"Looking at the summer months, June brings the Player's Strategy Guide, akin to a computer strategy guide but for Dungeons & Dragons. It offers up advice for building the best possible player character from the options available (including tips and tricks for using D&D Insider's tools) and better fitting them into your party." (emphasis mine)
Link: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20090814 (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20090814)
Nooooo . . . we're not trying to appeal to the MMO market, nooooo.... No influence from MMOs . . . nope.
Discuss.
...wow.
That strikes me as kind of ridiculous.
What do you expect, after the previews to the game they actually sold to people for hard dollars?
What's kind of interesting is that ivory tower game design is supposed to reward game mastery, and now, they cash in on this concept by selling guides to actually develop your game mastery, like cheat sheets and such. It's just an extension of 3.x take on game design, with the volume turned up to 11, when you think about it.
"advice for building the best possible player character"
No advice for playing the most interesting and fun character?
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;320789"advice for building the best possible player character"
No advice for playing the most interesting and fun character?
I thought they covered that?
Wait, are you saying there's a way to have fun other than having the most twinked out munchkin in a group of twinked out munchkins?
Dude you just blew my mind.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;320789"advice for building the best possible player character"
No advice for playing the most interesting and fun character?
Who would want that?
Sounds like the D&D 3e for Dummies book.
Quote from: Machinegun Blue;320803Sounds like the D&D 3e for Dummies book.
That book was actually pretty cool.
So in 5e, will the characters come pre-made, with only one per class (of which there will only be three - melee, magic, and dragonborn uberl33t shock trooperz) called "Archetypes", which are pre-maximized for your enjoyment? After all, no reason to let things like creativity or random dice rolls get in the way of obtaining that ultra hard core level 80 purple raiding gear.
And yet the usual suspects at RPG Net deny the obvious. Fuck this for a game of soldiers.
Makes sense. Strategy guides are very lucrative. Additionaly, I could see it as a real vanity project for someone who thinks that 4E would be well loved -- if only people were smart enough to appreciate it!
But I reject the assumption that Strategy guide = Computer game. There are also strategy guides for collectable card games, Chess, touring a city, and a million other non-MMO recreational activities that require a bit of knowledge to do enjoyably.
I'm guessing five hundred replies, give or take fifty, before this thread finally cools off.
Quote from: The Shaman;320822I'm guessing five hundred replies, give or take fifty, before this thread finally cools off.
This thread here? We haven't even started! :D
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;320819Makes sense. Strategy guides are very lucrative. Additionaly, I could see it as a real vanity project for someone who thinks that 4E would be well loved -- if only people were smart enough to appreciate it!
But I reject the assumption that Strategy guide = Computer game. There are also strategy guides for collectable card games, Chess, touring a city, and a million other non-MMO recreational activities that require a bit of knowledge to do enjoyably.
You're right. I don't dislike the idea because its CRPG related myself.
I dislike it because I think players twinking out their characters like MMO freaks is a terrible idea.
Quote from: Machinegun Blue;320803Sounds like the D&D 3e for Dummies book.
Exactly. This is just the 4e version. There will be one for 5e too.
I'm not seeing the controversy.
I'd rush right out and buy that. Except I'm saving my money for next month's 400 page+ Player's Guide to Sitting Politely at the Gaming Table. Between that and the must have Ranger's Guide to Plucking Turkeys, it's an exciting time for young gamers.
This used to be a Dragon Magazine column in early 3.0, no?
Also, it's not really CRPGLand until they start selling hint books for modules.
There are players that read modules beforehand...
I like computer game strategy guides, and I don't even play computer games. Some of those books are gorgeous, full of concept art (vice versa the often mediocre pixelized versions as they appear on the screen), and dungeon and/or town maps (Elder Scrolls!) that can be salvaged for tabletop RPGs.
I wonder what a traditional RPG would look like if a publisher chose to mimic the general layout and writing style of those books.
This sounds a lot like the 3E "Hero Builder's Guidebook", which was released a few months after the 3E D&D core books were first released. (It was the first or second splatbook released by WotC for 3E D&D).
http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/868960000
A 4E "Player's Strategy Guide" book probably would have been more effective if it was released shortly after the 4E core books were first released (ie. during the summer of 2008).
I'm not entirely sure why such a book is being released two years after the release of the original 4E core books. The more conspiracy minded people many argue that the purpose of a "Player's Strategy Guide" this late in an edition's lifetime, is that WotC is desperate to attract more of the video game and MMORPG crowd and/or they have been previously ineffective at attracting and retaining such a crowd. :)
Nevertheless, I think this 4E "Player's Strategy Guide" would have a better chance of selling if it's one of those 64 or 96 pages softcover books and not as a hardcover. The more experience 4E players may possibly skip over this book as being superfluous.
Quote from: Settembrini;320853There are players that read modules beforehand...
Thus the brilliance of doing it all with random charts :D
Oooh... this is genius. The next step is to sell individual strategy guides for each module that comes out with a complete walkthru of the dungeons and tips on how to beat each monster and where the best loot is.
Quote from: mhensley;320881Oooh... this is genius. The next step is to sell individual strategy guides for each module that comes out with a complete walkthru of the dungeons and tips on how to beat each monster and where the best loot is.
Walkthrough of WotC modules H1->E3 in one easy step. ;)
For 2010, it looks like they're only releasing one module so far. Maybe the D&D cash cow is in the hardcover splatbooks, and not the adventure modules.
Quote from: ggroy;320885For 2010, it looks like they're only releasing one module so far. Maybe the D&D cash cow is in the hardcover splatbooks, and not the adventure modules.
It'd be a bit surprising if that hadn't changed from 3.X.
Quote from: 1989;320783Nooooo . . . we're not trying to appeal to the MMO market, nooooo.... No influence from MMOs . . . nope.
Discuss.
It's always been clear to me that they
would like to draw in some of the MMO market (no idea if they've been successful), and that they did draw
some inspiration from MMOs, quite intentionally.
Some may argue otherwise, but it's pretty clearly true from my point of view. It's also not inherently a bad thing.
If there are (say) ten ways to make a character, but one of them makes a way more effective character, and the modules are created assuming you made that choice, *and* there's a strategy guide which tells you to make that choice - then it's not really a choice. There's really one way to do it, and nine ways to make the DM tell you you're doing it wrong.
Most theories about how to make an interesting game say that having the work of a choice, but not the interesting consequences of a choice, makes that part of the game un-fun. You're supposed to either eliminate the work, or make the choice a real choice.
So, unless they can make all ten choices balanced - and they've been trying for balance for a long time without any apparent reduction in the complaints about lack of balance - surely it'd be better to eliminate the choice, and turn it into an element of the particular class?
It is a bit strange that they're releasing this book - 4E is designed to lack sub-par choices, in terms of mechanical effectiveness. They already have suggested builds in many books. Seems a bit redundant.
Whatever, I certainly won't be buying it. No skin off my nose.
Quote from: Fifth Element;320893It is a bit strange that they're releasing this book - 4E is designed to lack sub-par choices, in terms of mechanical effectiveness. They already have suggested builds in many books. Seems a bit redundant.
Does the PHB
spell it out in sufficient detail for total RPG newbies? Or does it kind of suggest some stuff, and leave the "obvious" conclusions to the reader?
Not a loaded question there; I read the PHB about a year ago, but I can't remember very much now. Just the basics of the classes, races, skills, some feats and fewer powers.
Quote from: paris80;320897Does the PHB spell it out in sufficient detail for total RPG newbies? Or does it kind of suggest some stuff, and leave the "obvious" conclusions to the reader?
It spells things out very specifically for first level. I suppose there might be some value in suggesting builds at higher levels as well. Particularly tying them into paragon paths? I could see that.
Quote from: Fifth Element;320898It spells things out very specifically for first level. I suppose there might be some value in suggesting builds at higher levels as well. Particularly tying them into paragon paths? I could see that.
Right. Does seem a bit odd then. The only thing I stumbled on that was what this sounds like, is the warrior's and the spellcaster's optimisation guides for 3rd edition, put out by Goodman Games I believe. Wasn't anything I thought I'd need or want, so I let it sit there in the shop. Might still be there!
But yes, they could be providing guidelines for optimal paths to uh, paragon paths, and epic... destinies, was it? Those things, anyway. That could make sense. How hard is it to figure out that stuff though - anything like 3rd edition multiclassing and prestige classes?
Quote from: Fifth Element;320887It'd be a bit surprising if that hadn't changed from 3.X.
In principle, they probably would have known about the sales rates of modules back in the TSR days, as to whether they were lackluster or not. By the time it was 2E, it appears they possibly already knew that modules may not sell as well as the core AD&D rulebooks and other player centric splatbooks. So they picked another approach of pumping out many different settings, hoping it would become another cash cow but to no avail in the end.
The hardcover splatbook cash cow thing probably came later. Around half of the WotC 3E D&D splatbooks were done as 64 page (or more pages) softcover books, along with around 10 WotC D&D modules produced for 3E. By the time 3.5E came around, just about all the WotC splatbooks were done as 160 page (or more pages) hardcover books. By then they probably figured out that hardcover splatbooks were a big cash cow.
4E D&D in effect is probably a cherry picking of the approaches which have worked reasonably well for them in the past, found through decades of trial and error:
- Make everything "core".
- Hardcover splatbooks in preference to softcover splatbooks.
- 3 books per setting, instead of a proliferation of setting specific splatbooks.
- Less emphasis on adventures (ie. leave them to 3pp's like Goodman Games).
- Use the game to sell miniatures and power cards.
- Attract a new audience.
The problem I have with this is that their idea of best and mine often different, even if we're just talking about potential via mechanics.
Seanchai
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;320789"advice for building the best possible player character"
No advice for playing the most interesting and fun character?
Alas, if only. Problem is I think that D&D continues to move towards being its own hobby, with little relation to the hobby it spawned--role-playing games.
Quote from: Silverlion;320912Alas, if only. Problem is I think that D&D continues to move towards being its own hobby, with little relation to the hobby it spawned--role-playing games.
C'mon now - what's fun and interesting is even more subjective that what's "best" mechanically. If you wrote a book about what's fun and interesting to roleplay, you'd be skewered. At least if you focus on mechanics, you can fall back on math to prove your point.
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;320918C'mon now - what's fun and interesting is even more subjective that what's "best" mechanically. If you wrote a book about what's fun and interesting to roleplay, you'd be skewered. At least if you focus on mechanics, you can fall back on math to prove your point.
Seanchai
I've seen some gamer's math, I've seen some game designer's math--and how they fail to work out to do anything interesting mechanically in play. Aside from failing alot--if Keystone cops is wanted as a game genre, I know who to call. Otherwise, I think I'll stick with something more subjective, because at least I know that works for some of us.
The problem as I see it isn't in writing a book for optimal play--but if it can be done in D&D4E, then D&D4E flawed itself into pointlessness. After all isn't the point of 4E to make ALL classes and races, and power set combos equally effective and fun? that is why we get daily powers instead of spells, instants instead of actions and so on?
Plus of course even match can be wrong when you're talking about optimal in a play environment. I've watched friends play WOW and watch them choose things that were not the numeric best, simply because that was fun for them. They can still do that even knowing the best numbers of course, but I think ti is misleading to suggest that one book will show you the "best" of anything for "you."
This whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth . . .
Like Bradford said . . . if people can't see the obvious, then, eh, whatever. It's just denial.
4e. What a joke.
Quote from: Melan;320847Also, it's not really CRPGLand until they start selling hint books for modules.
There were hints for adventure modules in the Dungeoneer's Survival Guide. (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20071015a)
The problem I'm having with this kind of product is that it is designed for those who are intent on "winning" D&D. The Players who will twink their characters until it is the ultimate (fill in the blank) machine which is useless outside of its twinked out niche. The ones who get offended if their character suffers a setback during the course of the game. In short, those Players who tend to suck all the fun out of a game for the rest because they are not there to enjoy the adventure journey, but to prove that they can beat the game.
Quote from: paris80;320901But yes, they could be providing guidelines for optimal paths to uh, paragon paths, and epic... destinies, was it? Those things, anyway. That could make sense. How hard is it to figure out that stuff though - anything like 3rd edition multiclassing and prestige classes?
I don't think it's really even close. You don't have to plan for prerequisites or anything like that. It would be more about what powers synergize better with particular paths and destinies. I don't think there's a lot of value there, but I suppose a new player might.
Quote from: jeff37923;320929The problem I'm having with this kind of product is that it is designed for those who are intent on "winning" D&D. The Players who will twink their characters until it is the ultimate (fill in the blank) machine which is useless outside of its twinked out niche.
I agree to an extent, though 3.X catered to that type of player much better. I don't see much value in this type of book or that playstyle. But if some groups like it that way, more power to them.
Quote from: 1989;3209234e. What a joke.
You could have done this book with 3E (though would have had to have been a series), and even with 2E with all the kits etc. It's not about 4E. Get over it.
Quote from: Settembrini;320853There are players that read modules beforehand...
One of the reasons I never run modules.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;320880Thus the brilliance of doing it all with random charts :D
Seriously.
Quote from: Werekoala;320811... and dragonborn uberl33t shock trooperz)
It will be a dual wielding sword-mage, for maximum effectiveness.
Quote from: Fifth Element;320946You could have done this book with 3E
Yeah, but it wasn't done, was it?
Only with 4e do we see it.
Only with 4e do we finally see the "computer strategy guide for D&D", with those words coming straight from WotC.
That shows us the mindset. It's a joke.
Quote from: 1989;320985Yeah, but it wasn't done, was it?
Only with 4e do we see it.
Only with 4e do we finally see the "computer strategy guide for D&D", with those words coming straight from WotC.
That shows us the mindset. It's a joke.
Who cares? The important thing is how it's played at the table. I play 4e like I did any version of D&D, from 1979 until now. I don't give two shits about someone else's "mindset," because I play the game exactly the way
I want to play it. 4e plays like old school D&D at my table because that's
my mindset. Think for yourself and you won't have to hand-wring over what "mindset" a game designer has; the game becomes what
you want it to be.
Quote from: 1989;320985Yeah, but it wasn't done, was it?
Only with 4e do we see it.
Only with 4e do we finally see the "computer strategy guide for D&D", with those words coming straight from WotC.
That shows us the mindset. It's a joke.
They did do D&D for Dummies. It was a neat piece of cross-marketing, but it also indicated that they needed a book . . .well, for dummies.
Quote from: stu2000;320990They did do D&D for Dummies. It was a neat piece of cross-marketing, but it also indicated that they needed a book . . .well, for dummies.
And there have been dummies playing D&D since the beginning.
Quote from: ColonelHardisson;320991And there have been dummies playing D&D since the beginning.
They just didn't have their own book. :)
I used to draw pictures and flowcharts for folks who couldn't get the rules. Character sheets these days, though, do seem like a series of pull-down menus. A computer manual is probably the way to do it.
Quote from: jeff37923;320929The problem I'm having with this kind of product is that it is designed for those who are intent on "winning" D&D. The Players who will twink their characters until it is the ultimate (fill in the blank) machine which is useless outside of its twinked out niche. The ones who get offended if their character suffers a setback during the course of the game. In short, those Players who tend to suck all the fun out of a game for the rest because they are not there to enjoy the adventure journey, but to prove that they can beat the game.
I'm right here on this one.
Quote from: ColonelHardisson;320989Who cares? The important thing is how it's played at the table. I play 4e like I did any version of D&D, from 1979 until now. I don't give two shits about someone else's "mindset," because I play the game exactly the way I want to play it. 4e plays like old school D&D at my table because that's my mindset. Think for yourself and you won't have to hand-wring over what "mindset" a game designer has; the game becomes what you want it to be.
I care. I don't wanna have to wade through a bunch of powergaming munchkin primma donnas to try and find a group I can game with. If there's a way to teach newbies a method of "building the best possible player character from the options available (including tips and tricks for using D&D Insider's tools)" without also teaching them to try to "win" then more power to them, but I don't believe they can do that. We all seemed to manage to thoroughly enjoy the game for years without a character building "strategy guide".
You like 4e, you don't mind the strategy guide bullshit, fine. That doesn't mean the rest of us can't express opinions on it. Don't like it, get the fuck out of the thread.
Min Maxed D&D characters are sooooo fun though. Stone wolf druids that talk in animal form / cast spells... giant monks fighting with twin chain weapons, tripping horses... paladins with a reaper scythes doing hundreds of points of damage....
It beats the shit out of regular fantasy.
Quote from: Cranewings;321002Min Maxed D&D characters are sooooo fun though. Stone wolf druids that talk in animal form / cast spells... giant monks fighting with twin chain weapons, tripping horses... paladins with a reaper scythes doing hundreds of points of damage....
It beats the shit out of regular fantasy.
Sounds retarded to me.
(http://enrill.net/images/forump/wotc-strategy-guide.jpg)
Wow. Cover art by Scott Kurtz, imagine that.
Quote from: Cranewings;321002Stone wolf druids that talk in animal form / cast spells... giant monks fighting with twin chain weapons, tripping horses... paladins with a reaper scythes doing hundreds of points of damage....
It beats the shit out of regular fantasy.
If you're cool with that, that's fine. Different strokes and all that jazz.
At the same time, though, the game should be able to accommodate those of us interested in much more gritty, down-to-earth style games.
You sure? Looks more like Jerry Holkins to me.
Quote from: Cranewings;321002Stone wolf druids that talk in animal form / cast spells... giant monks fighting with twin chain weapons, tripping horses... paladins with a reaper scythes doing hundreds of points of damage....
It beats the shit out of regular fantasy.
Yeah, regular fantasy sucks.
But
über-fantasy sucks
and blows.
Quote from: Werekoala;321014You sure? Looks more like Jerry Holkins to me.
That was my thought as well.
These are the guys of Penny Arcade doing the cover. It's said in the video.
Color me corrected then.
Quote from: Benoist;321046These are the guys of Penny Arcade doing the cover. It's said in the video.
So any doubt of them being paid shills for the game is gone.
The video the screenshot comes from (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR4MVaCiSPM) discusses the actual product at the very start.
It's interesting to hear what Andy Collins has to say about it.
New and Improved System Mastery: Now Without Any of that Learning-by-Doing Crap!
Quote from: mhensley;321061So any doubt of them being paid shills for the game is gone.
I think it's hilarious that one of them spends his entire life eschewing pen and paper RPGs (meanwhile grinding through some of the worst video game sludge to be squeezed out of tube and calling it brilliant), and then when the chink of money is heard, he's drawing the cover of a fucking 4e book.
(Yes I'm aware he plays what wizards passes off as D&D now.)
Quote from: thedungeondelver;321078I think it's hilarious that one of them spends his entire life eschewing pen and paper RPGs (meanwhile grinding through some of the worst video game sludge to be squeezed out of tube and calling it brilliant), and then when the chink of money is heard, he's drawing the cover of a fucking 4e book.
(Yes I'm aware he plays what wizards passes off as D&D now.)
A more conspiracy minded person may think that WotC must be very desperate to have to go "bottom feeding" in such a manner. 4E may not have attracted and retained enough of the video game + MMO crowd, and this is their last ditch effort.
Quote from: ggroy;321079A more conspiracy minded person may think that WotC must be very desperate to have to go "bottom feeding" in such a manner. 4E may not have attracted and retained enough of the video game + MMO crowd, and this is their last ditch effort.
Eh, I'd say that there are just too many ways and reasons for WotC to have tapped the PA boys for cover art to immediately jump to the conclusion that this means that 4e is failing.
Quote from: GnomeWorks;321087Eh, I'd say that there are just too many ways and reasons for WotC to have tapped the PA boys for cover art to immediately jump to the conclusion that this means that 4e is failing.
Yeah, I'm not going to start hailing the imminent death of 4e just yet.
The cover art is shit, though.
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;320819...
But I reject the assumption that Strategy guide = Computer game. There are also strategy guides for collectable card games, Chess, touring a city, and a million other non-MMO recreational activities that require a bit of knowledge to do enjoyably.
Maybe strategy guide doen't equal computer game... But I don't think it is good for RPG's either.
With all the other games you listed there is a definative final result that can be achived if certain 'strategies' are used.
For real RPG's there should be no such thing as optimal strategies, or definative results. It is an organic game that depends upon the input of players and a good GM for an enjoyable playing expierience.
RPG's are not games where a winner is determined by following a set of rules to thier conclusion. That's what makes RPG's special. By trying to remove or limit that element you rob RPG's of what makes them unique.
A little Character optimalisation is expected. But not only to actively encourage it, but make it an
essential part of the game... ??? People should just admit what they are doing, buy Munchkin, and stop lying to themselves.
That's how I see it anyway.
Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;320819But I reject the assumption that Strategy guide = Computer game.
But that is exactly the analogy WotC is using:
"June brings the Player's Strategy Guide,
akin to a computer strategy guide but for Dungeons & Dragons."
I'm normally first in line to bash 4E, but even I can't believe that WotC would be so mindless as to think the words, "akin to a computer strategy guide" will make the MMO kids switch to tabletops.
4E is essentially a bunch of mathematical models interacting, and the guide probably demonstrates the best ways of reducing the odds against the player (though the fact that this is an accessory for a game designed to protect players from loss of any sort suggests that much of the 4E audience should only use cutlery when under supervision).
It does, however, say, "this game is so unintuitive, so far removed from the processes of imagination and creativity, that we can show you how to "win" it through technical mastery of the game system."
Quote from: Silverlion;320912Problem is I think that D&D continues to move towards being its own hobby, with little relation to the hobby it spawned--role-playing games.
I suspect that's part of the WotC strategy. They want to sell "the D&D Hobby" because that's what they own and control.
I doubt Games Workshop is interested in growing the "minis wargamer" hobby - they just want to sell "the Warhammer Hobby"
Quote from: Jaeger;321096For real RPG's there should be no such thing as optimal strategies, or definative results. It is an organic game that depends upon the input of players and a good GM for an enjoyable playing expierience.
I doubt the book is about in-play strategies as much as it is about Character Building and Team Building. This book is a synergy product. It will show gamers the various types of builds you could do with various race and class combos if you own all their PHBs, Race books and Power books.
I have made many characters for 4e because I do pre-gens for all my con games. There is no uber-build, but there are certainly some builds that do particular things better than others.
But this ain't new. Every point based RPG and every D20 game had better and worse ways of making certain types of characters. Min-maxing didn't start with 3e. People were doing it with Champions in the early 80s.
Quote from: mhensley;321061So any doubt of them being paid shills for the game is gone.
That's just naysaying. They are little guys just like you, me or the talented Mr. Rouse -- underground comic artists with a genuine love for the game. Why so mean?
Quote from: thedungeondelverThe cover art is shit, though.
I had issues finding a clear shot of it. Honestly, though, PA's style is rather distinctive; it may be more important that they did the cover, rather than what it necessarily is.
Quote from: Melan;321128...or the talented Mr. Rouse...
Fuck Rouse. He's an asshat.
And if you decide to direct the "why so mean?" question at me: because when I tried to explain why I did not like 4e - in a thread on EN World in which he mentioned wanting to try to bring in "lapsed players" - from the perspective of someone who preferred 3.5, he pulled some bullshit about not wanting to get into an edition war. If you don't want to fucking discuss the issue, then don't claim you want to.
Quote from: GnomeWorks;321139Honestly, though, PA's style is rather distinctive; it may be more important that they did the cover, rather than what it necessarily is.
It's actually reminiscent of the cartoony style of early D&D artists. I think it should be encouraged over the super-serious, demi-anime style of 4E so far.
I want more art like this.
(http://cache.lego.com/images/shop/prod/7036-0000-xx-33-3.jpg)
Quote from: Hairfoot;321148It's actually reminiscent of the cartoony style of early D&D artists.
As in Erol Otus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erol_Otus
Quote from: ggroy;321151As in Erol Otus?
Yup.
Quote from: Melan;321128That's just naysaying. They are little guys just like you, me or the talented Mr. Rouse -- underground comic artists with a genuine love for the game. Why so mean?
Oh, I like them well enough and usually enjoy their comics, but their podcasts and posts about 4e are nothing more than a paid advertising campaign which I find to be unethical. Ironically, they've done comics in the past that lambasted video game reviewers for taking money under the table to print good reviews. They've done the same thing here.
Book idea suXXXorz. Cover art r0XXXrZ. 'Nuff said.
Quote from: Spinachcat;321121Every point based RPG and every D20 game had better and worse ways of making certain types of characters. Min-maxing didn't start with 3e. People were doing it with Champions in the early 80s.
Yes, but there was a learning curve that was part of mastering the system. One became competent at creating optimized characters by creating and playing characters.
Even the optimization boards at Whizbros, which turned the process up to eleven, were fan-based for the most part.
I think it's the idea that, "Look! It's skill-in-a-can!" that rubs me the wrong way.
Then again, on further reflection strategy guides for games aren't unusual. After all, chess books detailing attacks and defenses have been around for centuries, and one can study for a lifetime to achieve mastery of the game. I suppose my reaction is simply based on the fact that what I know of the games I like came from my own experience in mastering the rules through play. I think I'm having a, "Get off my lawn, you kids!" moment . . . :p
Heck, many players of Vampire: The Masquerade I know became masters at character optimization.
I know, because I was one of them.
Quote from: Hairfoot;321148It's actually reminiscent of the cartoony style of early D&D artists. I think it should be encouraged over the super-serious, demi-anime style of 4E so far.
Hehe, +3 backscratcher.
I think that 4e's art style sucks. I really liked 3.5's art style; I prefer serious art over the silly stuff.
Quote from: Kyle AaronI want more art like this.
I would play that game
forever. The minis would be cheap as hell, too!
Quote from: Hairfoot;321111It does, however, say, "this game is so unintuitive, so far removed from the processes of imagination and creativity, that we can show you how to "win" it through technical mastery of the game system."
'Nail on the head' there. Simply knowing 1500 pages of rules better than another player is a no win.
Quote from: Benoist;321196Heck, many players of Vampire: The Masquerade I know became masters at character optimization.
I know, because I was one of them.
You know, there is something in the idea of munchkinism in V:tM I find amusing. I'll take a munchkin group over an angsty/gothy group any day, but in that particular game... I don't know, it just sounds funny.
Quote from: SunBoy;321243You know, there is something in the idea of munchkinism in V:tM I find amusing. I'll take a munchkin group over an angsty/gothy group any day, but in that particular game... I don't know, it just sounds funny.
For sure, since VTM was the first Storytelling (so-called) game in existence. It's the one people remember as saying that what mattered was the "plot" and "stories", the anti-munchkinism of role-playing as a True Artform (so-called) and so on, so forth.
It's highly ironic, as a matter of fact, especially since at the time, I was very much into the WW proganda thing and yet was optimizing my characters for the game, and didn't see any oxymoronic behavior going on.
I'm still playing the WoD, because I like the mechanics and the inspiration the games provide, but my games really are my own thing now. I just skip the "ideological" parts of WW's texts today. The best of both worlds, really.
Quote from: mhensley;321166Oh, I like them well enough and usually enjoy their comics, but their podcasts and posts about 4e are nothing more than a paid advertising campaign which I find to be unethical. Ironically, they've done comics in the past that lambasted video game reviewers for taking money under the table to print good reviews. They've done the same thing here.
The PA guys have never, in the entire history of the comic or the site, endorsed a product they did not enjoy. They've even gone out of their way to point out products in the past they've refused to endorse because they found them to be crap, and IIRC, there was one very public moment where they pulled an endorsement, of WoW of all things, when the product wasn't holding up to the original promised standard.
I have no doubt in my mind that the PA guys are indeed enjoying 4e, even if perhaps the podcast is a bit of a stunt initially. If they weren't they wouldn't keep working on it.
I did find this interesting, however, from a recent newspost:
QuoteOne of the things that makes Dungeons & Dragons so appealing to me is that it has, somehow, retained its illicit nature. I don't want to dredge it up in its totality, but my mother never knew that I played it, and the very core of that experience - where we began to explore, as a group, campaign-wide themes and more robust characterizations - was Dark Sun.
And now, it's coming back.
Modularity - perhaps the key principle of Fourth Edition - wasn't a concern at all, back then. If you wanted character portability, you played Palladium or Gurps. I have to admit that part of me liked how filthy everything was in D&D, by comparison - shimmed in sans caulk, rough seams everywhere, with prodigious lengths of duct tape officiating any number of unlikely systemic marriages. The post-apocalyptic Dark Sun epitomized this concept, with its warring schools of magic, two alternate forms of clerical magic, a truly bizarre path for character advancement beyond level 20, and (for a very long time) a world whose history that was almost completely unknown. The more they told of that history, the less I liked it. Funny how that works.
The new system has the capability to describe the blasted world of Athas with much greater precision, oh, but that filth. I will miss those jutting mounds of junk, where such treasure hides.
(CW)TB out.
So maybe Tycho's starting to realize what he's missing. ;)
Quote from: Benoist;321245I'm still playing the WoD, because I like the mechanics and the inspiration the games provide, but my games really are my own thing now. I just skip the "ideological" parts of WW's texts today. The best of both worlds, really.
Exactly. The last Vampire campaign I played (more than a year ago) was something like that, and it was actually really cool. Downside was, there was one (possibly two) of the other players that were all about that "what matters is the exploration of the inhuman psychology" crap, so they ended up with characters that not only sucked system-wise but also were totally boring, because they were trying to play a different game.
One of these days I need to do a thread/blog post about the WoD games and their disconnects.
The books initially start with one idea of how it should roughly be played, yet the games usually give a different vibe, and of course the playerbase has an entirely different one. And the inspirational fiction usually goes in a totally different direction from that.
This is probably why Promethean is the best WW setting book, yet its also the least popular and most vocally hated.
Its everything WW games have strived to be from the start, yet the playerbase totally rejects it.
(A close second is Changeling, and the playerbase fucks it up more than anything. Though the books do a decent job of helping the borking along. Yet it almost works in a sad form of irony that covers the human condition ALL too well.
SPOILERS: in Changeling you are effectively humans who were abused which made you a Changeling and you escaped from a mixture of heaven and hell. The people who did this to you were subjected to the same thing you were. They just got powerful. You return and basically fuck up doing all the Machiavellian bullshit that ruins the entire gamut of White Wolf RPGs. And many proceed to then perpetuate the cycle of abuse heaped on them. Just like in our real world, so many victims of abuse then abuse someone else usually in exactly the same way instead of saying NO MORE. WHAT HAPPENS TO ME HAPPENS TO NOBODY ELSE, IT ENDS NOW, they do it to others. )
I also need to write why being a WW character is usually the polar freaking OPPOSITE of awesome. Especially Vampires which have gotten this idealistic fetish now thanks to Anne Rice and now that crazy Mormon chick who wrote Twilight instead of being a mixture of monster to be feared or wretch to be pitied.
Quote from: Captain Rufus;321347One of these days I need to do a thread/blog post about the WoD games and their disconnects.
(...)
I also need to write why being a WW character is usually the polar freaking OPPOSITE of awesome.
[OT]
Please do! I would
very much like to read your thoughts on that matter!
[/OT]
Quote from: Benoist;321245For sure, since VTM was the first Storytelling (so-called) game in existence. It's the one people remember as saying that what mattered was the "plot" and "stories", the anti-munchkinism of role-playing as a True Artform (so-called) and so on, so forth.
(Actually, Prince Valiant by Greg Stafford described itself as a "Storytelling" game a few years earlier, but it never made the waves that VtM did.)
Before anyone else goes labeling the Penny Arcade guys as shills, they should know that they are the same guys who let Paizo use one of their creations (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/3/21/) for free, to stat it up for one of their Pathfinder products and make it OGC material.
Quote from: Evansheer;321396Before anyone else goes labeling the Penny Arcade guys as shills, they should know that they are the same guys who let Paizo use one of their creations (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/3/21/) for free, to stat it up for one of their Pathfinder products and make it OGC material.
I'm guessing someone somewhere is supposed to think this is impressive.
Quote from: Sigmund;321000You like 4e, you don't mind the strategy guide bullshit, fine. That doesn't mean the rest of us can't express opinions on it. Don't like it, get the fuck out of the thread.
That doesn't mean the rest of us can't express opinions about your opinions, etc, etc.
Quote from: Captain Rufus;321347SPOILERS: in Changeling you are effectively humans who were abused which made you a Changeling and you escaped from a mixture of heaven and hell. The people who did this to you were subjected to the same thing you were. They just got powerful. You return and basically fuck up doing all the Machiavellian bullshit that ruins the entire gamut of White Wolf RPGs. And many proceed to then perpetuate the cycle of abuse heaped on them. Just like in our real world, so many victims of abuse then abuse someone else usually in exactly the same way instead of saying NO MORE. WHAT HAPPENS TO ME HAPPENS TO NOBODY ELSE, IT ENDS NOW, they do it to others. )
And here I was thinking how Changeling was the WW game I enjoyed the most, 'cause you get to play fairies with cool powers... So all the times I was playing that satyr I was actually portraying the psychologically fucked up abusive cycle of a rapist?
Dude... I'm sorry, but sticking to the "cool fairies" is way more fun to me...
Quote from: SunBoy;321664And here I was thinking how Changeling was the WW game I enjoyed the most, 'cause you get to play fairies with cool powers... So all the times I was playing that satyr I was actually portraying the psychologically fucked up abusive cycle of a rapist?
Dude... I'm sorry, but sticking to the "cool fairies" is way more fun to me...
Paging someone to explain to this young lad the terrible tyranny of fun!
Thanks, but I think I'll pass.
Quote from: SunBoy;321664And here I was thinking how Changeling was the WW game I enjoyed the most, 'cause you get to play fairies with cool powers... So all the times I was playing that satyr I was actually portraying the psychologically fucked up abusive cycle of a rapist?
Dude... I'm sorry, but sticking to the "cool fairies" is way more fun to me...
I like both games. Changeling the Dreaming is cool in its own right, with the "cool fairies", the different courts, the banality, and all that... it's a much more light-hearted Vampire with the politics more or less kept intact. It's a cool game.
But man, Changeling the Lost is great too. It's a completely different approach, much darker, much more horrific, but it's also much closer to the original meaning of what a changeling's supposed to be in folklore. It provides a completely new and different game, and it's no surprise to me to see it associated with Promethean the Created for the best game of the new WoD (I think Promethean is even more genuinely new - it's less playable out of the gate, but I consider it to be an absolute gem of a game).
Im not saying that Changeling is a bad game, but one way to intepret it is how many people play it.
Of course the way many people play WW games is part of the problem as I mentioned, though in Changeling's case (as mentioned) it sort of works in a kind of sad and depressing look at human psychology.