View Poll Results: Will you be moving to 4th Edition D&D?

Voters
127. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    26 20.47%
  • No

    66 51.97%
  • Eventually maybe, but I'm in no rush

    29 22.83%
  • Other

    6 4.72%
Page 17 of 18 FirstFirst ... 7131415161718 LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 176
  1. #161
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elton Robb View Post
    Not in Rolemaster.
    Veeery long time since I last checked my Rolemaster books to talk about its advantages and disadvantages as a game system (appart from the Tablemaster pun ). The last thing I read from ICE was HARP and I didn't like it at all

  2. #162
    Senior Member Elton Robb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    588
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
    Veeery long time since I last checked my Rolemaster books to talk about its advantages and disadvantages as a game system (appart from the Tablemaster pun ). The last thing I read from ICE was HARP and I didn't like it at all
    you just named one of it's strengths.

    I can name hundreds more.
    Regent of Medoere

  3. #163
    Birthright Developer irdeggman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Virginia
    Posts
    3,945
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post

    An armless half-orc fighter is useless, no matter how much you try to spin it. Combat is a task with a lot of movement involved and arms are mandatory to maintain balance. While I may believe someone can create balls of fire, believing that someone who is unable to control his own balance can fight is just too much (at least for me).
    Not with improved unarmed strike.

    Heck there were several Prestige Classes that made advantages of things considered to be disadvantageous.

    What was it Drunken Brawler? or Eye of Kuumarsh (ignore my spelling please)
    Duane Eggert

  4. #164
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by irdeggman View Post
    Not with improved unarmed strike.

    Heck there were several Prestige Classes that made advantages of things considered to be disadvantageous.

    What was it Drunken Brawler? or Eye of Kuumarsh (ignore my spelling please)
    Having no arms is far more than a disadvantage. The half-orc problems are two sided:

    - He is physically unable to make complicated movements as he has no way to maintain his own balance.

    - He is such a strange thing in the world, that if he was to fight, he would need to develop the fighting style but himself (and re-learn everything he used to know) because I doubt there are many people trained in the art of fighting without having arms

  5. #165
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elton Robb View Post
    you just named one of it's strengths.

    I can name hundreds more.
    For me tables are its biggest disadvantage
    Last edited by Vicente; 07-02-2009 at 10:26 PM.

  6. #166
    Site Moderator AndrewTall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    2,476
    Downloads
    30
    Uploads
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by dundjinnmasta View Post
    I am not talking about a subpar character. I am talking about a character that is so neuter that it can't do anyhting that it is ment to do. A halfling fighter is a subpar character but if you are playing a Half-Orc Fighter that has NO ARMS then it becomes a moot point, what the heck is he doing in the party instead of somewhere safe. Someone said to me today while I was discussing this argument with them...

    "So.. you're completely useless in all practical matters.... why are heroic adventurers carting you along?"

    Most adventurers aren't previous companions unless the group built a backstory of them together. No most of them are strangers meeting for the first time so why would they bring along a stranger that is pretty much a cripple that they will have to defend in the thick of a fight which is likely to get one or all of them killed when the cripple would be safer back at town.
    I can see your point, but disagree in some areas. What happens when your group consists of 'the hero' types and 'the side kicks' - the bard who tags along to see true heroes in action - the heroes who exult in the fame that his songs bring them? The knight and his portly squire? The approach you describe, which I have played and enjoyed in the past, is the equivalent of an elite military unit, everyone exceptional in their role, everyone necessary for the completion of the mission - but its not the only way to play - frankly, in BR the PC's might well not see themselves as adventurers in the first place, and possibly not even as heroes.

    In a BR 'world' as opposed to just a 'game' your purpose of adventuring may be to teach your craven cousin to gain a backbone, so he can make a useful marriage match without bringing shame on the family - he's subpar, but he's also the point. You also get a lot of issues outside of combat that make carrying 'weak' characters make a lot of sense - the pure fighter quite possibly is the real 'weak' character, because outside of their one area where they utterly dominate they can't do anything. When you add in domain play, and the storylines and so on behind it as regular game features, combat takes a smaller amount of time meaning that ties to the gameworld and so on become much more important which can change which characters are 'strong' drastically.

    But I'd agree that a character with no arms is stuffed, blind I can handle, there are lots of ways to say that they can interact effectively, but without arms and hands mere survival becomes very difficult, 'I need to go to the mens' room, can someone come with me to help' just doesn't cut the heroic mustard in my view. As for no tongue, what do they do at the table, write notes? My groups tried that or variants a few times, it just doesn't work, certainly not for people who talk as much as me...

  7. #167
    Senior Member Elton Robb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    588
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
    For my tables are its biggest disadvantage
    Ah, then ICE's adventure game is more your cup of tea.
    Regent of Medoere

  8. #168
    Senior Member Elton Robb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    588
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
    For my tables are its biggest disadvantage
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewTall View Post
    In a BR 'world' as opposed to just a 'game' your purpose of adventuring may be to teach your craven cousin to gain a backbone, so he can make a useful marriage match without bringing shame on the family - he's subpar, but he's also the point. You also get a lot of issues outside of combat that make carrying 'weak' characters make a lot of sense - the pure fighter quite possibly is the real 'weak' character, because outside of their one area where they utterly dominate they can't do anything. When you add in domain play, and the storylines and so on behind it as regular game features, combat takes a smaller amount of time meaning that ties to the gameworld and so on become much more important which can change which characters are 'strong' drastically.
    Yes. You see, the whole point of playing such a character who is disadvantaged -- Craven coward, having a lame leg, old, tongueless, blind, or small -- is to provide roleplaying opportunities for the other players. A subpar character shines when the other players use him for a roleplaying opportunity.

    The type of characters that Dundjinnmasta wants to play with shines in a Military game. They are an elite unit of crack commandos out to do the general's will in taking out this or that. But what if you take them out of their arena and put them in a situation that calls for diplomacy and intrigue?
    Regent of Medoere

  9. #169
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vicente View Post
    Why? It's pretty common in our real world to land a job being unknown just because you are the right person in the right place at the right time. That happens a lot.
    First we live in the modern world in which the liberal project to emphasize the individual is achieved. People are not known by their kin groups or their associates as they were in traditional societies. Second, even under these conditions most hires are made from referrals and friends of current employees: insiders.

    Then consider that a medieval society is hostile to strangers. That people are known by their kin groups and social networks, not by their individual achievements. And then it becomes obvious that the fact that some people get hired by strangers in the real world is a meaningless fact with no bearing on the game world. Much like the average commute distance has no bearing in a predominantly agricultural, medieval society.

    That's a totally personal way of forming groups. I think playing with people who aren't connected and get forced together because of circunstances (Star Wars, LoTR,...) and then form bonds between themselves is a pretty common play style.
    This is a modern trope. Older stories about groups who take on adventures are either groups of friends and family, or on rare occasions collections of several heroes in the middle of their career who are known to one another by reputation, achievement, and previous encounters for a single mission.

    One of my central purposes of even playing role playing games is to take on the role play in pre-modern societies. I live in a modern society. Going elsewhere, where things are different, is a part of the escapism of gaming. Simply recreating the modern world in funny costumes is not interesting to me.

    Mechanically he is right, halflings aren't designed to be fighters, the books are pretty clear about it.
    This is power-gaming. I have no problem that you, Vicente, or dundjinnmasta, are very much in the middle of the power-gaming world view. But this kind of mechanical optimization is something I am not interested in. Who can get to 18 in Str is not an important question to me, because no one in my games gets to 18 in Str. The highest possible stat in the elite array is 15. Getting to 18 would require a level 12 character who never stopped to increase that 13 in say Con or Dex. I've seen 18 in Int, Wis, and Cha, the more important attributes, but never Str.

    90% of what makes a character formidable is their class, not their race or even (though they are more important) their attributes. Class level doubles the power of a character every couple of levels. Having a halfling or human or dwarf underneath all of that, is very much a noodling at the margins. Important only to people trying to squeeze that last +1 out of a build because they single-mindedly focus on one thing. I don't reward that style of design by feeding those characters the one thing all the time.

    In 3e their stats are not suited for a fighter and their favored class is Rogue. A ranged fighter is more viable for them, but it continues to be subpar.
    If you really think this makes any sense, you and I are simply playing different games. A halfling has the same elite array as anyone else, and whether they go with a 13 Str and 13 Dex, or a 10 Str and 17 Dex, or something else, these characters make fine fighters.

    And in 4e the same, their stats are not suited for a fighter.
    If this were true, I would consider it a flaw of 4e. Every race of people will produce warriors, soldiers, and physical combatants.

    Referring to my declaration that the core skills in my campaign are something like Diplomacy, Gather Information, Knowledge (Shadow World) and Survival,
    No one of those skills is a class skill for a fighter.
    Fighter is not a viable class for PC's in my campaign. It makes a nice dipping class for people who want to toughen up on combat, but I advise no more than 4 levels in Fighter. Too few skills for normal play, too much emphasis on combat, which sometimes never happens in a session. The game I run is about politics, intrigue, and statecraft. The Shadow World is an always present supernatural parallel to contend with. Characters should be designed to deal with those things.

    I have written several powers for 4e that would constitute the cool powers for my campaign. They look like this:

    Etymologiea Caulnorum Utility 2
    You have studied and mastered the teaching of the book Etymologiea Caulnorum. You understand the origin and meaning of words and their rhetorical use in argument.
    Encounter * Logic
    Standard Action Debate
    Target one opponent
    Attack thesis skill or rebuttal skill vs thesis or rebuttal skill
    Hit standard and you or an ally receive a debate surge

    Duenia Isagoge Utility 2
    You have studied and mastered the teaching of the book Duenia Isagoge. You know and understand this classic logic primer used by the old Imperial Temple and its successors.
    At-Will * Logic
    Minor Action Debate
    Effect: You gain a +2 logic bonus to any argument attack

    Questioneas Naturales Utility 2
    You have studied and applied the teaching of the book Questioneas Naturales. You understand and have utilized the natural science lessons of this textbook in wilderness locations.
    At-Will * Logic
    Minor Action Debate
    Attack Nature or Dungeoneering vs any appropriate thesis or rebuttal
    Effect: damage die improved one step

    Logica Vetus Utility 6
    You have studied and mastered the teaching of the book Logical Vetus. You know and understand this profound work of logic, the reply of Halmied Alameata to several Avanian scholars.
    At-Will * Logic
    Minor Action Debate
    Target one opponent
    Effect: You gain a +3 logic bonus to any argument attack and your damage die is improved one step.

    Secretum Ruornilia Utility 6
    You have studied and mastered the cryptic teachings of the book Secretum Ruornilia. You know and understand the hidden wisdom of this book.
    Encounter * Logic
    Standard Action Debate
    Target one opponent
    Attack Arcana or Religion vs any appropriate thesis or rebuttal
    Hit standard and you and your allies receive a debate surge

    Ecclesiastica Imperium Utility 6
    You have studied and mastered the teaching of the book Ecclesiastica Imperium. You know and understand the historical and religious development of the Imperial Temple.
    At-Will * Logic
    Minor Action Debate
    Effect: You may attack or reply to any Religion argument with the History skill.

    Tirestean Dialogues Utility 10
    +4 logic bonus any argument attack, damage die improved one step

    Posterior Analyticea Utility 12
    +5 logic bonus to any argument attack, damage die improved two steps

    Quanun Utility 12
    Attack Heal or Religion vs any appropriate thesis or rebuttal (disease, medicine, healing)
    +8 logic bonus to any argument attack relating to disease, medicine, or healing; damage die improved two steps

  10. #170
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    439
    Downloads
    31
    Uploads
    0
    Kgauck, do you have any more of those non-combat powers?

    As I've said before, I think that's the future of skill challenges--and it would fit right along with WotC's business model of developing a system that can continue to churn out new material (new non-combat powers). We must remember, after all, that a company must make money; I don't begrudge them the "bloat" as long as it is quality material.

    Kenneth, do you require your players to take those powers in place of combat powers? I wouldn't. I'd let it be parallel.


    ____

    On divination, as was mentioned before, I think there's quite a great array of such powers in the Rituals in 4e (as supplemented beyond the PH). In fact, I really think Rituals fixed a lot of things, but the concept needs to be taken further and not cost as much. I've made adjustments to it to those effects. One of the great advantages of it for me is that Rituals FEEL a lot more like magic to me--and they're not limited to spell slots, nor are they even limited to character class. A fighter can easily dabble in ritual magic, if he so wishes.

    ____

    As for flawed and crippled characters, I think it's REALLY important that the entire party and DM agree on such character concepts and talk about how they'll fit into the game. Such a character simply will not work in a group that whose PLAYERS will resent such a lack of team-playing. I don't begrudge such resentment at all, because it is very well-founded: the deficient character is NOT a team player, they're not contributing equally, so why should they be respected?

    Story can MAKE such a character worthwhile, but the other players need to be fully on board and okay with it. They can even play a PC who has a problem with the rogue's cravenness, but as long as the player himself actually enjoys that tension, you're okay.

    I think that if you bring a deficient character into a group that has not unanimously accepted it, you SHOULD be ostracized, because you're showing a lack of respect for the other players.

    That said, I think deficient characters work very well as secondary characters. I have played many games where the characters have multiple PCs. In fact, we're expanding the concept in my current group to include bringing on "Cameo Characters" (character concepts that people would like to play, but not invest in and spend as much time playing as their primary character--yet they'll fit into the story and get some fun play time), Secondary Characters (longer-term characters, but often of lower or higher level, again not getting as much face time as the primary), and Mission Characters (often NPCs they get to play for a short time during appropriate parts of the story).


    ___

    As for parties that don't fill all roles, I find 4e giving greater variety with which to fill roles (aside from 2e and 3e's strong tendency for: oh, you guys have got the fighter, mage, and rogue covered? I guess I'll be the cleric). I also find 4e actively encouraging different party make-ups, just acknowledging and discussing what they'll be better at and what they'll not be as good at. No harm in discussing the impacts it will have on the game.

    I've played many parties that don't fit all roles, and my current game, where everyone has two characters of the same level, mix and match party composition as the story dictates, or, if they have the choice, based on what will work best for the mission.

    I've always wanted to play an all-ranger, all-rogue, or all-paladin party, btw. Just haven't found a group of other players interested in that yet .

    ___

    As for encouraging character concepts, I took the Fantasy Flight Games "Midnight" setting's "Heroic Paths" and turned them into "Idiomatic Paths" in 3e. They converted over even more wonderfully to complement the characters' "idioms" (inspired by Monty Python) in 4e. Basically, they fill in those odd, very character-concept driven abilities at various levels, measured against feats, powers, skills, or other appropriate comparisons in 4e for balance.

    I could give examples, but I'd have to look up my text on them. To give you an idea, we've got a charming halfling who can beguile with words; a rogue whose suspicious nature both helps and hinders on and off the battlefield; and a conflicted half-doppelganger psuedo-paladin whose shifty heritage helps in his battles in the underworld, but is at odds with his attempted ascetic fervor.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2nd/3rd edition
    By NaMaN in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 06-17-2008, 08:56 AM
  2. 4th edition
    By Blastin in forum BRCS 4th Edition
    Replies: 127
    Last Post: 06-05-2008, 07:57 AM
  3. D&D 4th Edition
    By RaspK_FOG in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 07-04-2004, 07:52 PM
  4. BR 3rd edition
    By Shade in forum The Royal Library
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 02-05-2003, 05:43 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.