Greybeards & Grognards 4: I Saw the 4e Rulebooks, Oh Boy!

Polycarp · July 02, 2008, 07:13:55 AM

I had no idea "splatbooks" were such a problem. I've always regarded supplements to the core rules as wastes of money and this existential hatred of splatbooks makes me feel smart and vindicated. :) Part of it is that I've never played with players who knew more about D&D than I did, and never had the oft-quoted occurrence of a splatbook-equipped player pleading with me to introduce this-or-that feat/spell/class.

At any rate, I'm not sure what the proper measure would be for determining if a new edition was "due" or not. If 4th ed is better, why not publish it now? If it's not better, why not just keep playing 3rd and wait for 5th? I'm uncertain why the timing of an edition would even be an issue. If WotC wants to produce good products quickly, that's a good thing, and if you don't think this is a good product then I don't know why you'd care about the release date anyway.

Elemental_Elf · July 02, 2008, 01:12:55 PM

Quote from: Polycarp!I had no idea "splatbooks" were such a problem. I've always regarded supplements to the core rules as wastes of money and this existential hatred of splatbooks makes me feel smart and vindicated. :) Part of it is that I've never played with players who knew more about D&D than I did, and never had the oft-quoted occurrence of a splatbook-equipped player pleading with me to introduce this-or-that feat/spell/class.

Splatbooks are, as with most things in D&D, only a problem if the DM allows it to be a problem. Every campaign i have ever run came with a Campaign Standard, detaling rules for character creation, including which books are legal and which are not. Most often I simply restrict it to Core + PHB 2 + Completes. I have never really had a problem with players begging to use this and that... except for the anything goes 20th level campaign... That was a major disaster... 3 players came in with SRD only equiped characters, the other three scowered every 3.x book we own (which is nearly the entire 3.5 line and a good portion of the 3.0 line) and made 3 amazing characters... i had to throw a Mythril Golemn at them just to get them to break a sweat, lol!

Anyways, as I said, its only a problem if you let it to be one, lol. (so uhh, feel vindicated mighty Carp).

Stargate525 · July 02, 2008, 01:50:39 PM

@RT;

I've been a 3e guy my whole career, so I have no opinion on 2e. However, my guess is that 2e core had problems exactly like that too and that 4e... I admit, 4e probably won't, but that's because it's a tactical combat game and not roleplaying as we know it. Quite a few people are already poking holes in the skill mechanics and other sub-systems.

Ra-Tiel · July 02, 2008, 03:52:32 PM

Quote from: Stargate525[...] it's a tactical combat game and not roleplaying as we know it.

Why keep people saying that? Seriously, I don't get it. :huh:

Is it because you no longer have a number on the sheet that says that your character can weave baskets better than any other character? Or is it because casters no longer have spells that can completely replace any other noncaster class in a moment's notice?

If you think about it, why would anything outside of combat need regulation and controlling in a roleplaying game? From that perspective 3E was even less a roleplaying game than 4E because it tried to nail everything with stats and rules, including things that did not require such a treatment.

If 4E was no longer a roleplaying game, why the heck would WotC put all that "how to roleplay" and all the other chapters regarding exactly this topic in the PH and DMG?

Quote from: Stargate525Quite a few people are already poking holes in the skill mechanics and other sub-systems.

I know. But they are not poking holes in the "skill mechanics", but rather in the "skill challenge" system whose difficulties and complexities are off. I don't think it will be too long before we're going to see an errata to skill challenges.

And even if not, compared to what needed fixing in 3E, skill challenges are a minor issue. :P

Stargate525 · July 02, 2008, 04:35:51 PM

Quote from: Ra-TielWhy keep people saying that? Seriously, I don't get it. :huh:

Because other than those sections of unmitigated and obvious fluff, there is not a single rule in the entire system that does not directly relate to combat. Want to find out how much making that sword will cost you? Can't, there aren't crafting rules. What about building a house? Sorry. Buying a friggin piece of chalk? Nope, it doesn't exist.

The reason non-combat situations need rules structure is the same reason that combat does; to prevent piss-off contests where players argue over who's better at weaving baskets.

Raelifin · July 02, 2008, 04:45:23 PM

It's a matter of emphasis. 4E emphasizes the game aspect of the activity, which tends to reduce the acting aspect (in my eyes).

In The Riddle of Steel, for instance, much of the system actually penalizes combat, and I find that my games are much more dramatic and interesting because "you meet a warband of goblins" isn't usually followed up with "I roll initiative" as much as "I dive for cover."

Ra-Tiel · July 02, 2008, 06:45:14 PM

Quote from: Stargate525Because other than those sections of unmitigated and obvious fluff, there is not a single rule in the entire system that does not directly relate to combat.

And that's the good thing of 4E.

Quote from: Stargate525Want to find out how much making that sword will cost you? Can't, there aren't crafting rules.

Why would an adventuring hero want to make a sword? Because it's fun to find out that you need 7 weeks to make a frigging mw greatsword? Crafting should be something the DM gives the players as an opportunity to use, not something the players can force into the campaign at any time.

"I want to craft a sword." - "You can't, you need to find the princess in less than three days or she'll die from dehydration." - "But I really want to craft something." - "The king will make you personally responsible for his daughter's death if you start crafting something now." - "Man, you suck as DM, you won't let me craft anything." :-/

Crafting trivia: Take a smith that can forge a normal shortsword in his smithy with his assistants in a single day. Now place that smith with his smithy and his assistants on Athas. Suddenly he needs a crapload of time longer to craft the same frigging shortsword just because it's worth 100 times as much on Athas as on his homeworld.

Quote from: Stargate525What about building a house? Sorry.

Again. Why should an adventuring hero want to build a house?

Just to drive the point home: what's the Profession (architect) DC to design a solid two-story stone house? What's the Knowledge (architecture and engineering) DC I need to hit to make sure it won't collapse in the next storm? What's the Craft (Houses) DC to actually build that thing? I'm totally sure you can quote the 3.5 PH on that, can't you?

Quote from: Stargate525Buying a friggin piece of chalk? Nope, it doesn't exist.

Because knowing that a single piece of chalk costs 1 copper was so worth that table in the 3.5 PH.

How often did the additional bookkeeping of tracking the costs of firewood (per day), flasks, single mugs of ale, single loafs of bread, torches, or whetstones add something to the game? Anything worth less than a silver piece is prolly not worth the space in the book, much less the bookkeeping on the players' part, because the cost is so insignificant.

If you're not playing a "will adventure for food because we're frigging broke all the time" campaign I bet no character actually keeps track of his wealth in coppers past level 3 - if not right from level 1.

Quote from: Stargate525The reason non-combat situations need rules structure is the same reason that combat does; to prevent piss-off contests where players argue over who's better at weaving baskets.

I really wonder why "use common sense" and "roleplay that stuff" was never a valid option when it doesn't fit one's argument. ;)

// Edit: Oh and, 4E is no longer a roleplaying game because there are chapters about roleplaying in the books? Indeed, "fer cryin' out loud." *facepalm*

Stargate525 · July 02, 2008, 08:10:25 PM

Quote from: Ra-TielAnd that's the good thing of 4E.

Your opinion. Granted, the opposing side is also my opinion. so this entire thing is really nothing more than a richard-waving competition in either case.

QuoteWhy would an adventuring hero want to make a sword? Because it's fun to find out that you need 7 weeks to make a frigging mw greatsword? Crafting should be something the DM gives the players as an opportunity to use, not something the players can force into the campaign at any time.

Who says I want to play an adventuring hero campaign? Look at the commoner campaign for an instance of how the D&D rules can support things that aren't adventuring campaigns. By making 4e support one type of game and one alone, they've effectively destroyed their chances of selling anything to the people who use 3rd edition for anything but their vision of what D&D should be.

Quote"I want to craft a sword." - "You can't, you need to find the princess in less than three days or she'll die from dehydration." - "But I really want to craft something." - "The king will make you personally responsible for his daughter's death if you start crafting something now." - "Man, you suck as DM, you won't let me craft anything." :-/

I'm calling you on this. You can't use an idiot player and an idiot DM as a valid example.

QuoteCrafting trivia: Take a smith that can forge a normal shortsword in his smithy with his assistants in a single day. Now place that smith with his smithy and his assistants on Athas. Suddenly he needs a crapload of time longer to craft the same frigging shortsword just because it's worth 100 times as much on Athas as on his homeworld.

Since you're inserting supply/demand issues that are not inherent in the market system of D&D (an issue which 4e hasn't addressed except to remove players from the supply end of the economy altogether, btw.), you need to consider the fact that someone working with materials this valuable would take longer simply to make certain he doesn't completely ruin them.

QuoteAgain. Why should an adventuring hero want to build a house?

See my answer above.

QuoteJust to drive the point home: what's the Profession (architect) DC to design a solid two-story stone house? What's the Knowledge (architecture and engineering) DC I need to hit to make sure it won't collapse in the next storm? What's the Craft (Houses) DC to actually build that thing? I'm totally sure you can quote the 3.5 PH on that, can't you?

You know as well as I do that those aren't in there. However, by laying down a skill system with DCs for differently-rated tasks, I can make a relatively educated guess.

QuoteBecause knowing that a single piece of chalk costs 1 copper was so worth that table in the 3.5 PH.

How often did the additional bookkeeping of tracking the costs of firewood (per day), flasks, single mugs of ale, single loafs of bread, torches, or whetstones add something to the game? Anything worth less than a silver piece is prolly not worth the space in the book, much less the bookkeeping on the players' part, because the cost is so insignificant.

If you're not playing a "will adventure for food because we're frigging broke all the time" campaign I bet no character actually keeps track of his wealth in coppers past level 3 - if not right from level 1.

Which is a diametrically opposed view to the one you just took above. Which is it; the economy must be accurate, or we play the game with wealth marked in scientific notation?

I've played both methods, and I actually prefer the bookkeeping. I see this as a negative shift in 4e.

QuoteI really wonder why "use common sense" and "roleplay that stuff" was never a valid option when it doesn't fit one's argument. ;)

I could say the exact same thing about combat.

Quote// Edit: Oh and, 4E is no longer a roleplaying game because there are chapters about roleplaying in the books? Indeed, "fer cryin' out loud." *facepalm*

Just because an encyclopedia has a section on cooking does not make it a cookbook.

khyron1144 · July 02, 2008, 09:16:31 PM

Quote from: Ra-Tiel@SG & khyron1144: Ok, so it was time for 3E to appear because 2E was bloated with splats, but it was not time for 4E to appear because 3E was bloated with splats.

:huh: Double standard? 2E was also only bloated because of all the splats that were published.

You are correct that I was applying a double standard.

2e was bloated with quality supplemental material that could enhance the experience for players and DMs alike and also enhance roleplaying. When 3e was first announced we were hoping to see the good stuff from supplemental materials pulled into the core books. Basically another switch not entirely unlike the 1e to 2e transitition.

3e was bloated with a power-gamer wishlist of powers and nifty stuff for my character. The one good thing about 4e is that it sets that clock back to zero.

Ninja D! · July 03, 2008, 12:17:41 AM

I like 4E. Here's my thought, though: 4E isn't really meant to be "THE BEST." It's meant to be simple. You can house rule and add as much as you want. At it's core, it's meant to be a game that any video game junkie who wants to work outside the restrictions of said video games can pick up and play. It makes things run (pretty much) smoothly and easily. That's not for some people, though, and I totally understand why. I just like it because I sometimes have a hard time dedicating the time and focus needed.

Ra-Tiel · July 03, 2008, 06:54:15 AM

Quote from: Stargate525[...] Who says I want to play an adventuring hero campaign? Look at the commoner campaign for an instance of how the D&D rules can support things that aren't adventuring campaigns. By making 4e support one type of game and one alone, they've effectively destroyed their chances of selling anything to the people who use 3rd edition for anything but their vision of what D&D should be.

Don't blame the tool if you're using it wrong. If you want to play a nonadventuring commoner campaign don't play DnD. I don't hear people complain that nWoD doesn't support hard SciFi alien campaigns, or that Shadowrun doesn't support steampunk fantasy campaigns.

If you want an extremely low magic commoner campaign with a workable economy, play HÃ¢rnmaster. :P

Quote from: Stargate525I'm calling you on this. You can't use an idiot player and an idiot DM as a valid example.

You think that's more idiotic that "4E sucks, because it doesn't do what I want"? :-/

Quote from: Stargate525Since you're inserting supply/demand issues that are not inherent in the market system of D&D (an issue which 4e hasn't addressed except to remove players from the supply end of the economy altogether, btw.), you need to consider the fact that someone working with materials this valuable would take longer simply to make certain he doesn't completely ruin them.

Wrong. It's the exact same process, the exact same smith. That's the BS with the craft skill, that the time required to complete the item is based on its market price.

And you're saying that a professional smith does shabby work because the material isn't expensive? That's houseruling that is not supported by the rules. Please use the crafting rules as written without your personal modifications and justifications to answer my questions.

Another question: I have Craft (Woodworking) 20. I rolled and got a total of 34. How many quarterstaffs can I make that day?

Quote from: Stargate525See my answer above.

See my reply above. Pick a system that's more suitable for the campaign you want to run. If you want a sports car, you buy a sports car and not a truck you have to pimp and tune.

Quote from: Stargate525You know as well as I do that those aren't in there. However, by laying down a skill system with DCs for differently-rated tasks, I can make a relatively educated guess.

So 4E is bad because it requires houseruling and handwaving, while 3E is good because it requires houseruling and handwaving?

But I'm still curious to hear your DCs for the checks I wanted to make to build a house. How long does it take to come up with the plan? To come up with the structural calculations for the building? And how long does it take to build that thing? How many helpers do I need to build it? Just imagine I'm you and want to build a house.

In 4E the DM could just say: "You see a professional architect who makes the plans for you in three days. To build the house you need the help of at least five other men, and it takes you a bit longer than a whole month of working each day."

Prove to me that the "fluff" skills that failed at ~66% of their applications in 3E are superior to the freeform approach in 4E.

Quote from: Stargate525Which is a diametrically opposed view to the one you just took above. Which is it; the economy must be accurate, or we play the game with wealth marked in scientific notation?

No. My comments above were poking holes in your argumentation. As a DM I don't require my players to keep track of every copper when they are already carrying hundreds of gold pieces around. And as a player I ask the DM if I need to track every copper I spend at a tavern, or if I can just say "I'll pay 7 silvers for the room and the meal and drink I had this evening". That's exactly the reason why in d20 Modern you have wealth checks, so that the millionair doesn't have to keep track of every cent in his wallet.

Quote from: Stargate525I've played both methods, and I actually prefer the bookkeeping. I see this as a negative shift in 4e.

And what does prevent you from houseruling it? Also, don't blame the tool...

Quote from: Stargate525I could say the exact same thing about combat.

Wrong. Combat is the only thing that can be mathematically expressed in a system. Everything else is dependent on DM interpretation. Combat has to be "fair" to the players, otherwise it boils down to a "roll a new character each session", which is kinda bad.

Therefore, the only rules that are absolutely necessary are those dealing with combat. Anything else is nice but not required.

Quote from: Stargate525Just because an encyclopedia has a section on cooking does not make it a cookbook.

No, your statement was more like "It's not an encyclopedia because it has sections on cooking. Cooking is superficial fluff that nobody needs in a real encyclopedia".

Moniker · July 03, 2008, 10:32:45 AM

You know, one point of note - it's fairly easy to use 4E as a modular system to omit magic and magic items all together as long as you give PCs a +1 bonus every level, instead of half level, for the level modifier. The math works out surprisingly well.

Epic Meepo · July 03, 2008, 12:56:39 PM

Quote from: MonikerYou know, one point of note - it's fairly easy to use 4E as a modular system to omit magic and magic items all together as long as you give PCs a +1 bonus every level, instead of half level, for the level modifier. The math works out surprisingly well.

You also have to omit feats if you do that; see the "Level Bonus and Magic Item Threshold" sidebar on page 187 of the 4eDMG for the basis of my reasoning.

Stargate525 · July 03, 2008, 03:54:27 PM

Quote from: Ra-TielDon't blame the tool if you're using it wrong. If you want to play a nonadventuring commoner campaign don't play DnD. I don't hear people complain that nWoD doesn't support hard SciFi alien campaigns, or that Shadowrun doesn't support steampunk fantasy campaigns.

Bullocks.

If you're going to re-invent a hammer, people sure as hell have a right to complain if it can't be used for deconstruction anymore. Simply berating us because 'we aren't using the tool right' does not invalidate the fact that the tool works in that method, and by re-inventing that hammer, you prevented us from using it in the method we chose.

In fact, you're de-humanizing us by saying that our point of view, our choice of usage doesn't matter and is, in fact, wrong. By labeling it like that, you are associating us with a whole slew of negative connotations, which I find offensive and repugnant. By simply calling us the bad guys and attacking our moral standpoint, you're reduced this entire argument to name-calling. Good for you.

Quote from: Ra-TielIf you want an extremely low magic commoner campaign with a workable economy, play HÃ¢rnmaster. :P

Or, you know, I'll stick with 3rd edition.

Epic Meepo · July 03, 2008, 04:03:42 PM

EDIT: Contentious content removed.

The Campaign Builder's Guild

News:

Greybeards & Grognards 4: I Saw the 4e Rulebooks, Oh Boy!

Polycarp

Elemental_Elf

Stargate525

Ra-Tiel

Stargate525

Raelifin

Ra-Tiel

Stargate525

khyron1144

Ninja D!

Ra-Tiel

Moniker

Epic Meepo

Stargate525

Epic Meepo