|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 11:06:12 GMT -9
This company searched for artists on this forum some time ago ... isn't it the game DarkMook was working under contract on? Or is this misinformation on my side? Don't want to release some rumors into the wild ... . Yes, dear CBW community, that's the digital future - get used to it. I have a hard time with this stuff, as they are trying to jump on a aesthetical trend towards cardboard flats and standies? Sooner or later it's not necessary anymore to cut and glue and play on a table - just play on your lab/phone. I don't know, if this makes me really happy. It pushes the distributive and economic power into the hands of the few (crafty) people, who can bundle all energies and technologies into one winner application. The rest will starve. As is the Paper RPG industry starving under the PC/Console/Online gaming industry ... . The team is pretty impressive - some major names I recognize. I know those Dungeon Tiles - I have seen them before, I don't mean Babbles.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 10:17:20 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 8:35:27 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 7:55:24 GMT -9
ACTA!? What's that? mesper, I am under/desinformed. Have to dig this ... . I knew, this smells like concerted action ... . Thanks for your hint, mesper.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 7:18:53 GMT -9
Yes, we are all little play devils ... . Nothing to be ashamed of, really. Without play, no game, no creativity, no art. The best thing you can loose as a grown-up, is your ability to play and create. Children are really good at that, while most adults are stuck to routines - like programmed robots ... . If you like mesper's A solution, then get back to my suggestions ... ;D. What I personally find a bit cold looking in your Logo is the silver grey. Do you want to have a treasure type silver amulet? Then make it (for children) shiny and sparkling. Or perhaps a warmer looking wooden tribal talisman/totem/amulet with gems/jewels inlayed? You have to find a way to combine the pieces ... then, I think, your Logo is looking fine. I especially like the zagged form/font of the 'eivaj'-piece. Try to push the 'minis'-part into the center under the 'eivaj'-part - balanced with the amulet, of course. Your Logo could be more compact, not so lengthy then. Just try several solutions ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 5:56:50 GMT -9
;D ... Hell, no ... please, mesper, I don't want to offend your Logo Design Abilities - as solution C is exactly what you could see on a medicine/pill package. Have a look at Fat Dragon Games or World Works Games - or Cerberus Illustrations and others - they are not ashamed of their Artwork Logos. That said, I think, mesper, your products could profit from a little bit more 'illustration' of page borders/fontstyle etc. - of course as decent and fine as your delicate figures shown, they should not get overwhelmed, I see that too ... . I think, Reivaj needs time to think about his Logo for himself, as this is a very personal and important business decision. I have to say also, that Reivaj's first try is still the best ;D ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 5:39:21 GMT -9
... Damn, that's nasty and direct action from US officials. Is this in preparation/combination of SOPA or still independent? Looks like a long prepared and orchestrated strategy to me ... . Wish I could help, but I am not good at those technical problems ... . EDIT: reading the news and being German, I have to say, that this is no fun at all - and reminds me of the same procedures to kidnap people 'under suspicion of terrorism' in COOPERATION of US and German Officials of Justice and State Police without trial, national protection of law and personal id or sufficient civil procedures of justice. The German New- and Post-Economy Guru and owner of megaupload Kim Schmitz and his (mostly German) business partners seem to be catched by FBI in New Zealand to be accused in front of US courts for 'conspiracy to form organized criminality' (that could translate to 20 years of prison). That's a war going on right now - industry/politics versus web. I wonder, that Germany is silent. Kim Schmitz is still a German citizen - kidnapped by FBI with the help of German officials. Wtf.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 20, 2012 5:16:31 GMT -9
Ah, Parduz is awake! Greetings ... As long as we're trying to figure out, what it's all about with 4th Ed. (Cowboy was not convinced - and Adam occupied with 3.5 Ed., but he likes it ...), we're not derailing too much ... it helps. Parduz, you can play alot with those 3 Corebooks 4th Ed. of Summer 2008. This is a complete set with the most basic rules. But the rules are complete and fine to play as they are, some are saying. I recommend to have a look at the funny and insightful writings of the great 4th Ed. fan and blogger Greywulf (one source of my defending arguments pro 4th Ed.): greywulf.net/He has good additional material (e.g. best Character Generation Guide) and gaming examples to get the most fun out of 4th Ed. He describes this system as very old school like and easy to play with. He uses the 3 Corebooks (PHB1, DMG1, MM1) - and nothing else. No Rules Update. He doesn't care, he says. And it plays well. The second level of 4th Ed. gaming would be: downloading the Official Rules Update PDF from WotCs' website: www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/updatesarchive'Compiled Rules Update' will do. It's a Rules Update/Errata for ALL 4th Ed. publications. You can pick and choose new/changed rules as you see fit, I guess. The third level of 4th Ed. gaming would be: expand the rules with PHB2+3 and DMG2. You could also expand the Monsters with MM2+3. There seems to be a minor (?) rule break/showstopper between MM1+2 and MM3, the last one uses another format and changed rules for monsters in combat - BUT MM1+2 are NOT UPDATED yet, which seems to be quite confusing while gaming with MM3. You see, Parduz, WotC is here a victim of sloppy publication and the ever feared sprawling rule chaos creeping into this D&D monster since 1989. The fourth level of 4th Ed. would be: Character Option Books (the Power Book line) for those character builders out there. It's really Power overload then. Those are the books you will never read through - as you are not reading a telephone numbers book either. The fifth and last level: source/setting books, some additional races material and supplements/helpers. I do not know this material. I cannot recommend anything from the Essentials line of books/sets. I had a look into the Essentials Rules Compendium - it seems to be a sloppy fast product with old gfx and rules snippets tucked together. You could read on every 5th page: you need this book and you need that book - or: you need a DDI account with monthly fees. Parduz, you are fine with those 3 Corebooks as they are - at least to test it, if it is satisfying at all. As you are mentioning the holy words 'Dungeon Crawl', I suggest to expand them by 'Solo': shiftkitty.angelfire.com/This is a true classic for the more lonely and mad of us - but also a good guide for Module Designers and Testers. Have fun! gilius, ok. I am glad, you dig my thoughts and not turn away, as I sometimes could sound arrogant as others (not here, yet) are complaining. My pedantic lists could be quite enervating. I have to say though, that they are NEW to me also, because I am developing them while writing - scanning my (dusty) rulebooks out of curiosity. I also have no clear answer. I should test 4th Ed. firsthand like Adam or Cowboy did. Now, Gilius, this is a VERY thorough review of Essentials Red Box (which alot of customers on Amazon received quite well) - thanks for that. Now everybody has a good picture of what Essentials is all about: simplified introduction to the more complex core system of 4th Ed. For scribd you need a FREE account and I think, you have to upload something (an empty page - e.g. ;D) as a compensation for downloading something (you can delete it instantly again, btw.). Have a look at this masterpiece - it really could spark the fire. If you do not like the scribd thing, then you can PM me a mail-account of yours to send the PDF to you, if you want ... . You see, I am a 4th Ed. Angel right now ;D. EDIT: gilius, just have read Hackbarth's news about megaupload - now I understand your post better. Well, the PDF is on my harddrive, if you need it ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 19, 2012 13:57:27 GMT -9
... Reivaj is my name reading it from back to front, my name is Javier
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 19, 2012 13:43:38 GMT -9
To make all the readers of this thread really fall asleep, I just want to warn everybody who thinks, that Rhannon is hinting to a good offer. He is not. And it's getting rather complicated now, but I will make it brief: Essentials Rules Compendium (4th edition FOR 4th Ed. ;D, Sept. 2010) is a Rules Errata and Update and practical Compendium/Introduction to 4th Ed. at the same time, but: with omissions, major changes and simplifications in comparison to the Hardcover Ed. And it's heavily OUTDATED, as you get the official Rule Updates for 4th Ed. on WotC's page for download (more than 100 pages strong). And now listen: You CANNOT PLAY one single turn with this book, as all the game data (class data, powers, equipment etc.) is plain missing. You need the Hardcover Ed. or a WotC DDI subscription to get the data to play anything. The Rule Updates are quite confusing in regard to 4th Ed. Some say, they are neglectable and play with their old Hardcover books as printed some 3,5 years ago. Others say, they are quite heavy with major consequences for gameplay and mood of the game. People are complaining, that Essentials is useless crap, or they thank WotC for grasping 4th Ed. for the 1st time (especially with Essentials Red Box). Essentials Rules Compendium is NOT a complete game, it's a system introduction/overview/reference. It's not like D&D Rules Cyclopedia 1991. That was a COMPLETE game. In one book. 72 levels to climb to rule the Cosmos - literally.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 19, 2012 13:14:24 GMT -9
mesper, now there they are: the historical Hoplites with historical Shield Patterns! Fine Art, mesper. Would'nt had expected any less ... . Thanks for joining us to fight back the Persians (ehrr ... in my case: the Arachans !?). @reivaj, if you don't want to disturb the symmetry of your talisman thing, then there is the option to 'raise' the 'wooden' piece (where the 'eivaj'-part is on) to the same height level to combine talisman and piece organically - so that the letters could relax flat down on the piece. Now - as it is - you get the impression, that the 'eivaj'-part is ABOVE the piece, not engraved or such ... . Hackbarth said, your Logo uses too much color or form, is too complex, but I must say, that you can see especially in the Fantasy paper arts proud and heavy Logos, really show-off pieces, as we are not in the (dry) business class or industrial sector, where every Logo has 2 colors and the most boring pattern ... . So, I think, your Logo could work, if you could solve the 'e'-problem ... . What about a paper scroll attached to a compass thingie? No? Or a brazil wood piece attached to a wooden totem? Don't know, what your intentions are ... is your amulete specific? And is 'Reivaj' a (your) name, what does it mean etc.?
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 18, 2012 11:50:51 GMT -9
[Rhannon was faster ...] Edit: [Vermin King also ...] OUTSTANDING, Reivaj. This shows, that vectors can produce dynamic poses not of Bug Warriors only, but Humans too ;D. I see, you also have chosen some Fantasy armor decoration? Some biceps muscles are a bit odd, but fit the style - which reminds me of a tv series about the adventures of Odysseus, I watched as a child. Great stuff, Reivaj and definitely ripe for selling ... . Great Logo too, somehow Caribbean/Southern to me - be careful though with the red 'e' interfering with the amulete.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 18, 2012 11:02:10 GMT -9
... I stay by my words, that these minis are the most funny on this forum. Especially the boxy critters are new and refreshing to me. This is an original concept, I think, quite digital gaming like. I like, how you gave them individuality by dressing only. Yes, the face ... I remember the 'melting' scene quite well (watched it over and over again by rewinding the tape in the 80ies ... - still one of my favorite 'horror' film scenes, a true classic).
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 18, 2012 10:09:02 GMT -9
[1] The essentials books were bare bones aesthetically, but they were comprehensive rules wise. They would have needed the spit and polish of the core books to sell well, but they provide much more in terms of content, when lack of content in the hardcover core books was a frequently brought up issue. [2] Google any 3E title and PDF and you can find it for free...... Possibly another reason why 3E and Pathfinder are doing so well Q1: I have read quite the opposite: nice gaming materials (board and markers and introductory adventure etc.), but trimmed down 4th Ed. for absolute beginners. But maybe I have an incomplete pic of Essentials (a Dragon on a Red Box ;D). Q2: the first part of your sentence, @adam, holds true also for 4th Ed. - the second part not (for a reason) ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 18, 2012 8:00:31 GMT -9
[1] Honestly, I think there is a Knee Jerk reaction to hate the new edition whenever it comes out. There really were fewer choices in 4E on it's release, but to be fair people were comparing nearly a decade of 3E releases verses the 3 4E core books when that argument started. [2] ... If the "essentials" were the core products released years ago, I think 4E would have been a smash hit. ... [3] It allows a consistent mechanic (roll a D20 add modifiers and attempt to meat a target number) for all combat. Quotation 1: Yip, seems so. Players are afraid loosing 'their' game and hard-earned books and materials. I think, it was a HUGE failure of WotC to say openly, that 3.5 Ed. was unbalanced weird crap of old. You cannot do this to a loyal and then shocked community which felt betrayed as customers. Big, big mistake. Q 2: I doubt that. I think, Essentials line was the last marketing move of WotC to get a lethargic and saturated customer base interested in NEW concepts - and to jump on the (slowing) 'Old School' wagon at the same time. Essentials are even more cooked down than 4th Ed. Corebooks from what I know. Which verified and time tested roleplayer needs that? Essentials were for Kids who cannot even imagine to draw a symbol on paper without their Smartphone ... . But, as I said, I like, how WotC is experimenting with cards and tiles and markers, with die-cut gameboards etc. Hey, they have sold MtG, they know, what they are doing. They do the paper gaming market a HUGE favour - and I hope, that they don't stop. I have read on their forum though, that the customers are crying for DIGITAL TOOLS (which I cannot hate, fascinating as they are ...) to enhance the gameplay ... and WotC will hear that. I doubt though, that they have the knowledge, experience and resources to compete even against the FREEWARE tools (Masterplan or MapTool anyone?). Q3: yip, and that's MOST important in any good game system: COHERENCE and CONSISTENCY to enhance PLAYABILITY. And I find, that 4th Ed. is the most playable D&D since 1991. EDIT: ah, I forgot: Magic stuff and such in 4th Ed. - cannot say something about that. Cost tables are always Campaign dependent balancing rules for me - you are free to add or subtract 50.000 GP as a DM at any time - that's not too hard. FLUFFY rules and cool magic effects of rings and wands - that's another case. Could be, that 4th Ed. still needs work in that regard, as I've said. At least, it would be a (GIGANTIC) task for WotC to consult their rule databases (!) for 5th Ed. concepts. I am curious, what they are up with this time. Another failure - and we will see the D&D brand sold by Hasbro. As they did with Star Wars already ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 18, 2012 7:09:37 GMT -9
Cannot believe, what people are doing in their freetime - and just offer for FREE. Great effort and achievement, this 15 mm paper project. Thanks alot, guys! I will have a closer look - as I am always searching for Wargaming systems to integrate into RPGs ... . But be careful with what you are giving away - or the market will soon dry out ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 17, 2012 19:48:28 GMT -9
Hey, gilius, I don't want to whiz you off with overpedantic percentage statistics and undisputable truth logic ... I only wanted to defend 4th Ed. and the disappointed WotC team. They really MUST be disappointed. They seem to be clueless and helpless right now ... have a heart with them and their efforts ... they really tried their best to offer something new and solid and fixed in comparison to the older D&D stuff ... and the customers are playing their old stuff or nothing at all. I think, WotC deserve some credits here, and I've tried to play their advocate in this thread. I want to remember you, that I am no D&D fanatic or hardcore rule expert ... I even don't play D&D since 1990. But just by my rulebook material I own and in comparison to other systems I would love to crawl into the 4th Ed. dungeon - even as Soloplay. I see the problems. I have mentioned the cracks and errors of 4th Ed. But I don't want this impressive game system to die the gruesome death of ignorance and prejudice, that's all. I recommend to have a look at the following FREE expansion work of a single (hardcore) person, which may be nearer to 2nd and 3rd Ed. than everything WotC has done - I dunno - it's just too much material to evaluate without YEARS of active playtesting - so, Gilius try your corerules together with this jewel of homebrew: www.scribd.com/doc/3703481/4E-Classes-and-RacesNa, getting interested ... ? ;D I haven't read your 'childish remark', btw - really. I was offline the last few hours ... . @cowboy, yes, that's true. If you are coming from 3rd Ed. (I do not), then 4th Ed. Corebooks must be disappointing and feel like a ripp off. False marketing strategy by WotC. BUT - the layout and division of the different rule expansions make perfect sense - it's just: you had to wait some years to buy the full sparkling thing - and the developed system needs more time to flourish and convince the non-believers - but the market has changed - and 4th Ed. had only 4 years in a stormy sea - oh, that's bitter, I think ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 17, 2012 9:56:23 GMT -9
[1] ... We didn't feel that 4e had enough choices in character creation/advancement. ... [2] Oh, In 3.5e I like starting players at 3rd level. Enough HP to keep them alive and enough feats/abilities for everyone to shine in different situations. Look at the Ranger, no "Combat Style" until 2nd level and you need "Precise Shot" and the pre-requisite "Point Blank" to use your style effectively. I like the idea that players start off as heroes. You shouldn't have to struggle through multiple (possibley multi-class) levels before your charactrer starts acting like the swashbuckler/sniper/tank you imagined. ... Quote 1: because you are ignoring about 1200 pages of rules (PHB2+3, Power Option Books) ... Quote 2: Now I really ask myself, why you dislike 4th Ed. then. That's exactly, what is changed in 4th Ed. for the purpose to speed up the 'action' - everybody is rocking the dungeon floor right from the start - with cool cinematic moves and sparks and tricks ... . Damage is deadly. HP are beefed up, leveling is ultra-fast by the core rules (adaptable to the gaming style). 3rd level 3rd Ed. characters are like 0/1 level 4th Ed. characters - or worse. BUT ... ;D and that's cool ... MONSTERS and NPCs are beefed up also - just for balance. As I said: Killer Kobold Commando.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 17, 2012 9:27:58 GMT -9
Your Summary and Rule Evolution List of D&D is brilliant, @adam.
I agree with every keyword you've written.
paladin's wish list for 5th Ed. D&D:
1. Keep the working core rule system of D&D 4th Ed. Don't search for something new or better. That would be an insane waste of time, money and energy and doom the project.
2. Streamline the 'damage-only' Power Bloat of 4th Ed. Fill the gaps with traditional classic D&D lore of Narrative/Roleplay Spell Rules/Magic Items/Feats etc. Search the archives and work on the old stuff - it is the soul of the game ... . Maybe the core rule system must be expanded a bit to keep the overall structure of 4th Ed., but incorporate older material successfully = non-crippled.
3. Have a CLOSE look at Rule Cyclopedia 1991:
- mass/siege warfare rules - dominion/stronghold rules - overland hex-crawling - immortality and playable (NPC)gods/pantheons
That would fascinate some older gamers, I guess (35+) ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 17, 2012 8:25:09 GMT -9
That's, what I wanna see, sammo ... . Yip, works. Simple, but working. Only complaint: lighten up the reddish fill color of the 'Poison' marker - like the other light text colors ... it's a bit hard to read otherwise. Working with different grades of sharpness and focus is great (unsharp green poison splatter - sharp text) - cool depth effect ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 17, 2012 8:08:22 GMT -9
I had forgotten the fact that D&D 4th has three "Player's Handbooks," which sounds to me like a bad joke but hey, they've got books to sell, increasing sales curves to show. In any case, Wizards considers only the PHB, DMG and MM as "core" books and everything else as accessories so I don't feel wrong by judging the game by those three books. And on those three books what you have is an encounter (read: "combat encounter")-based tactical game and little else. That's not true, gilius - and it's plain unfair. ALL rulebooks (PHB1,2,3/DMG1,2/MM 1,2,3) are useful, meaty in substance, well written and layouted, nicely illustrated and bound. They're worth their price from a product quality viewpoint. And by their STRUCTURE and interlocking rules alone could you conclude, that the 4th Ed. designers had a clear and working CONCEPT in their mind - in contrast to the sprawling rule chaos of the previous editions since AD&D 2nd Ed. (with hundreds of 'Priest' subclasses and optional rules alone - you needed a database to keep track of the fiddly bits and pieces ... .). As paper mini designers we all should be glad about this concept, as it is for MOST roleplayers the only reason to watch the paper terrain/tiles/mini/cards market ... . 4th Ed. is gaming material heavy - and I appreciate this. PHB 1 4th Ed.: Combat Rules 30 pages out of 315 total. Less than 10%. DMG 1 4th Ed.: Special Combat Situations 18 pages out of 220 total. Less than 10%. PHB 2 4th Ed.: about 5 pages Combat related rule-updates out of 223 total. 2%. PHB 3 4th Ed.: 0 pages Combat Rules (= rules complete) out of 214 total. 0%. DMG 2 4th Ed.: 0 pages Combat Rules out of 222 total. 0%. I estimate 4% explicit Combat rule text in the complete 4th Ed. rule canon (nearly 1200 pages). And it's deep and rich (I've said that already). MM 1+2+3 4th Ed.: 740 pages monsters, monsters, monsters. No cannon-fodder here, but lethal weapons in the hand of a ( cunny - OMG - sorry ) cunning DM. Adventurers are advised to CIRCUMVENT combat encounters ... ;D. I have forgotten to mention the REAL character OPTIONS books: Divine Power 4th Ed.: 160 pages OPTIONS, PATHS & POWERS for character building ... Arcane Power (160 p.) + Primal Power (160 p.) + Martial Power 1+2 (320 p.) the same ... that's 800 pages of additional character customization rules ... . Don't say, that all Powers are combat-related only. They are not. There are rules for using even Combat Powers in non-combat-contexts ... . That's the main rule corpus of 'simple' 4th Ed. D&D so far: more than 2700 pages of gaming material. That's without special source-books and module material. You know, gilius, that I am a friend of RPG systems of all kind. I adore Ars Magica, I dig Basic Roleplaying in all its flavors, I love D6, you have pointed me to. I know some underground gems of the unknown masters (Kirk's Legendary Quest, Mazes & Minotaurs etc.). I even grabbed Fantasy Craft as an original and most advanced d20 OGL thing (more advanced than Pathfinder). But that does not hinder me to recognize, what a meaty, flexible, adaptable, scaleable and modular game system D&D 4th Ed. is. You can cut alot of features and powers from the system - it will work. Try that with 3.5 Ed. or Pathfinder.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 17:39:14 GMT -9
4e was like chess, but chess is not a roleplaying game. There was little in 4e that would encourage you to make a unique background for your character and too few choices to add "crunch" to that background. That would only partially be true, if 4th Ed. would be only combat. Partially true, because 4th Ed. combat COULD be chess-like (in the sense of tactical/strategical thinking), if all players (DM included) are knowing, what is going on. Kobold Minions could be nasty, if the DM knows how to play them well. But 4th Ed. is more than combat. What about Player's Handbook 2 - Character Options (pp. 176-)? I admit, that 2nd and 3rd Ed. may be more 'crunchy' - but especially 3rd Ed. is crunchy to an extent, that I would bite into my rulebook in despair, if I should build a less optimal character without my knowledge - just to learn after leveling-up, that he doesn't work. 3.5 Ed. is a game for maximizers who like to build the perfect character with perfect rule knowledge. That's not my taste. I prefer a simpler, but working system right from the start. Btw, the DMG 4th Ed. is the best Adventure/Campaign Building Guide I have ever read. I like everything - the simplicity, the structured (!) approach, the sound of the text, the gfx.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 16:34:03 GMT -9
Hmmm... Good discussion fellas, but once again, this is DRAGNOZ's art thread, not a discussion about blood vs. sexuality. Perhaps this would be better discussed in the forum under "General Topics." Yes, I also agree with you. But ... but ... "Tu quoque, Kiladecus, amici mi!" ;D ;D ;D Rhannon, ;D I am a thorough, but slow, and sometimes blacked out thinker ... you have to be patient with me. I didn't get the (subtle) irony of your reaction to Kiladecus - maybe, because I haven't followed your dispute in December ... . 'Tu quoque, Kiladecus, amici mi!' Latin proverb. Means: 'this (ethical) rule is also made for YOU, Kiladecus, my friend! So, Kiladecus was one of the first who posted OT=OFF-TOPIC stuff into this thread? I guess so ... . Your last post is clear as the sun to me (I hope ...), Rhannon. Welcome to the Wild Side of Art. Freedom! Freeeedom! FREEEDOOMMMM! FrEaDoM!!! So, your English is not as bad as you try to convince us that it actually is ... . Peace, brother. ;D
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 15:29:50 GMT -9
So paladin bows and offers sithcundman a coat of mail and a helmet, and an over-gilded sword.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 15:13:03 GMT -9
IMHO the 4th edition plays well as a "boardgame." It is a lot narrower in scope of what you can do with it, which disappointed lots of people, but when used within that scope it works well. Hi Gilius, long time since we've talked to each other ... I think, the 'scope limitation' of D&D 4th Ed. is a myth. It's a full-fledged and complex RPG, which is just different from lots of other RPGs, e.g. in the tactical deepness of combat. It has less Narrative Fluff Rules than e.g. D&D 3rd or 2nd Ed., but it offers not less roleplay, but simple and effective roleplay. In this sense it feels much more like Classic D&D than 3rd or 2nd Ed. ever could. That's great, I think. You can roleplay lots of stories with D&D 4th Ed. And they're not more repetitive than in any other genre games ... .
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 14:58:54 GMT -9
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 14:39:03 GMT -9
mesper, 'Weird Tales' is the name of an American Short Story Mag from the early 1920ies to the 1940ies until its disappearance because of bankruptcy. It was one of the few publication mediums of the greatest American classical horror/scifi/fantasy authors of that era, especially Lovecraft, Smith and Howard. So I would subsume everything which falls into this era - from Dreamlands, Cthulhu-Myth, Conan, WWWeird, Classic Superheroes, King Kong towards Atomic Mutants Hollywood ('Them!' (1954), 'Tarantula' (1951), 'The Beast from 20.000 Fathoms' (1953)) and Classic Aliens ('The Thing from Another World' (1951), 'Invaders from Mars' (1953), 'The Blob' (1958)) - even Classic Colonial Adventure (like 'Indiana Jones' as a modern adaptation). Verne and Wells I would pack into Victorian SciFi/Steampunk - as this has a very specific aesthetical quality (lots of steel). There is another species of Classic Romantic Fantasy beginning with Dunsany (Pegana-Myth) and overlapping with early Lovecraft (Dreamlands) and even Tolkien (Silmarillion) - but now we are in subclassifying mode ... ;D.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 13:48:57 GMT -9
excellent texturing
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 12:52:53 GMT -9
Hi Adam, if you are not glueing paper, then you are reading and testing it ... . Recreational 5th Ed. testing ... . 5th Ed. - now, really? WotC must be crawling near the edge of bancruptcy. The Hasbro pressure must be horrible. WotC failed to catch a good portion of the 3rd Ed Camp by oversimplification of D&D in the 4th Ed. Coreset. Alot of the older players were shocked by the amputation of beloved classes and especially complex spells of the roleplaying=simulation category. When WotC swamped the market with rule book after rule book for 3 years, the main advantage of 4th Ed. over 3rd Ed. - its relative simplicity and streamlined design - was lost due to sheer (power) bloat. So, interested 3rd Ed. players stuck to 3rd Ed. - no need to change at all - they continued playing the bloat they already knew. WotC tried to regain the simplicity value by starting their poor-man's cooked-down 4th Ed.=Essentials line to convince very old (school) and very young gamers, that Classic D&D was reborn out of the Red Box, combining it with simple boardgame adaptations of dungeon crawling. So, they advertised D&D Essentials as an INTRODUCTION to D&D 4th Ed., which was intended to be a simple-to-pick-up&play-game in the beginning (and succeeded in that). What irony. I have no real gaming experience with 3rd or 4th editions, I can only estimate and extrapolate what I know about the rules (I own alot of them ...) and the experiences of others I've read. I am not a qualified rules lawyer either. So my evaluation has to be tentative. I think, that D&D 4th Ed. is the most modular and coherent, also streamlined and playable edition of all D&D editions. It's also the most modern in regard to gameplay and technical quality. Combat rules are superb in their mix of tabletop wargaming and tactical chess (it's not for everyone, but I like it this way - with lots of battlemats and (paper) minis ). Some out-of-combat rules like streamlined Skill Challenges really remind me of the most elegant solutions for task resolution in RPG history (comparable to MegaTraveller). DMs are saving large amounts of preparation time in comparison to 3rd Ed. I've heard. In a gameplay sense D&D 4th is the most thought-out rule-set of D&D you could play today. It is mathematically sound - yes, too sound, some would say. That means: its 'balance', especially of different classes, has gone too far to the point, where it doesn't really matter, if you are playing a Wizard or a Rogue, as both are dealing Damage in a combat situation. The involvement of all classes in combat is great, but not in the way, the classes are loosing their specifity in terms of FLUFF elements - I mean: the chaotic 'noise' and creative fun of NARRATIVE rules of some highly complex spells and feats (mostly of the psychic or mind influencing kind) are gone. You are left to powers dealing mostly damage with interchangeable fluff text. That's not enough for serious roleplayers. I have read, that the last few 4th Ed. expansion books repaired some of these cracks, but I cannot proof it. Is there a Wish spell in 4th Ed.? That said, I would say, that going back to any edition prior to 4th Ed. would be a backstep in regard to simplicity and elegance. But alot of material of the rich D&D cosmos should be incorporated into the new rule mechanics without crippling them (spells, spells, spells ...) in exchange of too much combat related 'damage only' powers - this would make alot of 3rd Ed./Pathfinder players happy, I suppose. Also, WotC should have a look into the excellent and complete BECMI/Rule Cyclopedia D&D (= Classic D&D as of 1991), which I have played in my youth ;D - the second elegant and simple version of D&D. The BECMI Mentzer D&D is still in lots of aspects superior to any versions before or after (mass/siege warfare rules, dominion/stronghold rules, overland hex-crawling, immortality and playable (NPC)gods, good selection of spells and monsters) ... its incorporation into 5th Ed. would improve Charisma and Wisdom of The Game significantly. That's my somewhat general survey of the D&D case.
|
|
|
Post by paladin on Jan 16, 2012 9:42:09 GMT -9
I would love a hoard theme we never had before: [glow=red,2,300]Cthulhu[/glow] Iääää! Subscribed. Though, we could make it a bit more flexible by calling it: 'Weird Tales'. So every Smith/Howard/Derleth maniac is also included. I would even pack the WWWeird topic into this category!
|
|