Newsgroup: it.hobby.giochi.gdr.dnd
Titolo: QUARTA edizione 4th - risposte dei progettisti su slashdot

intervista ai progettisti su slashdot
[url]
http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl
?
no_d2=1&sid=08/02/18/1459259[/url]
le novità sono
1) oggetti magici e animali/mostri per summon/polymorph nel manuale
del giocatore
2) i Rogue faranno più danni dei clerici (in generale gli striker
fanno più danni dei leader/healer)
3) i guerrieri controllano/resistono/difendono (non è una gran novità)
4) sperano che la 4' duri 8-10 anni
5) la 3.5 è uscita troppo presto
ecco l'articolo
Why 4th Edition? by DrMrLordX:
3.5E had so many non-core sourcebooks that you could have easily
respun and/or rebalanced the material into a new set of books if you
had any need to sell more material (which you presumably do, as would
anyone else in the same business). Based on what has been released and
what I've read, 4E will be a radical departure of standards set back
in 3E which were, in turn, meant to improve the game drastically.
Don't you think more work could have, and should have, been done to
improve 3.5E? It seems like you're throwing the baby out with the
bathwater.
Wizards of the Coast:
The design team had play-tested Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 extensively
and it was clear that the game needed to evolve. Since there were
things we wanted to do digitally, like the Digital Game Table and the
Character builder, it became clear that we should create a new, fully
integrated system, with rules that would support our online
applications. There were so many system improvements that the team
really felt that the time had come to revamp the game. I don't imagine
that our customers would have been satisfied with a version 3.75.
How long will this edition last? by Erwos:
It upset quite a few folks when D&D 3.0E transitioned to 3.5E
relatively soon after release, and made some people's investments in
D&D become basically worthless overnight. While I appreciate that it's
sometimes time to spawn a new edition that's incompatible with the
old, it felt like 3.5E should have been an errata to 3.0E, rather than
a totally new set of books. I understand that WotC can't commit itself
to any firm "we will not release another edition for X years"
guarantee, but it would be nice to hear some sort of assurance that we
won't see a repeat of the 3.0E->3.5E debacle. What's the plan? What
lessons have you learned?
WotC:
I don't think it would be unreasonable to argue that the transition
from 3.0 to 3.5 happened a little too soon. Would Wizards of the Coast
have released 3.5 if we knew at the time that 4th Edition was coming?
My guess is probably not. We would like to have 4th Edition last 8 to
10 years just like previous editions.
Player's Online Component? by Zonk
I know this component is still 'in the works', but I have to ask: what
are you planning for the online pricing for players vs. DMs? You've
said that accessing D&D Insider and the 'online tabletop' will cost
between $10 and $15, but is that for everyone? I just can't see
telling my players they *each* need to pay $12/month to play online,
let alone shelling out $30/month for myself and my wife. Also, will I
need to have a paid subscription in order to access PDFs of the 4th
edition books that I buy?
WotC:
We will be announcing pricing and subscription details at the D&D
Experience convention in two weeks.
Open Gaming License by egg_green:
With D&D 3rd Edition, we were introduced to the D20 System and the
Open Gaming License, which allowed third party publishers to produce
supplements for the game. Will there be something akin to this for 4th
Edition? What form will it take, and will it be more or less
restrictive?
WotC:
The initial 4th Edition plans for allowing third-party publication of
compatible supplements have been announced, and we're currently
working with a number of independent publishers to iron out the
details and get them started. Our goal is to allow 3rd party
publishers, both large and small, the opportunity to publish products
compatible with Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition.
Will combat be more streamlined? by DeafDumbBlind:
At higher levels in D&D 3.5, a fight between the party and a group of
enemies can easily last a couple of hours. How has combat been
streamlined?
WotC:
Two significant changes to gameplay that accelerate and streamline
high-level combat are the reduction in the number of dice rolls
required on each turn, and the drastic simplification of monsters. No
more "full attack actions" requiring handfuls of d20s. No more monster
powers hiding in feats, or that require you to look somewhere else to
understand what they do--monster powers are self-contained,
specialized abilities appropriate to that monster's role, its tactics
in a battle, and its identity in the world.
Magic Item Requirement by Blackeagle_Falcon:
One of the things I dislike about 3rd edition is that at medium and
high levels magic items are such a big part of a character's power. A
PC has to be decorated like a Christmas tree with various magical
doodads in order to be effective. Running a campaign in a world where
magic items are rare or nonexistant required a lot of house rules and
adjustment on the part of the DM. Will it be easier to run a low or no
magic item campaign in 4e?
WotC:
We're definitely reducing the number of magic items that a typical
character will carry around. Magic items aren't going away--they're a
great way for characters to specialize their tactics, shore up
weaknesses, and otherwise differentiate themselves from other
characters--but they'll be a smaller overall portion of a character's
array of special abilities. In addition, we're being clearer to the
players and DM what mechanical benefits we expect all characters to
derive from their array of items, which makes it easier for a DM
running a "low-magic" campaign to know what his characters are missing
(so that he can either take that into account by reducing monster
stats, or provide the missing benefits via other methods).
D&D and WOW by halivar:
It appears (to me, at least), that many of the new rules-changes
mirror popular MMO's like WOW. How much influence do the designers
derive from video games; and, to the extent that D&D 4th resembles
WOW, is this a conscious effort to reach the MMO-generation of gamers
with table-top role-play?
WotC:
Just as the design teams of most computer games draw on their
experiences with Dungeons & Dragons and other tabletop games, we look
to other games for inspiration and innovation. Many of us in RPG R&D
play or have played MMOs and other computer games. Some of the lessons
we learned about gameplay on those platforms have helped us craft a
better tabletop RPG, both for current D&D players and for potential
new players who either haven't yet tried D&D or haven't found previous
iterations of the game to their liking.
The balance between easy and good by Mongoose Disciple:
How do you feel you've struck a balance between a desire to simplify/
streamline rules to speed play and make the game more accessible, and
a desire to preserve the strategy and general goodness of the game as
it exists today? Details about proposed changes that were a tough call
either way would be interesting.
WotC:
The struggle between playability and tactical depth is a constant one
for any game designer, and D&D is no different. We're always wrestling
with the right balance between providing streamlined, intuitive play
and giving players all the options they want. For example, by giving
more characters customizable options for their actions in combat,
we've added a dramatic level of depth (both strategic, in building
your character, and tactical, in employing those options during a
fight), but at the cost of increasing complexity for some characters.
We think that's a net positive effect, because the lack of tactical
and strategic options for fighters, rogues, and many other characters
had become a glaring weakness in the game. The key is to ensure that
players of different sensibilities can still find a rewarding play
experience within the game's framework. A player who prefers simple
options can select those and still feel like he's creating an
effective character, while his buddy who thrives on complexity can
load up on interesting combos without grinding the game to a halt.
New content for old Settings? by andphi:
I know that some of the old settings (Ravenloft, Spelljammers, Dark
Sun, Planescape) have been transitioned to other companies or have
been quietly kept alive by their fans with knowledge bases and efforts
at rules translations between old rulesets and 3.5. Will any of these
old, orphaned settings being making a comeback in 4.0? (Planescape.
Please, Planescape!) If not, are the 4.0 rules being written to make
these on-going translation efforts easier?
WotC:
We appreciate the devoted fans who have continued to run campaigns in
our older campaign settings. For a variety of reasons, we can't give
every setting an equal amount of support, but we certainly expect to
revisit older settings from time to time on D&D Insider. We constantly
re-evaluate the role of older settings in our business plans and
product schedules, and it's entirely possible that some of those
settings may well stage a full-fledged return at some point in the
future. For now, though, we're focusing on relaunching the Forgotten
Realms campaign setting in August of 2008, with the Eberron campaign
setting following in 2009. When we firm up any other plans, we'll
certainly share those.
Negative Press by eldavojohn:
Short intro, I read a lot of fantasy and sci-fi. Play a lot of
computer games. Enjoy reading up on lore and the like. But I never got
into D&D. I had friends that played it but I was never into it. I
tried playing it a few times and had some fun experiences. But there's
always been a sort of negative stigma associated with it among ...
well, the general populace. What are you doing to break free of this?
Or do you embrace it? What are your thoughts & opinions on this
strange negative publicity that popular movies push onto D&D players?
Do you ever try to break free of that?
WotC:
(Note from Gamer_Zer0: Sorry Zonk, I tried my best to get this
question answered for you, but apparently the Sci-Fi channel was
having an original Battlestar Galactica marathon and the entire D&D
team was no where to be found!)
Complexity vs. other gaming systems by Mechagodzilla:
Has there been any thoughts or discussions on reducing the amount of
books needed to play? Donating a bookshelf to every new edition is
getting a little ridiculous for the casual gamer. I have 40+ books
from first and second edition. I bought the Player's Handbook from the
third edition, read the first thirty pages and went "bleh". I know it
goes against the business model, but can you actually make a game that
can be played with less than four books?
WotC:
The only book any player needs to play the game is the Player's
Handbook. In addition, the DM will want a copy of the Dungeon Master's
Guide and Monster Manual (to help him craft encounters, build
adventures, and run an entertaining game). Players won't need the
Dungeon Master's Guide to equip their higher-level characters, because
the PH will have plenty of magic items for all levels. Players won't
need the Monster Manual to adjudicate shapechanging or summoning
effects, because those effects will be self-contained within the
classes or powers that grant them. That said, a large number of D&D
players want more options than the core rulebooks provide--so we
publish additional supplements and sourcebooks to meet that desire--
but the game's fully functional without them. Of course, with the new
online tools provided by D&D Insider (including a full rules
database), it'll be easier than ever to carry around even your whole
collection of D&D books wherever you play--just log on and there they
are!
DRM? by MykeBNY:
Many people are acting as if a new edition will not only obsolete
their old books, it will actually prevent them from accessing the
ruleset at all. Level-headed people of course regard that as silly,
nobody's going to sneak into your house and burn your old books!
However, with more and more importance being placed on digital content
(not specifically Wizards of the Coast, but in general) ... Is the
issue of whether to DRM or not, and why and how being treated very
seriously within the company?
WotC:
There is still a fair amount of non-rules content in the 3.x books
that is still usable with 4th Edition. The rules themselves are
changing and the old rules content will be obsolete. We plan to sell
digital versions of our books for use online. Our DRM philosophy is to
be as unobtrusive as possible.
Character sheets like by coppro:
We know that you are providing a tool for editing character sheets on
your computer, although you have not specified anything else. An
editable PDF sheet seems likely. However, there have been many popular
tools (e.g. PCGen) that can update many aspects of data automatically
based on game events, rather than numbers. Will the suite of digital
tools released with 4th Edition include a tool that can maintain a
character sheet that can be updated based on effects and
modifications, rather than simple numeric input? If so, will it be
extensible with published supplements/user-provided data?
WotC:
Our character builder application let's you build characters of any 4E
class and level. It will also let you populate the sheets with content
from the D&D database, and to update your characters as they grow.
Arcane/Divine Balance? by Rydia:
In 3.5 and even basic 3d ed, Priests were far and away more useful
than wizards and sorcers. They had damage spells, could use better
weapons out of the box and had a serious of buffs, combined with their
armor, that made them powerful and extremely difficult to kill. At
very high levels, a powerful wizard can deal great damage with delayed
blast fireball and whatnot, but at that point a good cleric can throw
down greater aspect of the diety, divine power and a load of other
spells and turn themselves into a combat machine, plus the ability to
heal and a few good damage spells. How are you going to balance the
two main spellcasting types in 4th ed? Or are you going to leave
things generally as they are?
WotC:
One of the most significant design goals of 4th Edition was to clarify
the roles filled by each of the character classes in the game. Not
only does this help prevent one class from being good at too many
things--such as the cleric--but it also prevents classes from being
unable to accomplish any role effectively (such as the bard or monk).
For example, clerics in 4th Edition occupy the "leader" role
(sometimes also known as the "healer" or "party buffer" role). Their
damage output is decent, but far behind that of the wizard or rogue,
and they don't have the defenses or melee-control abilities of the
fighter.
Who are you trying to please? by HikingStick:
I started playing D&D (the basic boxed set) and AD&D ages ago--first
on 1st Ed. rules and eventually ponying up for 2nd Ed. My friends and
I liked the game because it was easy and simple (regarding game
mechanics) in the first edition, and we did enjoy some of the changes
going into 2nd E. With the arrival of the 3rd Ed. rules, you lost me
as a regular player, along with many of my peers. I had no desire to
relearn a gaming system that, for the most part, had its rules
embedded in my head. My question is this: who are you trying to
please? Are you attracting any younger gamers to the fold? If not,
what's the point in publishing release after release after release?
The question I'm asking beneath the surface is, "Why should I care at
all?"
WotC:
The "beneath the surface" answer is, "Because this edition is the most
exciting and playable version of D&D that has ever been published." In
order for Dungeons & Dragons to continue to thrive, it needs to retain
current players while also attracting new players to the fold. Third
Edition D&D succeeded wildly on both counts, and also brought
thousands of lapsed D&D players back into the game (in some cases
after years away from the tabletop). We have every expectation that
Fourth Edition will repeat that success.
The fact that the Player's Handbook continues to be a strong-selling
book years after its publication tells us that new players still enter
the game every month. We also know from our RPGA programs that the
game environment is full of diehard veterans from the 70s, 80s, and
90s, as well as new players trying out their first characters. But in
order for us to continue to please existing players (whose preferences
in gaming continue to evolve) and also attract new players (whose
needs may be quite different from veteran gamers), the game must keep
pace with an enormously volatile and variable marketplace.
D&D has always been a tabletop-based game, and Fourth Edition won't
change that. However, we recognize that people think about games,
information storage, and even social gatherings differently now than
they did in 1974, and we want the new D&D to recognize and embrace
those differences rather than risk becoming obsolete. So now you'll be
able to access your rulebooks online via the Rules Database, craft the
perfect look for your PC with the Character Visualizer, and even game
with players across town or across the globe on the Digital Game
Table.
At the end of the day however, we really just want to please the
fantasy gamer inside all of us and feed that insatiable desire to keep
the adventure fresh and exciting!
+++
--
Fabio

iterations of the game to their liking.
Non buono. a mio avviso un gdr tradizionale non dovrebbe mutuare
elementi dai mmorpg, coi quali condivide poco più che la sigla e
null'altro.
ciao

elementi dai mmorpg,
a mio avviso, dipende dalle idee che mutua. se sono buone, perchè no?
-- 
 Domon

a mio avviso, dipende dalle idee che mutua. se sono buone, perchè no?
Perchè i mmorpg sono esclusivamente una corsa ad avere il pg più figo
che esiste e poco altro.

che esiste e poco altro.
se i mmorpg si limitano a questo, ugualmente fa dnd.
-- 
 Domon

che esiste e poco altro.
Dipende dal MMORPG e dipende da come lo si gioca. WoW per esempio e'
criticato proprio per questo.
Parvati V
-- 
UnaMoleDiDadi (TreEmme Torino):
http://umdd.altervista.org/
IHGGera #1069, IAFa #182 ^^^
http://parvatiquinta.altervista.org

se i mmorpg si limitano a questo, ugualmente fa dnd.
Solita battutina inutile domon?

Solita battutina inutile domon?
no. se tu puoi permetterti di dirlo dei mmorpg, io posso permettermi
di dirlo di dnd.
tutta la gente che gioca ai mmorpg per un motivo diverso da quello di
diventare il piů forte si offende per la tua affermazione sui mmorpg
tanto quanto tu ti offendi per la mia su dnd.
nessuna battuta inutile. cerco solo di sottolineare come quello che
stai dicendo sia un pregiudizio.
-- 
 Domon

stai dicendo sia un pregiudizio.
Mah, mi fido della tua parola.

fine a se stessa
beh, allora la gente ci farà il callo. resta comunque un giudizio
sommario e infondato
-- 
 Domon

sommario e infondato
sommario forse, infondato no.

> sommario forse, infondato no.
Io sono un appassionato di D&D da più di 20 anni e gioco a DDO da circa un 
anno e mezzo. DDO mi piace, ma effettivamente do ragione a Firwood: per il 
99% dei giocatori di DDO vale proprio il principio "Cerco in tutti i modi di 
fare il PG più potente possibile"; gli altri sono un'eccezione rarissima.
E comunque il videogioco di gruppo on line ha ben poco a che spartire con il 
gioco di ruolo (pbem compresi e compreso anche, spero, il futuro Game Table 
di D&D Insider).
Il tutto IMHO, naturalmente. ;)
Ciao,
Neri 

fare il PG più potente possibile"; gli altri sono un'eccezione rarissima.
potrei dire la stessa cosa di dnd, ma subito salterebbero in piedi
tutti :)
-- 
 Domon

 Domon
E' vero che esiste una tendenza sempre più comune, anche fra i giocatori di 
D&D, al cosiddetto "powerplaying", ma, anche ammettendo che sia altrettanto 
diffusa di quella che colpisce i videogiochi, essa è temperata dalla natura 
stessa del gioco di ruolo "verbale" (che è necessariamente interpretativo) e 
dalla presenza dal vivo di altri giocatori che possono in qualche modo 
riportare il powerplayer sulla "retta via".
Fa' un esperimento: prova a leggerti l'introduzione del Manuale del 
Giocatore di AD&D 2a edizione (se non la trovi da nessuna parte, te la mando 
io); lì trovi quello che secondo me è il vero spirito di D&D e dei giochi di 
ruolo in generale.
Buona giornata,
Neri 

tutti :)
:-P
perchè hai sparato a zero in ogni occasione, ed ormai la tua buona
fede non regge più :-)
battute a parte, qualsiasi crpg, ed in particolar modo i mmorpg, sono
obbligati a puntare sull'aumento della potenza del pg. Nei crpg
"normali" ci puoi mettere dentro una bella trama, una storia da
sviluppare in modo approfondito, una personalità da sviluppare, nei
mmorpg molto molto meno. Questa non è uno sminuire i mmorpg, solo che
le finalità dei due generi hanno in comune solo quelle 3 letterine e
poco altro. Nei mmorpg la trama è molto labile (quando esiste), e il
motore di questo genere è il potenziamento del pg, sia esso meramente
estetico, delle caratteristiche e di conseguenza della potenza.
Il bello dei mmorpg sono le relazioni che si vengono a creare tra i
vari giocatori, e la nascita di glide/fazioni/gruppi ecc.
Il tutto per che scopo? diventare più forti. Questo vale il 90% dei
mmorpg.
Inoltre, tutti i prodotti su pc o console non possono per forza di
cosa essere liberi come un gdr tradizionale. Per questo dico che
mutuare meccaniche da un crpg non è un gran cosa. Poi magari riescono
a implementare il tutto in modo eccezionale, ma per ora nutro qualche
dubbio.

ruolo in generale.
ho praticamente cominciato a giocare con quello.
e no, direi che è quanto di più lontano esista dal mio concetto di
gdr, quel papocchine aberrante di regole buttate a caso senza capo ne
coda e senza uno straccio di visione unificante.
dimine, l'esempio di gioco presentava personaggi complessi e profondi
come "guerriero 1", "guerriero 2" e "chierico"
a livello di gioco completo, preferisco di gran lunga la scatola
rossa.
a livello di sistema, di motore di gioco, anzi, non c'è paragone con
dnd3.x
adnd2 per me è al più grande porcata mai uscita col nome "dnd"
stampato sopra, e anche l'edizione responsabile di tutti quelli che,
oggi come oggi, odiano o disprezzano dnd.
ed è un vero peccato, visto che i setting che preferisco sono nati li
-- 
 Domon

dubbio.
alcuni dei migliori gdr da tavolo che conosco non sono liberi come un
gdr tradizionale.
-- 
 Domon