Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Project Black Flag Design Notes #1
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 8940921" data-attributes="member: 23484"><p>In some ways, this Design Diary makes me less hopeful than I was with the package itself. Some things that were not implicit in the packet are spelled out here and are likely to meet resistance. The biggest of these, to my eyes, is the description of talents. </p><p></p><p>we had seen that talents were replacing feats. What we are now told is this:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The division of talents is in itself fine, but assigning each class to one of them, and limiting choice to that one, is a needless straightjacket. Let Fighters take a magical or technical feat; let Sorcerers take a martial one. Allowing choice gives a great opportunity to allow players design choices that suit their own style. It might not always be optimized, but it would be fun, and it would cut down on multiclassing (which is not in itself bad, of course). </p><p></p><p>Sure, there is still the background feat; but I'd much rather have a mundane character with a dash of magic from a feat (talent) like Ritual Caster than have to MC for a level to get a small handful of spells.</p><p></p><p>I was also struck by the animus against One:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's a blending in this of concerns about bad corporate citizenship with bad design, and that feels, to me, sloppy. I too doubt there is going to be "true backward compatibility" (as I've discussed elsewhere), but it feels to me to be a mischaracterization to say the One playtests are throwing any babies out with bathwater. </p><p></p><p>Indeed, I had hoped that Black Flag was going to be more innovative, and take more risks. This diary entry suggests that is just not going to happen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kobold Stew, post: 8940921, member: 23484"] In some ways, this Design Diary makes me less hopeful than I was with the package itself. Some things that were not implicit in the packet are spelled out here and are likely to meet resistance. The biggest of these, to my eyes, is the description of talents. we had seen that talents were replacing feats. What we are now told is this: The division of talents is in itself fine, but assigning each class to one of them, and limiting choice to that one, is a needless straightjacket. Let Fighters take a magical or technical feat; let Sorcerers take a martial one. Allowing choice gives a great opportunity to allow players design choices that suit their own style. It might not always be optimized, but it would be fun, and it would cut down on multiclassing (which is not in itself bad, of course). Sure, there is still the background feat; but I'd much rather have a mundane character with a dash of magic from a feat (talent) like Ritual Caster than have to MC for a level to get a small handful of spells. I was also struck by the animus against One: There's a blending in this of concerns about bad corporate citizenship with bad design, and that feels, to me, sloppy. I too doubt there is going to be "true backward compatibility" (as I've discussed elsewhere), but it feels to me to be a mischaracterization to say the One playtests are throwing any babies out with bathwater. Indeed, I had hoped that Black Flag was going to be more innovative, and take more risks. This diary entry suggests that is just not going to happen. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Project Black Flag Design Notes #1
Top