13th Age: Where Do You Think it Belongs?

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: I've had a couple questions about my previous ruling of moving 13th age to Older AD&D/Other systems. Since I'm not terribly familiar with the game, I'm going to ask the Playground where it should go. Feel free to defend your argument, but please don't make me lock this and infract people.

[ngilop]

Im going to throw my vote in with 4th ed. As 13th age is just a tweaked version of the 4th edition ruleset.

Here (http://www.pelgranepress.com/?p=13569) is a intro to 13th age for the player.

To me 13th Age is to 4th ed D&D as Pathfinder is to 3rd ed.

[Kiero]

Im going to throw my vote in with 4th ed. As 13th age is just a tweaked version of the 4th edition ruleset.

Here (http://www.pelgranepress.com/?p=13569) is a intro to 13th age for the player.

To me 13th Age is to 4th ed D&D as Pathfinder is to 3rd ed.

There's a lot that is 4th edition that's missing from 13A (like the prominence of Roles), so it's not "just a tweaked version". It shows clear heritage from 4th edition, but it's very much a different game. It most certainly is not analogous to Pathfinder and 3.x.

It's fine where it is.

[Knaight]

It's another system. Basically, it's split between 4e and 3e in a lot of ways (given the authors consist of a designer from each), with some other stuff pulled from more narrative games. The catchall category fits it best.

[obryn]

It's not much like 3e or 4e, so neither of those. General or Other.

[Chaoticag]

Doesn't it use a d20 system? It may be unlike 4th edition in the lack of roles, but I know I heard that Mutants and Masterminds goes without classes, so is that under the 3e section? If so, it could fit under 4th edition since it has similar design principles to that.

I don't think it'd fall under other systems, since it does use d20s for resolving conflicts and shows a heritage from 3rd and 4th.

[obryn]

Doesn't it use a d20 system? It may be unlike 4th edition in the lack of roles, but I know I heard that Mutants and Masterminds goes without classes, so is that under the 3e section? If so, it could fit under 4th edition since it has similar design principles to that.

I don't think it'd fall under other systems, since it does use d20s for resolving conflicts and shows a heritage from 3rd and 4th.
AD&D and BECMI are under "Other." Most other d20 games are under "Other," too.

Really, 13A is closer to 3e in most regards than it is to 4e, but with some narrative elements thrown in. Don't misunderstand me - it's a good, solid game with a lot of innovative ideas. I like it a lot. But it's simply not a "successor" or a follow-up to 4e in any tangible way. The two games just aren't very much alike. It's more than roles; the complete and total lack of any tactical combat whatsoever is a start. No AEDU power structures, and many martial classes are beholden to even/odd dice rolls or crits. Vancian spellcasting is back. I honestly don't get where the "pathfinder of 4e" stuff comes from. :smallsmile:

[Kiero]

I honestly don't get where the "pathfinder of 4e" stuff comes from. :smallsmile:

Usually people not familiar with all four of 3.x, Pathfinder, 4th edition and 13A.

3.x and Pathfinder are very close, after all that was the entire point of PF. 13A only loosely bears relation to 4th edition, and it has lots of 3.x and other stuff in it too. You certainly can't take stuff from 4th edition and drop it, virtually unchanged, into 13A the way you can with 3.x content into PF.

[The Dark Fiddler]

...but I know I heard that Mutants and Masterminds goes without classes, so is that under the 3e section?

M&M is under the "other" section because the 3e section is only for fantasy variants of the d20 system.

[Chaoticag]

M&M is under the "other" section because the 3e section is only for fantasy variants of the d20 system.

Okay, that's something of a confusing distinction. Well, the people most familiar with it seem to be saying this also belongs under other, so I guess it's prolly best to defer to that then.

[Larkas]

I'm going with the d20 section, since it is thoroughly based on 3.5's OGL, but IMHO there should be a new subforum for 3E's offshoots, maybe inside the 3E subforum. That, or a total merge of the D&D subforums.

[erikun]

I'm under the impression that the D&D3e subforum is for D&D3e and similar systems which are roughly compatable: Pathfinder, Monte Cook's Iron Heroes, and so on. I'm not familiar with 13th Age, but I get the impression that it is different enough that you couldn't casually mix it with the others.

In addition, I'd recommend the Other forum just so any 13th Age topic doesn't get immediately drowned out.


I'm going with the d20 section, since it is thoroughly based on 3.5's OGL, but IMHO there should be a new subforum for 3E's offshoots, maybe inside the 3E subforum. That, or a total merge of the D&D subforums.
I don't think that merging D&D3e with the Other forum is a very good idea. Right now, D&D3e is still one of the most active of the Roleplaying areas. It would drown out every other conversation that is attempted. I only see three topics in the Others forum which would even be seen in the standard 50-post display, and two of those were just created.

I, for one, don't much care for D&D3e anymore, and so I wouldn't like to see a forum talking about other, potentially interesting games to be flooded with primarily D&D3e posts.

[LibraryOgre]

I'm going with the d20 section, since it is thoroughly based on 3.5's OGL, but IMHO there should be a new subforum for 3E's offshoots, maybe inside the 3E subforum. That, or a total merge of the D&D subforums.

We separated out 3.x because it was the bulk of the conversation, and pretty much everything else was getting lost, and NON-3.x threads were becoming innundated with 3.x posts.
"Well, just take this feat, and you're fine."
"I'm playing GURPS. It says so in the title."
"Well excuse me! I'm just posting."
So, yeah, that's probably not going to happen.

[Larkas]

We separated out 3.x because it was the bulk of the conversation, and pretty much everything else was getting lost, and NON-3.x threads were becoming innundated with 3.x posts.
"Well, just take this feat, and you're fine."
"I'm playing GURPS. It says so in the title."
"Well excuse me! I'm just posting."
So, yeah, that's probably not going to happen.

Hmmm, makes sense... Have you ever considered some kind of "filtering"? Like, keep all the D&D threads in the same subforum, but force people to choose about which game the thread is. That way, if you want to see only 3.5 stuff, you filter for that. Dunno if that's doable at all, though, it's just an idea.

[LibraryOgre]

Hmmm, makes sense... Have you ever considered some kind of "filtering"? Like, keep all the D&D threads in the same subforum, but force people to choose about which game the thread is. That way, if you want to see only 3.5 stuff, you filter for that. Dunno if that's doable at all, though, it's just an idea.

And thus, the separate forums were born. Put it in the right subforum and BOOM instant filtering.

[Larkas]

And thus, the separate forums were born. Put it in the right subforum and BOOM instant filtering.

Indeed. It's just that there is some merit to an unfiltered forum too... I think. Again, I'm just throwing ideas at the screen here, you don't need to take them seriously if you think they are bad. :smallredface:

[Seerow]

And thus, the separate forums were born. Put it in the right subforum and BOOM instant filtering.

Only real issue is that "Old D&D editions and other games" is a really broad deal. It's probably fine because despite being so broad there's almost no traffic compared to other forums, but it can be annoying for someone looking for just one game there and seeing dozens of games they don't care about instead.

[Cuthalion]

It's a poll, yay! :smalltongue:

[erikun]

Only real issue is that "Old D&D editions and other games" is a really broad deal. It's probably fine because despite being so broad there's almost no traffic compared to other forums, but it can be annoying for someone looking for just one game there and seeing dozens of games they don't care about instead.
I think the main problem is that, if there hasn't been a new post in a thread within the last week/last month, then separating those threads into a new forum won't help matters any.

The main point of the No Necroing rule (as I see it) is because people are not going to continue to monitor a thread months after their last post to see if it has been updated. This only becomes worse if every system has it's own sub-forum, because then everyone would need to go into every forum to check on new posts or just ignore them - and I think that, with most people, they'd be more inclined to not bother and ignore them. The ultimate result would be that, rather than checking a single sub-forum posting in new threads, we'd find a lot of these other sub-forums to be completely ignored and (with the 30-day cutoff period) completely empty.