A Time for (Edition) War, A Time for Peace (I Swear it's not too Late)

This post is a response to Bruce Cordell's blog post A Time to Heal on the DnD Next playtest group. You should take the time to read it if you haven't and vote on the poll. If you haven't yet and you are at all interested in DnD next you should bookmark that page and make your voice heard. For those of you expecting Weekly Homebrew I am going to try to get an article out at the normal time, but I really wanted to respond to Cordell's article.

I did pick up the t-shirt though

If you follow my blog you know that although I am definitely not an Edition Warrior (tm), I do have some concerns about the direction DnD next is going. If all you play are home games with your friends who all have similar playstales perhaps my concerns sound overblown to you. But imagine this, you go to your FLGS, a con, or even the D and D Virtual Table all set to play some 4e DnD. When you arrive the DM says I'm sorry I'm running Basic D and D I hope you can adjust. If you are a 1e Veteran the scenario also works in reverse just imagine your DM started running 4e one day without letting you know.

But you say DnD next is big enough for everyone. You can play your 4e Wizard with my 1e Fighter all at the same table. Well first I am not entirely convinced that will be the case. I certainly hope it is the case. I have no problem with someone else playing a Vancian Wizard, but I have no interest in it. I have talked a lot more about this subject here, but even if I can bring my character to the table, there is another problem which Cordell's article pointed out that I hadn't even considered. That problem is the Cure Selfish Wounds Cleric.

What do you mean all I know how to do is one sword swing?

I am a big fan of party optimization. I think D and D works best when you have a well rounded party both mechanically and for story purposes. At the very least you should try to have some connections between your characters so they have some reasons to work together and you should at least think about how they will work together in combat. I tend to weigh in on the side of game versus simulation, even though I really enjoy the shared storytelling aspect. I may be in the minority, but I believe that the game will run better if you have a balanced and well planned party.

Because of this I think it's very important to know what you are getting into for party composition. I know not everyone agrees with me, but it's how I prefer to roll. I like to have an idea what the others are playing so I can either pick something that will make us totally awesome, like a lazylord for a group with lot's of good basic attacks. Or conversely, I can fill in some roles to keep us at least at the baseline. That's one reason I really like the Berserker. I can provide some baseline defense while also bringing the pain to those who oppose me.

I am Delzoun you will FEAR ME!

The problem with bringing back some of the older edition stereotypes is that we left them behind for a reason. Some things can be fun to have at the table even if I don't like them. I suppose a Vancian wizard would probably fall under this, although I really don't want to have to rest after one round because my friend cast his one spell for the day. What I really don't want to deal with at the table is a cleric who doesn't heal or lead in any other way. I think a destruction cleric trope is fine, but if you are going to have a cleric there needs to at least be some baseline that they operate at for healing and whatever else leading means to you. I really like how this was handled in 4e all leaders have a baseline healing that is cheap and easy. I don't want to see a return of CoDzilla.

When I play D and D I want to show up at the table and have an idea what experience I am going to have. I want to be able to talk to my DM and the other players before the game and show up knowing whether I am going to play something like 4e, something like 1e or something like GURPS. I may enjoy playing all those games, but if I show up to play 4e and I am handed GURPS I will be disappointed. Furthermore if I am told to expect a cleric and I find Delzoun god of destruction sitting across from me I'll be disappointed as well. Not because I want Brian to play a cleric, but because I would have brought the cleric if I had known Brian was going to play Delzoun. As always your mileage may vary. Until next time remember don't let your DM tell you no. It's always, "Yes and...?"

Modularity in D and D

I don’t want people to get the wrong idea. I am actually tentatively excited about the next D and D. I’m not ready to give up on 4e, but I think there is plenty of time to finish it out with a bang. If anything the idea of another edition coming gives me the motivation to get back in and finish some of my games, Primordial Threat I am looking at you. I am also playing in three excellent paragon tier games and I hope that there is enough time to bring them to their logical end. Whether that is level twenty, thirty or some other place remains to be seen.

I do have some real concerns about the modular nature of the next D and D. I was very excited when I read this about the goals for the new edition. It really speaks to one of my main concerns about the modular nature of the game. I am concerned that when I step up to the table to play D and D I’ll find something else instead. Maybe that’s a bit of an overstatement. I do kind of agree with the Dungeon Bastard’s take on the Edition Wars. On the other hand there are some things from old editions that I am not excited to have to deal with again. It’s not to say they aren’t problems with 4e either, but I like the basic assumptions 4e makes about the game.

Feats? Check. Skills? Check. Magic Missile all day? Check.-- Red Mage
I like Swords!--Fighter
Stabbity goodness-- Black Mage

So when the author said that I could play my character with lots of skills and feats and powers and my friend can play his character who likes to hit things with his sword at the same table, it made me very excited. It does sound a bit impossible, but if they can pull it off I would love to see it. Maybe there could be a day when I can play D and D with my wife again. Who knows, stranger things have happened.

I read a blog post this week about some history of the game and what the author would like to see in the upcoming new edition. I really wish I could find it, but one thing the author talked about was in older editions the dm had more power and it was ok. I’ve actually played D and D since second edition and my first dm did have a lot of power. In fact he even leveled our characters for us. It was awesome he told great stories we still talk about to this day. I don’t think my wife will forget when Lady Lark suddenly became a cleric after the god of the moon showed up to save us one time to many. It’s funny now that I think about it I don’t really have any awesome memories about my characters. I think there might be a blog post in there somewhere. In any case I think if a dm tried a trick like that today I would have a fit.

I'm a what now?

I think the reason I trusted the dm to take that level of control was that he was a good friend. Besides, part of me was just excited to be playing. I’m not saying we didn’t have some issues, but I wouldn’t let a dm level up my character today. I have had too many problems with DM’s with god complexes. I’ve actually talked about some of my bad dm experiences in my post about pirates. Part of the problem is that I have moved a couple of times and I’ve lost touch with friends so in order to play I’ve had to find pick-up games and play with strangers. I won’t say it’s been all bad. I have certainly found my share of good times and good DMs. Even more I have found some good friends as well. It’s not the same though I just don’t trust a stranger to tell a good story and run with it. I want to go in with some guidelines so we can start a shared experience.

I could give you a laundry list of things I want in the next iteration of D and D. Things like powers and being able to do something magical as a wizard more than one time per day.  I was thinking of doing just that, lists of modules that I wouldn’t play without, and when the Angry DM said he was excited about limiting them I was all set to write a post about not limiting my D and D. But, I realized what I really want in DnDnext or whatever it ends up being called is not a list of fiddly bits or rules. What I really want are the baseline expectations that make for a good 4e game.

Home wrecker and Game killer.

So here is what I would like in DnDnext, at least for today, tomorrow I might change my mind. I want page 42. That is I would like an easy way to adjudicate things the rules don’t cover and have it spelled out clearly that it’s ok to make calls. I am ok with a bit of Rule 0 thrown in as well. I want the information imperative continued. I want to be able to know the information I need to make good tactical decisions. I think the bloodied condition was one of the best additions to the game. It gives me an idea where to have my friends attack if I am playing a warlord. I think adding some mechanical bits to the condition make it better than just having it be half hp. Some of my favorite monsters get more deadly when they are bloodied. But the one thing I really want in DnD next is Yes and… I have had too many DMs shut me down with a no.

 I think the best example was the encounter that killed D and D for my wife. We were doing an investigative adventure and we ran into dead end after dead end. My Paladin was about ready to start knocking random heads together and my wife asked if the family whose disappearance we were investigating had a maid servant. The DM said no shutting down yet another avenue to adventure.

The worst part that when my wife explained that a well to do family would have had a maid servant it devolved into an argument about medieval politics and actually ended up killing the whole game. I know I have fallen into the trap as a DM myself because it requires a great deal of thinking on your feet to run with what the players give you. If you follow it yes and can vastly improve your game, which is why I am glad it is a baseline expectation of 4e and hope that it continues to be in DnDnext as well. Until next time remember don’t let your DM tell you no. It’s always “Yes and…?”

How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love 5e

Don't worry men they'll take our 4e from our cold dead hands.

I imagine most of you have heard this by now but, just in case you haven’t, a new iteration of Dungeons and Dragons was announced yesterday. Between being stuck in retail land and all the hubbub, I almost didn’t get my Pixie review done on time. My first reaction was to entrench deeply in 4e and get ready for the edition war. Instead, I took a deep breath, looked around and found some things to be encouraged about. I am not a 5hilistine or a 4deventurer, but I can relate to both sides. I very much enjoy and love 4e, warts aside. Despite that, I am tentatively optimistic about the next iteration and I’d like to tell you why.

I, along with many people, am melancholy about the premature death of 4e. I believe 4e had at least a few more years in it. Even though it had a few problems, with the VT finally in open beta and the newly awesome Heroes ofthe Feywild, I truly enjoyed playing it as did many others. However, I understand the importance of publish or perish, and I recognize the desire to bring all the lost children back to D&D. There are people I miss playing with that only play Pathfinder (or 2^nd edition or any number of other systems) so I am kind of excited about a system that could bring us all back together. It would particularly exciting if they continue to provide good digital tools so I can keep playing D&D with my friends around the world and maybe reconnect with some lost ones as well. I am excited about the goals for the new iteration at the very least.

I didn't know you had your hand in that too

The main reason I am excited about the next iteration of D&D is that I will get to have a hand in it. One of the main problems with 4e was the lack of open playtesting. I think if Wizard’s had gotten the community involved in 4e it would have been a better game far earlier. Additionally, there would have been far less fracturing and perhaps the edition war could have been completely avoided. Jokes about making the fans do unpaid game design aside, I think a game by the fans and for the fans is the best thing I have ever heard. I am very happy with the level of communication from Wizard’s about the new edition and I look forward to some hardcore playtesting.

Fear my ULTIMATE D&D

As I said, I am far from convinced the new iteration is going to work. I am pleased with the goals of the new iteration, but I am very concerned they won’t be able to actually meet those goals. I really have two large problems with the directions the game is headed. The first is that I find it hard to believe that an Ultimate of D&D will work. There are too many diverse desires among the player base. Just as an example there are many people for whom the D&D does not work without Vancian spellcasting. There are others, myself included, who despise Jack Vance for what he has done to all my wizards. I’m willing to give Wizards the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps there is a way for both of us to play at the same table, but I am skeptical.

My second large concern is the idea of a modular system that seems to be the direction the game is headed. I may do a longer post on my problem with a modular system as it goes on and we get more information. For now my major concern is that I like having a large set of core assumptions to build a game on. I am worried that I will not be able to find a dm willing to run the kind of game I want to play. This can always be a concern, but I like most of the core assumptions of 4e and so if I look for 4e DMs I can at least go in expecting that most of the game will be what I want and the DM and the players can work out for ourselves what things might be different. If the base game is enough of what I like then it might not be a problem so I’m keeping optimistic until more information comes out.

I am not surprised that another iteration of D&D is in the works. I am a little sad about the end of 4e. I have some concerns about the direction the game is headed, but I am glad Wizards handled the announcement the way they did. I hope they really intend to have open playtesting and will listen to the feedback the playtesting generates. Until next time, remember, whatever your edition, don’t let your DM tell you no. It’s always “Yes and…?”