Over the past decade, there's been a noticable trend in D&D core books to dedicate increasingly less space to treating the rules as a toolkit you can play with. Rules to create your own stuff.
First we had the
3.5core books, which dropped the entries on how to make your own classes and races, a section you could previously find in the 3.0 DMG.
Then we had the
4.0 core books, which left out the section on how to make your own traps. You see, if you wanna build traps in 4E you must buy a separate book, the DMG
2.
And now we have
D&D Essentials, which does not even contain rules on how to advance monsters, let alone create new ones (same for traps). You can't get monster creation/advancement rules in the 'book which contains all the rules' (http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/291694-essentials-rules-compendium-preview-copy-hand.html), or in the DM's book (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26085449/Dungeon_Masters_Kit_vs._Rules_Compendium). Nor can you get these rules in the freaking Monster manual either (http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/296312-monster-vault-i-has-5.html#post5367512).
People asking for these rules in D&D Essentials on the WotC forums get this response:
QuoteYou might consider a DDI subscription. Every monster gets put into the Monster Builder where you can tweak them, change their levels and make your own.
Oh thanks, Larry. Yeah, I better get running now and pump money in a subscription service so I can build my own stuff.
To say the least, that's an interesting trend.
Now, I'm the last one to denigrate the usefulness of online tools - heck, it's been two years since I last built my own 3.x monster without such stuff. I also have lots of sympathies for people with (gasp) real jobs who don't want to spend an hour on making a character, and are happy to breeze through char gen in 2 minutes on the new "Character builder" which automates most sub-choices they'd have to make otherwise.
You see, I'm happy for a company to provide these options.
When they are
options. But when companies start to keep the actual math away from their customers - as with monster creation - I can't help but feel that there's a deliberate intent to create customer dependence on exclusive online tools. If these tools are then designed to no longer function offline - see the new Character Builder, which can't be downloaded - the trend to make pen and paper a "subscribe if you wanna play" experience becomes a lot more real than it was, say, a couple of years ago.
This was the very fear that people got when WotC announced DDI in summer 2007. I think we are yet to see the full blast of that. It will be interesting to watch.
Edit. Added since I just stumbled across this discussion (http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/297369-possible-houserule-feats-new-cb.html). It used to be possible tweak stuff on the Character Builder software for houserules. So what's the situation with the new software?
QuoteUnfortunately houserules are unsupported at the moment. They say they are going to add support... but we don't have a solid timeline as to when yet.
I made monster for many years (1975 on) by looking at monsters in the book and designing what I want from there. The math and official rules for such weren't published. I doubt they even existed to be published. I still design monsters this way today. If I played 3.x or 4e, I would design monsters the same way. It's fast and it works -- and it doesn't depend on buying more stuff let alone paying a monthly fee.
Quote from: RandallS;419635I made monster for many years (1975 on) by looking at monsters in the book and designing what I want from there. The math and official rules for such weren't published. I doubt they even existed to be published. I still design monsters this way today. If I played 3.x or 4e, I would design monsters the same way. It's fast and it works -- and it doesn't depend on buying more stuff let alone paying a monthly fee.
I feel you there. In 3E D&D I not only got monsters quicker by "guesswork" stats, but in my experience, more useful monsters than ones that I "leveled up." 4e monsters don't strike me as that hard to sketch up for a veteran GM - they're simpler than the PCs, at least, or 3e monsters.
However, that said, I think it is a real fuckup not to include chapters on how to make your own monsters and traps, because it's not as simple an intuitive leap for the beginners who the books
need to be reaching.
Well. I agree with everyone on this thread so far. It sucks that these elements are not included in the written game, it sucks to see the gaming trends it creates (what with people whining they can't be bother to create characters without the builder... seriously), and at the same time, Randall's totally right when he says you can just build the monsters like you would for AD&D, just looking at the existing monsters, tweaking them at first, and as your experience with the game grows, making up your own.
The whole bullshit of subscriptions and builders and all that jazz works only if you let it work on you, only if you buy into the rules balance bullshit in the first place, believe that a +1 there instead of a +2 is going to wreck your game, etc. So don't, in the first place. Just run the game, and make up your own stuff. If it's too hard to do it on your own, you need to change game systems. That's about it, really.
Quote from: Windjammer;419630I can't help but feel that there's a deliberate intent to create customer dependence on exclusive online tools. If these tools are then designed to no longer function offline - see the new Character Builder, which can't be downloaded - the trend to make pen and paper a "subscribe if you wanna play" experience becomes a lot more real than it was, say, a couple of years ago.
That's just smart business.
"Rules as Toolkit" creates the sub-hobby of Amateur Game Designer and that isn't what what sells today. WotC is selling "Play Da Game" and the focus is to make being a GM easier.
If GMing is easier, there will be more GMs. More GMs mean more players. More players mean more sales.
I am surprised FFG hasn't retooled Descent and hybridized it as RPG, then sold "Adventure Packs" to conquer the Casual RPGer market. Heck, grab the Diablo license and kick some ass.
If they can do a job equal to Warhammer Quest, they'd probably do awesome. Especially if they added a RPGA-like component of organized play.
But until DDI allows 24/7 worldwide D&D graphical gameplay, WotC is chock full of stupid.
WOTC have more or less always had a "you don't make up stuff, we make up stuff" policy, but it was much less overt in the 3.0 era, just since its actually much harder to build stuff in 3.5 - something experienced GMs are more likely to do since there's more fooling around with fiddly details and/or because your players have already fought everything in Monster Manuals I through III repeatedly. If monsters are easier to make, it perhaps needs some more draconian measures to ensure people are dependent on supply, whether via splatbook (the old model) or subscription (the new model).
They've probably always had a few formulas they weren't sharing - its pretty easy to reverse engineer the 3.5 Exotic Weapon construction rules, for example, but they were never made explicit since they'd rather sell you a few weird new weapons in each book.
I dunno, I ran 4e for a few months, and if I were to do it again, I'd probably just run everything from page 42 of the DMG and a little intuition to stat my own creations up on the fly.
Heck I bet I could run a whole campaign using nothing but pg 42 and some rough ideas of hitpoint totals.
No big surprise here.
Getting people to pay more for less.
Quote from: WindjammerOver the past decade, there's been a noticable trend in D&D core books to dedicate increasingly less space to treating the rules as a toolkit you can play with. Rules to create your own stuff.
Must be part of the reason I took my bat and ball and left to create my own stuff.
You are, BTW, forgetting the other dimension that went along with this. AS the space in rulebooks decreased for helping people who wanted to grow with a game, so to grew the shrill emphasis on (encounter) balance. The two are related.
Sure, push all the creative folk away.
Quote from: Windjammer;419630Rules to create your own stuff.
You mention 3.0, 3.5, and 4e, but were there rules for creating your own classes, monsters, etc., in OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, or 2e?
Seanchai
Quote from: Seanchai;419814You mention 3.0, 3.5, and 4e, but were there rules for creating your own classes, monsters, etc., in OD&D, BD&D, AD&D, or 2e?
For 2E AD&D, it's on page 22-23 in the DMG.
Quote from: Benoist;419655The whole bullshit of subscriptions and builders and all that jazz works only if you let it work on you, only if you buy into the rules balance bullshit in the first place, believe that a +1 there instead of a +2 is going to wreck your game, etc.
The Builder doesn't exist to take anything away from the game or DM. It exists to make customizing and creating your own monsters easier, which it does.
I think folks are a little off base here. If WotC didn't want DMs creating or customizing their monsters, if they didn't feel doing so was a) expected and b) a selling point, the Monster Builder wouldn't exist.
Seanchai
Quote from: ggroy;419819For 2E AD&D, it's on page 22-23 in the DMG.
That's classes in 2e - how about anything else? 'Cause I'm not exactly seeing the latter editions dropping the ball when it was never really in play to begin with...
Moreover, see the bit in my latest post about the Monster Builder...
Seanchai
Quote from: Spinachcat;419659I am surprised FFG hasn't retooled Descent and hybridized it as RPG, then sold "Adventure Packs"
Not marketed to non-gamers I know, but have you looked at WFRP3? :D
Quote from: Seanchai;419829That's classes in 2e - how about anything else? 'Cause I'm not exactly seeing the latter editions dropping the ball when it was never really in play to begin with...
There's some rough guidelines for building one's own monsters, at the end of the 2E AD&D Monstrous Manual.
In WotC's defense, most people really don't, or don't want to, make their own creatures.
That being said, I do. I can tweak things, but consider it haphazard and prefer a framework to build around, or the existing framework to be exposed. Buying into a subscription model to do that is a non-starter for me.
Fantasy Craft is suiting my purpose this way right now. Creature/NPC system in book, free online tools, as well as free online Class framework (it actually has one) and point design system for PC races, talents, and specialties.