Greetings. It appears you have not registered with the keeper of records. Visit here to submit thy name to our registrar. Once completed, you will enjoy all the features these hallowed halls provide. Please be sure and introduce yourself to others you find here after having done so. The more you participate, the more access you may be granted.
Loremaster - Game Design: Foundational Layers for 4e
    • Game Design: Foundational Layers for 4e

      This article deals primarily with the 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons game, but has applicability in any range of tabletop roleplaying games.

      The blogosphere has been erupting since the introduction of the Essentials line of products by Wizards of the Coast. Many consumers of the game sensed a fundamental shift in the game’s architecture and became wary of discontinued support of existing content. I have a unique perspective on this event having designed content for both pre and post Essentials. That being said, I have no intimate knowledge or insider information on the development processes that went into this shift. At first glance, and even as content began to be released, I was of the strong opinion that Essentials-style content would remain optional and that the game would continue uninhibited.

      This is where I steer the ship off course…

      One of the greatest things that Wizards of the Coast has produced for 4e was that of character themes—like the ones found in the Dark Sun Campaign Guide. Character themes are extremely simple in design yet provide a powerful mechanic for shaping the game. I have thought a lot about themes in the past six months and have come the conclusion that their implementation has far wider reaching benefits across any number of sub-systems to the game.

      Lets examine

      The Dark Sun theme Gladiator provides a template that is laid over top of an existing character. For all intents and purposes, this design does not affect the underlying system and works flawlessly to pull character concepts in new directions. For the first time (in 4e) you could have an Elven Cleric of Correllon that was also a Gladiator—giving the character depth via game mechanics that it could not have otherwise obtained (without a heavy feat tax). The addition of this layer was truly intriguing to me on a personal level and has forced me to reflect deeper on its importance.

      By adding layers to a base character in a fashion similar to that of the character themes, you are able to open far more design opportunities without having to change the fundamental system principles. Let’s move on to a specific example that I often use when chatting about it--

      My older brother, game design Brian R. James, wrote an article for Dragon magazine awhile back called Playing Dampyr. This article is the perfect example of one that can be used as a template rather than a feat tree. With a simple conversion, you can take all of the amazing fluff of the article and convert it to a more compelling design implementation. Imagine if the Dampyr was a theme template that could be applied to an existing character. It could seamlessly be applied without imposing restrictions in the form of a system tax. This design idea reaches even further now that we have seen a preview for the new Vampire class. In my opinion, having the Vampire designed as a class completely misses a golden opportunity. Now, if you want to have a cool story-arch where one of your PCs is embraced by a vampire lord, you would (in effect) have to completely rebuild the character, giving them a brand new class. This is counter-intuitive. By making the Vampire a character theme, you could have the base character retain its class and race integrity, while still adding the vampiric template. Sure, some features may be gained, but you would balance this with the negative effects of being a powerful undead race.

      Multiclassing

      Multiclassing is not one of my favorite things about 4e. In fact, I really dislike it—so much that I stay away from it if at all possible. For example, spending a feat to gain a single class feature, and maybe a skill bump, was uninspiring to say the least. One of my biggest (and most broken; system-wise) characters is a Half-Orc Paladin of Tempus (need I say more?). This character has multiclassed into Cleric and had to do so with the use of feats. In addition, because I wanted to add some beefier healing powers, I had to spend even more feats. This is not inherently bad, but it started to take away from some of the other cool areas of my character. What if, instead of having to use feats to multiclass into a cleric, I instead applied a multiclass character theme instead? With the use of the theme, I would gain some abilities inherent to the Cleric class, but not so much that it would take away from the Core class. This would be easy to implement and would help to define my character the way that I want without compromising the integrity of the game engine/system.

      Half [Insert Race]

      It would also be prudent to use the character theme implementation when dealing with half-races as well. There is no need to have entire race write-ups for Half-Elves and Half-Orcs (beyond backstory) when you could instead handle this via (wait for it…) a character template. So now, instead of having an entire race, you could have a template that provides racial adaptations to the base character race. For instance, if you wanted to play a Half-Elf you would have to first choose a base race (Elf or Human). After your base race is chosen, you would then apply the Half-Elf/Human template to your character. In effect, this would show one race having predominate features over the other. As thus, two Half-Elves could be completely different (one having more human traits, whereas the other has more elven).

      Layers

      By applying layers to a base character, in the form of templates, you really open the game up to brand new avenues of play without compromising the core mechanics. Many of the features and strengths of the new Essentials races and classes could have been developed this way. I won’t go as far to say that WotC missed anything, or did something poorly. I will say that it may be an opportunity to grow for the future. All of the errata and changes in the math could have been fixed using this method, and you could still provide relevant content for players new and old.

      If you liked this article and would like for me to draft some of the ideas presented, please respond here.

      Bio

      Matt James is a freelance game designer for Wizards of the Coast. His design credits include Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale, as well as numerous articles in Dungeon Magazine and Dragon Magazine. Matt recently had a sourcebook released with Open Design (publishers of Kobold Quarterly) called Soldiers of Fortune. When Matt isn’t having celebrities bless his dice, he lives a quiet life in the Washington, DC area with his wife and two Chihuahuas.


      Comments 28 Comments
      1. jonathanjacobs's Avatar
        jonathanjacobs -
        Matt -- this mechanic of "layers" is required by 4E because it is a class-based game system. Many other games simply get around this "nuanced" game design feature of character creation simply by ditching classes altogether and have a free-style system entirely. Then, mainly to help foster the themes of a particular setting, those same game systems often present "Archtypes" to the players. i.e. example characters that are your typical "wizard", "fighter", "archonian track feeler", etc... as a means to show and tell how to use a classless system to create "classes". And yes.. as you might guess... this is another reason why Savage Worlds took my old 4E D&D group by storm and we have not looked back.

        So - in short - I think what you are trying to get at here with your "layers" is perhaps a way to retrofit a classless system onto a class/rigid system. This is typical and not a new thing for D&D. In 3E we had prestige classes, multiclasses, specialty classes, and "adept/apprentice" systems as ways of "blending" classes together. 2E and 1E also had similar mechanics layered on top and optional.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        Agreed. I believe this sort of correction would have been more appropriate than the Essentials line of products where the system was adapted to fix issues.
      1. Nai_Calus's Avatar
        Nai_Calus -
        CORELLON. ONE R. TWO LS. RAGE.

        Otherwise, I am intrigued and wish to subscribe to your newsletter. (Themes would certainly be better than what I wound up doing with my Paladin, which was just plain homebrewing a half-eladrin race.
      1. jonathanjacobs's Avatar
        jonathanjacobs -
        Well.. its not a "correction" I don't think. SW and D&D have fundamentally different design strategies. D&D (all editions) has used a class system first, and then presented countless options to blend/fix/powerup/mashup those classes to player tastes. That's teh D&D way of doing things. The Tao of D&D if you will - Restrict First, Blend Later. Nothing wrong with it either. Essentials I think was aimed at simplifying those options though - and then presenting options for those simplifications (which could be thought of as creating a new layer of complexity on a simplified set of options, thereby _maybe_ making the matters worse... I dunno... what do you think?)
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        I should have clarified. Essentials (and the associated errata) served to help correct many issues to the overall 4e game system.
      1. JeffGupton's Avatar
        JeffGupton -
        I was just wondering (sudden amount of time on my hands) do the people who complain about Essentials also complain when they buy a new PS3 game and have to wait while they download the 1.02.03.2469 patch that came out right after the product was made? Nothing is ever perfect when it hits the shelves, it's as perfect as can be done with the tools at hand. Sometimes, a larger than errata patch is needed, which gave birth to Essentials.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        I tend to agree. The RPG gaming community is a fickle bunch and with the advent of the Internet, it seems it is way easier to be disgruntled. Either way, I still tend to gravitate towards games I enjoy. 4e has been quite enjoyable for several years now.
      1. JeffGupton's Avatar
        JeffGupton -
        Quote Originally Posted by Matt James View Post
        I tend to agree. The RPG gaming community is a fickle bunch and with the advent of the Internet, it seems it is way easier to be disgruntled. Either way, I still tend to gravitate towards games I enjoy. 4e has been quite enjoyable for several years now.
        I agree, I spent a lot of time and money on 3E/3.5 and have had more success with DMing and teaching new players with 4E. And, for some reason, when playing 4E there is a STRONG sense of nostalgia for when I first began with D&D in 1981.
      1. TheGreatZomboni's Avatar
        TheGreatZomboni -
        Excellent article. I love the themes and would love to see more of them. I agree that the vampire would have been better served as a theme.

        This is kind of material and options that I think would be a great addition to the game. I would love to contribute, playtest, and of most importantly buy a product like this.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        Thanks TheGreatZomboni! I am fiddling around with some ideas on implementation, but I think it would be neat to have people try this type of alternate advancement. That being said, it would not be easily portable to the VTT if that's a concern (for anyone).
      1. TheGreatZomboni's Avatar
        TheGreatZomboni -
        Not for me, for that matter not even really worried about the Character Builder. I think the character builder is becoming to much of a crutch for myself - not having to do the math as much is starting to have an effect on my ability to determine balance as well as I would like to.

        These types of themes that get added on would work great for settings such as Dragonlance, where you have the towers of high sorcery. You probably wouldn't want to wait until level 10 to have the character choose which tower they go with... and I don't know if having them select at level 1 is appropriate either. (alternatively, I suppose a background works as well - but I like the theme concept a bit more).

        As a side note - more and more, I'm thinking I'm going to homebrew the Vampire class to be a theme for my home games. Thankfully it seems it will be pretty linear so I can make the theme out of it. I'll even include the penalty of 2 healing surges.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        I might do a Vampire theme write-up and slap it up here on Loremaster. I might have time in a week or so. I think it would serve as a good example.

        Edit: hmmm, I might write this up tonight if I can get some other work done first .
      1. superbigrobot's Avatar
        superbigrobot -
        Hey!
        so i basically joined the site for this post. I've thought 4E's multiclassing options were lacking and setting them, or other templates up as a theme is a GREAT idea. I'd def buy this as a product and would be excited about contributing!
      1. BrianLiberge's Avatar
        BrianLiberge -
        This is actually something I've been playing with. I firmly believe that themes, combined with backgrounds, are the answer to the 4e multi-classing woes.

        A theme, pulled from a class, would be easy to create. Grab the class features gained from the hybrid version (with some slight tweaking) and then open up power choices from levels 2 to 10. If you need a new class skill to make it work thematically, you can use your background or level 1 feat.

        It doesn't have to end at level 10. You now qualify for Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies that depend upon the power source or base class of your theme.

        Those who don't wish to multi-class at first level still get more depth from existing themes in source like Dark Sun, or Soldiers of Fortune. You can even keep your eyes out for a Theme in StufferShack.com's next theme week (central blog theme, not the mechanic. . . but there will be a theme, the mechanic).
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        Spot on, Brian. Those are my thoughts exactly.
      1. Farcaster's Avatar
        Farcaster -
        Ah, I hadn't thought of the new vampire class being layered on as a theme before. That's an interesting idea. I like it!

        On the other hand, I think we have to recognize that themes aren't a zero-sum change to the 4th edition engine. They definitely represent a power-creep in the the player's favor. Dark Sun balances this out a bit with its inherent deadly nature. It should only be added to other games with a degree of caution.

        For instance, if you are going to redesign multiclassing to use themes instead, then you have to balance that out by giving non-multiclass players access to other themes. If you allow more than one theme for a single character, then it really needs to come at some sort of cost to balance that character against others. And, of course, if all the players have one (or more themes) then you need to be aware that it does affect game balance and your encounters will need to be just a little tougher. Is there anything wrong with that? Not to my thinking, but it must be applied carefully.

        Either way, interesting thoughts. I definitely would like to see more non-setting specific themes added to the game. They were a great idea and go a long way to spicing characters up a little more.
      1. TheGreatZomboni's Avatar
        TheGreatZomboni -
        Quote Originally Posted by Farcaster View Post
        Ah, I hadn't thought of the new vampire class being layered on as a theme before. That's an interesting idea. I like it!

        On the other hand, I think we have to recognize that themes aren't a zero-sum change to the 4th edition engine. They definitely represent a power-creep in the the player's favor. Dark Sun balances this out a bit with its inherent deadly nature. It should only be added to other games with a degree of caution.

        For instance, if you are going to redesign multiclassing to use themes instead, then you have to balance that out by giving non-multiclass players access to other themes. If you allow more than one theme for a single character, then it really needs to come at some sort of cost to balance that character against others. And, of course, if all the players have one (or more themes) then you need to be aware that it does affect game balance and your encounters will need to be just a little tougher. Is there anything wrong with that? Not to my thinking, but it must be applied carefully.

        Either way, interesting thoughts. I definitely would like to see more non-setting specific themes added to the game. They were a great idea and go a long way to spicing characters up a little more.
        I would think that the limit of one theme per character would be best, or even treat them like backgrounds where you can take multiple themes but you can only gain mechanical benefits from one.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        Indeed. There would absolutely have to be a restriction on this sub-system.
      1. Matt James's Avatar
        Matt James -
        There is a big thread about this article over on EN World -> http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-disc...direction.html
      1. BrianLiberge's Avatar
        BrianLiberge -
        My article and slight response on themes went up today, http://stuffershack.com/themes-taking-on-new-roles/. Check out the end where I talk about 4e modern, one of the main reasons I've been thinking about expanding on themes.