Quote from: jibbajibba;360929You will never read a fanatasy novel where the Wizards can just do stuff all the time without years ofstudy or it tiring them out or it opening up a path to the Duat to allow a horde of demons to escape or something.

I don't remember any particular limits in Harry Potter. They didn't even really need wands...

Quote from: jibbajibba;3609294e removes that because its not deemed important.

You're right - what's important in a novel and what's important in a game are different. For example, if novelist created wizard who could cast spells as often as they'd like, he'd have a difficult time coming up with a conflict or challenge for said wizard to overcome. In an RPG, there are mechanics which balance a wizards power and so fluff isn't needed...

Seanchai

Quote from: One Horse Town;360951Are there any innovations, though?

Probably not, but the thread isn't about innovation, it's about site traffic.

Seanchai

Quote from: jibbajibba;360929It doesn't matter if D&D magic was Vancian, psuedo-vancian or whatever. The point really is that the designers thought it was necessary to wrap some sort of concept round magic provide some insight as to why it worked the way it did.
You will never read a fanatasy novel where the Wizards can just do stuff all the time without years ofstudy or it tiring them out or it opening up a path to the Duat to allow a horde of demons to escape or something.
4e removes that because its not deemed important.

Yep, and that's why 4e fails as an RPG.  Because they completely missed the simple fact that it's the why things are the way they are not how does that translate into a mechanic.

Quote from: PaladinCA;360949This makes a lot of sense for the casting classes. Much less so for the non-casting ones.

It's an abstraction.  Just like HP or AC.

I suppose they could have just given the fighter "fatigue points" or something and have each attack cost a certain amount of fatigue and then have complex rules for how to recover fatigue, etc.

So, the options were:
A. Leave the fighter really boring to play tactically while everyone else gets to do cool stuff.
B. Create a complex system for managing the fighter's abiltiies that will slow down combat even more.
C. Give the fighter cool stuff to do but at the same level of murky abstraction that the rest of combat uses and that uses the same rules as everyone else to keep the game rules simple and modular.

I seriously don't see how A or B were better options than C.  I really don't.

1st: All characters have something no one else has. That's what game balance is all about. It's not about comparable damage or anything. It's about everyone else's character will make you a bit envious.

2nd: No teleport. OK, you can reappear behind a glass door at levels 1 - 5. No problem. But whenever you want to cross the continent it's about 100 gp and limited number of destinations.

3rd: Choosing a race does have noticeable effect.

Quote from: jgants;360965So, the options were:
A. Leave the fighter really boring to play tactically while everyone else gets to do cool stuff.
B. Create a complex system for managing the fighter's abiltiies that will slow down combat even more.
C. Give the fighter cool stuff to do but at the same level of murky abstraction that the rest of combat uses and that uses the same rules as everyone else to keep the game rules simple and modular.

I seriously don't see how A or B were better options than C.  I really don't.

Given your choices of boredom, complexity, or the way it turned out, I suppose you're right.

But I'm saying that I would have liked it to be different than it came out. I'm also wondering what other options were considered. I don't, however, have what I consider to be a viable alternative designed yet -- Not being a game designer myself.

I understand their reasoning. I just don't fully embrace their implementation.

Quote from: Seanchai;360960Probably not, but the thread isn't about innovation, it's about site traffic.

Seanchai

Traffic is fine AFAIK.

Quote from: Casey777;360859As someone who really likes Vance and even more obscure authors, I'll be the first to admit that he's not highly read and never has been, even with the free advertising from AD&D. While he provided Gygax with a germ of an idea to balance his game Cugel et al aren't what most people think of when they picture a wizard.

Nor was D&D Vancian magic terribly Vancian. Dying Earth RPG did a better job, but then again D&D wasn't just a Dying Earth RPG.

D&D magic is closest to the magic in the original Dying Earth book. There, wizards are wizards, and they do have to memorize spells which are forgotten on casting. In Eyes of the Overworld this still seems to be the rule but mainly you get to see the reason for D&D thieves (i.e., Cugel) having a chance to cast spells from scrolls, but not really become proficient. There may be other sources for that bit, as well.

If you take the wizards from The Dying Earth as the model for the wizards in D&D, a lot things make better sense, not only from a spellcasting perspective but also how they fit in socially or personality-wise. They're more like Turjan or Mazirian than Gandalf or Merlin.

(Note, the fourth DE book was published well after D&D was created, and the mages there operate on entirely different principles.)

Quote from: IMLegend;360870So in order to make my wizard a worthwhile contributor in combat I have to:

1. make sure I'm proficient with darts.

2. make sure I have a high enough dexterity to really utilize any thrown object.

3. purchase darts and flasks of oil over and above all the usual equipment and spell components for a wizard.

4. hire and pay an underling NPC specifically to run around and light my little
puddles on fire and hold my hand.

Yeah, sounds like a whole bunch of extra fucking around and expense just to be more useful than that one spell a day.

Note, being a worthwhile contributor in combat isn't the only way to be a worthwhile contributor. It's just a result of the increasing focus on combat in the game over the years, and to be fair, The Fantasy Trip, which was published in the 70's, took exactly the approach of balancing magic users in combat. (IMO, in an overall more simulationist way than what I read about 4e.)

But if combat isn't the focus, then you contribute in a bunch of ways including being an extra set of eyes and ears and perhaps most importantly another person contributing ideas.

Quote from: JRR;360924Magic in pre 4e D&D sprang as much from the sympathetic magic from L. Sprague de Camp and Fletcher Pratt's "Harold Shea" series as from Vance.

Still have that one on the shelf. Unfortunately (a) The Compleat Enchanter isn't very well written, at least in the first few pages, and (b) I get itchy every time I pick it up.

(I was able to overcome both obstacles with Three Hearts & Three Lions; actually the first few pages of that one are fairly good, but once the character arrives in fantasy land, the main story never gets off the ground.)

Quote from: One Horse Town;360970Traffic is fine AFAIK.

Yeah, when you stir the pot. Clearly, with the threads he started today and at least one of their subjects, today was a pot stirring day.

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;360960Probably not, but the thread isn't about innovation, it's about site traffic.

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;360994Yeah, when you stir the pot. Clearly, with the threads he started today and at least one of their subjects, today was a pot stirring day.

Seanchai

Show us on this doll where the naughty theRPGSite touched you, Seanchai.

Fuckin' A, you are like the guy dumped by his first girlfriend who then starts the He-Man Woman Haters Club. If you don't like this forum and its members, then why are you here?

Quote from: jeff37923;360996Show us on this doll where the naughty theRPGSite touched you, Seanchai.

Fuckin' A, you are like the guy dumped by his first girlfriend who then starts the He-Man Woman Haters Club. If you don't like this forum and its members, then why are you here?

Because the whiny pussies at tBP would boot his ass if he tried this shit even once over there.

Quote from: jeff37923;360996If you don't like this forum and its members, then why are you here?

Because he doesn't like this forum and it's members.

Just like Seanchai is a big part of why YOU come back.

Quote from: Shazbot79;361016Because he doesn't like this forum and it's members.

Just like Seanchai is a big part of why YOU come back.

Except Jeff doesn't make a habit of complaining about the forums and members in general, but continue posting screeds about how shitty the forums and members are.