D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked

Li Shenron · Nov 7, 2018

Mearls said:
I’m a little angry at myself for not looting more of the at-will powers [for 5E]

They can still "loot" older editions powers/abilities and turn them into 5e feats, subclass features, spells, or something else.

OTOH I definitely hated the power sources hard categorization. It's too nerdy, bordering OCD, and fundamentally redundant. But if you really like it, it's easy to add the concept to any edition without imposing it to everyone else.

pemerton · Nov 7, 2018

Jester David said:
The champion fighter in my 5e game is often the mvp. The more complicated battle master is also often the best damage dealer and most effective PC, dependant on the rolls.

Are you talking especially about combat? That's the impression I'm getting because of your emphasis on damage dealing.

Parmandur said:
If the Champion Fighter is a rugged outdoorsman with a decent Charisma, then yeah, very easy to be the driver in all three pillars.

What party composition do you have in mind? Eg I would assume its easier to build a "social pillar driver" as a bard, sorcerer, wizard or warlock than as a champion fighter.

Parmandur said:
Mearls spoke to 4E again on his Twitch show today: one of the issues in real terms he brings up, was the game style you mention was always dominant. He said that 4E was the best edition ever...for the given playstyle that was being attempted. But that isn't what most people were doing or looking for.

Sorry, I'm getting confused a bit because the style I mentioned was one for which I think 4e doesn't offer anything, namely, "there aren't any such decisions for the players to make, because eg the GM makes them all by manipulating pacing, outcomes, etc behind the screen, ensuring every PC build gets some spotlight, etc".

If Mearls is saying that 4e supported that style and only that style then I think he's radically confused about the game - I've never seen anyone who likes that style praise 4e, let alone point to 4e as a good fit for it.

If Mearls is saying that 4e didn't support that style, and hence wasn't popular with the large number of RPGers who enjoy that style, then I would agree with him.

dwayne · Nov 7, 2018

I find is sad that most players need things spelled out for them or spell casters as well, partly why i loved 2nd edition was that it left room for improvisation and the GM to let it happen. Later editions seemed to get bogged down in rules and trying to balance classes with each other when they really should not be, too many rules to the point you need a power or a feat to do something like stand up without getting hit in combat "say dex roll DC if you make it you don't get hit", as an example. I liked doing and making calls like this when my players would think of new ways to use a spell or a fighter trying something in combat, I still do it i use the rules that work and fix those that don't.

UngeheuerLich · Nov 7, 2018

pemerton said:
Asymmetrical desgin "works" only if the GM manipulates pacing so as to ensure a certain number of resource-soaking encounters per "adventuring day". In 5e it is 6 to 8 (with 2 short rests on the way through). I don't believe that 4e has a published figure anywhere, but many people seem to think that it is about 4 (with a short rest between each).

One of the very powerful features of 4e for me as a GM is that the GM does not need to railroad the players through a certain amount of "plot" between rests in order to maintain intraparty mechanical balance.

Whereas many critics of 4e describe it as "hyperbalanced", it is in fact incredibly forgiving at nearly every level of balance - the single opponent level, the encounter level, the pacing level, etc. All because of the symmetrical player-side resource suites.

I played 4e as long as it was running, and I found everyone having the same resources at any time very boring after a while. There was no tension and resource management because everyone knew when to use which power. And often there was just encounter, encounter, maybe a daily and at will at will. It doesn´t matter which enemy. Not everyone having the same schedule makes things interesting, but as I said, when essentials hit, those that like the AEDU structure were disappointed.

Sadras · Nov 7, 2018

pemerton said:
Also, Conan is typically able to kill a lich in one blow. In AD&D a lich has 11 8-sided HD. No one-blow kills for AD&D Conan!

Sounds like 4e didn't fix this particular issue for you, unless of course you want to minionise the lich.

Sadras · Nov 7, 2018

UngeheuerLich said:
There was no tension and resource management because everyone knew when to use which power. And often there was just encounter, encounter, maybe a daily and at will at will. It doesn´t matter which enemy. Not everyone having the same schedule makes things interesting ...(snip)...

I had the same experience in 4e. Having characters on different resource clocks, such as in 5e, provides additional stresses and decision points.

I found, the primary issue with 5e was that if one wanted to put stress on the resource management side of things one needed to ensure the recovery system (rest) used, worked for short/long rest PCS AND for dungeon, city and travel type adventures. For my table the rest mechanics that were offered in the PHB and DMG were just not practical in all the abovementioned categories all the time.

pemerton · Nov 7, 2018

UngeheuerLich said:
I played 4e as long as it was running, and I found everyone having the same resources at any time very boring after a while. There was no tension and resource management because everyone knew when to use which power. And often there was just encounter, encounter, maybe a daily and at will at will. It doesn´t matter which enemy.

Personally I find this quite odd, for multiple reasons.

I've GMed AD&D games with all "martial" PCs - eg all warriors in OA, all thieves in KotB/City of GH. Those games didn't become boring because all the players had similar resource suites. What is interesting is not inventory management, but deciding what to do to engage the present situation.

And in our 4e game, it's never been the case that "everyone knows when to use which power". Eg deciding which NPC to dominate, or when to pull in a group of enemies, or when to heal, has been pretty significant. And it has certainly mattered which enemy is targetted by which power! To be completely blunt, you seem to be describing a very uninteresting game - if the only or principal interest is going to arise from deciding who should sleep when!

Sadras said:
Sounds like 4e didn't fix this particular issue for you, unless of course you want to minionise the lich.

It fixed it perfectly well precisely because there is a mechanical framework for minionisation!

Likewise the were-hyenas can be handled as a swarm. (Which an appropriately-built fighter can carve apart using close bursts.)

Sadras · Nov 7, 2018

pemerton said:
Also, Conan is typically able to kill a lich in one blow. In AD&D a lich has 11 8-sided HD. No one-blow kills for AD&D Conan!

pemerton said:
It fixed it perfectly well precisely because there is a mechanical framework for minionisation!

11d8 allows for an 11hp lich. As you mentioned above the fighter has two attacks a round. 11 points of damage is very doable even for an AD&D fighter. The example is as ridiculous as minionising a lich.

Cergorach · Nov 7, 2018

The 4e we ended up designing lost a lot of thematic power concepts

That was imho 4E's biggest issue, a lack of theme. The game mechanics were strong and clean, but the core books had about as much personality as a doorknob (none). I bought everyone of my old gaming group a 4E PHB, got heavily invested in the books, but any motivation I had for DMing 4E was quickly drained by the clinical nature of the rules. I even attempted to get other adventure settings/adventures converted to 4E, but due to the mechanical nature of 4E, I got quickly bogged down in number crunching mode. Eventually I threw up my hands and had the realisation, why try to convert an old D&D/Pathfinder adventure to 4E, when I can just DM Pathfinder. The issue there was that it wasn't D&D and that threw up some obstacles for the rest of the group... Eventually we got back together for some 5e gaming, but life being life, we're now stuck on a 'once in a blue moon' schedule of board games... Being adults sucks! (And I've been one for a while now!) ;-)

pemerton · Nov 7, 2018

Sadras said:
11d8 allows for an 11hp lich.

The odds of rolling 11 1s on 11d8 is 2 ^ 33, or less than 1 in a billion.

4e has a systematic device for setting the status of a creature, and has a resolution system (the skill challenge) that can be used for determining whether or not that device is deployed.

There is simply no comparison between AD&D and 4e in these respects. (More generally: is it really the case both that AD&D does everything 4e does, and that 4e change the game so horribly that no one wanted to play it?)

D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked

Li Shenron

Legend

pemerton

Legend

dwayne

Adventurer

UngeheuerLich

Legend

Sadras

Legend

Sadras

Legend

pemerton

Legend

Sadras

Legend

Cergorach

The Laughing One

pemerton

Legend

Similar Threads

Related Articles

Latest threads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Upcoming Releases