shadowrun is a worse game than 3rd ed too, despite being more balanced and streamlined and faster.

The fact is, no matter what you do to the system, it's the same game. If the system is fun, who cares how much it resembles the old system? The point of an RPG is the setting, and DnD has many to choose from. The setting makes the game, the system can only break it. Change the system, keep the setting, and you have the same game. Unless of course the system actually changes the setting by, say, making certain character classes too crappy to play, effectively wiping them from the world. But I digress. People are not complaining about substantive game elements, they're complaining that it will be faster and easier and require less grunt work to create a character and go through combat. I don't get it. It's not the same system, but until you actually play it, you can't tell me if it's the same game or not. And until you actually play it, you can't tell me if it's a fun game or not.

[Cain]

Change the system, keep the setting, and you have the same game.

I'm sorry, but that's not the case.

Try converting Shadowrun to d20, and see if it's the same game. You might get passable results with HERO or GURPS; but it still wouldn't be the same thing. Wushu is a wonderful universal system that I love dearly, but if I tried converting Shadowrun into it (easier than you might think), it would not feel the same. Heck, just try using the next closest thing-- Rifts-- and you'll still be playing a totally different game.

[Larme]

Feeling different is not the same as truly being different. But really, does difference matter if it's a fun game? We were pissed when the Xbox game was nothing like real Shadowrun, but did it really matter? It fell short of our expectations, but that's not what made the game bad. In fact, I hear the game was pretty good, despite having the name Shadowrun and not having much to do with Shadowrun. The same might be true for DnD 4e. It has the name D&D, and it might not be the same game, but it still might be worth playing. And like I say, listening to people playing it, it sure as hell sounds like a game of D&D.

[Muspellsheimr]

@Muspellsheimr: Your other option for balancing the mundanes is to reduce magic's power, rather than increase the mundanes. The best way would probably be to increase drain, either by adding a set figure to all the drain codes or introducing some random element. This would bring magicians back into some similar "spell points" like style of play as they exhaust themselves through magic, requiring rest. But it doesn't alter the power of individual magic radically, so they still get their glory. I'm not sure it would play particularly well though as in a traditional TOG style adventure of Little Fight-->Little Fight-->Boss Fight the magician will play as Throws a Rock-->Throws a Rock-->Kills the Big Villain with a single spell.

This affects almost solely Magician's, while Adepts are the primary concern. Regardless, although it could be effective, just talking to the players about your concerns would likely have much the same result. It would reduce the frequency of high-force spells, but would not actually limit their power.

Another option that I have gone over and immediately dismissed is increasing the Build Point cost of magical abilities. The reasons why this would not work is it discourages players from playing magically active characters, and those that do are (nearly) required to heavily specialize to be of use.

If you are still concerned about Magician's being to powerful, another option you could use, instead of or in addition to increasing Drain, would be to make the maximum Force of a spell the Magician's Magic, with the Drain being physical if it exceeds half their attribute, &/or change (F/2) to (F).

Once again, though, my primary stopping point is Adepts, and none of the above solutions address them.

[FrankTrollman]

Feeling different is not the same as truly being different. But really, does difference matter if it's a fun game? We were pissed when the Xbox game was nothing like real Shadowrun, but did it really matter? It fell short of our expectations, but that's not what made the game bad. In fact, I hear the game was pretty good, despite having the name Shadowrun and not having much to do with Shadowrun. The same might be true for DnD 4e. It has the name D&D, and it might not be the same game, but it still might be worth playing. And like I say, listening to people playing it, it sure as hell sounds like a game of D&D.

Most of the fun of D&D, or any RPG is the role playing aspect. The interpersonal relationships, the quest, the jokes, the table camaraderie. 4th edition is no different there from any other version. And with a fun group of people who are all on-task because they want to be there, you can have a rollicking good time. With D&D 4th edition or any game system.

4th edition differs not really in how much a Fighter can accomplish, but in how little anyone can accomplish. A 29th level Wizard casts Meteor Swarm (once per day) and he rolls to hit to do 8d6 + Int Mod + Orb Bonus against every enemy in an area 5 blast. Seriously, it's like 3 hits from a 1st level character with their basic attack at 29th level with your ultimate once-per-day. The "Utility" abilities that people get are actually just combat powers that don't involve attacking enemies directly. You don't get any world affecting abilities. The moment you step off the battle map, you're basically just playing Magical Teaparty. There aren't really any rules for whether and how Eladrin can teleport around their homes during downtime because the rules are literally only supposed to handle combat between PCs and NPCs.

Magical Teaparty is a fun game. Münchhausen is a great "system." But having that be the rules for D&D every time you aren't actively fighting enemies is basically insulting. The Shadowrun playing crowd threw fits when SR4 abstracted Build/Repair modifiers, do you think that we would accept a system that treated any wall that you couldn't burst through like the Kool-Aid Man as indestructible?

In D&D4, there is no real advancement. Your bonuses get bigger, your target numbers get bigger at essentially the same rate, no matter what you do. If you specialize your character fully, you are no better at accomplishing your schticks at 20th level than you are at 7th. And if you don't specialize, you've fallen behind. And even if you do specialize, your damage output falls horribly behind as you go up in level. A super attack from a 29th level character is seriously just two and a half super attacks from a 1st level character. Meanwhile, a Level 3 Solo has 200 hit points, and a Level 29 Solo has 1,335 hit points. High level fights take forever - and all your "cool" abilities are used up in the first couple of rounds. For the next 15 rounds or more, you're just picking one of the two attacks you got at 1st level and using it round after round after round.

-Frank

[Cantankerous]

Feeling different is not the same as truly being different. But really, does difference matter if it's a fun game? We were pissed when the Xbox game was nothing like real Shadowrun, but did it really matter? It fell short of our expectations, but that's not what made the game bad. In fact, I hear the game was pretty good, despite having the name Shadowrun and not having much to do with Shadowrun. The same might be true for DnD 4e. It has the name D&D, and it might not be the same game, but it still might be worth playing. And like I say, listening to people playing it, it sure as hell sounds like a game of D&D.

In an RPG, the feel is half the game.The idea of the RPG is to act as a stage upon which the roles are acted. If the stage constructed to have the feel of wide open spaces and limitless vistas then it's almost impossible to bring across the feel of tight subterranean tunnels and claustrophobia.

D&D is the flagship for the heroic fantasy genre, but it no longer feels anything like heroic fantasy. Those who buy it thinking that what they are getting is heroic fantasy are going to feel robbed. Super heroes in a supposedly heroic fantasy universe has very limited appeal I think...but thankfully for WotC most people will buy any drek they serve up and happily chow down smiling all the while.

It's the designer label syndrome.

Isshia

[knasser]

It's my contention that the structure of the rules does affect the purely role-playing aspects of the game. Frank put it pretty succinctly with his examples, but I think I can put it even more so: The rules stop at the edge of combat. They really, actually do. And I think that strongly affects the role-playing feel of the game. Now in Shadowrun, we know that the magician who can use Levitiate in a battle can also do so at home. But in 4e, everything is explicitly determined by combat parameters. An example would be a Warlock power that enables a short distance teleport after dropping an enemy to 0hp. Why? It was nicely summarised by someone over there as follows:

Warlock hanging from tree-root off a cliff
Warlock: Quick - help me up!
Fighter: Why don't you just teleport up here? You do that all the time in combat.
Warlock: I can only do that if a person I've been fighting has been knocked unconscious or killed.
Fighter: Oh, okay. I can't reach you.
Warlock: *sigh* Okay, go and find a bunny rabbit or something and drop it down to me.

I'm actually fine with the tactical mechanics of it from what I've seen. It looks quite good fun. But the severe lack of attention to world outside combat really damages the immersion in the setting for me. There are no non-combat skills. The DMG states that if a player used to be a blacksmith, the GM should just say they can make horseshoes or whatever if they want. Perform skill has also been taken out. If you want to be a poor bard, just say you are. If you want to be the world's greatest musician, just say you are There's no mechanical difference. Only a few non-combat areas such as Diplomacy rolls for negotiation get any attention.

I'm really actually saddened and annoyed by this. The presentation of the game is exemplary. At least that is to say it's perfect for it's feel - heroic battles against villains and monsters. The rules show a lot of thought and effort. It is now unquestionably easier to pull together customised monsters and villains, which I see as a positive. All of which makes the flaws even more frustrating. I like running heroic fantasy games and because I have a habit of pulling in total non-stereotypical gamer types to my games, it's also a lot easier to plunge someone into an elves and unicorns epic than it is to start with the "Okay, in the 2011...". Plus they can have ponies. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

On a slight tangent, I'm not sure I entirely agree, Frank, about the hit points issues. From what I've seen, the result looks more likely to be that players and GMs have longer to decide whether they want to run or change tactics than they would have under previous editions, but that combat actually goes so quickly that more rounds does not result in more real time for the same combat. But it does look as though you're bang on about there being no real progression. It seems numbers increase somewhat, but there's little real change in capability.

I am sad.

[Larme]

That does sound pretty disturbing... But I can't really defend the game, as I haven't played it and don't plan to soon. And it looks like the people who actually know what they're talking about are taking a pretty balanced view - maybe it's fun, but the system appears to have big holes in it.

Though I did hear that as you level, you can replace your basic level 1 abilities... And the progression problem seems like it would probably be solved with further sourcebooks? It really appears that what they've done is balanced the game by nerfing everyone to a pretty much even level of non-deadliness. That's kinda sad, but it looks like they're trying to take it in the direction of tournament play.

Regardless, 3e books are still available, and it's pretty much 100% complete as a game, so there's no need to feel sad if you like the old edition (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)