Hmmm ...

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Gentleman John at 2005-03-30 01:54:38
Converted from Phorums BB System

Hmmm.

Goes to games collection. Opens old box.

Hmmmmm.

Are you sure you didn't go back in time?

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Charlie Dunwoody at 2005-03-30 06:47:52
Converted from Phorums BB System

Take what works from all editions, stir in new game design that would make it better, and pour out 4th edition.

If D&D 4th edition sounds familiar and plays like the game so many of us know and love than I would meet a major design goal I would have for D&D 4th edition. Especially if the game plays more easily, is more exciting and fun, and facilitates more roleplaying and joint storytelling than ever before.

Again, I don't want to totally change D&D. I'd like to take what works and make the clunky things work even better. While at the same time simplifying getting into the hobby for both newcomers and those updating to the new system.

Charlie

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by MrMoto at 2005-03-30 10:39:41
Converted from Phorums BB System

Charlie Dunwoody wrote:
-------------------------------
If D&D 4th edition sounds familiar and plays like the game so many of us know and love then ...
-------------------------------

... it is neither brave nor new, in contradiction with the column title.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Gentleman John at 2005-03-30 23:39:58
Converted from Phorums BB System

The fact remains that there was a lot of good stuff in the old D&D that has been lost in time. Just because something is newer does not automatically make it better. A lot of the good things about D&D have become lost in the couple of decades since it achieved its ultimate form. It had its bad points, but it had a lot of stuff in it that has stood the test of time and would be worthwhile returning to (like shorter stat blocks for monsters).

The concepts in original D&D would be new to a lot of people, and it might be a brave thing to admit that, really, those old guys had the right idea.

[RPGnet Columns]

Post originally by Roy Morgan at 2005-04-01 15:08:49
Converted from Phorums BB System

"The fact remains that there was a lot of good stuff in the old D&D that has been lost in time. Just because something is newer does not automatically make it better. A lot of the good things about D&D have become lost in the couple of decades since it achieved its ultimate form. It had its bad points, but it had a lot of stuff in it that has stood the test of time and would be worthwhile returning to (like shorter stat blocks for monsters)."

"The concepts in original D&D would be new to a lot of people, and it might be a brave thing to admit that, really, those old guys had the right idea."

Having seen a lot of previous posts on the subject, I would say that this is the biggest difficulty in making D&D appealing to everyone. There are simply too many people to make it appealing to, and all of them have different ideas about how it should be done. One says jettison the old stuff and rewrite it entirely. Another says go back to the old stuff as much as possible. There simply isn't any one way to please everyone.

Personally, I would simplify spells to basic forms, adding energy modifiers as needed, work out a way to avoid that painful spells per day limit that's plagued the game since its beginnings, keep the basic attribute system as it is now, use some kind of Defensive modifiers to get out of that stupid idea that you can't get better at defending yourself without raising an attribute, and put in a truly socially focused class, if classes remain, because that's an area of the game that's sorely neglected. As for shortening monster stat blocks... I would do it, but keep the attributes in. Personally, I kind of like the ability to play as monsters.

Unfortunately, by placing this opinion, I've muddied the waters of making D&D appealing once more. It's a worthy cause, but... ouch.