Organização das regras, perícias e o swordmage

Um monte de pequenas notícias da nova edição que eu vou tentar compilar em um post só com breves comentários.

 

O primeiro é do favorito da casa Mike Mearls em seu blog sobre a organização das informações nos livros básicos da nova edição, em especial no capítulo de regras de combate:

In developing the combat chapter, this is my battlecry: Put stuff where it belongs!

A lot of complex games like D&D try to pretend they aren’t really as complex as they are by hiding some of their rules. Moving in D&D seems really simple, and it is until you throw in 5 foot steps, squeezing, difficult terrain, and diagonals.

Right now, dev is taking a structural approach similar to how special attacks like bull rush and grapple are presented. Those weird attacks aren’t simply stuffed under the basic attack header in the 3e PH. Instead, they are all listed separately for ease of reference and to make it clear they are separate rules. IME, people new to D&D can see that you don’t need to learn and memorize all those weird maneuvers. They are there as references when you start playing, and eventually you learn them as you play more.

I think that’s a good approach for a game like D&D – lay out everything up front, but make it clear what you need to know to play D&D (how to move, how to use a skill, how to attack), and label the rest as reference stuff you don’t need to learn right off the bat.

So, that’s an approach we’re using in other areas of the rules in addition to attacks.

In related news, we played 3e last Monday without minis. The big advantage to not using minis with D&D is that it puts the DM closer to the bowl of nachos on the table. The drawback is that the DM’s ever-expanding waistline becomes that much more ever-expanding.

So, when people say “I don’t like minis because the game isn’t as immersive” or “I like minis because it makes everything clear at the table,” I say that I like minis because they keep my hands out of the snack bowl.

Nem tem muito o que comentar aqui, mas eu já acho a organização do capítulo de combate do Livro do Jogador 3.5 muito boa, todo aquele drama dos vídeos de apresentação sobre ficar folheando o livro à procura de regras de agarrar é bem cretino, as regras são chatas mesmo, mas são bem fáceis de achar. Mas é sempre bacana uma organização mais fechada, e que ponha ênfase no que é realmente necessário alguém aprender para jogar, e o que pode ser considerado como secundário para um novato, mais ou menos como o GURPS tenta fazer em seus módulos básicos.

 

A segunda novidade é sobre as perícias da nova edição em comparação com o Star Wars Saga, em um post de Rodney Thompson na EN World:

Also remember that we designed the skill system in Saga so that, when you reach 20th level and are fighting the Sith Lord, it makes more sense for you to whip out your lightsaber and have a climactic duel than it does to just use move object to throw him off of one of the many no-handrails walkways that populate the SW universe. Given the lethality of Star Wars weapons (dealing 3d6 damage for a standard blaster pistol) the Jedi also need something to keep them survivable at low-levels while they’re out in the fray with no cover and such.

Star Wars and D&D are very different animals thematically, and we designed the Star Wars skill system to fit the way Star Wars should play, not the way a generic d20 game should play. I’m not saying there won’t be similarities between SWSE’s skill system and 4E’s, but I doubt you’ll see it work exactly the same way.

Eu dei uma olhada bem superficial nas perícias do SW Saga, mas de cara já achei que rolou uma super simplificação da parada em alguns pontos e em outros pericias que podiam muito bem serem unificadas – como Jump e Acrobatics, Pilot e Ride, foram deixadas separadas. A iniciativa como perícia também não me pareceu muito esperto, mas é o tipo de coisa que eu queria testar principalmente em um jogo de nível alto (no Saga além do bônus da habilidade chave, soma-se na jogada metade do nível do personagem). Espero que na quarta edição o sistema de perícias seja um meio termo entre a forma atual e a mecânica do SW Saga, principalmente no que se refere a forma de adquirir as perícias.

 

E finalmente um post do Rich Baker sobre o Swordmage conceito com o qual ele está meio apaixonado por causa dos romances de Forgotten Realms que está escrevendo, cujo protagonista (assim como o título) é um swordmage:

Good morning, everybody! Today, I can talk a little bit about the swordmage.

First, let me say a few words about the origin of the class. Some of you have already observed that the “grid” created by lining up power sources on one axis and character role on another axis is a natural first place to look for class ideas. We don’t intend to meticulously fill in each possible combination, or even limit ourselves to one class per cubbyhole, but it’s an interesting place to start. The swordmage appeared about 15 months ago when we asked ourselves, “Say, what would an arcane defender look like?”

We liked the idea well enough that at one point the swordmage was well on his way to being included in the Player’s Handbook. But for various reasons we decided to go with a slightly different mix of character classes, and so the swordmage is going to wait for a while. It’s a class we are going to design and publish someday, but it probably won’t be in 2008… with one key exception: I’m featuring a swordmage named Geran Hulmaster as the protagonist in my upcoming Forgotten Realms trilogy, beginning with the aptly-titled novel “Swordmage.” It’ll be out in May.

Naturally, I needed to know a lot about how the class ticks in order to write about one. Since I don’t have a mechanical design to base my Geran’s abilities on, I’ve thought long and hard about what the swordmage class should do, how it looks, and how it feels. So here are a few things I know about the swordmage, based on what I’ve done for my novel:

* Swordmages aren’t “gishes” or bladesingers. Someone over on EN World made an uncannily accurate prediction about the class, which I can confirm here: A swordmage is a warrior who uses magic to fight better.
* Swordmages use spells of armorning and protection instead of wearing heavy armor. At the most basic level, it’s something along the lines of an always-on mage armor spell, renewed each morning. Since they’re defenders, they need hit points and AC comparable to fighters, and swordmages get there by using persistent magic effects.I think there are other persistent wards in play too, spells that provide some energy resistance, mental defense, things of that sort.
* Swordmages have lots of room for fun, combat-focused “immediate” spells and “move” spells. For example, my character Geran makes use of a few short-range teleports and transpositions, as well as instant shield-like effects. The movement effects will work great for a defender–what better way to get the troll to stop beating on the wizard than to simply trade places with your unarmored friend?
* Swordmages have room for fun attack powers, too. For example, I have Geran make use of a short-duration, self-only strength spell, as well as another one that wreathes his sword in magical flames. There are a few others I touched on in my novel, but I don’t want to give any more away ‘cause I don’t want to spoil things.

Anyway, there you go! Someday you’ll be able to play a character like that if you’ve got the inclination to.

Legal, o conceito me lembrou uma espécie de duskblade mais focado em magias de buff e sem a mamata de reduzir a chance de falha em magias arcanas proporcionado pela armadura. No fundo esse post serve para matar a dúvida se teríamos um swordmage no Player’s Handbook como estava sendo cogitado, e a resposta é não. Pelo menos não no primeiro…

Comments are closed.