A 20-Point Letter of Protest Regarding the New 4th Edition of Dungeons & Dragons (from a Gnome and a Half-Orc)
Posted at 5:03 AM Apr 11, 2008
By Teague Bohlen
Recently, a trove of legal proceedings and assorted arcana was unearthed regarding demi-human protests to the upcoming 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons release. This list of demands was signed by 8th level half-orc fighter Angrus Torn-Eye and 9th level gnome Illusionist Gnor Fnortner, representing a group calling itself "Gruumsh, Glittergold, and Sons". It was found sealed in a bone scroll case and capped with a glyph of insanity. We publish it in hope that D&D publisher Wizards of the Coast will hear their requests.
1) Reinstate half-orcs and gnomes as a viable PC races.
Their exclusion from the new edition of the game is short-sighted at best. Half-orcs are the standard choice for assassin or barbarian, the legendary bandit king with the magical blade, Slave Lord Theg Narlot. Gnomes are…well, let's just stipulate that gnomes have an important place, and move on.
2) Make Greyhawk the defacto D&D setting.
This is an easy call. Eberron is too steampunk, and Forgotten Realms is just all elves and angst, drow-this and Elminster-that. Blah, blah. If it’s not the land where the Keep on the Borderlands sits? Guess what—it ain't D&D.
3) Stop with the racial ability bonuses already.
To suggest that all elves have one (or two) better dexterity than orcs or gnomes is an offensive and biased generalization. That said, our coalition does concur with the statement that elves are “flighty and frivolous” as mentioned in the original Dungeon Masters Guide (page 16). That should carry over into the new edition; we’d also like to add the descriptors “ridiculous” and “eminently killable” to that list of adjectives, for the sake of accuracy and precision.
4) Cease and desist using "orcs watching chests in small spaces" as a pejorative.
There is nothing inherently wrong with an orc guarding a chest in a 10’x10’ room. Whty, my father was an orc who guarded a chest in a 10'x10' room, and he always provided for us!
5) Stop messing with Halflings.
So Gygax and company ripped off Tolkien. Who cares? Making hobbits thinner didn't make them suddenly original. And the 4th edition silliness of swamp Halflings rafting up and down river channels? No. Halflings should smoke pipes, live in hills with round doors, and be a name-change away from complete copyright violation.
6) Okay, we thought of something to say about Gnomes.
They used to be illusionists, until illusionists went away. Then they were bards, but no one bought that. They're basically magic-using dwarves, right? So go with that. Is that so hard? And while we're at it, stop pigeonholing gnomes as merry pranksters. We know quite a few seriously pissed off gnomes, several of whom, based on their move from PC race to "monster" class, are planning retaliatory "pranks" that are decidedly un-merry.
7) Put electrum back into the money supply.
Economies are fragile things, and we need a coin to bridge the silver-gold gap. Besides, streamlining an entire system of monetary measure just so every coin is worth the same fraction of the coin above it is just inviting declination of the intellectual capacity of the average gamer. In short, getting rid of electrum is like saying “who the fuck needs quarters?”
8) Include orcish weaponry.
Didn't you see the Lords of the Rings movies? The swords and axes those orcs had were sweet. D&D orcs totally deserve some of that. But please note that orcish weaponry has absolutely nothing to do with Klingon weaponry.
9) Put that bashful naked succubus back on page 230 of the Dungeon Master's Guide.
Every DMG page 230 should have a bashful naked succubus. In fact, let's add one to all D&D books and supplements. Who's it going to hurt?
10) Restrain ability scores.
Back in the day, all scores were maxed out at 25. The gods themselves maxed out at 25. Now, any tenth-level fighter worth his ioun stones boasts a 25 strength. What, 18/00 isn’t good enough for you? We used to kill Odin with 18/00 strength, boy. And don't even get us started on how lame Gauntlets of Ogre Power are anymore.
11) Seriously, we can’t stress enough just how ridiculous elves are.
Start with the ears and work to the pointy shoes. Nothing but ridiculous, all the way down.
12) Make the twelve-sider useful again.
There are six dice, you know. Okay, seven if you count both percentile. Twelve-siders used to be for all the cool stuff—barbarians rolling HP, swinging a two-handed sword, that sort of thing. Now, the twelve-sider languishes in the Crown Royale bag, with the mud die from the original basic set and that golf-ball 100-sider that seemed cool at the time, but is too much of a pain in the ass to roll.
13) Re-establish Level Titles.
Remember how cool it was to reach "name level"? Even at lower levels, this made everything a little more interesting. That wasn't just a second-level thief and a fourth level ranger you just met—that was a footpad and a courser. Nowadays, paladins are paladins, not protectors, defenders, or justiciars. Which makes them less interesting as you're killing them.
14) Make clerics less awesome.
Remember when you'd roll up characters with your friends, and everyone raced to call "Not the cleric!" Yeah, that was back when clerics were just mace-carrying healers with a couple of decent spells and the ability to turn undead. Now most clerics are sword-wielding hyper-buffed egomaniacs with cherry-picked domains and no need to memorize healing spells at all. Let's at least go back to the charming hypocrisy of bludgeoning weapons somehow being thought of as more merciful.
15) Restore Barbarians, Druids, and Bards.
We can live with some of the classes going away for a little while. Monks were an experiment in 1st edition, along with psionics, that never truly made sense. Chop-socky just isn't fantasy role-playing. And Sorcerers? They were interesting while they lasted, but with the new magic system, they might be redundant. (And besides, sorcerers are really 8th level magic-users…see demand #13.) But barbarians, druids, and bards? If nothing else, who's going to use all the hide armor, scimitars, and lutes that are just laying around?
16) Bring back ring mail.
No one cares that it didn’t really exist. It just looks cool on your fighters, which is sort of the point, isn't it? No one’s getting a PhD in History here. There were no vorpal blades either, professor, but I don’t see your Ranger Lord tossing it away in protest.
17) Forget the D20 system.
Why does everything have to be rolled on the same die, or even on the same end of a die's range? Good ACs are low, successful saves are high, the Tomb of Horrors will kill you, and all’s right with the world.
18) Lose the skill checks.
If one class and a secondary profession were enough for our forefathers, they’re good enough for us. If I was trained as a sailor, then I probably know my stuff as it pertains to rope use, navigation, astronomy, and maybe even some knowledge about foreign lands. Why would you need to complicate it by ranking every composite ability separately? And really, no one's ever going to put points into Rope Use. Really.
19) Keep alignments.
Come on, no alignment in D&D means a domino effect throughout the system. No alignments means no paladins falling from grace, no restrictions on character behavior, no aligned magical weaponry, no "detect" or "protection from" spells. The list goes on. Alignments are a shorthand way of telling who's on your side, and who’s not. Without that, there'll be a lot more of "kill first, determine if that was the right call later" sort of adventuring. And then all those neutral lizardmen in Dunwater are just screwed.
20) We hate to beat a dead horse, but we’ll beat a dead elf.
Think about it.
Comments
CAP AC. Back in the Day it was -10 (30 for you folk who don't know what THAC0 is). Now every tough monster exceeds the former -10 barrier.
Posted 04/16/2008 at 10:26:02 AMMan, I miss THAC0. I used to have Excel spreadsheets to keep all those modified THAC0 scores correct.
Ok, I'm happy THAC0 is gone, but still...
Posted 04/16/2008 at 01:24:56 PMPersonally, I like the higher, positive, AC. It seems silly and unrealistic (ok, yeah, I know this is all fantasy) to have PCs with AC as good as a Diety/Avatar or some elder wurm dragon. I just don't buy it.
I agree with Ability Scores caps for PCs; again, I think it's silly and unrealistic to have PCs with scores on par with Dieties/Avatars or some elder wurm; these are SUPPOSED to be significant forces to be dealt with and shouldn't be matched by some 23 year old level 15 Human Fighter with belt of Titan Strenght or something - the dragon should eat that Fighter as a snack in about one round flat!
For what it's worth...
Posted 04/16/2008 at 03:56:09 PMtacos rule...
Posted 04/16/2008 at 04:20:33 PMPlease. The only good suggestion in here is #2. Everything else is nostalgia for stuff that was stupid or confusing to begin with.
Posted 04/16/2008 at 07:14:41 PMGah, they didn't do all that did they? Make half-orcs and gnomes monsters? Take out alignments and electrum?
I remember going through 1st edition D&D books.. the level titles were awesome. I think they should bring those back as well.
Posted 04/16/2008 at 08:00:12 PMI gotta say all the 1st edition nostalgia brings back many fond memories, but I do think a few of the newer changes from 3rd are good ideas. I like the newer AC system because I agree with jgw69, and . . . thats about it. I think all the dice should be used. It makes a properly rounded dice collection more important and useful. Lay off the elves. Bring back titles. Cap them ability scores. Make the girdle of storm giant strength awesome again. Okay, I think the newer style clerics are alright. Barbarians, druids, and bards are essential, but put the bard back where it belongs, instead of being a sissy. You should have to work hard to become a bard. Really, elves are cool. Racial ability mods are a good thing. They express racial tendencies, not absolutes. Which is why you roll your scores randomly. Alignments are important for the above stated reasons, and those are enough. Half-orcs, and gnomes, while not as cool as elves in general, simply put are every bit as iconic as all the other PC races, and serve important roles as bases for multiple archetypes. Halflings are hobbits. They're supposed to be. Don't go hybridizing them with other small PC races. Leave the Kender in Krynn, and anyone who wants to be one can go there. I like skill checks, in concept, but make them more dependent on intelligence instead of class, and really beef up the synergy bonuses. Also, don't limit what skills a person can learn based on class. A fighter could be a very intelligent sailor with knowledge and skills well beyond jump, climb, intimidate, swim, and fart. In conclusion, bashful naked succubi never hurt anybody. In fact I know a powerful wizard who prefers to date them. He always says, "From Archmage to Prestidigitator in one night!" (see level titles in point #13)
Posted 04/16/2008 at 10:29:06 PMHilarious. Love the whole thing. Just a note to those that have posted serious comments...its a GAME people. what's wrong with a bit of humor. I vote we beat a dead serious person along with the dead elves.
Posted 04/17/2008 at 08:00:07 PMGreat post. I agree!
Posted 04/18/2008 at 12:39:56 PMKeep on the Borderlands was in MYSTARA, not Dullhaw... I mean Greyhawk.
It was located in the Grand Duchy of Karameikos, where Bargle killed hot Larry Elmore drawn Clerics and level 1-3 characters died by the boatloads.
Posted 04/18/2008 at 12:46:35 PMWhile I tend to agree that this is a game, I do think that we need to take into account how much money WoTC is making off of it. My points:
-First Ed. -- Very difficult, hard to memorize the rules, and many people were too confused to play. It was also very time-consuming to successfully (and legitimately) level a character.
- Second Ed. -- More beefed up, easier to memorize, still confusing. Still, it kept the spirit of First Ed., but added some bonuses and made it a bit more playable.
-Third Ed. -- When WoTC bought the game and re-wrote it to make millions and millions of dollars. This is what they said, "Let's take a game that requires time, effort, concentration, and dedication, a game that people have played for years and years, a game where it can take 5 years to reach level 8...let's take that game and give it a face lift, a boob job, a botox injection, and some electroshock therapy."
This is not the game I started playing way-back-when. I know, I know, that's the point of progress. I understand the arguements that Third Ed. is better, blah blah blah.
I'm too old school for this, I see WoTC using D&D as a huge cash cow, and they're not staying true to the spirit of the game. We're supposed to sit around and complain that it's too hard, that we don't understand why the Ranger can't track a dog but can track a dragon, why the Barbarian can't hit the monster with an AC of 10, and why the Mage gets to have all the fun.
--Fourth Ed. - another cash cow for WoTC, where we will have to buy 500 new books just to keep up with all the new rules.
Posted 04/18/2008 at 03:11:47 PMActually, Captain Rufus, if you want to get technical...
...the Keep wasn't in Mystara originally, since Mystara didn't exist when the module was first written. Originally, it had a generic, one-world-to-suit-them-all setting, with some details that were easily changable. Mystara was an idea that was created in order to "house" a lot of the early non-Greyhawk adventures, starting with the Isle of Dread (X1).
In fact, the Keep was retrofitted (if badly) to be located in Greyhawk for the 2nd edition game.
But then again, I don't really have a murderous thirst for elf blood, either.
Posted 04/18/2008 at 03:52:30 PMHilarious! I especially agree with #9!
Posted 04/19/2008 at 12:13:17 PMNice! Beautiful list :) I showed one of the owners of our FLGS a copy of the 1ed DMG that was sitting on his shelf... flipped back to the random dungeon generator tables: "Wow! That's always been there?!" "Yeah, along with hundreds of other nice bits that have been lost over the years." He gave me free stuff :)
Posted 04/30/2008 at 10:21:09 PMYeah yeah it's a game blah blah. And I went back to 2nd ed three years ago after getting oh so tired of it all. No regrets either.
Why? Honestly?
Because 1st and 2nd ed were DM's games. 3rd and on have proven to be Player's games.
What does that mean? It means that in the earlier versions of the game, when the rules were somewhat confusing (although enough digging would reveal one, two or even three incompatible rules for any given situation) you needed a DM to adjudicate, make a call, and you lived (or died) with it.
Version 3 made the conscious effort to make it all work. All the rules worked together in an amazingly seamless whole. Almost like a video game (more on that below). Where's the problem? Well there are two big ones.
First, now when the DM wants to change something, it unbalances something else, every time. And the result might not come a-calling until three, four, five sessions later, when some one-off call to make that scene or fight work out cleanly and dramatically results in the new Feat of All Power (players will find it) or whatever rearing it's head in the next generation of characters.
What then? Either the DM keeps tweaking, or he goes back on his ruling and loses credibility. In the old days the DM's credibility stemmed from his ability to make these sorts of calls, and no one who read the rules would have dreamed of calling him for making the same call two different ways in two different runs. We were just glad we had someone who had bothered to buy all the damn books!
Second beef: With a rule for every situation, the DM is more a referee than anything. He's got monster scripts, challenge ratings, and by level (that's PC level, not dungeon level) encounter tables all scripted for him, and woe to him if he deviates from them, or his PCs are *dead*.
I think a good DM needs to be part creative writer, part dungeon engineer, and part sadist. I also think that holds for all RPGs. Any system that tries to curb any of those three elements is a bad system that is interfering with the experience (for me and the sorts of players I like to play with - look at me qualify. I must be trying to sound like a grown up!) And D&D post WotC has actively undercut the DM's ability to be an engineer and sadist.
Posted 05/12/2008 at 08:02:27 AMThe year was 1977 when I began playing D&D. I purchased my first DMG in 1979 and have second, third, third and a half, and fourth edition rule books. My response to the current state of affairs in regards to the rules remains the same as it was in 1977. Make the game your own!!! Forget the designers and what they want to do... this is a fantasy game. The rules are meant to be broken. Decide what you want the world to be and make it conform. It doesn't matter if there's a pic that makes your thirteen-year-old mind think about sex for the first time on page 230, or if there are stats for JC in Dieties and Demigods. You run the game, if you and the other players/master want it then in the words of Jean-Luc Picard, "Make it so." If you really want something racy you may want to contact Hugh Heffner about a compendium called The Prostitute Class or Babes in Hell. I'm sure that he can get you what you need. For those of us that are married with children and not needing "Spanktravision" as we read our rule books, its about whether or not the rules are balanced and meeting our expectations. Have today's gamers become too dependent on the WotC to stipulate how many rounds it takes to defecate? Or what size die to use to determine the fecal matter length and breadth? Does it matter? If you want hermaphroditic priest/wizard vegepygmies cross-pollenating treants to produce a future race of player characters that are ranger/wizard hangman trees then make it happen!!! Its a fantasy game... take it back from the game designers and have fun. I still remember the dreadful day that my elventaur (Elven/Minotaur) was killed in the spring of 1978. Its a game though and though I was just a youngster I knew that it was just that and regardless of rules as spelled out, the DM is the supreme answer in the campaign. If you don't like the results of the rules as players and masters then alter them. Spend a few hours and fix what you don't like. Adjust tables, titles, or just create your own reality for the game. Who cares if you play first edition and have Espers... who cares if you play fourth edition and have gnome... be happy and play D&D as it was meant to be played. Get away from the rules for a minute and consider what you want the game to be and then change what you see to be what you envision your game being. If you love Krynn then go there... If you want Klingon-style orcs, then great... Just get the world to work and think it out before you go about making it more complicated then you are prepared to deal with. If you want strength to go to 100 then go for it. If 25 is your max... great. I find that any of these rules can work but the rules may need work to make them fit the campaign. Never try to fit a campaign within the rules... create the campaign and the rules will help you define it but alter them to fit the fantasy reality or the reality of the rules will rule the campaign to its detriment.
Posted 05/14/2008 at 05:22:02 PMthaco bring it back i liked the neg 10 chain mail lol and lets not forget the ability to shatter ur own sword on a crit fumble lol
Posted 06/09/2008 at 11:57:31 PMbring back the old system
It's not a matter of nostalgia, the game was made for people who had an ounce of whit and two ounces of creativity. It's nice to have things a little vague so you can make stuff up. There are good points and bad points to the new system, I'm pretty much going from 2nd edition to 4th, I skipped 3.x entirely. I'm still soaking up all the changes but no druids, that's a crying shame.
The DM does seem more of a coach/referee than the actual dungeon "master". I was listening to a podcast and someone from wizards was like "The DM is suppose to be your friend not enemy" , that's laughable. I remember playing games where we were pretty much competing against the DM, and that was fun. I had a DM that did his best to try to kill us and it was a great accomplishment when you survived encounters. They weren't impossible, they just made you think. That's part of the problem today, no one wants to think.
All things aside, I can't wait to start playing again.
Posted 06/13/2008 at 05:50:52 AM3ed. skills have killed roleplaying as I knew it.
My 2 biggest problems with 3ed rules (which, apparently, go into 4ed) were the combat system and the skills system.
The combat system returned D&D to its "true" roots, by making it a tactical miniatures game all over again. The rules are far too complex for my taste, and demand the use of visual aids (no, minis aren't "optional" any more...). Combat encounters now take a LONG time to complete, and are an exercise in meta-gaming tactics, not a "realistic" simulation of fantasy combat.
But I can live with that. Skills, on the other hand, are a deadly, slow-working poison, killing the very heart and soul of the game.
A player is no longer demanded to roleplay anything - only to roll a die. I don't care how high your Bluff skill is - I want to SEE and HEAR you convincing the troll guarding the bridge that you're all messengers from Vecna or something.
Posted 06/24/2008 at 11:14:26 PMPersonally, I've played every D&D in detail except 4th, and I have to say, the only one I can play without wanting to kill myself is 1st edition.
The rules are simple, concise, and it takes 3 minutes to create a character. You flesh it out yourself. You build, you create. You were creative.
In 3rd Edition, we took normally a whole session with our group creating characters. Everything was convoluted and over-the-top.
Bring back THAC0S! Bring back half-orcs! BRING BACK CLERICS AND BLUNT WEAPONS! I frequently play clerics. I don't *want* to be difficult to beat. I want the game to be about thinking, because I can tell tell just from looking at the adjustments that this is all about combats.
My cleric survived the whole of Tomb of Horrors without dying (so did the whole group, actually...). You make me a group that can do that in 4th Edition. I don't care how high your Rope-Tieing skill is. I don't think it'll help at a vital moment, only hinder when the only guy with a rope-tieing skill is in a pit and bleeding to death. ANY competent person in a D&D world can tie a knot. Why waste your points on it?
This article shows up, in the greatest of humours, all the flaws of 4th edition and the reasons that the true-to-fashion players will hate it.
Posted 06/25/2008 at 06:45:40 AMI only agree with the nerf clerics statement. Clerics are OBSCENELY strong in 3.x, with only Druids being stronger.
As for the rest: Nobody likes gnomes. Or Half-orcs. There's extremely limited variety in the way they are role played, and nobody respects either race. Same goes to Barbarians. People who play barbarians are the player that just wants to say "I smash something with my sword, hard" As an elven wizard since 2e, I say "hah, what sword? You hold only a fish." and then the Barbarian goes and cries, cause unarmed damage sucks.
I think feats and PrCs INITIALLY added a great deal to customization and uniqueness of characters. Late 3.5 it began to get out of hand, with any straight class character other than Wizard, Druid, or Cleirc who didn't PrC into something falling WAY behind.
THACO, AC and stat caps were poor design. I see no reason, ESPECIALLY at epic levels, why a fighter can't have god-like strength, or a wizard god-like intelligence.
Posted 06/26/2008 at 10:01:24 PMI don't care what versions of the game they do, i play the game so i can roleplay, the rules dont mean crap to me. What ever the DM says goes, goes for me too. if all his orcs are pink fuzzy and have blue pokadots, well then thats the way they are. if they got 4th ed rules 1st ed rules or some other games rules i dont give a monkey frag. I'm there to roleplay a character. To be something im not. I have played Orc Paladins, Chain Kyton Devils, 1/2 vampire/ 1/2 elves in 2nd edition who were Fighter Mages, and have even had players play themselves with and without amnesia. I like D&D, regardless of the format.
Posted 07/24/2008 at 09:58:58 PMVery amusing. :)
I haven't even really played 3ED for want of time, but I've gotta agree with the people who say, "It's your game. Use your own rules." The official, corporate-endorsed rules only matter one whit if you're gonna (A) play one-shots with a bunch of strangers, as at a convention, or (B) write material for corporate.
D&D hit information-overload level for me midway through 2ED. Too many books, too many options, too much money invested in things that were all about to change again anyway. The protean nature of the game makes it impossible to build up a large library of perfectly standardized materials to use with it, so you always have to be prepared to pick and choose what works for you and throw the rest out the window. That was as true with the first TSR publications as it is with WOTC's 4ED.
I'm dusting off my old "D&D Rules Cyclopedia" because my 6-year-old's just discovered the joys of the dungeon-crawl via the old "Dungeon" board game, but most of the time I'd rather be GM-ing with West End's d6 system because it suits my personal style.
The bottom line is that each game master is unique, each campaign is unique, and each role-playing experience is unique. Any player who can't come to terms with that is destined to abandon your campaign and return to Monopoly, anyway, so it's pointless to grouse that the new isn't as good as the old. Just be happy you've already found a set of rules you do like and enjoy them.
Posted 08/06/2008 at 08:05:01 AMIt's just a role playing system.
It so happens that the d20 system is an easy way to run games. Make it all universal, it's less confusing. Everyone can enjoy.
If you're a DM and you feel like this or that edition robbed you of your power, you're not playing your game right. It is YOU, the DM, in this case, who is fumbling with the game.
There are systems in 3.5e set up for matching balances and such, but managing the 'imbalance' is what makes the game interesting, tense.
You put your 4th level party against a young adult red dragon, they'll have to flee or die. That's how their situation is resolved. If they make the right decision, they get awarded appropriately. If not, they die.
Try running a game where you don't have to roll a skill check or anything. Use the D&D rules for suppliment, but assign a percentage likelihood to tasks, and have players roll it out that way. Be consistent, you and your players will have fun no matter what world you decide to imagine.
As for campaign setting, I think they should have the greyhawk gazetteer in the back of the PHB, but that's my opinion. FR/AlQadim/KaraTur/Mazteca, Dragonlance, Planescape, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, Greyhawk, Eberon, Kalamar, they're all good.
Besides, 1st edition is still being supported: it's called "Hack N Slash", and you can buy it from most RPG shops. 3.5 is now being supported by the "Pathfinder" periodicals. You can find 2nd ed books online.
Play what you like! :D
Posted 01/26/2009 at 01:40:18 PM---------