My fwiw kickstarter economic analysis regarding the rift between the traditionalists and evolutionists

[Uomoz]

Well I'm in the beta for D&d 5th and I can tell that it looks like the 3rd with some unique powers attached to each class. Casters have more stuff then any other class, they retain the at-will powers like in 4th (plus daily stuff like vancian for everything else). Auto-attack turns for fighters, here we go again.

 

Too much semplification.

[nikolokolus]

Every system has strengths and weaknesses. The only time i get cranky about change is when it's done seemingly just for the sake of change alone, or to mimic some WOW feature and pander to the lowest common denominator.

 

Fortunately it appears that Tim and Josh seem to be focused on mechanics that create strategic considerations and deep game play, without being completely wedded to nostalgia, fan service or dumbing things down. Hopefully it works out.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Well WotC tries to milk as much as possible its franchises (eg. excessive number of manuals), this means a lot of money commitment for the average player. I feel like it's a desperate move, but I may be wrong about it.

 

I've never been a major fan of D&D, although some good old 2nd Ed. is always fun, and was looking more at White Wolf with the Print-on-Demand for both OWoD and NWoD as well as smaller published games that, while not huge, are doing well enough (e.g. The Laundry or CathuluTech). Honestly, I buy at least two-three books for every PC game I get, and considering I usually pick up at least one PC game a month that adds up (although it's gotten to the point that this might change as I've exhausted the stock of the local gaming stores, at least when it comes to things I want, and I tend to wait to order offline until I have fairly large order).

 

EDIT:

It's not all of them by any means, but here's an example of one of my gaming bookshelves.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Deadly_Nightshade

[happyelf]

4e is a great system with plenty of soul. Most of the bitching about it is purely due to resentment of the new, a backlash that will go down in history as one of the milestones of nerd rage.

 

The PE devs could do a lot worse than to look to it for inspiration, and by 'a lot worse', I mean, dnd3e, and dnd5e.

 

That said, it's clear that PE is a post-4e game. For instance, they've made it clear they're after varying resource scheduals, as opposed to uniform ones. That's certainly more viable in a crpg than a ttrpg, but it remains to be seen wether they do good work ensuring that the non-casters are up to snuff.

 

I certainly hope that obsidian doesn't make the mistake of making spellcasters more interesting than fighters, or turning fighters into dull auto-attack machines again. People with swords deserve just as much time, care, and gameplay content as people with pointy hats.

 

I'll also note DAO and in some ways da2 had some really solid takes on real time rpg combat, including better warriors. Da2 combat was also terrible for other reasons, but iirc it had some good fundamentals and fixes.

Edited October 8, 2012 by happyelf

[Deadly_Nightshade]

4e is a great system with plenty of soul.

 

From what I've played of it, and that's not been alot mind you as I don't own it myself and only played when someone else was running, it's a fun system but not one that I'd choose for a game of a serious nature. It's almost a satire of itself, at least that's the impression I got from what I've seen/played/read.

[Uomoz]

happyelf speaks truth.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

4th Edition is by far the most *fun* D&d I've played. I loved 2nd (mostly nostalgia now I think), HATED 3rd, never played Pathfinder but a friend of mine loves it so I'll eventually try it. 4th have some deep flaws (like balance between classes), but overall I feel like is a way better experience then previous D&ds. An example? Unlike 3rd, all the classes are NOT FORCED to pass their turns auto-attacking, every class have some interesting and unique actions\powers (a LOT of em) that makes character creation thousands times better and more engaging. One more thing I love about 4th is that they cut most of the rules from the *core* roleplay experience, leaving Master and Players a lot more freedom out of combat.

 

I may be biased, but just go to any D&d forum and you'll find out that D&d 4th is deeply respected and loved by most.

 

I'd have to agree. My two favourites are 2nd and 4th edition. I've been playing 4th edition about 2 years now and what I found most surprisinlgly when I first played it was that it's strikingly similar to 2nd edition. 3rd Edition I didn't like.

[nikolokolus]

"Healing surges"

 

W

 

T

 

H

 

?

 

/endofdiscussion

[Hiro Protagonist II]

It basically stops you from potion spamming. I'll just drink 50 potions while fighting - a potion in one hand with a sword in my other. :/

[nikolokolus]

Feh. Any self respecting DM would have forced a player to spend a round digging around for a potion back in the day.

Edited October 8, 2012 by nikolokolus

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Feh. Any self respecting DM would have forced a player to spend a round digging around for a potion back in the day.

 

Unless the player had made sure to have a bandoleer of them slung across their chest for easy access.

[Gorth]

Thats why straws were invented. A bandolier with potions and 20 straws leading up to your mouth. Now give me your best shot!

 

[happyelf]

Healing surges are an exmple of a clear improvement. Would you rather potion spam? Or a cooldown timer on your healing potion slots, like DA does it?

Surges are a per-day resource, that allow for dangerous fights, that deplete a resource, without making that resource as silly as potions, wands, and CLW spells, that just get hurled around and render the whole thing kinda pointless. When you're out of surges, you're **** out of luck.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Healing surges are an exmple of a clear improvement.

 

A DM could also control the players, and thus fix the issue.

[nikolokolus]

Ok, so what the hell exactly is a healing surge supposed to be simulating? It might be a fine mechanic, but utterly breaks immersion for me ... it's as bad as "taking a knee" in NWN 2, or hiding behind a wall in a shooter.

 

I

 

Just

 

Can't

 

Do

 

It!!!

[Uomoz]

Healing surge explain the reason why a seasoned warrior recover a lot more and faster then a squishy mage with the same healing potion, for example. A paladin with huge constitution is a lot better suited and trained at recovering from wounds compared to the aforementioned mage, and that's why the healing spell will have a complete diverse effect on the different body size. Is that sufficent as an explanation? The amount of healing you receive from various sources is related to your total HP pool, realistically. It's a CLEAR improvement from 3rd and 2nd editions systems.

 

EDIT: As a DM I totally love make the squishy ranger finish his surges. Play with those 5 HP for an entire fight, Legolas.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Uomoz

[nikolokolus]

Healing surge explain the reason why a seasoned warrior recover a lot more and faster then a squishy mage with the same healing potion, for example. A paladin with huge constitution is a lot better suited and trained at recovering from wounds compared to the aforementioned mage, and that's why the healing spell will have a complete diverse effect on the different body size. Is that sufficent as an explanation? The amount of healing you receive from various sources is related to your total HP pool, realistically. It's a CLEAR improvement from 3rd and 2nd editions systems.

 

EDIT: As a DM I totally love make the squishy ranger finish his surges. Play with those 5 HP for an entire fight, Legolas.

 

 

[alanschu]

Why is it that you believe I am referring to you personally? I assume you are referring to my statement: "They will probably make a lot more money on a system that younger players and modern game players are used to and seem to enjoy."

 

It's not that you're talking to me. It's that you make silly generalizations.

 

If you wish to argue against this statement then please go ahead and do so. It seems clear to me that kooldown kombat is definitely an easier system for younger and more casual players to get into.

 

Why is it "clear to you?" Because it's not what you want, and you obviously are a more seasoned and hardcore gamer?

 

Pretty much every major publisher would seem to agree with me. By "younger" I mean "younger". I am not referring to any particular age group. You are aware that 14 year olds play computer games too, right? Admittedly they are more likely to play console games, but some play computer games as well.

 

When Baldur's Gate came out, 14 year olds (and older) were more likely to play console games as well. Some do play computer games as well (or even instead). Given that my roots are as a computer gamer starting from about 5 on the Apple II (Loderunner FTW) I am well aware that people of all ages play PC games.

 

I think it will be easier for, say, a 10 year old to get into a cRPG with the kind of combat mechanics being proposed here than the ones in the original IE games or god forbid something like ToEE or the Realms of Arkania etc. That is not intended as an insult. I was once 10 years old as well and was playing computer games like Zork or Super Star Trek or whatever. We obviously didn't have such fancy games. I'm sure I would have enjoyed them. Especially if I had never tried anything else. But, yes, I do think a simpler system with less micromanagement and more action will have a greater appeal to younger gamers. Publishers seem to be making a lot of money based on that very assumption.

 

All the talk of 10 year olds and 14 year olds is a total red herring. Do you think that Dragon Age is being made for 10-14 year olds to buy it? Having the luxury of being on the seller side of a midnight launch one time, the diversity in age of people in line to buy those games is insane, and pretty much entirely adults over the age of 18.

 

I'll agree on the notion that the focus of a lot of game developers/publishers is to minimize barriers to entry and will wholeheartedly agree with the idea that in many cases you can argue that drawing in more "casual" players can be a benefit. But even then, COD doesn't "draw in casual players" either. But there are advantages to utilizing systems that have worked in other games because it helps limit barriers to entry.

 

There's a ton of hardcore gamers that play something like WoW (I'm sure many of them love a game like BG even!). As much as the Codex may hate WoW's popularity, when determining how to balance combat abilities, there are advantages to utilizing a cooldown based system because people are already familiar with it. A large penalty with using something like Vancian is that people inherently struggle with the concept, lore wise (I agree that it's retarded conceptually. Those that argue against cooldowns for being an arbitrary restriction yet support Vancian have completely failed to understand that it's also an arbitrary ruleset used to balance combat by equating spells as effectively being ammunition) and tripping up on understanding why the system is in place creates a barrier to entry. The other trip up is that it's frankly less common. Many games throughout history, PC or console, have had magic systems. Vancian style systems are much less common than, say, the idea of mana consumption (which most are more easily able to understand conceptually within the setting - it doesn't break the verisimilitude for them - and it's a more frequently used so there's an innate familiarity with the system).

 

Frankly, Vancian often loses out for simply not being as common of an idea. Even though it's original use was as the way magic works in Vance's books, unless people have been exposed to his books or game systems that utilize his system there's going to be innate barriers. D&D types are more willing to embrace it because they are more familiar with it, but so much more than D&D types play video games, even RPGs. Including the IE games. I think many people come to the conclusion that because the IE games are based on the D&D license, those that loved the games are in large part also D&D fans. I don't believe this to be the case at all, though. I say this as someone that did grow up playing D&D CRPGs too.

 

 

It's not that "younger" gamers are more likely to see lesser barriers to entry with "simplified" systems. It's that gamers of all ages are more likely to see lesser barriers. Dismissing the groups for being 10-14 year olds just makes one come across as being an old curmudgeon that doesn't want to believe that his preference has always been niche. Unfortunately the economies of scale of AAA game development make it more challenging to appeal to niches, but fortunately things like digital distribution and Kickstarter are allowing for a resurgence in "older school" game designs.

 

Frankly, a 10 to 14 year old PC gamer is probably more likely to pirate the games that they want because they have the free time to play a ton of games and to learn how to acquire them, and they lack the means to get the money to acquire all of the games that they want. At best they get some for gifts, but I'm sure I'm not that unique in that my piracy rates plummeted as I got older, with my rate of game purchases going up. The focus of the big publishers is not the under 18 crowd.

[alanschu]

As for 4th edition, work has a good number of people that have played all editions of D&D. Many seem to like 4th edition too (and many don't).

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

A DM could also control the players, and thus fix the issue.

 

In battle, you could potion spam by using items like armor (Battle Harness comes to mind) that can retrieve an item with a free action. a Minor action to drink it and a free action to drop the empty bottle. You still have 2 more actions left you could do, a move and standard attack. Second round? Rinse and repeat. This is well within the rules. You could do it 50 times. Unless the DM nerfs items, rules, etc, then why bother playing. Healing surges stop this.

 

What about after a battle? I can potion spam without resting. Who needs rest? Fighters and Thieves don't. Maybe some other classes don't need rest either. There's no reason to rest for some characters. Just potion spam and continue. 4th ed stops this with its healing surges.

[happyelf]

Healing surges are an exmple of a clear improvement.

 

A DM could also control the players, and thus fix the issue.

The idea that DMs can magically fill in the gaps in designs is just an excuse for shoddy, old school design.

 

It also places a lot of pressure on them, and forces players to endure endless DM fiat based situations.

 

Healing surges are far from perfect, but they're a lot better than the old school approach of basically having an argument about it- an argument only the DM can win.

 

And none of that is really notable either way since there is no DM in a single player crpg. And in a single player CRPG, boy howdy would I love to see the end of healing potion spam.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Ok, so what the hell exactly is a healing surge supposed to be simulating? It might be a fine mechanic, but utterly breaks immersion for me

 

When I first played, I was like WTH? Now, I don't have a problem with it.

 

As for 4th edition, work has a good number of people that have played all editions of D&D. Many seem to like 4th edition too (and many don't).

 

It's one of those games that's divided the community. Some like it, others hate it. Our DM who's played 3, 3.5 and 4th prefers 4th edition. A couple of players in our group have tested out D&D Next and while they like some things, other things they don't. There are some WTH? things in D&D Next like the disengage mechanic and shifting 2 squares.

[Deadly_Nightshade]

The idea that DMs can magically fill in the gaps in designs is just an excuse for shoddy, old school design.

 

Honestly, I'd disagree - exploits and 'tricks' are always going to be there and it's up to the GM to fix those if he/she wishes, or simply find a group of players who don't want to powergame. But, again, while I'm not the biggest fan of D&D, and I have considerably more experience with other game systems. Honestly, I like games where it's rather hard to heal and healing surges are more along the lines of what exist in the systems I tend to play (e.g. having to spend blood to heal lethal in Vampire: The Masquerade or having to use magic spells, or regular old time and medicine if you've not got any, in The Laundry). Unforgiving games can be fun, and I actually like situations where I might very well die at any moment.

[KhaineGB]

So I read the epic first post, and I have to say that I feel the OP is being far too "Black and White" with the situation.

 

I don't consider myself a Codexian, nor do I consider myself a Biowarian. The first ever RPG game I remember playing with any kind of clarity was Dungeon Master on the Amiga 500. I believe that was a 6 person party system, used health, stamina and mana for how much you could do, required you to collect and learn runes in order to cast spells (and you had to put the runes in by hand... in the right order!) and it was hell if one of your party died. I loved that style of game, and still do. There's a reason I bought Legend of Grimrock, after all.

 

I also loved the BG games, because I started playing AD&D 2nd Edition at the tender age of 14. I loved NWN and NWN2 and couldn't get into PS:T for some reason (I've since re-purchased it with the intent to play it again now I'm a lot older). Why did I love those games? Because they had good stories (more so BG than NWN/NWN2) and used an RPG system that I was more than familiar with. But I also loved Dragon Age: Origins. The combat, to me, felt very much like Baldur's Gate... with the exception of the cooldowns... but since I'd been playing MMO's, I could deal with that. DA2, on the other hand, just felt like a glorified console game and I absolutely hated it.

 

Mass Effect? Loved it... well... except the third, but we won't go there. It was new, different and some tactics were required for combat. The story was pretty damn good, but I wasn't impressed with the romances (unlike BG2, where I thought the romances were very well done since you had no easy way of knowing if what you were going to do would screw things up or not. Hell, I didn't even realise some of the conversations were romance-aimed!).

 

I think the OP needs to realise there are some of us here that simply DON'T fit into either category. We like some aspects of the old RPG's, and some aspects of the new. What am I hoping for out of P:E? Combat similar to BG. It won't be exactly the same, because that was based on D&D, while this game isn't. I would prefer -not- to have cooldowns on skills, as I feel this would detract from that old school feel, but it's not a deal breaker for me. I would like to see romances, but they'd have to be done in the BG style, not the DA:O/ME style... and only if Obsidian have time. If they don't, leave them out... no big deal. I'd like to see crafting similar to KoToR2 and maybe even DA:O (Really liked the rune idea, could be better implemented though).

 

So yeah... kinda lost my point, but essentially there's more than just the Black & White hinted at in the first post.

 

Also, since people are talking about RPG systems... I played D&D 2nd, 3rd, 3.5 and 4th. I've also play-tested 5th edition 3 times so far. 2nd was good, 3rd was... a bit crap. 3.5 was fantastic and 4th was absolutely bloody awful (Regarding Healing Surges, potion spam is easily stopped. PHB states drinking a potion is a standard action. If you have a potion belt, you can draw it as a free action... but do you really want to stand in front of a monster without having a weapon in your hand? Instant AoO. Drinking a potion? Also an AoO. There's ways around that entirely within the rules without having to nerf characters).

 

5th seems to be a lot better, but I probably won't bother with it. Over the past couple of months, I've been getting into Pathfinder, which is essentially D&D 3.75. It fixes a lot of the problems with 3.5 and has streamlined a lot of the game (like combat manuevers for a start!).

 

EDIT: And to comment on the "How much of your monthly income would you pledge?" question... approx 10%, and I have done. However, considering that 66%-75% of my monthly income goes on bills... that 10% is a hell of a lot to me.

Edited October 8, 2012 by KhaineGB

[happyelf]

The idea that DMs can magically fill in the gaps in designs is just an excuse for shoddy, old school design.

Unforgiving games can be fun, and I actually like situations where I might very well die at any moment.

That's what surges do. They allow hit points to swing low and high in a combat, rather than only really being ground down over multiple combats worth of depletion. They mean you can get close to 0, or lower, or even dead in any given battle, rather than only really being at risk once you're out of potions/heals. But at the same time, since you only need a couple of surges to get back to full, a fight where you're almost killed doesn't mean the end of the day- which in turn means each fight can be more genuinly risky, instead of just being filler combat.

 

There are a lot of problems with 4e, but it's rare for it's critics to understand it well enough to know what it's real problems are.

Edited October 8, 2012 by happyelf