Living 4th Edition Discussion Thread

Bront · Aug 21, 2008

Sweet, the day before my birthday

Be aware though, if you want to start on the 15th, that means you need characters and adventures approved by then. That might be a better "Open for proposals and characters" date than an actual start date. Give that a week, and then actualy open the doors.

Or, you could open the proposal date on the 8th, and the 15th for actual game play.

covaithe · Aug 21, 2008

Personally, I think we're almost ready to open for character submissions now. Graf and others have been doing great work on the Transitive Isles setting proposal; so much so that I think very soon it will be complete enough that we can vote on whether to go ahead with it or keep working on other proposals.

I'd like to have another go at the character sheet template, but honestly we could get started without a final decision on that. We need to nail down the regional benefits, but I think we're pretty nearly done with that, too.

If people wanted to start working on characters now, it would probably not be premature.

Atanatotatos · Aug 21, 2008

by the way, did we vote on regional benefits?

covaithe · Aug 21, 2008

Atanatotatos said:
by the way, did we vote on regional benefits?

No, not yet. I'm not sure they need a separate vote, or if they can just be rolled into the setting proposal. There hasn't yet been any strong objection (that I'm aware of -- please correct me if I'm wrong!) to the idea of having regional benefits, though there has been some moderately vigorous debate on the details of specific benefits.

Atanatotatos · Aug 21, 2008

Well, I, for one, oppose having regional benefits at all. 4e is very strict about bonuses and such, and I think they're not really fair. Not particularly needed, too.
I'd also like to mention another balance issue. I believe paragon multiclassing needs house rules to make it less unfairly weak compared to paragon paths. I propose the character multiclassing gets one class feature of the secondary class when he switches the at-will (for example, combat challenge, implement mastery, sneak attack, etc.).
What do you guys think?

garyh · Aug 21, 2008

No regional benefits would certainly be one way to make sure the options are balanced.

As for multi-class house rules, I'm hesistant to go for that just yet. I haven't given a ton of thought to paragon multiclassing, but that main reason, really, is that it won't matter for L4E until our first character hits level 11. So, I see that as something we can take up once the games are going, if we feel the need, instead of worrying about it while we're trying to get everything else started.

covaithe · Aug 21, 2008

I agree. Balance issues at level 11+ is something I'm not remotely qualified to comment on at the moment, and I'm perfectly happy to have a good excuse to postpone thinking about it.

As for regional benefits, if you feel that strongly about them I suppose we should vote on them as a proper proposal separate from the setting proposal. And make sure that one of the options is "no regional benefits". I kind of vaguely like regional benefits myself, but I can see there being some good arguments against them. Not least of which is the fact that they penalize players who want to do something creative and unexpected with their background.

The Goblin King · Aug 21, 2008

Atanatotatos said:
Well, I, for one, oppose having regional benefits at all. 4e is very strict about bonuses and such, and I think they're not really fair. Not particularly needed, too.

What if they were regional feats that could only be taken at 1st level? That might be more fair.

I'd also like to mention another balance issue. I believe paragon multiclassing needs house rules to make it less unfairly weak compared to paragon paths. I propose the character multiclassing gets one class feature of the secondary class when he switches the at-will (for example, combat challenge, implement mastery, sneak attack, etc.).
What do you guys think?

I think this is a deliberate design decision made in reaction to the multiclassing nonsense that 3.5 became. To be fair I think they shouldn't have kept the name and called it Dual Classing instead. Hopefully, the class books will adress the multiclassing issues. I know Warlock certainly needs it.

Erekose13 · Aug 21, 2008

I think we'll need a tutorial on creating characters for the wiki. I've never done any wiki work before and while I've created my first character (stats only) in notepad, I have no clue how to add him in there. I have used the template so I know he'll come out right and will have lots of feedback on changes to the template now that I've used it a bit. But I'd like to put him up and test some things.

garyh · Aug 21, 2008

The Goblin King said:
What if they were regional feats that could only be taken at 1st level? That might be more fair.

I think the feat idea is fine. I think if we go that way we should strengthen them a bit above what they are now (since right now the aim was to be minor bonuses), to be even with the average feat.