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

pemerton said:

I will repost LostSoul's post that makes this point as clearly as I believe it can be made, about the sequence of fiction and mechanics in 4e compared to other editions (he focuses particularly on 3E, but I think the point generalises):

Click to expand...

Okay I realize this isn't your quote but I'm finding it hard to parse exactly what is meant. So when I look in the 4e DMG pg. 64 there is a chart that lists DC's to climb or Break Through Walls. It lists a 6in thick wooden wall as a DC 26 to break and a natural stone wall (3ft thick) as a DC 43 to break. Is the contention that I can't measure how much closer I get to being able to break stone walls vs. wooden by looking at the bonuses I am receiving in Athletics skill?? If so that doesn't seem right.

Imaro said:

I don't think I necessarily disagree in a general sense... just not a big fan of Howard's Conan as the be all and end all of sword and sorcery (which seems to happen alot when the genre is brought up on these boards) when there is so much more to the genre... also while I can appreciate Howard's work I found Moorcock, Lieber, Saunders and a few other just more to my tastes as enjoyable reads and with less to none of the more unsavory aspects of Howard's writings.

Click to expand...

hey there is one I havent read (Charles Saunders)

I will say I meant out of the box... because I am certain we can "make" it Sword and Sorcery feeling with player buy in and/or limits.. I do not think the hero party works too well in it either (badass teamwork needs to be cut down to 2 man).

Lanefan said:

Yes, any character could try this at very limited odds of success.

Click to expand...

How so?
Would you write it so you had a penalty on the jump check? Wouldn't that reduce the overall odds of success and thus negate the bonus conferred by using the pole in the first place?
Or would it be a check to use it, which then conferred a bonus?

Lanefan said:

Yes and yes. The class ability and-or the feat serve only to improve your odds of success from poor to very good.
Improvement of the chance of success. With the feat/ability you can count pole-vaulting as one of your more reliable tricks. Without it, it's only something you'd do in desperation.

Click to expand...

A *good* feature does that. And not every feature is necessarily well written. When you have a deadline for putting out 75 feats, sometimes you just need to meet the quota.
But then that makes you wonder what the penalty is for trying it without the feat. So that typically adds codification and a rule that needs to be looked up...

Garthanos said:

Pole Vaulting? are we doing it out of combat or in a low stress situation? Is it an improvised tool or one designed for it with nice spring and the right length. Generally speaking its a tool for bonus to jumping someone can use it without training and get a circumstance bonus for an individual jump.

Click to expand...

Either or.
Aladdin pole vaulting between rooftops he can't jump between springs to mind

Jester David said:

A *good* feature does that. And not every feature is necessarily well written. When you have a deadline for putting out 75 feats, sometimes you just need to meet the quota.
But then that makes you wonder what the penalty is for trying it without the feat. So that typically adds codification and a rule that needs to be looked up...

Click to expand...

Agreed its something that one has to take care when implementing.

Jester David said:

Either or.
Aladdin pole vaulting between rooftops he can't jump between springs to mind

Click to expand...

Yes and that could be handled similarly to the bog jumping and similar I mentioned earlier (if he is in a chase so the enemy is making it difficult and urgent) and
it could become another terrain type adaption (I mentioned bogs --- ie the city skyline could be another) one could gain practice in (or add to the list of terrains
a fly ritual is powerful it by passes the majority of terrains).

Imaro said:

I don't think I necessarily disagree in a general sense... just not a big fan of Howard's Conan as the be all and end all of sword and sorcery (which seems to happen alot when the genre is brought up on these boards) when there is so much more to the genre... also while I can appreciate Howard's work I found Moorcock, Lieber, Saunders and a few other just more to my tastes as enjoyable reads and with less to none of the more unsavory aspects of Howard's writings.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Though there are heavy SnS elements to settings like Greyhawk, when this work backwards, using a D&D system for a SnS setting, then the fit becomes incredibly awkward and cumbersome. This is one of the problems I have, for example, regarding using 5e or even Pathfinder for Primeval Thule. It seems that there are far better rule systems than D&D 5e for the sort of SnS world Primeval Thule wishes to evoke. I would probably consult Savage Worlds, Warhammer, PbtA/Blades in the Dark, and a few other systems first, including even Blue Rose AGE.

That said, it does seem weird to me that in the larger-than-life epic heroic fantasy of D&D, the martial capabilities and physical prowess of the fighter seem restricted to a greater degree than similar martial characters of the SnS genre. Or we may perhaps more appropriately say that the "fantasy" of the fighter does not grow in equal proportion to wizards. This is not strictly speaking a matter of mechanical Linear/Quadratic power, but of the class fantasy. As [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] posted earlier, the imagined fantasy essentially entails "take more hits" and "make more hits" as opposed to the wizard wielding cosmic powers of the universe. Magic items should probably not be regarded as a great "equalizer" given how magic-wielding characters likewise have access to magic items.

Incidentally, it seems as if Pathfinder 2 likewise views this as an issue that presents cognitive dissonance given how the capability of skills were stated as being expanded to permit fighters and rogues to perform more fantastical physical feats the combined skill tier and level system.

Aldarc said:

Agreed. Though there are heavy SnS elements to settings like Greyhawk, when this work backwards, using a D&D system for a SnS setting, then the fit becomes incredibly awkward and cumbersome. This is one of the problems I have, for example, regarding using 5e or even Pathfinder for Primeval Thule. It seems that there are far better rule systems than D&D 5e for the sort of SnS world Primeval Thule wishes to evoke. I would probably consult Savage Worlds, Warhammer, PbtA/Blades in the Dark, and a few other systems first, including even Blue Rose AGE.

That said, it does seem weird to me that in the larger-than-life epic heroic fantasy of D&D, the martial capabilities and physical prowess of the fighter seem restricted to a greater degree than similar martial characters of the SnS genre. Or we may perhaps more appropriately say that the "fantasy" of the fighter does not grow in equal proportion to wizards. This is not strictly speaking a matter of mechanical Linear/Quadratic power, but of the class fantasy. As [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] posted earlier, the imagined fantasy essentially entails "take more hits" and "make more hits" as opposed to the wizard wielding cosmic powers of the universe. Magic items should probably not be regarded as a great "equalizer" given how magic-wielding characters likewise have access to magic items.

Incidentally, it seems as if Pathfinder 2 likewise views this as an issue that presents cognitive dissonance given how the capability of skills were stated as being expanded to permit fighters and rogues to perform more fantastical physical feats the combined skill tier and level system.

Click to expand...

Being a nearly unkillable dealer of death is a very primal human fantasy. Look how obsessed people get in pop culture with dudes whose superpower is being really good at shooting things with a bow: the Green Arrow, Legolas, Hawkeye, etc. All of whom would fit the Fighter role in D&D well, and are major foci of wish fulfillment fantasy. I understand that not everyone thinks getting off twelve arrows in 12 seconds is epic...but try doing that sometime.

Aldarc said:

Agreed. Though there are heavy SnS elements to settings like Greyhawk, when this work backwards, using a D&D system for a SnS setting, then the fit becomes incredibly awkward and cumbersome. This is one of the problems I have, for example, regarding using 5e or even Pathfinder for Primeval Thule. It seems that there are far better rule systems than D&D 5e for the sort of SnS world Primeval Thule wishes to evoke. I would probably consult Savage Worlds, Warhammer, PbtA/Blades in the Dark, and a few other systems first, including even Blue Rose AGE.

That said, it does seem weird to me that in the larger-than-life epic heroic fantasy of D&D, the martial capabilities and physical prowess of the fighter seem restricted to a greater degree than similar martial characters of the SnS genre. Or we may perhaps more appropriately say that the "fantasy" of the fighter does not grow in equal proportion to wizards. This is not strictly speaking a matter of mechanical Linear/Quadratic power, but of the class fantasy. As [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] posted earlier, the imagined fantasy essentially entails "take more hits" and "make more hits" as opposed to the wizard wielding cosmic powers of the universe. Magic items should probably not be regarded as a great "equalizer" given how magic-wielding characters likewise have access to magic items.

Incidentally, it seems as if Pathfinder 2 likewise views this as an issue that presents cognitive dissonance given how the capability of skills were stated as being expanded to permit fighters and rogues to perform more fantastical physical feats the combined skill tier and level system.

Click to expand...

Well to be honest many of the martial heroes in sword and sorcery fiction do tend to hit harder, do more damage, take more damage. There are a few who surpass this but it's usually through magic... Elric, Gray Mouser... or through some kind of mystical armament/curse...Kane the Immortal, Corum... and even though it's often presented as dangerous (this is a major part I think D&D needs to rethink for a real sword and sorcery feel) sorcery is usually pretty powerful in SnS stories. I think earlier edition had some of the feel of the danger and unpredictability of SnS magic... but it has been scrubbed away in later editions.

This is an excellent example, to which you can easily add villains (Bullseye, Deadshot), medieval figures (Robin Hood), and Greek Epics (Odysseus), and so on. Many many stories are "good brawn vs. evil magic". Many stories involving Knights are might-makes-right, and magic (or even archery) is "cheating". Wait, where was I going with this...

As a GM and a player, I want the person playing the fighter to have as many options at his or her command as the person playing the wizard. in 3e, that was provided by Tome of Battle: Book of Nine Swords (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tome_of_Battle:_The_Book_of_Nine_Swords). 4e built it into the system, and I loved it. The Iron Heroes rule system had a similar concept, one since mirrored by Pathfinder's giving most classes "Talents" so they can diverge internally from others, and have cool things they can do. IMC, the warforged fighter is an axe-and-shield juggernaut, shoving (or luring) foes around the field and physically tossing his allies to safer locations. The ranger is all about moving himself or his enemies around, switching fluidly between swords and his bow as needs change, and occasionally pinning them in place for the fighter to beat on. The cleric functions more as a "warlord" healing and doing minimal damage, but tagging the next enemy for the warriors to kill. And the two wizards merrily blast things and screw up my battlefield with control spells. Everyone has *several* somethings fun and interesting to do. One player has actually stated that his favorite part of playing the game is when he does something creative - not because he was creative, but because he loves the inevitable >sigh< that escapes me as I realize my plans or neat encounter or BBEG power have just been foiled or neutralized.

In previous editions, the fighter says "I hit it. Wait, I'm 16th level... I swing 4 times, I hit it twice." The ranger says "I shoot it." The cleric says "Anyone need healing? No? Okay, I hit it." The wizards then spend 30 minutes pondering which of their 30 spells is most appropriate to the situation. [Yes, I know, a well-played cleric has the same potential spell choices.]

Imaro said:

Well to be honest many of the martial heroes in sword and sorcery fiction do tend to hit harder, do more damage, take more damage. There are a few who surpass this but it's usually through magic... Elric, Gray Mouser... or through some kind of mystical armament/curse...Kane the Immortal, Corum... and even though it's often presented as dangerous (this is a major part I think D&D needs to rethink for a real sword and sorcery feel) sorcery is usually pretty powerful in SnS stories. I think earlier edition had some of the feel of the danger and unpredictability of SnS magic... but it has been scrubbed away in later editions.

Click to expand...

I've mentioned Dungeon Crawl Classics, but that approach to magic as a dangerous and unpredictable d20 skill check is great. Indeed, as far as genre emulation, I haven't seen anything as solid as DCC. Though 5E is better at being "D&D" still, a special unique genre all it's own.

Parmandur said:

Being a nearly unkillable dealer of death is a very primal human fantasy. Look how obsessed people get in pop culture with dudes whose superpower is being really good at shooting things with a bow: the Green Arrow, Legolas, Hawkeye, etc. All of whom would fit the Fighter role in D&D well, and are major foci of wish fulfillment fantasy. I understand that not everyone thinks getting off twelve arrows in 12 seconds is epic...but try doing that sometime.

Click to expand...

I agree to an extent. The fighter can satisfy some of that fantasy. As you reiterate, they can take and make hits well. Where I, and perhaps others in this thread, take issue lies in the how.

First, being able to take hits when that is expressed almost entirely in HP or AC is mostly passive. In contrast, for example, a wizard can throw up a Shield spell to adjust their AC. This does not strike me as particularly interesting in terms of imaginging a high level class fantasy of the fighter. Second Wind is probably one of the more active abilities for fighters in this regard. So here I would invite you to consider with me how we could express "unkillable" in more active ways other than HP and AC, particularly for a higher level class fantasy for non-spellcasters.

Second, "being really good at shooting things with a bow" often entails a lot more than shooting quickly and accurately, but also a variety of trick shots (or even trick arrows) that empowers these sharpshooters to have more narrative control than they would otherwise. Their abilities are also often accompanied by other associated feats of physical prowess (e.g., freakish athleticism, "hawkeyed" sight, etc.). It's also hardly a coincidence that a lot of the mundane or non-powered heroes are often ones that have other accompanying narrative benefits (e.g., the power of being SUPER RICH). But one basic fantasy for these archer archetypes is the ricochet shot. Can a 5e fighter archer perform a ricochet shot around corners? Can a 5e archer aim or make a called shot that expresses their capacity to hit with their arrows on a more localized location? To the best of my knowledge, no. The best bet would be to create a subclass or a BM maneuver capable of doing it.

This is likely why the 5e Battlemaster is regarded as the best fighter subclass. The maneuvers provide the greatest amount of narrative control options, at least in combat, for many mundane classes. But it is one subclass for one class. But this is baked into the BM subclass as opposed to the proper Fighter class. And whereas magic users typically receive more new spell options in new books, the BM maneuvers don't. A trend that is mostly par for the course when it comes to martial options. (New feats and subclasses are something equally available for magical classes.) And uncoincidentally, the 5e battlemaster is probably one of the most 4e like archetypes in the 5e game.