I like what I'm hearing. WoTC seems to finally be scaling down the twinkly. Boy power gaming minna era are going to be pissed though

Still think "ability bumps" and feats are completely unnecessary wank, but I guess they're expected by the kids these days. Now if only they'd drop the retarded class gut and cut it down to 3 or 4 classes.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;676969Yeah, while OSR gamers may roll 'em, 3e/Pf and 4e gamers are far more likely to point-buy their character attributes.

Not in my experience.  I played 3e for the better part of a decade, at game stores and in probably dozens of different groups, and every single time attributes were rolled.  Generally 4d6 in order, sometimes other variations, but the only time point buy was used was at conventions in tournament play.  I won't speak for 4e, because I'd rather be assraped by a herd of gorgons than touch that abomination.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;677006I'm curious to know why such aversion to rolling for stats, especially since classes don't require a high stat anymore.  Is it fear of having the chance for a low roll?  Is it hating the fact that another player might have better rolled stats than you?

Rolled stats have always been anathema to the min- maxers.

Quote from: JRR;677010Not in my experience.  I played 3e for the better part of a decade, at game stores and in probably dozens of different groups, and every single time attributes were rolled.  Generally 4d6 in order, sometimes other variations, but the only time point buy was used was at conventions in tournament play.  I won't speak for 4e, because I'd rather be assraped by a herd of gorgons than touch that abomination.

I would rather play 4e than get assraped by a herd of Gordon's, but I'd also rather not play at all than play it.

Quote from: Benoist;676970If that's true, it's sad. There's some excitement to have in generating attributes randomly. I'm sure not all recent 3e/PF/4e gamers would like it, but if they're not even aware that could be done, or what it actually does when you generate a character in such manner, then some of them might be missing something that would actually make the game more fun to them, and not necessarily less.

It's my preference as well, whenever possible. Even those I usually go all soft-hearted and let them swap around 2 stats.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;676974I mean, your entire position has been reduced to a very bad strawman.

Maybe in your mind it has, but in reality you're the one existing in a fantasy world.

By your own admission you don't care about such things and yet claim you know all about them. Sorry, but you don't. These feats and attribute bonuses are a balance nightmare.

What I love about people like you is that you'll decry the efforts of people like me and yet in the same breath spit vitriol at WotC for making imbalanced classes. It's people like me, you know, the ones who actually understand system mechanics and system balance, who provide valuable feedback to WotC so that you can bitch about something else other than game balance.

I suggest calling 5e too video-gamey.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;676987If you learned Archery Mastery as your feat, you gain:
* range doesn't impose disadvantage
* ranged attacks ignore half cover and 3/4 cover
* once on your turn with a bow, you can make an additional attack.  Both attacks suffer a -5 to hit.

Here's a perfect example of not understanding system mechanics or balance. This is an absolutely terrible feat. For one thing, the range on even a shortbow is more than you're likely to need in most of your sessions. And really, if you're an archer then you're going to go longbow which is more range than you'll probably ever use at all. And since most characters who are going to forego a stat bump for a feat in order to focus on archery are going to already be proficient in the longbow, that's void too.

Then you have a -5 on all attacks. First of all, a -5 is MASSIVE in this system. You're essentially saying that you'll miss on most of those attacks. Second of all, it's a penalty and the entire system design and everything the designers have claimed up until this point, has been to steer away from penalties. That's why the entire advantage/disadvantage system was developed in the first place. And yet, here we are, already deviating from the design goals.

There are very good reasons for not wanting to use penalties. You should try investigating them and learning a bit about system design.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;676987Skills:  Skills are gone.  Which I like.  Reinforces the "anyone can attempt" theory that I prefer.  Now they just need to address the DC values of tasks, which IIRC, they are doing right now to reflect this.

They're not gone. They simply weren't included in the packet because they're still being worked on.

Honestly, why do people like you even want to play D&D Next when it's patently obvious that you want it to be a BECMI or 1e clone.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;677006I'm curious to know why such aversion to rolling for stats, especially since classes don't require a high stat anymore.  Is it fear of having the chance for a low roll?  Is it hating the fact that another player might have better rolled stats than you?

Here we are again. The mere fact that you're asking this question tells me you have no real understanding of system balance and design. In fact, it indicates that you have no real understanding of fun at all. At least, not other people's versions of fun.

Quote from: Zachary The First;677025It's my preference as well, whenever possible. Even those I usually go all soft-hearted and let them swap around 2 stats.

Thanks for proving a point. All you've done is defeat the point of rolling. Why bother rolling when you're going to let them have better stats anyway? 4d6 drop the lowest is already statistically going to average to be better than the point buy option.

It's always the people who don't understand system mechanics who decry new systems and cling to the old ones. Things were better in my day, grump, grump, hurumph.

Quote from: Zachary The First;677025It's my preference as well, whenever possible. Even those I usually go all soft-hearted and let them swap around 2 stats.

We did the 2-for-1 swaps, but not with the B/X restrictions.  Figured it was showing that your character concentrated on one score to the detriment of another, or possibly two others.  Spending all that time working out didn't leave much time for studying, as an example.

Balance.
...
Boiled Pork.:rotfl:
(Forgive. I'm easily amused.)

Quote from: The_Rooster;677027Maybe in your mind it has, but in reality you're the one existing in a fantasy world.

What do you mean "in my mind"?  This is what you said:

Of course, you're only right if you don't care about game balance.

So unless you can point to a quote of mine saying I don't care about game balance, that is a textbook strawman.  Not in my mind.  In reality.

QuoteBy your own admission you don't care about such things and yet claim you know all about them. Sorry, but you don't. These feats and attribute bonuses are a balance nightmare.

Not knowing and not caring are not the same thing.  I know the names of most of the cast of Jersey Shore, but I can assure you I don't care about them at all.  Once again you are showing your complete ineptitude at comprehension.  

QuoteWhat I love about people like you is that you'll decry the efforts of people like me and yet in the same breath spit vitriol at WotC for making imbalanced classes. It's people like me, you know, the ones who actually understand system mechanics and system balance, who provide valuable feedback to WotC so that you can bitch about something else other than game balance.

I suggest calling 5e too video-gamey.


Here's a perfect example of not understanding system mechanics or balance. This is an absolutely terrible feat. For one thing, the range on even a shortbow is more than you're likely to need in most of your sessions. And really, if you're an archer then you're going to go longbow which is more range than you'll probably ever use at all. And since most characters who are going to forego a stat bump for a feat in order to focus on archery are going to already be proficient in the longbow, that's void too.

Then you have a -5 on all attacks. First of all, a -5 is MASSIVE in this system. You're essentially saying that you'll miss on most of those attacks. Second of all, it's a penalty and the entire system design and everything the designers have claimed up until this point, has been to steer away from penalties. That's why the entire advantage/disadvantage system was developed in the first place. And yet, here we are, already deviating from the design goals.

There are very good reasons for not wanting to use penalties. You should try investigating them and learning a bit about system design.


They're not gone. They simply weren't included in the packet because they're still being worked on.

Honestly, why do people like you even want to play D&D Next when it's patently obvious that you want it to be a BECMI or 1e clone.


Here we are again. The mere fact that you're asking this question tells me you have no real understanding of system balance and design. In fact, it indicates that you have no real understanding of fun at all. At least, not other people's versions of fun.


Thanks for proving a point. All you've done is defeat the point of rolling. Why bother rolling when you're going to let them have better stats anyway? 4d6 drop the lowest is already statistically going to average to be better than the point buy option.

It's always the people who don't understand system mechanics who decry new systems and cling to the old ones. Things were better in my day, grump, grump, hurumph.

OK, look.  I think by now we have a clear picture of your playstyle, and it's the "put everyone in an arena gladiator style and refresh resources back to max after every battle."  Let's just look at the short bow thing that you said gaining the ability to ignore range penalty doesn't matter.  Any target greater than 80 feet away means you have to roll disadvantage.  Unless all of your adventures take place in a dungeon or building, 80 feet is very important.  You've made it very clear that are viewing the game through an analysis that rarely, if ever, actually happens in game play.  You've also shown an ignorance of the rules ("you can't get an 18") and when called on your mistakes, can only reply with arguments that people haven't actually made.  

Congrats on that.  And to top the ridiculousness off, you have to audacity to accuse me of not understanding how things works.

Sorry, I can't handle that level of irony in one day.  I have a feeling rpg.net would be a better site for you.

Quote from: StormBringer;677029We did the 2-for-1 swaps, but not with the B/X restrictions.  Figured it was showing that your character concentrated on one score to the detriment of another, or possibly two others.  Spending all that time working out didn't leave much time for studying, as an example.

I think that's reasonable. I always thought of it as perhaps I roll a 10 STR, 12 DEX, 9 CON, 10 INT 14 WIS, 11 CHA, I swap the CON and WIS--that's sort of a Teddy Roosevelt move. I'm sickly, so I spend time making me tougher. Maybe I could have garnered more book knowledge in that time, but instead I focus on what I'll need to be tough and durable in the outdoors (or even a marital scenario).

Quote from: Sacrosanct;677006I'm curious to know why such aversion to rolling for stats, especially since classes don't require a high stat anymore.  Is it fear of having the chance for a low roll?  Is it hating the fact that another player might have better rolled stats than you?

Because players might not get to do exactly what they want. If you want to play a paladin in AD&D, good luck; chances are you won't even get close. I think this is more a problem with entitlement than anything else. When we played Mentzer D&D (for pretty much the entire time I was in junior high), you rolled dice and picked whatever class had the highest rolled prime. It was a game, and it was fun to take a less-than-capable playing piece to success. One of my favorite characters ever was randomly rolled a few years ago. All stats were phenomenal, but with an abysmal WIS, so of course I made a thief named Cugel. He eventually died doing something ridiculous, but heroic. I planned to play a cleric in that game, but the dice dictated something else...I went with it and had a great time.

Point-buy inherently fails on some level because of perceived "fairness". HERO or GURPS, for instance, try to make all characters the same in power level by stressing points, but a great player can be extremely successful with a shitty character. The worst player ever won't be able to do much with a D&D character who has all 18s.

Fundamentally, and I say this sincerely, random stats vs. point-buy (or even arbitrary assignment) is equivalent of picking the shoe in Monopoly vs. randomly pulling a piece out of a bag. In the end, the piece itself is essentially irrelevant to the gaming experience if you're just trying to have a good time. People who look at rpgs as something other than a game will most likely disagree.

Yeah, but as I mentioned, you don't have attribute requirements in recent versions.  Certainly not in Next.  So regardless of method, you can still play whatever class you want.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;677041Yeah, but as I mentioned, you don't have attribute requirements in recent versions.  Certainly not in Next.  So regardless of method, you can still play whatever class you want.

But but but...you have an 18 and I have a 12. 18 is bigger than 12. You are winning arbitrarily.

Quote from: Brad;677043But but but...you have an 18 and I have a 12. 18 is bigger than 12. You are winning arbitrarily.

It's worked for decades.  I guess I'm secure enough in myself that I don't get my panties in a wad if another character has a higher stat.  After more than 30 years, it really hasn't had that much of an impact to the gaming experience.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;677044It's worked for decades.  I guess I'm secure enough in myself that I don't get my panties in a wad if another character has a higher stat.  After more than 30 years, it really hasn't had that much of an impact to the gaming experience.

Pretty much. There are hobos with 180 IQs...am I intimidated by their greater intellect? Considering they're dumpster diving, not really.