Quote:
The only concern I have about 4e Dungeons & Dragons with regard to Castles & Crusades is that the 'simplification' of 4e is an attempt to retain consumers who are fed up with the byzantine nature of the 3e system.
When I played 3E, I didn't find the rules complex. Sometimes there were more steps in resolving an action than there needed to be (grapple), but the steps weren't terribly difficult. What drove me away as a DM were the character build options and the way that difficulty classes (DCs) for skills and saves weren't determined with one simple formula (as they are in C&C). As a DM, I needed to have a working knowledge of 20 or skills and many feats. This aspect of the game became tiresome and boring to me. I liked C&C because it was more straight forward, because it adopted the rule simplifications that 3E made over older editions, and then added simplifications for the complexities (feats and skills) that 3E added. Thus my problem with 4E. Although there do seem to be some simplifications of rules systems over 3E, it also seems like there will be many more character options. Again - great for the players, but a pain for the DMs. I'll stick to C&C and raid the 4E SRD for material when it's released.
Edited for spelling
That would be why I usually say complex, rather than complicated, or at least it is usually my intent to make the distinction between difficult and 'too many [unnecessary] steps' with regard to 3e. In this case, 'simplification' was intended to convey the same.
When writing things for 3e, I find myself routinely giving Monsters and NPCs Bonus Skills, Skill Points and Feats to bring them in line with my concepts. The next step is to release Attack Bonus, Saving Throw and Skill Rank caps, but then I might as well be playing AD&D.
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.
I am curious as to what direction 4e will take, but I don't think it will do anything to detract people from C&C in the long run. I am sure there will be a giant marketing push, and it will get some media attention in the beginning of it's release, which will start sales off with a bang regardless. It's the long term where people see if it's truly for them or not.
I love C&C (and it is my first choice now), and although not often, I do play other systems, like Gurps and Rolemaster. If 4e, with its mass medial push, brings in more people into the rpg world, that means more people who may potentially switch to a different rpg, like C&C. In the end, I think it will be good for all.
PIperdog wrote:
I am curious as to what direction 4e will take, but I don't think it will do anything to detract people from C&C in the long run. I am sure there will be a giant marketing push, and it will get some media attention in the beginning of it's release, which will start sales off with a bang regardless. It's the long term where people see if it's truly for them or not.
I love C&C (and it is my first choice now), and although not often, I do play other systems, like Gurps and Rolemaster. If 4e, with its mass medial push, brings in more people into the rpg world, that means more people who may potentially switch to a different rpg, like C&C. In the end, I think it will be good for all.
Direction of 4E?
Thats easy. Greater powergaming munchkinistic tweakiness.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael
