My new comic project is now live at The Escapist.
I am experiencing an unprecedented level of happiness. I do hope the thing serves your comedy needs. Barring that, I hope you hated the UT3 story as much as I did.
My new comic project is now live at The Escapist.
I am experiencing an unprecedented level of happiness. I do hope the thing serves your comedy needs. Barring that, I hope you hated the UT3 story as much as I did.
I recant on yesterday’s complaints about the combat in 4e. Part of my complaint was based on the misconception that once-a-day powers reset at midnight, which is arbitrary and mechanical. (Part of the problem is that I’m reading both the PHB and DMG at the same time, scattershot, instead of just sitting down and reading them in an organized or responsible manner.) But the main reason I objected to the powers was that I couldn’t see the cinematic / dramatic / possibilities it opened up, because I’m so used to combat being a break in the roleplaying.
The fact that players can try tricks and stunts and improvise with the environment is exactly the sort of thing I’ve always wanted to do, but found the books got in the way. Early in my DM career I tried a few fights with epic scenery (like a rope bridge in a storm, which is right out of the 3.5 DMG) and while they were nice, the setting didn’t really translate into more interesting combat. It was just something cool I described before we began the fight on a stark grid, standing next to each other while we rolled lots of dice. If a player had decided to cut the bridge, or attempt to push their foe over the side, I would have been at a loss. First we’d have to muck about with attacks of opportunity, then I’d have to figure out if this sort of thing was already covered and if there were rules governing it, and then (assuming they didn’t) I’d make up some ad-hoc way of resolving it and the mechanics would feel rudderless. Are we setting precedent here? Am I going to regret doing this? Is this going to imbalance things later?
The page 42 rule – where page 42 of the DMG gives you rough guidelines for all sorts of improvisational situations – is something we could have done in 3.5, but having it in writing gives a certain sanction to this sort of business, and gives players the assurance that while the current action isn’t provided for in the books, the DM is still being governed in some way by the rules and not surrendering to anarchy or capricious whimsy.
I like Rule 42 so much I’m going to drag it along with me – as best as the rules allow – on our Star Wars campaign. (We’re using d20. I understand there is a d6 version as well, but the d20 is the sourcebook I have, so we’re going with that.)
The two most notable things I’ve seen said about 4e are:
I’m not done reading, much less absorbing, the fourth edition books, but it looks to me like both of these statements are true.
The system is certainly more rigid. There are “roles” in every party. (Combat roles, that is.) Someone to absorb damage, someone to deal damage, someone to manage crowds, someone to heal. The 4e manual calls them defenders, strikers, controllers, and leaders. These roles have existed in MMO games for years. The four-person team with one person for each of these jobs is so common that even the jokes about how cliché it is are old and stale. The classic D&D adventuring party is a fighter, a rogue, a wizard, and a cleric. Note that this is the ideal setup for both an adventuring party and a sitcom.
How it looks to me so far is that the system is less open to roleplaying because it wants to railroad you into a narrow idea of what an adventuring party is and what they do. But if you already play that way, then the rules are less cumbersome (because they’re not trying to accommodate all those other sorts of parties) and so you can get in a fight and get back to the plot with less time fussing around with numbers and charts.
So what it looks like to me is that 4e D&D is just specializing more than it has in the past. This is a trend that’s been going on since before I got into gaming. We’ve been moving away from monolithic systems that try to be all things to all groups, to more focused systems that are easier to learn and use but are a lot less flexible. Pirate games. Space games. Superhero games. Mob games. Etcetera games.
I haven’t tried to run a 4e battle, and that experience probably won’t come for some time. My group is in the early, faltering stages of trying to get a game going during the season of cookouts and nice weather. And when that game does get going, it will be our long-awaited Star Wars game. So I’m not going to be qualified to really comment on the thing in detail any time in the foreseeable future. So, I’ll hold off on the criticism until then.
I’m just messing with you. Let’s do this:
Continue reading 〉〉 “D&D 4th Edition:
First Impressions”
Jar Jar, you’re a genius!
I really like how things are going with Darths & Droids. R2D2 is a jerk, and Jar Jar is clever and imaginative, if a little whimsical. It also leads to the phrase we see above, which apparently was never used once on the internet until now.
Speaking of webcomics:
Starting July 8th, my new webcomic will go live. It will not be on this site. It will, in fact, appear on another site.
Things will become more clear on Tuesday.
Tim G. left an excellent comment on my post about the XP reward vs. Risk in RPG games. That post is a little old and the conversation has trailed off, so I thought I’d quote it here. Also, it’s always nice when I can just have visitors write my posts for me: Continue reading 〉〉 “Story Ownership”
Lots of people have this impression of MMO games – not entirely undeserved – that the gameplay is an unbroken stream of monotony. You walk up to a monster an click the attack button until it falls over. Continue to do this until the “level up” gauge fills, at which point you go find a new, slightly different monster and continue doing the same thing.
I alluded to some of the depth of WoW gameplay in an earlier post, but let me go over one of the character classes in WoW and talk about how this really works:
Continue reading 〉〉 “World of Warcraft:
Hunter Class”
As a counterpoint to the post earlier today:
My brother signed up for WoW this afternoon. He called in to upgrade from trial to full account, and was very happy with how things went. The woman on the phone was uncharacteristically eager and cheerful and even bantered with him a bit. He sounded as through the experience may even have been uplifting.
He got the same story: It’s much easier to simply run to the store than to upgrade a trial account. (That is, ignoring the trip to the store.) He didn’t mind, and in fact ran out and got the fancy edition that includes Burning Crusade and strategy guides and whatnot.
And now he’s home, and will spend the rest of the evening downloading patches.
Sigh.
An ongoing series where I work on making a 2D action game from scratch.
Let's ruin everyone's fun by listing all the ways in which zombies can't work, couldn't happen, and don't make sense.
What makes the gameplay of Borderlands so addictive for some, and what does that have to do with slot machines?
What does it mean when a program crashes, and why does it happen?
A novel-sized analysis of the Mass Effect series that explains where it all went wrong. Spoiler: It was long before the ending.
When the source code for Doom 3 was released, we got a look at some of the style conventions used by the developers. Here I analyze this style and explain what it all means.
A video discussing Megatexture technology. Why we needed it, what it was supposed to do, and why it maybe didn't totally work.
A game I love. It has a solid main story and a couple of really obnoxious, cringy, incoherent side-plots in it. What happened here?
An interesting but technically dense talk about gaming technology. I translate it for the non-coders.
My picks for what was important, awesome, or worth talking about in 2014.