Newsgroup: it.hobby.giochi.gdr.dnd
Titolo: QUARTA edizione 4th - una mini recensione

il boss della necromancer games recensisce (brevemente) i libri, più
che altro sono le sue impressioni
la cosa interessante 99% crunch 1% fluff :)
http://necromancergames.yuku.com/forum/getrefs/id/158152/type/0
Orcus wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My review of the books.
I'm still digesting alot of it. But I can make these statements. The
books are startling. That is the best way I can describe them. That is
both good and bad to some, I think it is all good.
1. They are startlingly beautiful. Maybe that isnt the most useful
comment for a game book. But they are. They are very cleanly laid
out.
2. They are startlingly useful. Their layout format is so easy to use
it is amazing. These books were designed to be used to answer your
question at the game table during play. No more 10 minute breaks to
flip through the PHB. Literally, it takes 2 seconds to find the answer
to "hey, does he have cover" or "can I do that with my acrobatics
skill" or "what does XXX do?"
3. They are startlingly well organized. The 4E designers were not
afraid to change things. They put magic items in the PHB, for
instance. Having the powers by class also makes them more easy to
reference. And there are nice sidebar "headers" on each page that say
which class you are looking at to make it clear where you are in the
book. Stuff is more where it should be. There is little to no flipping
between books for answers. The DMG is more advice and adventure prep
and stuff like that. The PHB is what you need to run the game.
4. They are startlingly unashamed in the changes they made. This is
where the books, at first glance, will bother people who are
predisposed to not liking 4E. The books dont at first glance seem
"comfortable and similar and familiar." They used a new layout and new
organization. Looking back on all the PHBs since the first AD&D PHB
the format has been about the same. This one changes it all up. And
that first impression is a bit startling. Plus, some of the new stuff
is front and center. Heck, dragonborn are the first player race. The
first bit of art in the book, starting from teh first page, is a
dragonborn. That is new content. They dont try to ease you into it. I
have said in the past, they didnt just kill sacred cows, they hung
their carcass in the store windo--but I think this is a good thing. If
you are going to make changes, dont %+%+* foot around the issue, jump
in and do it. And that is what they did. I firmly believe that if
people want to not like 4E, there is enough there on first glance to
support their fears, BUT once you look past that first layer, you will
see this is not only D&D, its is better and better organized and all
the changes are improvements.
5. There are a few startling omissions. I still cant find a
justification for leaving out a druid and a bard. I can see leaving
out sorcerer (that was a 3E add on anyway) and monk (not that
mainstream anyway, and has a particular flavor that has always clashed
a bit with mainstream high fantasy) and the barbarian. But the druid
and bard really should have been there. Of course, all that means is
that we can create that content for you
6. Monsters are startling simple and awesome. Dragons are back. They
are rad. They are easy to create and modify. Gone are the multi-hour
prep sessions for DMs. My only gripe is that a few powers should be
more deadly. I think they went overboard the other way in removing
save or die powers. But, again, that just lets me provide the
alternate rules. I may question a few of their choices--like, why do I
need a couple of the lame monsters that are new but you wont give me
the iconic iron golem, for instance. But those gripes are few.
7. The game is both startlingly complex and startlingly simple. This
is not Basic D&D. It has a lot of options, but those options are
surprisingly managable.
8. The books are startlingly fat-free. They are 99% crunch, 1% fluff,
if that. They are not for reading anymore. Remember the days you might
crack the DMG for a list of suggested reading and to get some fun
gygaxian flavor and musings. That is gone. These books are purely
designed for game use at the game table. Period. I thought I knew what
all crunch, no fluff was, but then I saw these books. These are all
crunch, no fluff. I think it is a bold move, but, like many of the
above, it will contribute to people who are predisposed to not like 4E
to say "this doesnt feel right with me." But if you look past those
things, this is D&D.
Bottom line: this is the best designed set of D&D books ever. The MM
is awesome. The stuff you need to run the game is in the PHB and is
organized so it is really useful at the table. And the DMG truly
offers help for the DM in a way we have never seen before.
--
Fabio

offers help for the DM in a way we have never seen before.
...e qualcuno ha preso appunti dai giochi indie ;)
-- 
 Domon

justification for leaving out a druid and a bard.
Eh, beh, il druido soprattutto manchera' anche a me, dato che
giocavamo a Warcraft e volevo convertire quella campagna. Comunque
c'e' tempo (la campagna a Witchcraft procede piu' lentamente di quello
che pensavo ed ora arrivano le vacanze).
Parvati V
-- 
"Cosa e' celvello? Pai non ha cosa del genele" - Pai, 3x3 occhi
UnaMoleDiDadi (TreEmme Torino): 
http://umdd.altervista.org/
http://parvatiquinta.blogspot.com/

 la cosa interessante 99% crunch 1% fluff :)
Che significano i due termini per favore?
Sko

 Che significano i due termini per favore?
Crunch = regole
Fluff = resto del mondo (ambientazione, roleplay)
GP



crunch = roba da giocare
fluff = roba da leggere
-- 
 Domon

 vedremo...
Anche a me, principalmente perché nel 99% dei casi li leggo e non ci 
gioco... Però mi aspetto che il "bello da leggere" stia nelle ambientazioni, 
il MdG fa l'onesto lavoro di fornirti le regole per giocare
salut
-- 
_______________________
l'Iran ha chiesto l'intervento dell'Onu contro gli Stati Uniti perché
loro hanno Chuck Norris 

gioco... 
bingo!
-- 
 Domon

 fluff = roba da leggere
Non necessariamente -- nella descrizione di un PNG di alto livello
(rispetto a quello della campagna che si intende giocare), la parte
fluff è quella da giocare, la parte crunch non necessariamente.
GP

 la parte crunch non necessariamente.
se non giochi quella cosa giochi?
-- 
 Domon