A letter to my beloved Mongoose

[tneva82]

This demonstrates that you have absolutely no idea how 4e works at all. There's a LOT of internal logic and consistency in 4e, and the fact that everyone has at-will/encounter/daily powers doesn't necessarily mean that "everyone has magic powers", it just means that everyone has stuff that they can do at-will, or once per encounter, or once per day. That may be anything from "fire a magic missile" to "do a cleave attack with a weapon".

Something that looks like a magic and works like a magic is a magic. Same thing which is just renamed. Not to mention it's stupid logic. By D&D4e logic I could throw dagger just once per day regardless of how many daggers I have with me because that ability happens to be daily...

And why I can't cleave more than once? Why can I only once per day make attack that makes opponent bleed? What the bloody logic that is? Only case that has any logic whatsoever is if that's magic power. And funnily enough that's what they are.

Funny, I remember playing basic D&D and that's pretty much "all it was good for" too - along with most of the editions since then too. D&D's always been combat-heavy, but that's certainly not all it can do, and 4e is no different. It's all in how the DM runs the game, not in the rules.

You could do other stuff with 3.5E for sure. But 4th ed decided to scrap that and concentrate on simple combat with added bonuses of every combat must be beatable by the adventures mentality because kids can't be bothered to think that avoiding combat once in a while might be a good idea. Oh no! What's fun avoiding combat when you can go in and hack them apart instead?

Again, you have no idea what you're talking about - raising the dead back to life in D&D is not an easy proposition.

Lol. When rulebook ITSELF mentions that soon even death is no obstacle yeah right. Sure it takes few levels but that's hardly issue. Once you have that you are raising them back in no time.

Even D&D4e RULEBOOK disagrees with you on this one. Death is no problem whatsoever in D&D world so why are humans supposedly in such a danger from evil guys when there's no worry about death?

I have the rules and I have played with the rules. They stink. They have no support for non-combat related stuff so if you want non-combat stuff you have to create them from get-go. At which point might just as well scrap them. Official scenarios are tons of combats and little else. Their basic rules for them is: 3-4 combat encounters each lasting about 45-60 minutes(which in itself is stupidly long for one combat encounter).

Oh and nevermind the stupidity that magic items guarded by monsters aren't supposed to be USED by the monsters. "Oh yeah I guard this sword of all-slaying +10 but I'm instead going to fight you with my short sword instead".

Whole rulebook and their design principles are just full of idiotism. They simply decided to forget RPG'ers and concentrate on making hack&slash for kids who aren't interested in detailed plots or worlds(heck they have ADMITTED destroying detailed forgotten realm setting in place of adventure full realm. And then their internal logic gets into fore again that one of the shining spots in the world has about 1000 people crammed into 17 buildings. Yeah right). Yup that's smart. Destroy detailed setting so that kids don't have to worry about depth and deep history and can concentrate on killing tons of monsters which are just stat blocks with virtually no information about them. The monster manual is just a disgrace. Just stats but very little to no information about what makes those creatures. What a bloody hell is beholder anyway? Unless you have previous edition stuff you don't have a clue because D&D4e doesn't bother to explain it. And why should they? Kids aren't interested in that. They just want to hack&slash.

 

[EDG]

You don't like it. You very clearly don't understand it, and you want to spend your time ranting about it and making baseless statements about it. Whatever. If you hate it that much then don't play it and have the decency to not deride or insult or belittle those who do get it and who do like it.

Either way, it's nothing to do with Traveller.

 

[Garuda]

Something that looks like a magic and works like a magic is a magic. Same thing which is just renamed. Not to mention it's stupid logic. By D&D4e logic I could throw dagger just once per day regardless of how many daggers I have with me because that ability happens to be daily...

You can throw a dagger as many times as you like in 4e, its called a basic ranged attack.

And why I can't cleave more than once?

You can.

You could do other stuff with 3.5E for sure. But 4th ed decided to scrap that and concentrate on simple combat with added bonuses of every combat must be beatable by the adventures mentality because kids can't be bothered to think that avoiding combat once in a while might be a good idea. Oh no! What's fun avoiding combat when you can go in and hack them apart instead?

You can do this in 4th ed. Its called role playing. Its what the players do.

Their basic rules for them is: 3-4 combat encounters each lasting about 45-60 minutes(which in itself is stupidly long for one combat encounter).

I found 4e combats to be too long winded too at first, but we get through most of the much quicker now we're all a bit more conversant with the rules , although high level stuff still drags. I play 3.5 on a Wednesday and 4e on a Thursday - I really enjoy both. Last night's 3.5e combat from the Red Hand of Doom took five players just over 3 hours. One combat vs Wrymlord Ulwai and a half dpzen hobs, a summoned ape and an unseen servant. Long winded combats exist in 3.5 too.

Oh and nevermind the stupidity that magic items guarded by monsters aren't supposed to be USED by the monsters. "Oh yeah I guard this sword of all-slaying +10 but I'm instead going to fight you with my short sword instead".

The rule book says that? Wow, I must have missed that one.

 

[tneva82]

The rule book says that? Wow, I must have missed that one.

Not rulebook but their scenario design guide. Couldn't believe my eyes when I read that.

Ah well. D&D is owned by company making toys for kids so hardly surprising they turned D&D for another toy line. Hardly surprising most of serious RPG'ers who use D&D system have either stayed with 3.5 or moved to Pathfinder(which is what D&D4e SHOULD have been instead of this system that shares only name with D&D and where they admit of deliberatly destroying any semblance of depth in Forgotten realm setting because it gets in a way).

D&D4e does nothing better than 3.5 except possibly eye candy which is not what RPG'ers should be interested about. Stupid Hasbro. The moment they bought WOTC under them was the moment D&D got death blow as serious RPG. Thank god Pathfinder atleast keeps D20 torch flaming bright as serious RPG for those who enjoy D20 system.

 

[EDG]

Wow, could you get any more conceited? What on earth makes you think that you're any better than anyone else who enjoys 4e? And you very clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when you claim that WotC is "kiddifying" D&D.

The only real difference between 4e and previous editions is that it's a lot more obviously "gamist" - there's more obvious tactical choices to make. Yes, it's geared towards combat but ALL editions of D&D have been like that to some extent or another.

If you prefer Pathfinder then by all means go off and play it and stop pissing on everyone else who likes 4e. Just spare us this high and mighty BS about "serious gaming" vs "gaming for kids". It's completely baseless and just makes you look obnoxious.

Oh, and you do realise that the d20 system that you love so dearly was created AFTER WotC (and through them, Hasbro) bought D&D, right? So much for your "death blow"... :roll:

 

[Twin Agate Dragons]

EDG hit the nail on the head tnev. I'm not a 100% supporter of 4E, but I am enjoying reading the few 4E books that I'm buying books and taking from them what I want for the 3E & Pathfinder homebrews that I'm working on. :wink:

 

[kristof65]

Wow. I don't like D&D - but my dislike is based on the class/level system that all editions have as it's underpinning. Even with that anti-D&D bias, I find 4e the most thought out and internally consistant edition of D&D yet.

I'm wowed even more because I agree with EDGs last post 100%

 

[tneva82]

And you very clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when you claim that WotC is "kiddifying" D&D.

Let's see:

1) oversimplifying rules and making them detail combat only in any sense of detail. Even 3.5E had more non-combat rules
2) simplifying combats so they are quaranteed to be balanced to ensure party can go in and combat them without worries
3) deliberatly destroying any attempt of depth(which they have ADMITTED) from their settings. Can't let detailed setting to get in way of hack&slash. Somebody might remember RPG's are supposed to be more than hack&slash at which point inadequancy of rules fall apart. Now settings are nothing more than poorly thought out(17 buildings housing 1000 people? Bejezus. And the amount of space they had for food growing wouldn't sustain even half that amount...If even that...) which has no logic and no sense of consistency that exists just as a place to go kill next bunch of monsters without any sort of character. I mean: Few monsters evoke greater terror than the dread beholder, an avaricious tyrant that fires terrible rays from it's eyestalks. Gee THAT'S useful amount of information. Nothing about where it lives, why it does what it does or ANYTHING even remotely useful. It's just a stat block. For all that matters it could be tiny rat or big dragon.
4) making scenarios follow simple go to place A, kill all, go to next point, kill all. Even 3.5E offered more possibilities. That's now their official line. 3-4 combat encounters, each 45-60 minutes leaving 0-105 minutes for non-combat encounters. Wopedoo. Scenarios are ridiculously biased toward combats(note the 0...). That's how they define scenario now. Oh and don't even think about making that orc warlord use that blade of all-slaying he happens to own. Monsters can't use those against player characters. They fight with toothpicks instead.

They took 3.5E, ripped out all non-combat related stuff, added some bare bones into mix, simplified combat making it less interesting and removed any depth in the settings(and ADMIT doing it deliberatly). D&D is owned by toy company which turned it into another toy line seeing as that generates lot more $$$ than serious RPG.

 

[EDG]

You're clearly not interested in facts, tneva. And we're really not interested in reading the same tired old rants that have been done over and over by people who have a hate-on for 4e and who refuse to understand or accept the reasons for the design choices that led to it.

You're no different to the people who keep ranting about MGT or any other new edition of Traveller in that regard. What you don't get is that the people who actually enjoy playing the new games aren't interested in having rants from people who hate them rammed down their throats. Play your Pathfinder, nobody's stopping you. It's not like D&D4e is actively preventing you from enjoying your own games in whatever other system you prefer. Just get over it and move on.

 

[Infojunky]

Myself I prefer good rules. I can live with subpar artwork if rules are good. I can't live with crappy rules like D&D4 has.

Art is just eye candy. I want the real meat of RPG books to be good and not the eye candy since I play rather than admire pictures. Haven't seen any RPG book yet where art is even anywhere near as useful as the rules and setting describitions themselves.

Amen brother!

The prevalence of full color rpg books where the art budget was higher than the design/editing budget has been one of the major reasons that I buy few new book/games now.

I believe that the 48 page, Black and White, Digest Sized book was the absolute pinnacle of Game presentation.

 

[Twin Agate Dragons]

tnev, since you feel so strongly about it, your brothers in arms are over at enworld.org.

I came to these [the mongoose boards] and paizos boards to get away from the edition wars. Please, either stop, or go register at enworld.org.

 

[Strangelove]

I think some individuals frustration with Mongoose's proofing issues on Traveller also come from

The fact that they have offered at little to no cost to Mongoose to proof read the material for them as a second or third set of eyes.

I have put off buying Mongoose Traveller material when it first comes out right now, because I want to wait for the updated version with corrections.

Dave Chase

An extra 5 to 10 PLAYERS would likely make a world of difference in the quality of the proofed books at the cost of what? Maybe a comp copy of what you read and markup in acrobat reader?

I just bought the whole set of Traveller PDFs and have read two of them so far. On my first read through I could have marked up several outright errors and even more suggestions on unclear phraseology. All it would require is me sending the marked up PDF back for someone to read over. They don't have to agree with my suggestions but they would easily see the obvious errors I saw in one read through.

I review stuff for Amazon as part of their Vine program where they send me free comps just to write an honest review. Some of what we get are electronics, CDs, DVDs or software but most of it is books. Some of the books are advance copies that are not finished being edited but most are finished ready to go on sale in two weeks sort of things.

There still seems to be a large disparity in the quality of layout and writing between books and RPG books. Even the "dry and boring" technical manuals I've reviewed like one on Pharmacology have been vastly better assembled than most products put out by gaming companies these days. A good rule of thumb is that if your product looks to a customer like something they could produce themselves in Word or Pages then you have a problem.

 

[EDG]

I believe that the 48 page, Black and White, Digest Sized book was the absolute pinnacle of Game presentation.

I wouldn't go that far myself. But there was a time at least a few years ago where style seemed to dominate over substance, and I'd rather have a game that looked decent and readable in black&white than all shiny and full colour.

 

[tneva82]

. Play your Pathfinder, nobody's stopping you. It's not like D&D4e is actively preventing you from enjoying your own games in whatever other system you prefer. Just get over it and move on.

Who says I play Pathfinder? I don't play D20 that much except Conan but it's vastly superior to D&D4e. Instead of destroying good working rules 3.5E had for no gain whatsoever that atleast has been simply content on improving it.

D&D4e does nothing better than 3.5E. Not even combat. For that's it's way too simple and EASY. Doesn't take any thought to walk over the combats which are designed so that even <10yo kids can beat them easily.

If they had atleast kept the settings same there would be atleast them to be interested but nope. They destroyed all depth(and admit it to boot) and act like previous history is gone(so good luck if you wish to submit them scenario which refers to past history. If it's anything more than simple passage odds are good you'll be rejected. Statement that previous history should be ignored is said flatout on their guidelines :lol: ). Not to mention some new craziness they have introduced on their living forgotten realm campaign like robots :lol: . Couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that. ROBOTS in forgotten realms? Bejezus.

And you defend that while attacking Traveller rules for their artistic licenses in areas like piracy :lol:

 

[kristof65]

1) oversimplifying rules and making them detail combat only in any sense of detail. Even 3.5E had more non-combat rules

One could also call this streamling. When I think about all the RPG games I've played in and ran over the years, the only game I've ever needed lots of non-combat rules in is Traveller - in order to design space ships and stuff.

2) simplifying combats so they are quaranteed to be balanced to ensure party can go in and combat them without worries

Have you actually every played a 4e combat? I thought the same thing, up until recently when our group began a new game, with the GM choosing 4e for her game. It seems to me that there are just as many tactics options for 4e combat as before, it's just that they are A) different, and B) thanks to the way the rules are, quicker to process your options.

3) deliberatly destroying any attempt of depth(which they have ADMITTED) from their settings. Can't let detailed setting to get in way of hack&slash. Somebody might remember RPG's are supposed to be more than hack&slash at which point inadequancy of rules fall apart. Now settings are nothing more than poorly thought out(17 buildings housing 1000 people? Bejezus. And the amount of space they had for food growing wouldn't sustain even half that amount...If even that...) which has no logic and no sense of consistency that exists just as a place to go kill next bunch of monsters without any sort of character. I mean: Few monsters evoke greater terror than the dread beholder, an avaricious tyrant that fires terrible rays from it's eyestalks. Gee THAT'S useful amount of information. Nothing about where it lives, why it does what it does or ANYTHING even remotely useful. It's just a stat block. For all that matters it could be tiny rat or big dragon.

Several points here:
- one could level the same accusation at Mongoose about Traveller. Geesh, when compared to the wealth of information available about the Third Imperim in Classic Traveller, Mongoose must have deliberatly sabotaged the sense of depth in there version, because, golly by geezuz, the Spinward Marches book is crap - Mongoose DELIBERATELY left out stuff.

- Poor scenario/background design has been a problem for a lot longer than 4e has been around, and by a lot more companies than just WotC. A few months ago I picked up a d20 modern scenario by another large publisher, and the bathrooms in the included floor plans of a smallish mansion were 30x30 ft or larger! Every Paizo module I've ever looked at for 3.5e has dungeons and other areas that make no logical sense to me. Heck, I gave up on published scenarios and settings in the 80s when I got fed up with the poor way most settings were handled. So again, this is hardly a charge you can level at strictly WotC.

4) making scenarios follow simple go to place A, kill all, go to next point, kill all. Even 3.5E offered more possibilities. That's now their official line.

That's pretty much been their official line all through 3/3.5 and now 4. It's hardly changed.

They took 3.5E, ripped out all non-combat related stuff, added some bare bones into mix, simplified combat making it less interesting and removed any depth in the settings(and ADMIT doing it deliberatly). D&D is owned by toy company which turned it into another toy line seeing as that generates lot more $$$ than serious RPG.

They didn't do this to "kiddify" it, they did this to sell miniatures, because they'll sell far more of those prepainted DDM pieces of crap they call minis to any one customer than they ever will books. Games Workshop has been doing it for a LONG, LONG time, WotC/Hasbro just figured it out in the last 10 years.

I'm an not a fan of D&D, nor WotC. However, you're villifying them, and insulting a bunch of people who do like the game for what appear to be simple biases and unfounded "facts".

 

[tneva82]

One could also call this streamling.

So simple system simplified even further. Kids love that.

Have you actually every played a 4e combat?

Yup. Doesn't take much thought to figure out optimal way to go for. The bloody encounters are balanced on way lower level.


I thought the same thing, up until recently when our group began a new game, with the GM choosing 4e for her game. It seems to me that there are just as many tactics options for 4e combat as before, it's just that they are A) different, and B) thanks to the way the rules are, quicker to process your options.

Several points here:
- one could level the same accusation at Mongoose about Traveller. Geesh, when compared to the wealth of information available about the Third Imperim in Classic Traveller, Mongoose must have deliberatly sabotaged the sense of depth in there version, because, golly by geezuz, the Spinward Marches book is crap - Mongoose DELIBERATELY left out stuff.

Mongoose didn't destroy old stuff and go with the principle it never happened. WOTC does. As far as they are concerned old history never happened. All that exists is what they have now which is stupid illogical in a first place(17 buildings for 1000 people? And that's including common buildings like pubs and stores...That's one cramped place when each living building must have something like 100-150 persons minimum. And from the map buildings sure don't look big enough for that. Guess they must be 200 metres high. In fantasy realm with robots guess that's sensible enough. Sure would be nice if they had then atleast made note that the buildings are hundreds of meters high with multiple rooms for living quarters. Because that would be sufficiently important detail for GM's to be notified).

Mongoose didn't aim to destroy depth and history from the 3I. WOTC did. And they admit it...They aren't even hiding the fact they wanted to simplify the setting to be more suitable for hack&slash.

Only good thing about that move is that atleast they are honest about that so anybody who is interested in getting setting book with real depth and coherency can avoid that book like plague. I was inches away from buying that book but after reading it it became clear that this book serves no useful purpose. Any adventures you care to make out of that can be done just as well in any generic setting since there's nothing of interest left there. Might just as well save quite a few bucks and do adventures in generic setting for free rather than doing adventures in generic setting for high price.

 

[EDG]

D&D4e does nothing better than 3.5E. Not even combat. For that's it's way too simple and EASY.

Yeah, and you know what? I LOVE that it's easy. 3.5e was so frakking complicated when it came to combat, it was ridiculous, and largely unplayable at higher levels too because you were drowning in modifiers and conditions that made you recalculate pretty much everything. So I'd say right off the bat that this is why 4e actually is better than 3.5e. I'm quite firmly never looking at 3.x Edition again and am glad to see the back of it.

But, yet again, just because you don't like 4e doesn't mean that anyone who does like it is simple, or a kid, or shallow, or whatever. All you're doing in ranting here.

 

[tneva82]

Yeah, and you know what? I LOVE that it's easy. 3.5e was so frakking complicated when it came to combat

Complicated? LOL! Hardly complicated for anyone who is willing to read the rulebook and is capable of + and - calculations. Only ones who might have problems with that are kids who aren't native english speakers simply because of language barrier :lol:

So I'd say right off the bat that this is why 4e actually is better than 3.5e.

Rulewise it is just as complicated. It just doesn't offer as much variety or challenges. Easier as in no challenge for combats. You go in, you kill. Monsters dead. Not easier as in easier to understand the rules where it is just as hard/easy as 3.5E.

 

[EDG]

Mongoose didn't aim to destroy depth and history from the 3I. WOTC did. And they admit it...They aren't even hiding the fact they wanted to simplify the setting to be more suitable for hack&slash.

Um, Matt has actually implied that there are going to be what sound like significant changes to the 3I over the next few years.

As for fantasy with robots, you clearly haven't seen Eberron or Iron Kingdoms or Exalted, have you...

And you know what "pretending previous history never happened" is called? It's called "a reboot". Maybe if you look at it that way you'll froth about it less.

 

[tneva82]

As for fantasy with robots, you clearly haven't seen Eberron or Iron Kingdoms or Exalted, have you...

When those have been in Forgotten Realms? Never until they decided to mix Eberron with FR. Why make 2 settings when you can mix them into one and save half the design costs.

And reboots are never good when they are done just to destroy depth of setting for setting with no depth and no colour. Now it's just generic setting for generic adventures against soulless monsters in scenarios that are nothing else but hack&slash.

For reboot to be good it should IMPROVE the setting. Not destroy all that is good in it and replace it with substandard poorly thought out crap. It doesn't take much of intelligence to notice they didn't even think what they were writing or whether it makes sense. If they had considered they wouldn't have let idiotism like 1000 people in 17 buildings(not all even habitants) slip through.

They were told to make hack&slash game for kids and not spend extra time in making good rules or believable settings and that's what they delivered.