D&D 4e
Dnes
Starší
Kultura
Alnag
28.5.2008 14:07
Dungeons & Dragons 4e (II)
Diskuse o čtvrté edici pravidel Dungeons & Dragons po jejich vydání. Prosíme i přes vypjaté téma o dodržování základních pravidel netikety, tak jako v jiných diskusích.
Navazuje na více či méně spekulativní diskusi o 4E.
Navazuje na více či méně spekulativní diskusi o 4E.
Jo a taky koukám, že Wizardi zveřejnili video podcast jehož hlavní náplní je ukázka toho, jako hrají D&D (konkrétně bojový encounter). Jinak ten podcast má 230 MB takže nic malého...
Koukám na to. Rob Watkins, který v tom videu hraje postavu rogua je úplně super. Ten pohled očí a výraz při představování - mohl by klidně jít i na casting na roli rogueho ve filmu :)
zbezne som pozrel licenciu a srd a je to vazne trapas. ja som daval wizardom velky palec hore za OGL tak za GSL posielam boooo.
Protože nikdo nereagoval na můj příspěvek na zde, tak jsem ještě pohledal na internetu a našel jsem tyto reakce hráčů:
Without a word of a lie, _this_ is the true, modern successor to original Dungeona and Dragonse. Castles & Crusades isn't just another "retro clone" knock-off. Not even close. Rather, it evokes all the elements which made classic D&D so much fun, while marrying these to a slick, simple, flexible and _modern_ d20 dice mechanic. No need to wade through pages and pages of skills and feats at character creation. The unified dice mechanic here (called the SIEGE engine) will also let you choose (and demonstrate in play) what makes your character noteworthy -- no skill lists or feat descriptions required. Best of all, Castles Crusades is based on the WotC Open Game License, so (with a little simple adaptation) all of your old D&D stuff from 1e through 3.x can be used with Castles & Crusades. I could write pages elaborating on why I think C&C is worth at least a look from interested gemers.
I've been using the supremely elegant C&C rules for six months now (along with all my old 1st Edition AD&D stuff, which is easily convertible), and my games have never been better. Castles & Crusades is brilliant. Add a smattering of 1st Edition stuff for creative inspiration, and you have an ideal combination for storyteller DMs who prefer fast, narrative-driven play.
If you started out playing old school fantasy RPGs back in the 70s and 80s then you'll love C&C. The first time I saw the C&C Players Handbook I felt like a ten year old kid again- the game plays very quickly and smoothly, and it is a joy to run as a DM. I cannot recommend this game enough, so if you're tired of 1000+ page core rules sets in other fantasy RPGs try C&C out.
I'll admit it, I love C&C. It's old-school-meets-new-school philosophy just rocks. Make no mistake about it, this game will take you back to a time when RPGs seemed (and were!) a lot simpler than some of the bloated behemoths we have today. C&C isn't for everybody - I'm sure there are some 3.0/3.5/4.0 addicts out there who would never dream of playing C&C, but I'm not one of them. C&C is simple, quick, and fun. It is, IMHO, a far better successor to AD&D than 3.0 was.
Without a word of a lie, _this_ is the true, modern successor to original Dungeona and Dragonse. Castles & Crusades isn't just another "retro clone" knock-off. Not even close. Rather, it evokes all the elements which made classic D&D so much fun, while marrying these to a slick, simple, flexible and _modern_ d20 dice mechanic. No need to wade through pages and pages of skills and feats at character creation. The unified dice mechanic here (called the SIEGE engine) will also let you choose (and demonstrate in play) what makes your character noteworthy -- no skill lists or feat descriptions required. Best of all, Castles Crusades is based on the WotC Open Game License, so (with a little simple adaptation) all of your old D&D stuff from 1e through 3.x can be used with Castles & Crusades. I could write pages elaborating on why I think C&C is worth at least a look from interested gemers.
I've been using the supremely elegant C&C rules for six months now (along with all my old 1st Edition AD&D stuff, which is easily convertible), and my games have never been better. Castles & Crusades is brilliant. Add a smattering of 1st Edition stuff for creative inspiration, and you have an ideal combination for storyteller DMs who prefer fast, narrative-driven play.
If you started out playing old school fantasy RPGs back in the 70s and 80s then you'll love C&C. The first time I saw the C&C Players Handbook I felt like a ten year old kid again- the game plays very quickly and smoothly, and it is a joy to run as a DM. I cannot recommend this game enough, so if you're tired of 1000+ page core rules sets in other fantasy RPGs try C&C out.
I'll admit it, I love C&C. It's old-school-meets-new-school philosophy just rocks. Make no mistake about it, this game will take you back to a time when RPGs seemed (and were!) a lot simpler than some of the bloated behemoths we have today. C&C isn't for everybody - I'm sure there are some 3.0/3.5/4.0 addicts out there who would never dream of playing C&C, but I'm not one of them. C&C is simple, quick, and fun. It is, IMHO, a far better successor to AD&D than 3.0 was.
Castles & Crusades? No to je taká divná směska d20 a klasického "dýčka". Ale má své zaryté fanoušky. Nemám s tím, ale žádnou zkušenost kromě toho, že to občas objevuje v diskusích... :)
Nejvíc mne pobavily reakce hráčů na ten podcast, na EnWorldu. Předem se omlouvám, za dlouhé anglické citace, ale tentokrát jsem si nemohl pomoci. Celý thread je tady.Třeba:
píše:
On top of that, the DM was very boring, offering no descriptions and just giving bare-bones mechanical notes. Also, the one hot girl they could find around the office and therefore dragged into the game looked very, very bored.
Což je teda fakt... kdyby se mi takhle tvářila hráčka, tak bych se na boj vykašlal a něco s tím dělal. (-1 to DM)On top of that, the DM was very boring, offering no descriptions and just giving bare-bones mechanical notes. Also, the one hot girl they could find around the office and therefore dragged into the game looked very, very bored.
píše:
I want to point out some really fundamental shortfalls in the video podcast combat. The paladin did not challenge/mark (PHB 91) (minor action to do so, which she had plenty of). The warlock forgot to curse (again, minor action) enemies until about the third round of combat, I believe. The fighter did not enter melee until later in the combat, nor did he challenge/mark (not even an action, you just have to remember it) when he used his wizard powers. The rogue, while having a good first round, was neither backed up by his party nor did he use his mobility once he was in trouble (this was mostly bad luck on his part).
A tahle ten rant pokračuje o tom, jak herní designéři neznají vlastní pravidla. Zdrcující kritika. (-1 celému týmu :))I want to point out some really fundamental shortfalls in the video podcast combat. The paladin did not challenge/mark (PHB 91) (minor action to do so, which she had plenty of). The warlock forgot to curse (again, minor action) enemies until about the third round of combat, I believe. The fighter did not enter melee until later in the combat, nor did he challenge/mark (not even an action, you just have to remember it) when he used his wizard powers. The rogue, while having a good first round, was neither backed up by his party nor did he use his mobility once he was in trouble (this was mostly bad luck on his part).
píše:
They rolled badly, but as Palladion says, they really played poorly - very few attempts to help each other out, almost no coordinated tactics. You can tell their attitude was straight 3e/powergamer by the fact that everyone blew their action point in the first round. Using action points in the first round is really only a good idea if you are going to pull off some combo that eliminates an opponent or two. You don't just use it to re-roll a missed attack.Seriously, why in the world is the rogue charging the mindflayer right out the gate? Even if his entire purpose there was to knock him unconscious, he should have encouraged the others (and they should have known) to work with him and pile on the Mindflayer at that point, or he shouldn't have done it. If they couldn't get there, then that is all the more reason not to charge in and blow the action point right away.Ignore the rolls and simply focus on the actions the party takes in the first round or two and it doesn't even seem like they are playing the right game. I didn't see one instance of someone moving to flanking position, or even paying attention to the position of another PC.Another thing that is a shame is that there are several poorly adjudicated or forgotten rules. I think that the OAs for the minotaur were not handled correctly (I'm pretty sure I saw the minotaur use one against the paladin twice in the same turn, and I also thought the warlock hit one of the creatures with a power that made it take OAs against its allies and yet I don't remember any of those occuring). Also, the paladin power "pray for more" is used to make the DM reroll at one point, which isn't how it works. They did put the text up, but it would have been better if they had also pointed out that Dave made a mistake in allowing that use of it.
A pak kdo má největší problém s přechodem na novou edici. WotC :))They rolled badly, but as Palladion says, they really played poorly - very few attempts to help each other out, almost no coordinated tactics. You can tell their attitude was straight 3e/powergamer by the fact that everyone blew their action point in the first round. Using action points in the first round is really only a good idea if you are going to pull off some combo that eliminates an opponent or two. You don't just use it to re-roll a missed attack.Seriously, why in the world is the rogue charging the mindflayer right out the gate? Even if his entire purpose there was to knock him unconscious, he should have encouraged the others (and they should have known) to work with him and pile on the Mindflayer at that point, or he shouldn't have done it. If they couldn't get there, then that is all the more reason not to charge in and blow the action point right away.Ignore the rolls and simply focus on the actions the party takes in the first round or two and it doesn't even seem like they are playing the right game. I didn't see one instance of someone moving to flanking position, or even paying attention to the position of another PC.Another thing that is a shame is that there are several poorly adjudicated or forgotten rules. I think that the OAs for the minotaur were not handled correctly (I'm pretty sure I saw the minotaur use one against the paladin twice in the same turn, and I also thought the warlock hit one of the creatures with a power that made it take OAs against its allies and yet I don't remember any of those occuring). Also, the paladin power "pray for more" is used to make the DM reroll at one point, which isn't how it works. They did put the text up, but it would have been better if they had also pointed out that Dave made a mistake in allowing that use of it.
Ještě k tomu podcastu. Vyloženě jsem si říkal, že ti hráči se měli natýmovat do dvojic a krýt si záda. Rogue + Fighter, kteří by soustavně drželi ve protivníka ve flanku/CA, Paladin + Warlock. Jedna z dvojic by byla víc ofenzivní, druhá by víc defenzivně kryla nástup potvor.
Joeyeti: Hodně zjednodušeně, můžeš vydávat jenom doplňky D&D 4e. Zazdili všechny zjevné možnosti jak vydat samostatnou d20 hru s mechanikami přejatými ze 4e. To nelze.Taky nelze citovat drtivou většinu věcí z pravidel 4e, což znamená, že Green Ronin třeba nemůže vydat "Power Cards", které si plánoval. Znamená to ale taky, že nemůžeš v dobrodružství přetisknout staty potvory z Monster Manualu, čímž bys DMovi zjednodušil život. (Můžeš si tam přetisknout potvoru vlastní...)Taky to brání vydávat v rámci jedné herní linie zároveň OGL a GSL produkty. Atd. Je to hodně restriktivní, víc restriktivní než bývala d20 licence.
alef0 the translator robot prelozil ten clanok o narabani s vlajkami ktory som linkoval v tejto diskusii.
Corvus: Nemusíš, v mé skupině Warheart totálně rozbil zájem vyzkoušet si 4E :) (jen tak mimo diskuzi, bude 1.0 verze?)
Gurney: to ma tesi :) Warheart ma so 4e spolocne snad len to ze pouziva d20 :-)
o verzii 1.0 uz chvilu rozmyslam, ale zmeny oproti draft verzii budu asi len kozmeticke. (napriklad chcem zmenit nazov 'd20 Warheart' len na 'Warheart', mozno bude lepsia sadzba s par obrazkami...). pravidlami uz hybat nebudem, som spokojny s nimi tak ako su.
o verzii 1.0 uz chvilu rozmyslam, ale zmeny oproti draft verzii budu asi len kozmeticke. (napriklad chcem zmenit nazov 'd20 Warheart' len na 'Warheart', mozno bude lepsia sadzba s par obrazkami...). pravidlami uz hybat nebudem, som spokojny s nimi tak ako su.
No tohle je skoro spíš anti-4e zpráva, ale Mongoose Publishing, svého času zaplavující trh spoustou d20 titulů se rozhodl, že některé v tuto chvíli už pasé řady (tedy ne Conana a tak) dá volně k dispozici v podobě wiki. Jinak řečeno OGL žije a daří se jí dobře...Wiki byla spuštěna zde: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/start
Vydavatel Kenzer&Co. zas podle vyjádření na vlastních stránkách některé tituly ke světu Kingdoms of Kalamar dál vydávat nemůže a vrazil proto na své stránky alespoň jejich nabídku na amazonu. Další tituly ke Kalamaru původně vydané bez loga Dungeons&Dragons nabízí dál. Ty tituly, které logo měly, potom jak jsem si všiml postupně převádí do podoby bez loga a prodává je za nižší cenu jako .pdf soubory.
A už tu máme první vlaštovku, která podepsala GSL. Redbrick Ltd. vydavatel hry Earthdawn (která je na 4e jak dělaná) a Fading Suns. Tak uvidíme, co z toho vznikne...
Na komu se nechce čekat na jeho oblíbené povolání nebo rasu až se s ní WotC uráčí přijít...
Necromancer's Game 4e nabídka píše:
The Advanced Player's Guide--a source book with alternate classes based on the classic druid, bard, barbarian, monk, as well as classic versions of the halfling, gnome, and other optional rules such as 0-level adventuring, new spells, etc. Written By Ari Marmel. The Iron Tower Adventure Path--a series of adventure products and campaign supplements for your 4E campaign.Winter's Tomb--a free, downloadable pdf to get you up and playing 4E right away. A lead in to the Iron Tower Adventure Path or a standalone adventure for your use. Contains pregenerated characters and a ready to play format similar to or Ennie-award winning Wizard's Amulet. Start 4E the way you started 3E--with a free adventure from Necromancer Games. The Folio of Fiends--a monster book by Scott Greene of Tome of Horrors fame. Contains new monsters for your use in 4E play!
The Advanced Player's Guide--a source book with alternate classes based on the classic druid, bard, barbarian, monk, as well as classic versions of the halfling, gnome, and other optional rules such as 0-level adventuring, new spells, etc. Written By Ari Marmel. The Iron Tower Adventure Path--a series of adventure products and campaign supplements for your 4E campaign.Winter's Tomb--a free, downloadable pdf to get you up and playing 4E right away. A lead in to the Iron Tower Adventure Path or a standalone adventure for your use. Contains pregenerated characters and a ready to play format similar to or Ennie-award winning Wizard's Amulet. Start 4E the way you started 3E--with a free adventure from Necromancer Games. The Folio of Fiends--a monster book by Scott Greene of Tome of Horrors fame. Contains new monsters for your use in 4E play!
Pro přispívání do diskuse se musíš přihlásit (zapomenuté heslo). Pokud účet nemáš, registrace trvá půl minuty a 5 kliknutí.