D&D 4E

[Eltor Macnol]

Não lembro de um precedente no momento.

Minha única conjetura de algo que faça sentido nesse contexto é que os PVs sejam mais relacionados a "vigor e disposição em batalha" do que ao estado de saúde do personagem em si. Se for assim, algo como a fúria do bárbaro faz com que ele seja capaz de se manter vivo em batalha por mais tempo, até faria sentido um líder inspirar um "reforço de moral" que fizesse seus aliados se manterem em condições de combate em momentos que eles normalmente cairiam.

Mas não sei não. É um dos pontos que eu estou com um certo pé atrás.

[Elven Paladin]

Você PERCEBE que isso não vai alterar nada a opinião dos jogadores de roleplay "true" que vão contra a "malvada corporação" da WOTC e afirmam que D&D é o pior sistema de todos os tempos e as pessoas deveriam jogar _insira sistema underground que ninguem nunca ouviu falar_ mas elas são BURRAS e não o fazem, certo?

Oda, o seu Detector de Ironia está meio falho ultimamente, certo?

Existe algum precedende na 3.x?

Sim, boa parte das manobras da Devoted Spirit, uma das Escolas do Tome of Final Fantasy, digo, Tome of Battle.

[Eagleyes]

D&D vai deixar de ser um Wargame Anti-Roleplaying Malvado e vai integrar a Elite da Profunda Interpretação Superior e Trágica!

Você PERCEBE que isso não vai alterar nada a opinião dos jogadores de roleplay "true" que vão contra a "malvada corporação" da WOTC e afirmam que D&D é o pior sistema de todos os tempos e as pessoas deveriam jogar _insira sistema underground que ninguem nunca ouviu falar_ mas elas são BURRAS e não o fazem, certo?

Eu odeio esses caras... É tipo um amigo meu que diz que todas as bandas são trash só <insira banda de rock que ninguem conhece> é que é rock de verdade.

[Fëanor]

Sim, boa parte das manobras da Devoted Spirit, uma das Escolas do Tome of Final Fantasy, digo, Tome of Battle.

Adoro Final Fantasy!

Mas acho que ta mais para Soul Calibur.

[Elven Paladin]

Adoro Final Fantasy!

Eu também. Ainda mais se estiver no meio da fogueira

Mas acho que ta mais para Soul Calibur.

O Lune já me disse isso diversas vezes, e eu concordo com isso. Mas como uso esse termo ( e também Tome of Chrono Trigger ) há um bom tempo e não ligo para a realidade e veracidade ao utilizar tal nome, mantê-lo-ei.

[Fëanor]

Ta na verdade eu disse que gostava de FF só pra encher o saco.

Mas eu gosto muito de Soul Calibur e Chrono Trigger.

[Youkai X]

Sou outro fã de Soul Calibur. As manobras do Tome of Battle se pareceriam com os estilos de luta de que personagens de Soul Calibur?

[Kinn]

Façam suas apostas:
Defensor marcial: fighter
Defensor arcano: swordmage?
Defensor divino: paladino

Matador marcial: ladino
Matador divino: ranger
Matador arcano: warlock?

Controlador marcial: monge?
Controlador arcano: mago
Controlador divino: ? druida?

Líder marcial: warlord
Líder arcano: bardo? feiticeiro?
Líder divino: clérigo

Confirmaram o feiticeiro há um tempo atrás, mas depois esqueceram ele. Disseram especialmente que ele seria bem diferente do mago. Se ele não virou o warlock eu não sei, mas que disseram, disseram. Ele não cabe em nenhuma função exatamente, sem repetir a possível vaga do bardo. O druida é também um mistério...

[Wykthor]

Notícias do dia: Muito fluff, pouca coisa concreta

WotC_Thomasson, 11/8/2007 1:13:01 PM

I just wanted to follow up quickly on a comment to my post about our first session last week.

We have plans to start talking more about character creation for 4th Edition on Insider in the very near future. In fact, Shelly is going to be talking about her character creation experience in an upcoming column of Confessions of a Full-Time Wizard. We're not going to be able to go into too many specifics yet, because the design team makes tweaks and changes pretty much every day (and all for the better I might add).
In the meantime, I can say this: In 4th Edition, creating a character involves nearly all the things that you're used to picking in 3rd Edition. You pick a race, a class, equipment, skills, and so on. The methods used are slightly different, and you actually have a few more decisions to make. But the biggest difference to me is that in 4th Edition, I was the happiest with my character when I started with the concept I wanted (as in, I want to play a guy who's wicked good with a bow, or I want to play a guy who smites the forces of evil for Bahamaut, or I want to play the guy with a shady side who has a hard time telling the truth when he's stressed), and then made my other decisions from there. I think 4th Edition encourages this approach to character creation more than previous editions, which means in the end, you get a character that's closer to your concept. And I think that's fantastic. I didn't have the square peg/round hole problem I often faced in 3E. I didn't have to try and shoehorn my race and class together with my character concept, because starting with my concept informed my other choices.

Fonte: http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Comm ... logid=7138


WotC_GregB, 11/8/2007 6:02:10 PM

It’s been an interesting and busy week. Scheduled tasks here at wizards seem to often fluctuate, and I was at the center of one of those fluctuations this week. I was supposed to be editing an unannounced star wars miniatures set, but instead I’m now writing the tactics entries for the monster manual.

I’m quite happy for the opportunity to get to do some writing, and I’ve been helping my fellow editors develop the monster stat block format, so I’ve already had some hand in the book. Of course, the monster manual is quite large and I have only two weeks, so Rich Baker is working on the latter half of the book. So far I’m up to demons.

Monster strategies are much more intuitive in 4th edition. The tactics sections certainly help, but I think it’s also quite simple to study the stat block for a few moments and see intuitively what the monster should be doing. The addition of monster “roles” is one of the biggest helps for how to run a monster.

Nonetheless, there are still some monsters, such as the beholder, that have enormous tactics blocks because they just have so much cool stuff they can do.

I guess I’ll spend some time writing about the various games I’m in:

Monday Lunchtime Playtest Game

We all leveled our characters up from 1 to 14 (made easier by my beautiful excel sheet! ...even if no one else uses it ) I was loving my 14 dwarven paladin. I’m a tank. A rock. I laughed in the face of three opponents as they feebly tried to hit my armor class. I blocked one of the passageways from a pair of giants and several other enemies as my companions did strikes and the like. I may not dish out the damage like them, but there’s definite satisfaction that comes with being able to stand up to many enemies round after round. Most of the powers I chose were things to help allies, which I didn’t end up using because I was doing a good job at defense. A few helped augment my own abilities though, and it saved me a couple brutal hits. Peter talks a little more about it here (http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Comm ... logid=2126).

Tuesday Night Prophecy of the Priestess Campaign

My 4E campaign is continuing nicely. I recently posted a playtest report from a couple weeks ago and will be putting up another one shortly in an attempt to catch up with the current session (I think the reports are about 3 weeks behind).

Basically, the highlight of the session was the PCs being the victims of a hit and run by a dragon. I proved with certitude that dragons can indeed be lurkers. I’ll save the full explanation for a playtest report which I will try and have up on my gleemax blog next week.

Oh, and I almost killed Logan’s character. What can I say, strikers should know better than to be the first to run straight into a pack of wolves.

Wednesday Night Iomandra Campaign

This was the second session of Chris Perkins’ campaign and I’m having a blast. It’s just the right mix of intrigue, plot, and action. I’m very pleased with his incorporation of backgrounds and stories into the overall plot. He devised a 28-page campaign packet from which we could choose or derive backgrounds. I created a mixture of what he provided with some of my own hooks and elements. This is a different approach than my campaign, where I used the Herobuilder’s Guidebook table for creating character background and then worked individually with each player to develop a history. Both ways work very well to create an intricate tapestry of plot with subtlety and nuances.

As for the actual events in the sessions—there’s a lot to cover. The highlight yesterday, for me, was breaking into a wizardess’ room and finding a glass marble thing that I suspected was magic. I didn’t think I had any way of activating it, (I’m a tiefling rogue and didn’t have any interest in such things) but I gave it a try anyway and with a combined roll and int modifier, managed to get 20 (eu: use magic device?). To my horror, the little bead exploded into an electrical dragon. I had no idea what this was (that includes my character and me), so I rolled initiative, scored high, and got the heck out of there. One of the room’s occupants then returned and found me there, talking through the door to the dragon... It went something like this:

Me: “Hey dragon...are you...are you in there?”
Chris: You hear crackling energy. Zzzthhshhhzzzchhhh.
Me: “Um hm. Well...dragon, can you understand me? Roar once if you can understand me.”
Chris: Someone taps you on the shoulder and asks, “Who are you talking to?” You turn to find the one-armed elf (one of the cabin’s two occupants).”
Me: “Oh hey—hi. Um, wow, so there’s a dragon in your room.”
Chris: “A...dragon?”
Me: *guilty expression* “Well, I was sort of... well... looking around. And I found this glass bead and it became a dragon.”
Chris: “Did it?” He looks at the door skeptically. “Can I look?”
Me: “I...I don’t think that’s a good idea. I know, why don’t you go get my uncle [the inn proprietor] and I’ll wait here and make sure nothing happens.”
Chris: “Why don’t I wait here and you go get him?”
Me: “Or I could do that, I s’pose.” I go down the hall toward the deck. [Note that the inn is actually part of a ship and the common room is below deck.] I look back when I get outside.
Chris: He’s watching you.
Me: I go down toward the stairs and look back.
Chris: He’s come out and is still watching you.
Me: Crap. Okay, well I go down the stairs. Is there any way off the boat from below deck?
Chris: Nope.
Me: Hmm.

I then proceeded to find an alternate way back to the upper deck, being all sneaky. Chris had me make a skill check, but I managed to avoid the elf’s gaze and was able to slip over the side of the ship into the water. I then proceeded to avoid the ship (my home) like the plague for the rest of the day.

The other highlight of the session involved my near-death. I suppose arguably it was my second near-death experience of the session. Anyway, I was literally one role away from dying, and I had roughly a 50% chance of survival. In third-edition speak, this was about the equivalent of being at -9. Fortunately, my cleric ally managed to get over to me in time, but it was close. The whole fight was close. I imagine someone else will go into details in another blog. I’ll see if I can find the link. For now, work is over and I’m outta here.

Fonte:
http://www.gleemax.com/Comms/Pages/Comm ... logid=2948

[Wykthor]

Novidades do Mike Mearls:

Aggro in Core D&D?
Aggro in D&D is a big issue. In early drafts, there were much more explicit rules for it, where monsters had to attack the fighter or paladin or a creature's tactics dictated that it attack the nearest foe. All that stuff is gone.

First, it isn't fun playing the guy whose job it is to get beaten up. In early playtests, the fighter soaked up all the attacks and then.... soaked up some more attacks. It was the cleric problem, but even worse. At least the cleric doesn't take damage for spending all his spells healing other people. So, those mechanics went right out the window.

Second, it restricts DMs needlessly. We don't want to tell DMs, "You have to do this." It's pretty lame to force DMs to walk through a monster script. It might be interesting for a specific monster (the clockwork knight programmed with three specific routines) or encounter (the zombies in the temple of Orcus attack good clerics above all other targets), but not as a core rule.

Third, we want playing a fighter or similar class to be fun, and we think we have mechanics that make it fun to sit in front of the party and hold back the monsters while beating on their asses.

The paladin does resemble the knight, but (we hope) that the paladin's use of the knight's toys solves the problem some people had with the knight. Namely, that the knight's compulsion felt like a magical effect, but didn't use magic. In the paladin's case, he's doing something similar with his mastery of divine magic. However, his ability does not say that the monster must attack him. It makes it a better option, but doesn't eliminate other options.

The fighter is just nasty. In design, we figured that people who play fighters do so because they want to kick the crap out of monsters. If you're next to a fighter, and you take your eye off him to deal with someone else, you aren't going to be happy. We hope that this sort of mechanic leads to good teamwork (the fighter holds down the hill giant) while also speaking to why people play the class (the fighter player gets to have fun beating down the hill giant).

There are no mechanics that compel the monster to attack anyone (well, a specific spell might do that, but we already have that in D&D). We want DMs to make NPC fighters and paladins, and it would be really dumb if the DM had to impose a threat or aggro mechanic that dictated who the PCs had to attack.
__________________
Mike Mearls
Lead Developer, Dungeons & Dragons R&D

Fonte: http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php? ... stcount=15

[ShinRyuu]

Gostei da forma como consideraram mas descartaram aggro. É até esperado que tenham tanta influência de WoW já que metade da equipe é viciada. Mas não só por isso, também porque, na minha opinião, WoW representa um patamar maduro de gamedesigning, no contexto de MMORPG é claro, mas não significa que não possa trazer princípios que agreguem valor ao RPG tradicional de mesa.

Na minha opinião, como o computador automatiza muito do que fazemos manualmente na mesa, essas rotinas se tornam mais mais banais; além disso, como o computador não permite toda a amplitude e riqueza de interação de que a nossa imaginação dispõe na mesa, nossas opções ficam bem amarradas e certas coisas se tornam tão mecânicas que tendem a desagradar os adeptos fervorosos do RPG de mesa. Entretanto, quando a discussão é sobre desenvolvimento de regras mecânicas, é bobagem contestar que WoW e outros MMORPGs amadureceram vários pontos, que podemos aproveitar.

[Eltor Macnol]

Olha, eu acho bom mesmo que essa idéia tenha saído bem rápido da mentalidade deles. Tem conceitos bons que dá pra se pegar de jogos online, é verdade, mas meu maior medo é que eles acabem indo longe demais nessa direção. Por exemplo, se implementarem um sistema de PvP na 4E, eu largo D&D de mão.

[CF]

Sabe que esse sistema veio do D&D para os MMOs, né?

Matar personagens de outros jogadores é uma tradição que vem desde o OD&D. E as arenas. Bem. Sempre rolam em encontros de RPG.

[Pepilegal]

Eu não consigo chamar esse MMO de MMORPG, pra mim eles não tem nada de RPG.
RPG é a interpretação de personagens numa história proposta por um mestre, tem mestre que até gosta de criar aventuras no estilo matar-pilhar-destruir, mas não são todos. A maioria dos bons mestres exige a interpretação dos personagens e os bons jogadores interpretam antes dos mestres exigirem. Acho que chamar um MMO de MMORPG não tem nada a ver, pior que agora vocês estão me dizendo que o D&D vai ficar com cara de MMO. Putz, ai é f@#$.

[Torneco]

Calma cara, não é bem isso.

O que a gente tá falando é que nesses jogos existem mecânicas interessantes, que encaixam bem numa mesa. Claro, nem tudo vai ser usado, mas algumas coisas funcionam bem e podem funcionar bem no D&D, simples. Ele não vai virar um MMORPG, só vai se aproveitar de boas idéias.