General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
In the parent thread, BryonD laments how homogeneous 4e classes are. And the response notes that 5e will probably not bring back more complexity to D&D.
Well, there's no reason you can't have complexity in 4e. You could have non-conforming classes in 4e that work alongside the standard classes. In fact converting some 3rd party 3e classes to 30 levels and modifying their class abilities to 4e terminology would work a lot better in some cases than doing a full 4e conversion. (I've often wondered if a 1e Wizard could be converted with just a boost to hit points.)
Of course, you can't publish such things with the GSL so you won't see anyone doing this. But calling 4e flawed because all the classes have to be the same is wrong. They don't have to be. But I doubt WotC will ever explore this avenue and it is cut off from 3rd parties.
__________________ Joe Mucchiello, Head Honcho at Throwing Dice Games
Priority One: Fatherhood.
Priority Two: Sanity.
Down on the list: seemingly real close to releasing a notebook essential. It's in layout! Has been for months now. (Just nod politely so I won't cry about this.)
"I've never heard of the term Flavor lawyer..." -- Scribble
Best way to remove homgenity from 4E is to play it without shallow preconceptions. It plays a whole lot different than it reads, and its not the mechanics but the tactics that make characters different. Put in a small effort to understand 4E, and the homogenity vanishes.
IWell, there's no reason you can't have complexity in 4e. You could have non-conforming classes in 4e that work alongside the standard classes.
I kinda hope that once all the power sources have been well tapped for PHBs WotC will do a line of Unearthed Arcana, Unearthed Martial, Unearthed Divine, etc, that does exactly that. There isn't any reason you couldn't do a more Vancian wizard in 4e, just as there isn't any particular reason why you couldn't make the martial classes more at-will/combo based. It would be a great way to keep things fresh without having to toss out the whole system. Clearly they are experimenting with this in the Psionic classes
__________________ All we want to do is eat your brains
We’re not unreasonable; I mean, no one’s gonna eat your eyes
All we want to do is eat your brains
We’re at an impasse here; maybe we should compromise:
If you open up the doors
We’ll all come inside and eat your brains
Best way to remove homgenity from 4E is to play it without shallow preconceptions. It plays a whole lot different than it reads, and its not the mechanics but the tactics that make characters different. Put in a small effort to understand 4E, and the homogenity vanishes.
This.
The homogeneity of 4th Edition is a myth perpetuated almost exclusively by those with little to no actual play experience.
It doesn't need to be removed. It was never there to begin with.
__________________ Tales from the Rusty Dragon - A 4th Edition Conversion Blog Covering Paizo's Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path
The homogeneity of 4th Edition is a myth perpetuated almost exclusively by those with little to no actual play experience.
It doesn't need to be removed. It was never there to begin with.
I'm going to have to throw in my lot with this as well. If you play a fighter, than a wizard and still think the classes are the same, you're probably not paying attention. Every character using the same system for their abilities doesn't do the slightest thing to discourage versatility or a varied play experience. Ask a Warmachine player about how different warcasters are, and then bring up that they all must be similar because they use the same rules. Then watch him laugh at you.
To an outsider, the classes in 4e are similar. But then, to an outsider, D&D and White Wolf games are similar. But the closer you get, the more details are present that the comparison just doesn't work.
The 3e melee classes all rolled a d20 to attack, used a weapon, added their strength to the attack and damage, and wore armor*. They all had feats. Yet if I said "they're too alike", most who play 3e would consider me quite wrong.
*Okay, the monk didn't use weapons or wear armor, but the monk just didn't work either.
Best way to remove homgenity from 4E is to play it without shallow preconceptions. It plays a whole lot different than it reads, and its not the mechanics but the tactics that make characters different. Put in a small effort to understand 4E, and the homogenity vanishes.
Everything is relative. There are games out there with vastly more variety built in to the mechanics. Compared to those games, 4E is quite homogeneous.
I understand 4E very well. And the homogeneity is shining bright.
Perhaps, if you wish to actually contribute to a solution oriented discussion, you will quit offering shallow preconceptions of your own regarding other people's experience with the game you enjoy. Because, you are wrong. Deeply wrong.
I think you claim regarding mechanics vs tactics is pretty sketchy at best. But even with that, why can't we have both?
Also, I'll clarify that it is the game I referenced as homogeneous, not specifically the classes.
__________________ It was one of those nights when you turn out the lights, and everything comes into view
The combat system should be based on the world design. The world design should not be based on the combat system.
My 4 year old ties a towel to her shoulders and pretends to be a superhero. Roleplaying is not between the covers of a book.
As an extension of that, if you tell me that any game is the same just because you roleplay the same, then as far as I am concerned, you don't get the point.
"I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal." - A 4E fan
"I've got to have all that, but I require intelligent conversation as well." - Me
Also, I'll clarify that it is the game I referenced as homogeneous, not specifically the classes.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a bit of clarification on this. In what way to you see 4e's mechanics as being homogeneous, and how is this a bad thing?
I've played a wizard, rogue, avenger, fighter, and paladin thus far.
I see no sameness in the classes. Each plays out distinctly different, does different things, uses different styles, weapons, and effects.
I agree with all the above posters that the game is not homogeneous if you look beyond the fact that they all get at-will, encounter, and daily powers. No more the same than in 2e when they all got hit points, and used Thac0.
__________________ "..Death greets me warm; Now I will just say goodbye.."
If you play a fighter, than a wizard and still think the classes are the same, you're probably not paying attention.
Oh no, I agree completely. The fighter and the wizard play quite differently.
I also think that the numbers 7 and 12 are very different. But when I'm used to comparing 1 and 100, the space between 7 and 12 seems much smaller.
Quote:
Every character using the same system for their abilities doesn't do the slightest thing to discourage versatility or a varied play experience. Ask a Warmachine player about how different warcasters are, and then bring up that they all must be similar because they use the same rules. Then watch him laugh at you.
I agree with this. But 4E goes beyond the same system.
__________________ It was one of those nights when you turn out the lights, and everything comes into view
The combat system should be based on the world design. The world design should not be based on the combat system.
My 4 year old ties a towel to her shoulders and pretends to be a superhero. Roleplaying is not between the covers of a book.
As an extension of that, if you tell me that any game is the same just because you roleplay the same, then as far as I am concerned, you don't get the point.
"I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal." - A 4E fan
"I've got to have all that, but I require intelligent conversation as well." - Me
Those appear to be decent efforts to undo the problem. But there is such vastly superior starting points out there that it doesn't matter.
__________________ It was one of those nights when you turn out the lights, and everything comes into view
The combat system should be based on the world design. The world design should not be based on the combat system.
My 4 year old ties a towel to her shoulders and pretends to be a superhero. Roleplaying is not between the covers of a book.
As an extension of that, if you tell me that any game is the same just because you roleplay the same, then as far as I am concerned, you don't get the point.
"I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal." - A 4E fan
"I've got to have all that, but I require intelligent conversation as well." - Me
I agree with this. But 4E goes beyond the same system.
This is something I'll have to disagree with you, unless I'm not understanding your statements. The powers and abilities of every class are extremely different, to the point that you can look at the effects of two given powers and have a really good idea as to what class they belong to without it being stated. I really would like to know what you mean when you say the system is homogenous though. It seems that most posters think you mean "every class plays the same," although this is obviously not the case.
Perhaps, if you wish to actually contribute to a solution oriented discussion, you will quit offering shallow preconceptions of your own regarding other people's experience with the game you enjoy. Because, you are wrong. Deeply wrong.
The OP pretty clearly implied that 4th Edition was homogeneous and lacked complexity, which (apparently) everyone here but you and the OP disagrees with.
Our point is that though all characters are rooted in the same system, each of them plays in a very distinct manner which strikes a nice balance between depth of characterization and ease of learning and play.
__________________ Tales from the Rusty Dragon - A 4th Edition Conversion Blog Covering Paizo's Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path
I'm sorry, but I'm going to need a bit of clarification on this. In what way to you see 4e's mechanics as being homogeneous, and how is this a bad thing?
Sorry, but I've been through this easily a hundred times in the past two years.
There are people who can see it and people who can't. But recycling the argument all over again isn't going to be productive.
I was stupid and starting responding here because I was called out in the OP.
I should not have.
I am truly glad that 4E provides a great, fun experience for many people.
There are also a great many people who find it homogeneous and underwhelming.
The other thread was not about how to fix 4E. It was about how to make a product that would attract people who are no longer sending cash WotC's way. I answered that question. I'm not interested in fixing 4E. I'm happy with my games and I'm going that direction.
If *you* want to bring more people into the game you love, you may want to consider an open-minded assessment of what some people do find wrong with it. But you have no obligation there.
__________________ It was one of those nights when you turn out the lights, and everything comes into view
The combat system should be based on the world design. The world design should not be based on the combat system.
My 4 year old ties a towel to her shoulders and pretends to be a superhero. Roleplaying is not between the covers of a book.
As an extension of that, if you tell me that any game is the same just because you roleplay the same, then as far as I am concerned, you don't get the point.
"I just want D&D to run smoothly, palpate my gamer gland, and bring the metal." - A 4E fan
"I've got to have all that, but I require intelligent conversation as well." - Me
If *you* want to bring more people into the game you love, you may want to consider an open-minded assessment of what some people do find wrong with it. But you have no obligation there.
I don't understand how I've been anything but open minded. I really do want to know where the core of the homogeneous argument comes from, and I've yet to hear an argument that forms an actual argument and isn't just a buzzword. I haven't seen your arguments, and I'd like to have an actual discussion on the matter. There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding as to what you mean, and I'd like it cleared up. I'm asking for a simple definition, not a dissertation on RPG design. Believe me, I've got a very open mind about gaming as a whole, and pidgeonhole myself to a specific game or system. There are a lot of asinine arguments on both ends of the edition war, and they're difficult to filter out at times. I'll never claim 4e is perfect, and I'll be the first one to say there are things I'd do differently, but I still play the game and don't see it as being this often derided, childish MMO boardgame that it's claimed to be.
I like hearing opposing statements, as I may learn something from them, or at least see a perspective that I may not on my own.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
