The Needles: I Want My D&D

Feb 13, 2008
19,430
0
0
So...what you are saying is that you like Stereotypes rather than Arechetypes?

Fine, play Tunnels and Trolls or King's Quest or City of Heroes.

But there's a lot of us out there that LIKE the idea of building our own sort of hero that doesn't depend on dreams of Rincewind or Schwarzenegger.
 

wrshamilton

New member
Aug 30, 2007
42
0
0
Dungeons and Dragons, like fantasy sports, seems to exist to satisfy two simultaneous, and sometimes conflicting, nerd desires: escapism and statistics.

Some people aren't as much into one or the other, but it's a kind of fun that I think D&D has always gone for, and it's a little weird to jump on it for it now. Especially for the set of rules that has just been replaced.
 

Fire Daemon

Quoth the Daemon
Dec 18, 2007
3,204
0
0
TheKbob said:
Well Im new to the Escapist, so don't throw stones *ducks*
Damn, missed again.

As for the article, I agree whole-heartedly. When a game a gives you many options, even for the most simplest of things, you feel obliged, maybe even forced, to take the most complex option to justify the size and complexity of the game. Going with the simple route feels like you are not getting all that you can and are in some way ripping yourself off.
 

NCGrimbo

New member
Jan 22, 2008
4
0
0
Fire Daemon said:
As for the article, I agree whole-heartedly. When a game a gives you many options, even for the most simplest of things, you feel obliged, maybe even forced, to take the most complex option to justify the size and complexity of the game. Going with the simple route feels like you are not getting all that you can and are in some way ripping yourself off.
I can see your point, but I guess I'm lucky that I've never wanted to play those advanced classes. Give me a simple mage or thief that I can bump up to high levels and I'm happy. Killing can be done by single class characters even if it's not as easy to do. I've never felt obligated or forced to make a multiclassed character or gone the prestige class route.
 

UnterHund

New member
Jul 1, 2008
33
0
0
I never understood the "prestige"classes that came up newer versions...
Rather than having a class called Paladin, why not simply play a cleric/fighter and then name the mixedclass Paladin.

For those of you who don't know what I mean, take a look at TitanQuest. (non DnD)
You chose two classes(Masteries) (or you can stick with one if you want to) one at lvl.2 one at lvl.8. Lets say at 2 you choose "Warfare". If you stick with it you'd be called Warrior. Now if you take a second mastery your "class"name would change to something more or less describing your new mixed class. (Battlemage, Assasin, Conquerer, Slayer)

Even special skills like LayOnHands wouldn't be the problem. Make a check if the "mixed class" consists of the two required (Cleric/Fighter) classes then grant the skills.

So long
Unterhund
 

Karisse

New member
Apr 16, 2008
128
0
0
*clap clap clap*

Beautiful. I've never liked all the prestige class malarkey, whether for pen and paper or for the computer. What's wrong with being a regular old wizard shooting a fireball? I don't need that Loremaster or Archmage crap to function.
 

Trogundak

New member
Jul 16, 2008
2
0
0
The hell with 3,3.5,4 (or whatever) D&D rules... It's not by changing the rules that you give D&D CRPGs a good story, cool characters and imaginative settings.

What is great is when you create a simple thief, a common mage or (yet another) warrior and MAKE it a UNIQUE player character.

So forget about rules, they don't make great games by themselves.
 

Archon

New member
Nov 12, 2002
916
0
0
My problem with 3.5's prestige-multiclass system is that it went too far in enabling players to customize their characters beyond what the genre should support.

In an earlier iteration of D&D (say Basic D&D, or AD&D 2nd edition), the class system could be frustrating because it made it impossible to create a character like Conan (who had thief-like stealth and climbing combined with a fighter's strength and prowess) or Rand Al'Thor (who was a master swordsman as well as mage). Given that these sort of hybrids are common archetypes that we all enjoy reading about it, it's no surprise that players would want the ability to make heroic, well-rounded characters of similar ilk.

But in enabling unlimited multiclassing, with "dips" in to a class to scoop particular powers, and endless variations of prestige classes, characters went from too bland ('a fighter') to too spicy ('a half-ogre fighter/barbarian/ranger/templar/dervish') and missed the sweet spot. The characters that are created don't feel like the fantasy heroes of myth, legend, and fiction. They feel, at best, like the wierd quirky side character that shows up in one chapter and interacts with the real hero.

The root cause of the problem is the irregular distribution of benefits from leveling. Simply put, some levels of some classes are not worth as much as some levels of other classes. As a result the min-maxing player will switch out of classes when they are no longer optimally beneficial and find a new class that provides better benefits for his intended purpose. The net result is that a character who skims through a bunch of different classes is far mor effective than one who levels up consistently as a fighter or thief.

This is, of course, the opposite of the real world, where specialists trump generalists in most fields of endeavor. Gold medalists in track don't switch to swimming in between the summer games. Chess grandmasters don't play Starcraft to tighten up their openings.

With neither narrative feel nor realism to support the hybrid class character generation, the system is inherently going to lend itself to min-maxing.

You sure aren't playing a Svirfneblin Red Dragon Disciple because of a character concept.
 

TheKbob

New member
Jul 15, 2008
367
0
0
Archon said:
My problem with 3.5's prestige-multiclass system ...

*snip for space*

...You sure aren't playing a Svirfneblin Red Dragon Disciple because of a character concept.
You sir, hit the nail on the head. People against 4.0 say there are skills and abilities that have no real world explanation... so please explain how someone goes through all these heavy skill changes. My only big dip in being a character cocktail was roughly the following:

Cleric 3 / Church Inq 2 / Radiant Servent 3 / Sacred Exorcist to the end.

The DM allowed the alignment smudges on the Church -> Radiant servant. Add in all the bonus turn checks I got from requirements and the radiant servant class + Divine metamagic... I was a beast. I one shotted a boss with a Bolt of Glory. He happened to be an evil outsider and I empowered it and upped my caster level with some handy accessories and blam... 180~ dmg to a boss at level 11 I believe. Funny part was, it was a character I had made that went evil (role played him well ;D ).

I could easily explain my progression, but I see so many that cannot be. I was also part of the a duo of min maxers (myself and a bud) in a group of 6 and we were def the power houses thanks to my blend and his use of the "Book of Broken (nine) Swords".

All in all, I love 4.0 because the stuff just does make a lot more sense in terms of settings and that is may be "easier" but a fighter just isnt going to become a winged theif/mage over night as could happen in 3.5, either.

Give and take. I will finish out my 3.5 campaign with my Radiant Servant of Broken and then retire the set. 4.0, here I come :D
 

Archon

New member
Nov 12, 2002
916
0
0
TheKbob said:
You sir, hit the nail on the head. ...
Haha, thanks. I'm actually a prestige class hybrid Lawyer 1 / CEO 5 / RPG Game Theorist 20.

Bad attack bonus, though.
 

holness_202

New member
Jun 25, 2008
4
0
0
baldurs gate was easily the best D&D imho - its AD&D 2nd edition? or mb third i forget but it had that feel that your character was a legend :)
 

TheKbob

New member
Jul 15, 2008
367
0
0
Archon said:
TheKbob said:
You sir, hit the nail on the head. ...
Haha, thanks. I'm actually a prestige class hybrid Lawyer 1 / CEO 5 / RPG Game Theorist 20.

Bad attack bonus, though.
ME 1 / EE 3 / Nerd 15

I have great wisdom and intelligence, I just roll bad,.... I swear ...

What?

Stop looking at me like that!
 

Archon

New member
Nov 12, 2002
916
0
0
Hahaha! I also tend to think of everything in terms of game mechanics.

I once used the mechanics of MMO guild and grouping to explain matrix organizations to my company. "Your department is your guild. Your project is your group; you've come together to accomplish the quest..."
 

SirSchmoopy

New member
Apr 15, 2008
797
0
0
The main reason to swap from 3.5 to 4? The new game feel. Everything feels new and fresh to me which is entertaining.

Not sure how long I will play it considering a lot of the fun aspects I have learned to love in 3.5 are gone but at least the pictures in the books are neat. Seriously, the art in the 4E monster manual blew me away and the biggest thing I look forward is the D&D Insider to come out and if it isn't all just hearsay and is what they are pitching then I'm all for change.
 

TheKbob

New member
Jul 15, 2008
367
0
0
SirSchmoopy said:
The main reason to swap from 3.5 to 4? The new game feel. Everything feels new and fresh to me which is entertaining.

Not sure how long I will play it considering a lot of the fun aspects I have learned to love in 3.5 are gone but at least the pictures in the books are neat. Seriously, the art in the 4E monster manual blew me away and the biggest thing I look forward is the D&D Insider to come out and if it isn't all just hearsay and is what they are pitching then I'm all for change.
The monster manual was the last book for me to order from Amazon and I LOVE THE ARTWORK. I'm kind of depressed on some of the monster selections and there isn't a "How to create monsters" guide, unless that's in the DMG and I'm just blind.

I read the hydras, there isn't anything about regen or needing to burn heads off.

*Sadface*
 

unangbangkay

New member
Oct 10, 2007
142
0
0
In my estimation there is nothing wrong with enabling deep customization and character building. Adding more systemic elements to the game doesn't necessarily interfere with the way the story plays out. You can munchkin your character all you want in Baldur's Gate and Torment and they'd still play the same way in the end. All this reads as is an objection to allowing more options. While having many prestige classes et al can cause a bit of feature creep, all of it is entirely optional. Pressing "recommended" every time you level up with a single-class character makes a perfectly useful one. In fact, Neverwinter Nights' official campaigns are easy enough to muddle through with almost any character build.
 

monodiabloloco

New member
May 15, 2007
272
0
0
I think the problem is video games them selves. As they become more prevalent in our lives, they alter how we want to play the table top games. In 3.0-3.5 there was a small push to combine the table top RP-ing with the action and epic game play of video games. The RPing was pushed down a little from the previous versions.
In the new version, they have REALLY jumped to make this an action game based more on PC MMORPGS than on the original D&D. Role playing is pushed aside and not even really much of a factor now. You can practicly see F1-F12 on your power cards and giant yellow exclamations over the bar keeps head.

What makes me sad is that, unlike the poster, I actually love the table top game AND all the computer games based on it. While the games haven't all been awesome, I just ignore the bits I don't like, make the character I do, and go on from there. Sure, I feel that a halfling monk is a bit silly, but I don't care.. I don't have to play one. The same rule applies to the table top version. I don't have to play it. I have my 3.5 books and I'm OK with that version so I will stick to that (when my friends and I all get on the same schedule.)
Unfortunately, the video games will keep with the newest versions.. as they do, and as time goes on... they will adapt D&D to be WoW with pencils.
 

unangbangkay

New member
Oct 10, 2007
142
0
0
jpalfy33 said:
I completely agree.

And like you said, you can always just use 'Recommend', or just start with one of the already pre-made characters. I personally would rather have all those customization options then non at all.
We must also consider that both Neverwinter Nights and its sequel were constructed primarily with having customized entirely user-created content and campaigns. While NWN's expansions and NWN2 had strong single-player experiences (particularly Mask of the Betrayer), you can see NWN1's campaign is little more than a demonstration of the Aurora game tools' usability.

Multiplayer and user-content focused RPGs have to be heavy on the customization. There's no point having a custom campaign when all you can do is choose the NPC's unique classes, races or abilities. Imagine Torment's multiplayer, if it had any, for example.