Obsidian Entertainment and Future D&D/Forgotten Realms Games

[Junai]

Well, I liked the AD&D system better than the 3'ed++ versions. I just love the Forgotten Realms setting. What system is being used doesn't really matter that much to me. Take a look at Rolemaster if you want a new system. Now that's a beautiful roleplaying-game. Very realistic, and it'd be perfect for a crpg, since you could just code all the rules and tables. Wouldn't have to look through book after book to find critical table C for the fire-element etc. Everything would unfold right on the screen. *Slurp*.

 

Rolemaster and Iron Crown Enterprises' Shadow World would be perfect. But I must admit I love the FR setting. Maybe I never got tired of it simply because I never read all that FR fantasy literature about Drizzt etc.

 

Oh well,..

 

J.

Edited November 25, 2007 by Junai

[Xard]

I really want to know why some people prefer AD&D to 3.++ editions. I just can't understand it.

 

I vastly prefer BAB to THAC0 as well as enjoy how 3ed purged many - although not all - idiotic restrictions (not to forget 3ed brought feats) in D&D

 

( Granted, my knowledge of AD&D comes almost exclusively from CRPG's. )

Edited November 25, 2007 by Xard

[Junai]

^

I'm not too fond of all the feats. They should be skills, and you should be able to develop your skills. That's the way Rolemaster works. Maybe that's why I like AD&D better, because I played the simple PnP AD&D system side by side with Rolemaster PnP, and I always saw Rolemaster as the "big brother"- system, and AD&D as a quick and easy ruleset. When 3'rd ed came, it struck me as a cheap version of Rolemaster where they tried to introduce skills through feats, and BAB offensive and defensive bonuses instead of ac and thac0. Of course, Iron Crown's last Rolemaster version stole quite a bit from the latest D&D systems too, so both companies grab ideas from the other. It just cheapens or overcomplicates the individual systems imho. You can't add anything more to D&D now. It's like building a castle on a simple derelict adobe-brick foundation.

 

J.

Edited November 26, 2007 by Junai

[Xard]

True, I understand why some people prefer more simple system, D&D 3++ are very complex

 

Feats are more than just skills. They're that, feats. Background feats, abilities (non-combat too) etc. in addition to "skills".

 

With my latest game in BG2 I made fighter and the fact my abilities were "how many dots you have in weapon-shield fighting" it felt a bit too...crude. There's other stuff (especially absolutely idiotic restrictions.) too. Not to mention there's not as much classes. Heck there isn't non-memorized spellcasters in AD&D (not that I tend to play sorceress much compared to wizards, but yeah...). And no PrC's (although most of the PrC's are ridiculous. Mystic Theurge, moar liek munchkin theurge).

 

But it's matter of taste. Thanks for bothering to answer. For me it has looked like most of the people who prefer AD&D over 3rd ed do it mostly by feeling based "decision"

aka nostalgia and such. I hadn't actually thought some people might prefer simples system.

[Magister Lajciak]

Although I enjoyed AD&D when it was around, I personally prefer the mechanics of 3.X edition. I think many people like AD&D more, due to the flavorful settings (Dark Sun was amazing!) that arose then, rather than because of the ruleset.

[mkreku]

Personally I'm hoping that they'll never touch the D&D license again. It's such a horribly stilted system that actively encourages meta-gaming. I hate meta-gaming.

 

No it doesn't. D&D has its flaws, true, but it's still great system. And which does not encourage meta-gaming.

Yes, it does. And you even have a quote in your signature that kind of reflects that. I'm not interested in a system that's almost a game in and of itself. You guys can sit and discuss different "builds" for hours on end and discuss which "build" you will try in this and that game with later. Look up the word meta-gaming sometime and you'll see my point: "In role-playing games, a player is metagaming when they use knowledge that is not available to their character in order to change the way they play their character (usually to give them an advantage within the game), such as knowledge of the mathematical nature of character statistics.". I'm sorry, but however much you twist the words, planning your next mage-warlock-gnome-dishwasher hybrid ahead of the game is exactly that. I'm absolutely NOT interested in doing any of that.

 

This is why Neverwinter Nights 2 failed for me (I've basically given up trying to get through that game now..). I wanted to play a sneaky bastard that attacked people from behind. A rogue or assassin. Cool, I thought. So I rolled a character, chose a rogue and went on playing. Every time I leveled up I chose the skill/feat that seemed suitable for my playing style. When the time came for my character to take the next step and become an assassin, it was not possible! Why? Because I had PLAYED like a rogue/assassin and not read the f-bomb-ing rulebook! The system actively encouraged me to READ AHEAD of my character and META-GAME my character to be able to become what I thought I was already playing!

 

I once tried to explain this to Gromnir in some sort of thread about pen & paper gaming (that disappeared) but people who LIKE D&D refuse to accept this definition of meta-gaming, for some reason.

[Istima Loke]

...

 

This is why Neverwinter Nights 2 failed for me (I've basically given up trying to get through that game now..). I wanted to play a sneaky bastard that attacked people from behind. A rogue or assassin. Cool, I thought. So I rolled a character, chose a rogue and went on playing. Every time I leveled up I chose the skill/feat that seemed suitable for my playing style. When the time came for my character to take the next step and become an assassin, it was not possible! Why? Because I had PLAYED like a rogue/assassin and not read the f-bomb-ing rulebook! The system actively encouraged me to READ AHEAD of my character and META-GAME my character to be able to become what I thought I was already playing!

 

...

 

 

So when you want to work for a company at a specific position, you don't check for the requirements, you just go there and say "Hello, I want to work here" and if you thought what you did in your life was relevant to the job, they take you? Or if you checked what the specific position needed, then you "meta-gamed" life?

 

A character is well aware of what are the prerequisites for any class or prestige class because they are jobs. If your character wants to be an assassin, that means he wants to join a specific group of people (an assassin's guilt), which won't take anyone, so there exist prerequisites.

 

Meta-gaming has to do with the knowledge that it's a game. It's the abuse of the rules because you know that the world is fixed by them.

 

Anyway, by the definition you provided "planning your next mage-warlock-gnome-dishwasher hybrid ahead of the game" is not meta-gaming, since the way one plays his character is not yet set, thus cannot change.

Edited November 27, 2007 by Istima Loke

[Tale]

How can someone miss out on the Assassin pre-reqs if he wants to be a sneaky bastage? He only needs: Hide, move silently, and be evil. That's it. Was the idea to be a non-evil guy who murders for money? Or maybe a sneaky guy who didn't actually know how to sneak?

Edited November 27, 2007 by Tale

[Hurlshort]

This is also a problem with taking a pen and paper ruleset and putting them into a hardwired game. In a PnP game, the DM can adjust rules as they see fit. But it requires some hefty programming to do that in a video game.

 

I see the D&D ruleset as a bit of an impediment to a good video game. Considering the pace of leveling and speed of a video game, a simpler format like SPECIAL is easier to jump in and understand.

[mkreku]

So when you want to work for a company at a specific position, you don't check for the requirements, you just go there and say "Hello, I want to work here" and if you thought what you did in your life was relevant to the job, they take you? Or if you checked what the specific position needed, then you "meta-gamed" life?

This argument is so silly it's not really worth responding to.. But OK, I'll humour you: Yes, I "meta-game" life. Mostly because it's not a game but also because it's something I have to do, whether I like it or not. Games I play for entertainment (and thus I don't want to have to meta-game) while life is everything else. Beginning to see why your argument is one massive fail?

 

A character is well aware of what are the prerequisites for any class or prestige class because they are jobs. If your character wants to be an assassin, that means he wants to join a specific group of people (an assassin's guilt), which won't take anyone, so there exist prerequisites.

 

Meta-gaming has to do with the knowledge that it's a game. It's the abuse of the rules because you know that the world is fixed by them.

 

Anyway, by the definition you provided "planning your next mage-warlock-gnome-dishwasher hybrid ahead of the game" is not meta-gaming, since the way one plays his character is not yet set, thus cannot change.

No, I don't want to join a guild. I want to play as an assassin. It's like playing a murderer.. or a scientist.. or a barbarian. They're not jobs, they're some sort of clumsy titles to be able to categorize people easily. If they were jobs, wouldn't I be able to play as a carpenter or something? Meta-gaming is when you play the game with the knowledge of the rules in mind (unaffected by what your character might possibly know) and adapt your way of playing so you do everything "right" according to the rules, to attain a certain goal. I didn't want to meta-game so I chose to play my assassin-wannabe as I pictured an assassin to behave. That wasn't good enough because I hadn't played according to these stilted rules so I could never become an assassin. Like I said, no matter how you twist it, it's still meta-gaming and I hate it.

 

How can someone miss out on the Assassin pre-reqs if he wants to be a sneaky bastage? He only needs: Hide, move silently, and be evil. That's it. Was the idea to be a non-evil guy who murders for money? Or maybe a sneaky guy who didn't actually know how to sneak?

I chose move silently and backstab and some exotic **** that I don't remember. I'm not interested in alignment (which should adapt itself to what I do and not the other way around) and hide was not on my agenda. To be honest, I'm not even sure the class I wanted was called assassin, but it was one of the stealthy silent-kill types. I think it was an assassin.

[Tale]

No, I don't want to join a guild. I want to play as an assassin. It's like playing a murderer.. or a scientist.. or a barbarian. They're not jobs, they're some sort of clumsy titles to be able to categorize people easily.

 

You're confusing Assassin with assassin. The Assassin (PrC) is a member of an assassin's guild, he must meet the requirements they set forth to join the guild. An assassin is any character at all, regardless of class, that kills people for others. Simply selecting any class and choosing options to kill people at the request of others made your character an assassin. Even a level 1 Barbarian can be an assassin. You wanted to be the Assassin (PrC).

 

Do not confuse behavior with Class with Prestige Class.

 

Other examples are:

Red Wizard of Thay. This one has to be completely obvious. Joining the Red Wizards isn't a playstyle. It's not a clumsy title. It's an organization of Wizards, a prestigious organization. That's why it's a Prestige Class.

Shadow Thief of Amn, Harper Agent, Arcane Scholar of Candlekeep, and Neverwinter Nine are in the exact same boat as the Red Wizards. The exact same boat the Assassin is in. The Assassin PrC originally referenced a specific assassin's guild in, I think, Greyhawk. It's been extended to be no specific assassin's guild since.

 

Not all Prestige Classes are parts of organizations, of course. Some require ranks in Knowledge skills (Lore in NWN) that I guess represent finding out secretive knowledge on how to achieve the Prestige Class alone along with skills and feats that represent required aptitudes to accomplish it, such as Pale Master and Dragon Disciple. And there are other kinds. However, the PrCs aren't meant for everyone and they're not meant to be just classes or "clumsy titles."

Edited November 27, 2007 by Tale

[Istima Loke]

So when you want to work for a company at a specific position, you don't check for the requirements, you just go there and say "Hello, I want to work here" and if you thought what you did in your life was relevant to the job, they take you? Or if you checked what the specific position needed, then you "meta-gamed" life?

 

This argument is so silly it's not really worth responding to.. But OK, I'll humour you: Yes, I "meta-game" life. Mostly because it's not a game but also because it's something I have to do, whether I like it or not. Games I play for entertainment (and thus I don't want to have to meta-game) while life is everything else. Beginning to see why your argument is one massive fail?

 

That is my point. You can't meta-game life, because you are not aware that there is a bunch of folks sitting on a table, throwing some dice, arguing over our actions. As much as you know about a job, that much is known to your character about his career of choice. You know that you need to be able to code to be a programmer and the thief knows that he has to stab people on the back to be an assassin. This is not meta-gaming this is just planing ahead for what you will do in your life. The only difference is that abilities in a game like that are translated to numbers, thus you have to think of numbers instead of saying "I ll study to go to a good uni". That simple it is, really. If you don't like planing ahead about a character because you just want to have some fun in the game it's fine, just don't blame meta-gaming for it.

[waleswizard]

Does any one remember Eye of the Beholder/2?

Aaah the fun time i had with that game,not bad for a first person(which i tend to dislike).

[Pop]

It's interesting, you know, people who can't accept the necessarily deterministic nature of video games. They have to be either incredibly thick or staunch codexians. Silly philosophical libertarians. One pictures them getting indignant at not being able to fly when they jump, when they've made a choice to fly.

[Tale]

It's interesting, you know, people who can't accept the necessarily deterministic nature of video games. They have to be either incredibly thick or staunch codexians. Silly philosophical libertarians. One pictures them getting indignant at not being able to fly when they jump, when they've made a choice to fly.

It's posts like this that remind me why you're not on the list.

[Pop]

We certainly can't all be. Then there wouldn't be a point in even having a list.

[Magister Lajciak]

Most games with anything more than rudimentary complexity encourage some degree of metagaming. This is not necessarily bad, though, as metagaming can sort of become a game in itself and can even be fun.

[sharkz]

I'd like to see Obsidian try new things, Honestly I'm sick of the D&D universe and I think Obsidian's creativity is being held back on already established franchise like D&D and even Star wars to some extent...

 

I'd like to see Obsidian make some of their own original IPs.

[Roz]

That whole argument tangent was ridiculous. I read the whole thing. Loved it.

 

Some of the arguments were a little illogical or flawed at times, but that didn't take away from the passion. The passion is what counts.

 

I can see the frustration of wanting a prestige class that doesn't quite match up with your exact build or character vision. (Having character vision is, in fact, meta-gaming)

 

Unfortunately, that's the way it works in this system. It makes sense within the confines of the D&D rule-set.

 

I think an interesting alternative would be having base classes and prestige classes with variable pre-requisites. Like instead of 8 points in sneak/hide/listen/wilderness survival... just dictate 32 points spread between them.

 

Alternately, you could do a more open system using a generic prestige class, and have your skills, attributes and existing feats make certain class abilities available at certain levels of experience. Basically it'd be a more malleable feat system that would govern class progression past a certain point. Like Oblivion's build your own class.

[qaz156]

how about a warhammer 40k rpg?

[Yoshi]

I've not been here for a long, long time... and I just want to say one thing: OBSIDIAN, do another D&D game (4th edition perhaps, since it's coming) set in FR (4th edition, since there will be some major changes, mostly refreshing the setting). MotB was simply awesome and restored my faith in deep, plot-wise cRPGs. Beautiful setting of Rashemen, beautiful characters (especially Gann) and a very intriguing, personal plot. I've not played a decent cRPG since Kotor 1. Now, thanks to MotB, I had the chance.

[Musopticon?]

how about a warhammer 40k rpg?

How about "hell yeah"?

[Magister Lajciak]

I've not been here for a long, long time... and I just want to say one thing: OBSIDIAN, do another D&D game (4th edition perhaps, since it's coming) set in FR (4th edition, since there will be some major changes, mostly refreshing the setting). MotB was simply awesome and restored my faith in deep, plot-wise cRPGs. Beautiful setting of Rashemen, beautiful characters (especially Gann) and a very intriguing, personal plot. I've not played a decent cRPG since Kotor 1. Now, thanks to MotB, I had the chance.

 

I agree. Playing MotB was like finding an oasis in a desert.

[Dagon]

how about a warhammer 40k rpg?

How about "hell yeah"?

 

Agree, plus Warhammer Fantasy would also be nice. Nicer than D&D anyway..

[Magister Lajciak]

Well, I think another expansion for NWN2 would be nice.