Anybody Bothering with 4.0?

SenorOcho wrote:

BTW, for a more co-op environment between the DM and players, I absolutely love the Burning Wheel system.

I've seen Burning Wheel at the game shop, and I've read some about it online, but not enough to actually comprehend what it is. It's probably either ahead of its time or way out on a weird tangent, and I can't tell which.

The more I think about it, the greater likelihood that I'll try to get a Traveller campaign going sometime this year as opposed to getting involved in 4.0. I really like the feel of the campaign world, and I think that this is something that I could do on the side without too much effort.

--Mike L.

Shellhead wrote:

SenorOcho wrote:

BTW, for a more co-op environment between the DM and players, I absolutely love the Burning Wheel system.

I've seen Burning Wheel at the game shop, and I've read some about it online, but not enough to actually comprehend what it is. It's probably either ahead of its time or way out on a weird tangent, and I can't tell which.

Weird tangent. I like it, and own it (and the sci-fi version, Burning Empires). It's brilliant in many, many ways -- but it's a hyper-crunchy rules system that's idiosyncratic to the extreme. Which IMO puts it into the retro category.

It has some nice narrative properties that are way cool, and 90% of the crunch is in stuff that is story-related (instead of combat related) but it's still crunch and takes time to learn and implement.

dysjunct wrote:

Weird tangent. I like it, and own it (and the sci-fi version, Burning Empires). It's brilliant in many, many ways -- but it's a hyper-crunchy rules system that's idiosyncratic to the extreme. Which IMO puts it into the retro category.

It has some nice narrative properties that are way cool, and 90% of the crunch is in stuff that is story-related (instead of combat related) but it's still crunch and takes time to learn and implement.

Care to do a review for the frontpage? I was doing some reading about it, and it seems pretty interesting, but there wasn't tons of information regarding it on their website.

Dunno if I really have the time or inclination to type something up and make it all purty and presentable. But I'm happy to answer questions if you like.

Also, rpg.net has a smattering of reviews on both BW and BE.

I read through Burning Empires and I would love to run it. Trouble is I have no idea where I would find players who could handle a system that is so complex rules wise and yet at the same time requires players that are into the whole imaginative players drive the story kind of gameplay. I think I would need to make a serious player aid just to get players to understand what they are meant to be doing. I have heard Burning Wheel is quite a bit more manageable. I must say the fact that the creator has made a Dune mod for Burning Wheel appeals to me.

I love the beliefs and instincts idea. I will use those in any other game I GM from now on. They're such a simple way to flesh out a character and give the GM great plot fodder.

Agree here.

Burning Wheel is much easier to get into. The system (while still complex) is simpler, plus you have the whole "it's fantasy!" selling point to get people to buy into it -- you don't have to give them the whole backstory spiel about the Vaylen, and the Kerrn, and the Iron Empires etc.

My actual choice for crunchy non-D&D fantasy is The Riddle of Steel. The game itself is dead (sob) but the fan community is supportive and the game rocks on toast.

So 4th ed is out, anybody get it or go to the worldwide game day to check it out? My interest was pretty low until I read this post over on BGG http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/318040

It sounds pretty cool to play a GM-less, advanced dungeon crawler. And with the Mythic GM emulation system you could even do the non-combat stuff without a GM too. So now I'm kinda interested, but I do have Descent + expansions + Road to Legend. But the character customization and advancement is way beyond anything in RTL.

I've flipped through it a little, so take with a grain of salt. Initial thoughts:

- Very pretty. Great graphic design, great art, clean page layout.

- Some questionable layout choices. Every power you'll ever get (except for the inevitable expansions) is in the class/race/feats chapters. This made it bewildering for me to try and figure out exactly what the hell was going on, but I suspect that once you get over the learning curve it speeds up.

- they've done away with some of the sacred cows. You no longer have to memorize spells. You can either cast a spell once/day, once/encounter, or at will (this applies to all powers and abilities, not just spells). A wizard can now cast Magic Missile every single turn, for as long as he can stay awake. Also, Magic Missile no longer autohits; it can be dodged on a (IIRC) Reflex Save. This will no doubt get millions of nerd panties in twists, but I think it's for the better. I hated the D&D magic system and never played magic-users as a result.

- A lot of the behind-the-scenes math appears to have been redone to balance out properly. The main criticism of old editions was that there was this "sweet spot" of levels 5-14 (or so), where the PCs could take a few hits without going down, without being so powerful that it was increasingly-difficult to challenge them. WOTC has spread the goodness over all the levels now (which instead of being 1-20 are now 1-30).

- They've definitely taken a lot of inspiration from MMORPGs. Completing the cycle, I guess. Whether this is a good or bad thing remains to be seen. It looks mostly good to me. The powers and abilities are all very cleanly and unambiguously defined. Everything has clearly-delimited effects and so on. I think this completes the trend in the 3.x editions of moving away from the messy morass that characterized the early editions, where different aspects of the game were just bolted on instead of the whole thing being defined as an actual system.

- I don't play D&D anymore. But if I did I'd be all over this.

- For your purposes (GM-less dungeon crawl) I'd say that it probably would be a good choice if dungeon-crawl games are your absolute favorite style of game. If that's the case, then go for it. It will be much better than Descent -- greatly variety, etc. But if you think Descent is just another fun game, I wouldn't bother.

I did not like the MMO-type stuff that I was reading about in 4.0--but then D+D has always been about pure dungeon crawls and min/maxing so I guess this is the next logical step.

dysjunct wrote:

- Very pretty. Great graphic design, great art, clean page layout.

It is so very nice to flip through the books and see that they finally trashed that damned pseudo-steampunk bullshit style that was so indicative of 3rd edition.

I've got the PHB (and I've seen the others), and I have to agree about the quality of the design and layout. I'm less than thrilled with some of the guts of the game, but I think that if they'd have called it something other than D&D I'd have been fine with it.

--Mike L.

Well, I've played about 10 encountners so far. I don't love it. I don't hate it either. I think it fails to do any one aspect of gaming really great and is clearly designed for maximum marketibilty. More than anything though it playys like a pen and paper mmorp:
The multiple powers with different refresh rates, the ability to hold aggro, the focus on self healing and charater buffing.

I'm expecting a whole wave of products (as usual) but this time I expect to see more emphahsis on game aids, minis, power cards. I wouldn't be surprised to see whole a whole slew of products released simultaneously for one aspect (arctic modules, a handbook, and arctic minis for example)

Steve"MY 2 cents"Avery

Original D&D was not a mini's game. One might think arguing this point is kind of stupid since the cover reads:

Dungeons & Dragons

Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargame Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures

Yet, it is more a case of a misleading title than D&D being a mini's game. Indeed, if one delves further into Men & Magic(the first book of the original D&D set), they find a list of recommended equipment:

Dungeons and Dragons (you have it!)
Outdoor Survival (available from your hobby dealer or directly from Avalon Hill
Company, 4517 Harford Road, Baltimore MD 21214)
Dice — the following different kinds of dice are available from TSR
1 pair 4-sided dice 1 pair 20-sided dice
1 pair 8-sided dice 1 pair 12-sided dice
4 to 20 pairs 6-sided dice
Chainmail miniature rules, latest edition (available from your hobby dealer or
directly from TSR Hobbies, POB 756, Lake Geneva, Wi. 53147)
1 3-Ring Notebook (referee and each player)
Graph Paper (6 lines per inch is best)
Sheet Protectors (heaviest possible)
3-Ring Lined Paper
Drafting Equipment and Colored Pencils
Scratch Paper and Pencils
Imagination
1 Patient Referee
Players

Notice anything? Miniatures didn't make the list. Sure the Chainmail Miniature Rules are listed, but this is for the combat rules, and they are not really required to play. As a point of fact, many people played the original set quite happily without ever setting eyes on Chainmail. Outdoor Survival is even more optional is listed merely because it was an available hex map of a wilderness area.

4th Edition may be a game you like or not. That's not the point I'm trying to make. This is: Saying 4th edition takes D&D back to it's origins as a miniatures game is historically untrue.

For someone else's take on the subject:

blog.retroroleplaying.com/2008/06/early-...er-not-tactical.html

That depends on how you define "origins." Though the original D&D system was not specifically a miniatures game, Chainmail definitely was. Would there have been a D&D without the groundwork laid by Chainmail? No.