nWorld of Darkness 1E v 2E
So, There has been a lot of comparisons about 1E V 2e in another thread involving a game called San Fran, and I have definitely been involved in it.. and after trying to redesign characters, I've decided I'll get the ball rolling...
First and best change of 1E versus 2E, hands down? No debate. No question?
Flat XP costs
Players should not have to worry about always taking 5, 5, and 1 in a sheet or otherwise I'm wasting on a conservative estimate at least 30 experience points, with the possibility of up to let's say 50-70. The obvious response is, well don't tink your sheet out, and make a normal character, with a varied sheet and intentionally put yourself several dozen if not possibly up to a hundred xp behind someone that made a more focused sheet. All so I could pick up a single dot of computers that might come up once in the entirety of my roleplay. Or 2 dots in driving which will come up never. Or maybe that 1 dot in expression!
Worse still when you give players 400 xp to start and then tier and gate things thinking that characters like the ones I might design which are highly optomized, sit in the same category as a player who doesn't spend 2 weeks optimizing their shit. I'll throw 23 dice on an attack and they'll throw.. what? 14? 15?. I'll throw 14 on stealth and they'll throw 5, My larceny s 18 and they offer up a piddly perception of 7. In this very reasonable example the differences in power levels is basically such that my character would walk over any conflict that would be geared towards the other player, and their character would die quickly to anything more geared towards my own character level.
Just change your behavior a person might say, or perhaps there should be restrictions on what players can buy. No more than 1 attribute at a 1. So the solution is to create artificial house rules.. to try and prevent twinkery.. Except that litertally all that does is force the players who optomize to build to the letter of the rule as close as possible, and still end up with characters that are miles ahead d of the other players. If your going to make a house-rule like that, why not make one that instead of punishing Optimization freaks, makes them less worried about making mistakes n their sheets.. and makes it far easier for the less optimized to catch up. (Attribute caps exist for a reason after all) Even more important, it follows n the foot steps of the designers themselves decided was important for the game?
Flat XP removes this risk significantly. Yes, it is still possible to have wildly differing levels of competency as people go more broad than tall, but it's much easier to start broad and go tall in a flat system, versus a multiplicative then on.
TLDR: Going from 2e back to 1e is fucking hell, Multiplicative XP is terrible and forces every player to spend hours tinkering a sheet just to make a viable concept or litertally fall upwards of hundreds of xp behind another player.
Edit: This also says nothing about the fact that throwing 400 xp at a mage versus a giest, a giant panda and a werewolf will result in this gulf of power growing even further. The tier system idea is unfortunately flawed from the start in a cross platform game, and as the above hopefully demonstrates, even within self-contained splats.
No debate. No question?
Why are you opening a discussion with this line?
@Tinuviel Because I'm a stupid idiot? Who cares?
Ganymede last edited by
It doesn't matter to me. To me, they are two separate games, like nWoD v. oWoD.
I prefer 2E vastly, but comparing things is folly and pointless.
@d-bone Because this is the constructive section. You've outright said that nobody gets to argue what you've claimed.
And I agree with @Ganymede, though I prefer 1E. They're so different that comparing them is like comparing apples and elephants.
Except the way the sheets are laid out, similar stats, etc?
Yes the merits are different slightly, yes the powers and splats specifics are different, but they are similar enough to bear consideration and comparison.
To say the editions completely incomparable I find to be a frankly, a disingenuous statement.
The way you build sheets in 1e and 2e for example, are so different, even though they literally are using systems that clearly use the same amount of points, pools and dots. Primary this is in terms of feel. Yet the steps are almost exactly step for step the same.
Ganymede last edited by Ganymede
I'm hardly concerned with what you think about my beliefs or opinions, but your thoughts and statements reinforce them.
As you said, the way you build sheets in 1E and 2E are vastly different. The way you build your PC through XP is necessarily different because of the removal of exponential XP costs. You have Conditions too, which help you get additional XP. But there's more than that.
Conditions don't exist in 1E, and are extremely important for Vampire (if you play it). Vampire 1E and Vampire 2E play completely differently because of the way Disciplines work, and other matters. Werewolf 1E and 2E are almost completely alien. And in 2E, you have systems that don't exist in 1E, and these systems -- the Doors system, the Clues system, the Chase mechanics -- are well thought-out, interesting, and built into the Merits system.
Regardless, we're talking about opinions. I would agree that putting a PC together is similar between the two systems, but the considerations are far greater in 2E and that's what makes it a different game.
@d-bone That's not the only issue I have with what you said, mind.
You're also throwing numbers at this that the game (at least 1E) weren't designed for. In tabletop, you're not going to be throwing four hundred XP at a character in its lifetime unless your ST has lost their mind. They're also not really supposed to be played together. You're a cabal of Mages OR a coterie of Vampires OR a pack of Wolves. It can work, but it takes work.
As for the comparison, they are markedly different. How one earns XP is different, how one spends XP is different. Much of the IC world is, apparently, different. You can compare them all you like, as you can compare pretty much anything, but that doesn't mean it's a useful or not-stupid thing to do.
@d-bone now its been awhile but isnt owod sheets very similar to nwod? I mean afaik there has been no huge change in sheet layout or design in the wod game lines.
Eta: I like things like flat xp (much easier math) but I am so engrained in 1e after a decade of playing it I find it very hard to try out 2e simple bc how different everyone says it is.
@Ganymede Yes, the individual tacked on systems are 'suppoedly' diffirent, yes, there are now bands and conditions. Yes there are now all sorts of tilts you cna inflict.. but at the end of the day, what is going on here?
11/7/5, 5/4/3. Try and match your dots to your abilities and concept as best as you can. The games are similar in that way, and those tilts and conditions are the effect of powers that often times are specified within the power/merit itself. (Fighting styles giving -1 to dex instead of a leg wrack tilt for example.) It creates a shared language of easily referable status effects..
And becuase of this, this incredible similarity, there is no logical reason why 1e has to maintain a multiplicative xp system.Nothing about it screams it needs it other than a series of books that clung to it for unclear reasons. Indeed changing it clearly would be for the betterment of much of the playerbase who doesn't like to twink their shit out.
And @Ganymede, I dunno what game you've been playing, but when I have to decide whether I want to do 4 things competently now, or 2 thinks really good now, and not be able to do things, and ultimately save 80 xp, that isn't really an easy choice, where as in 2e I can drop a dot into driving becuase hey, my character knows how to drive a car! Lol! Why not! I'm out 2 xp.
@Tinuviel Too bad SF is starting with that as the base state, and that in order to get let's say,... a renown of 5 or a power stat of 3 we are dropping down anywhere from 30 to 80 experience points.
And on the subject of xp gain, beats tend to on average INCREASE xp gain, not decrease.. which means that in a flat xp system, power level would theoretically go up faster.. so why is it not reasonable to ask to use a flat gain system in 1e?
but when I have to decide whether I want to do 4 things competently now, or 2 thinks really good now [...]
Hey, that sounds almost like a balanced and realistic thing!
Too bad SF is starting with that as the base state
Yeah. What part of
that the game (at least 1E) weren't designed for
didn't you get? Just because someone is doing something with a system, it doesn't mean the system was designed for it.
I could cook a hotpocket on my car engine. Doesn't mean that's what it's for.
@d-bone uhhh.. i mean, in a MU setting you tend to get xp very quickly. I am not sure how this applies.
@tinuviel Good selective quoting there, notice the losing out on 80 xp part.
@magee101 THe specific rate gain depends on the MU, and the system in question? I.. must admit to being confused why you felt the need to specify that?
@d-bone Quoting is, by nature, selective. Losing out on 80xp vs 2xp actually bolsters my argument. You're not supposed to be good at everything all at once. You are either a jack-of-all-trades (master of none) or a master of something. Very, very, very rarely both.
@Tinuviel But then why can't we do just a flat conversion, get rid of the multiplicative nature of Nwod 1e? Like nothing you've said screams its so different it's impossible. More, they arn't worth comparing, yet the comparisons lead credence to the game can take and tolerate a flat curve.. and it'll even out to some extent the distribution level of power based on xp?
@d-bone you tried to say beats in 2e have better/faster xp progression and would be better. Paraphrased but I believe that was the jist. Tbh i dont think it matters. At the end of the day in a tabletop setting the gm is going to determine your xp gain (beats help force his hand and help both player and GM work together to create storylines to explore) but I dont think beats cause any drastic or notixeable difference in progression in a MU setiing
@d-bone Because that's not what 1E has. If you want 1E, play 1E. If you want 2E, play 2E. You don't need to rewrite an old system when a new one exists. It's almost like that's why a second edition was made... to 'fix' problems in the first one.
Some people just like first edition. That's the main reason why this comparison is pointless. People that prefer first edition already have their work done. People that prefer second edition also have their work done. That's why we use published systems rather than make up our own all of the time.
@magee101 That response was made in specificity towards why 1e turning to a flat system would not immediately break apart, because 2e has a flat system, and has beats, which theoretically would increase the xp gain rate, in a flat system.
@Tinuviel Fair enough, this is probably a case of I don't like Sushi, but it's Sushi where on the one hand Joseph spends 38 hours crafting the perfect peice, and lives a great life, and jerry makes a regular peice of sushi, doesn't realize he's not getting the best, and has gastro distress for the rest of his life, with no way of ever obtaining the level of Jospeh. And then both are told their levels of sushi are equally appropriate for the iron chef cook-off.
@d-bone doesnt the gmc update to 1e make it a flat xp system without issue? Gmc is still considered a 1e mod or 1.5 isnt it?
Eta: trying to agree by showing the gmc example but cant remeber if it is still considered 1e
@d-bone That's a very poor comparison. Best is an exceptionally subjective term - with some objective bars.
There's a reason oWoD games are still out there when nWoD exists. We just like what we like, leave us be.