PDA

View Full Version : Looking for a 3.0 Interview



Nero24200
2009-06-25, 05:39 PM
Hi there

Gotten in a bit of an arugment regarding the design of 3.0 D'n'D. I recall reading an interview in which one writer mentions that the majority of the classes were assumed to be played in a specific way. Doesn't anyone have a link to such an interview?

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-06-25, 06:45 PM
I can't find any interviews or links, though I'm sure I've read that interview before.

I do remember reading that the CR system was calculated on the assumption that wizards only used blasting spells (HP damage), clerics only healed, fighters took all of the focus-on-one-weapon feats and charged (so they only got 1 attack in a round), and rogues mostly hid and struck from the shadows...which explains why the CR system breaks down the first time a wizard uses a crowd-control spell, the cleric buffs himself, the fighter goes the tripping or ubercharge route, or the rogue goes TWF.

Matthew
2009-06-25, 06:51 PM
I believe that it was SwordGuy who posted that here, but the recent purge of threads makes it hard to locate.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-25, 09:13 PM
I believe that it was SwordGuy who posted that here, but the recent purge of threads makes it hard to locate.It was, though it wasn't a link to the interview. Rather, SG claims his uncle was one of the (designers? Playtesters?), and told him that. There may be more official sources, but that's where I heard it first.

Nero24200
2009-06-26, 05:55 AM
I suppose it's the CR discussion, though I'm trying to find a source as..well..."offical" as possible.

Matthew
2009-06-26, 06:07 AM
The thread from SwordGuy can be found here: Optimizing - Designer's Intent (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49378). You might find this thread useful: The Reason for Imbalance in D20 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79809).

Zeta Kai
2009-06-26, 07:55 AM
I can't find any interviews or links, though I'm sure I've read that interview before.

I do remember reading that the CR system was calculated on the assumption that wizards only used blasting spells (HP damage), clerics only healed, fighters took all of the focus-on-one-weapon feats and charged (so they only got 1 attack in a round), and rogues mostly hid and struck from the shadows...which explains why the CR system breaks down the first time a wizard uses a crowd-control spell, the cleric buffs himself, the fighter goes the tripping or ubercharge route, or the rogue goes TWF.

Which really makes you wonder how all those unbalanced elements got in there in the first place. I mean, the playtesters didn't use them, or at least didn't factor those abilities into their calculations, so how did all those unbalanced powers end up in the finished product? Are we supposed to believe that all that playtesting of the D20 system was done under multiple restrictive assumptions, or that nobody was using their powers intelligently?

Matthew
2009-06-26, 08:05 AM
Which really makes you wonder how all those unbalanced elements got in there in the first place. I mean, the playtesters didn't use them, or at least didn't factor those abilities into their calculations, so how did all those unbalanced powers end up in the finished product? Are we supposed to believe that all that playtesting of the D20 system was done under multiple restrictive assumptions, or that nobody was using their powers intelligently?

You have to bear in mind that a lot of stuff in D20/3e appears to have been carried over from AD&D/2e without much thought. It was not a game designed from the ground up, but an extensive retro-fitting of the previous game system and combination with Classic D&D. Considering the significant differences between TSR and WotC D&D it is amazing how much of D20 is in fact directly ported from AD&D. That being the case, yes it is quite likely that a number of things that appear in the books were not play tested under the new paradigm at all, but were included because they were in the previous game system. A lot of high level spells are exactly like that, which is to say legacy elements.

Duke of URL
2009-06-26, 08:35 AM
Which really makes you wonder how all those unbalanced elements got in there in the first place. I mean, the playtesters didn't use them, or at least didn't factor those abilities into their calculations, so how did all those unbalanced powers end up in the finished product? Are we supposed to believe that all that playtesting of the D20 system was done under multiple restrictive assumptions, or that nobody was using their powers intelligently?

Remember too that 3.0 was the first edition really released in the "internet era". If you take someone relatively new to the system, even if they're familiar with other fantasy RPGs, including earlier D&D, they're going to look at the class flavor and probably follow close to the designers' intent, using the variety of feats/spells/whatever for little bits of customization here and there, but not radically departing from the basics.

Then come the message boards, including those focused on character optimization. People collaborate -- an idea here, and idea there, and all of a sudden, rules that may seem reasonable in isolation become "broken" when applied differently or in combination. (And that's without some of the blatantly ridiculous RAW lawyering that can go on in CharOp.) Ideas get passed around and built upon, and all of the weaknesses in the rules get found and exploited eventually. Variations beyond the designer's and playtesters ideas get tried out, shared, and improved upon.

Look at the open source model of code development -- a common phrase heard there is "with enough eyes, all bugs are shallow". An in-house group of playtesters simply isn't a broad enough spectrum to find everything, especially not if they're using the system as intended rather than looking for ways to twist and abuse it.

Yora
2009-06-26, 08:46 AM
I assume that most people who experience real balance problems are mostly those who play in games revolving a lot around optimization. But those are only a fraction. Possibly a rather large fraction, but maybe also a very small fraction. All we can really say is, that people who know quite some stuff about optimization and feel compelled to talk about it, think the rules are imbalanced. Which doesn't say a bit about how much D&D players really think it's a problem.

Nero24200
2009-06-26, 01:46 PM
I assume that most people who experience real balance problems are mostly those who play in games revolving a lot around optimization. But those are only a fraction. Possibly a rather large fraction, but maybe also a very small fraction. All we can really say is, that people who know quite some stuff about optimization and feel compelled to talk about it, think the rules are imbalanced. Which doesn't say a bit about how much D&D players really think it's a problem.

To be fair, it's not always about optmization. A few number of players in my current group go out their way to try and make their characters powerful..and well it just plain doesn't work for them.

I however, intentionally go for feats/spells/abilities which I feel suit my character, yet despite that I always seem to outshine them. It may be because I'm more willing to experiment with abilities that might seem "out there" or it may just be because they're god awful at optimization, but regardless, the point is the same, they try to power build and get nowhere, I don't yet outshine them easily. Even if they didn't try powerbuilding balance would still be a problem for us.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-26, 01:52 PM
To be fair, it's not always about optmization. A few number of players in my current group go out their way to try and make their characters powerful..and well it just plain doesn't work for them.

I however, intentionally go for feats/spells/abilities which I feel suit my character, yet despite that I always seem to outshine them. It may be because I'm more willing to experiment with abilities that might seem "out there" or it may just be because they're god awful at optimization, but regardless, the point is the same, they try to power build and get nowhere, I don't yet outshine them easily. Even if they didn't try powerbuilding balance would still be a problem for us.Slightly off-topic, but which classes do they use, and which classes do you use? ToB, Dread Necro/Beguiler, and Psions all have a high starting power level and low optimizability, while things like Wizards take a lot of skill to break and things like Monks can't be broken.

Myrmex
2009-06-26, 02:02 PM
ToB, Dread Necro/Beguiler, and Psions all have a high starting power level and low optimizability

ToB is really powerful from levels 1 to 10, without trying much. Dread Necro & Beguiler can be even better if you use their wonky casting mechanic to get higher level spells or have hugely expanded spell lists. Admittedly, though, the tricks are relatively few, and they are the sorts of classes you don't gain much from PrCing out of.

Nero24200
2009-06-26, 04:25 PM
This should emphasise how little my group knows about optimization.

I have straight fighters (going all the way up to level 18) being considered more powerful than high level clerics, druids, wizards, dread necromancers. Incidently, my DM won't allow psionics as he considers them overpowering.