D&D 4E 4E sceptics - what do you like?

[Lizard]

There's a lot of things I like, they're just counterbalanced by things I don't.

Racial choices mattering for the life of a character -- at least this was a design goal, don't know if it's still in there.

More cool options for non-magic classes. But I think people who like playing wizards will be disappointed they have no more options, numerically, than the fighter does.

'Healing surges' as a tactical resource. This means everyone has a 'no more today' limit; the fighter doesn't feel like the wizard is a drag, or everyone stops when the cleric runs out. Just wish they didn't basically eliminate all wounding, even in flavor text, from the game.

Maybe multiclassing -- we'll need to see, but 'dip style' multiclassing actually models most character concepts better than previous styles.

Social encounter -- there's still some oddities to it, but multi-success systems are something I like a lot.

Power Sources -- I like the idea of distinguishing classes more by source of power than by different resource management strategies. I'm very interested in new power sources and if there will by 'hybrid' sources, like a true swordmage class (Martial/Arcane)

Monster levels -- I really like the minion/standard/elite/solo concept as a way of creating different challenges in the same level band. Throwing a higher CR monster at a party is often a recipe for TPK (or sometimes, cakewalk). This is something which might be interesting to back-engineer for 3x, possibly via templates.

Death rules: Love the new death&dying rules. Am using them in 3x.

Rituals: In theory, I like them, but since we know so little about them, I think people are projecting a lot of their hopes and dreams onto the system. I don't want them to be either plot devices or things Joe Shmoe can pick up trivially.

Still complex: A lot of things have been grossly oversimplified, but there's still plenty of interesting interactions and lots of crunchy rules to memorize. Those who expected "D&D As Done By The Forge" probably lost faith about the time the Rogue preview was posted.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Right, two more I nearly forgot...

- The supposed changes in focus from Heroic to Paragon to Epic levels. If it's pulled off right, it could be a flashback to Basic D&D, where your character's focus widened with every box.

- The multiclassing could be very interesting. I've tried to come up with feats to convey class abilities (in minor ways, though) for 3E fairly early after I noticed that the multiclassing system there had some effects I didn't like so much.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

'Healing surges' as a tactical resource. This means everyone has a 'no more today' limit; the fighter doesn't feel like the wizard is a drag, or everyone stops when the cleric runs out. Just wish they didn't basically eliminate all wounding, even in flavor text, from the game.
.

If there is one thing that will keep me from picking up 3e it's this. I don't want regeneration in my games - except for trolls and the like.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

"Skeptic" doesn't describe me -- "Not going to 4E" does.

That said, I like the following:
Some of the flavor (Feywild, Shadowfell, Elder Evils, Points of Light)
Removal of iterative attacks
Less variation in Fort/Ref/Will defenses between the good classes and the bad ones at high levels
Apparent reduction in buffing combos
Removal of stat-boosting items for Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha
The general concept of a fighter guarding his allies - not sure about the exact mechanics

 

[Aus_Snow]

Great thread, GR.

OK, I'm not buying 4e, but I've been a sceptic all along, and still am.

Let me see. . . hm. . .

• Points of light as an 'implied setting' of sorts - this meshes well with some of my sensibilities and tendencies as a DM.
• The gutting of Vancian. Even should they keep some remnants and jiggle them around for chuckles, it's better than the full-blown thing. I've already mucked around with alternatives in 3e/d20, many a time in many a way, so again, this decision itself suits me well enough.
• No Gnomes. I just hate them, is all. I also don't care about Half-Orcs, so yeah, good call.
• Apparently cutting down the range on most ranged weapons. . . and other attacks? Well, the weapons part of that is good and sensible, anyway.
• 'Blooded'. This reminds me of my house rules, once again. Except for the fact that I divided HP into 4 sections, not 2. Well, 5 really, but at the 5th, you're pretty stuffed.
• More HP at 1st level - see my house rules, again. The two main reasons I did this were: a) having 4 wound categories; and b) adding in 'real wounds', bleeding, critical effects and suchlike. So, different reasons mostly, but similar decisions. . . in some regards, at least.
• Action points. I have fate points, which work quite a bit differently, but are essentially the same kind of narrativist aid.
• Fixed HP increases beyond 1st level. See house rules, once more (I went with average + Con bonus.)

There might be a few more I'm forgetting. If so, I'll add them later.

 

[Celebrim]

1) More hit points at first level. This helps fix the 'Are housecats too dangerous to keep as pets?' problem.
2) Sustaining many spells requires a minor action. It's an elegant solution to the problem of spell buffs.
3) Amount of (magical) healing scales with level. It's never made alot of sense that 'Cure Light Wounds' cures the serious wounds of a 1st level character, but cures only the minor hurts of a higher level one.
4) More powerful racial templates to allow 'LA +0' races to have more character.
5) Better balance between the classes, although, I don't like the approach taken to achieve it.
6) Some elements of the setting, the 'Underworld/Shadowworld' being a plane of its own rather than just caves, and the close proximity of the the Faerie world with the normal setting more strongly resemble my own Dunsany/Grimm/Tolkien/Lovecraft inspired setting. That gives me some hope that the fluff might be usable in some cases. However, not much because the definition of heroism of 4E seems to be inspired by El Marachi, the Matrix, wuxia, and anime and thinks 'Die Hard' is gritty. Whereas, my take on heroism is more inspired by Homer and Tolkien, and thinks the girl that cut her own finger off so she could have something to pick a lock with is gritty.

Points #1, #2, #3, and #4 are important enough and interesting enough that they've made me contemplate changes in my own rules.

 

[pawsplay]

At one time I would have said "simpler maths," but the huge increase in exception cases pretty much nullified that for me. Honestly, at this point, I think normalizing BAB and defenses across classes is it.

 

[Celebrim]

The supposed changes in focus from Heroic to Paragon to Epic levels. If it's pulled off right, it could be a flashback to Basic D&D, where your character's focus widened with every box.

There are alot of elements of the design that remind me of a flashback to Basic D&D. Since there are alot of people who really like the 'classic D&D' rules, that isn't going to be a bad thing for everyone.

 

[Erithtotl]

Delete: Double post.

 

[Erithtotl]

I think what is so frustrating about what I've seen for 4e (and I'm trying to withhold final judgement until it's released), is that so many of the changes it is making were necessary but they are coming with a whole bunch which I think suck the flavor out of D&D and make this another game entirely. But many of the core 'ideas' I like and would want in my own game.

1) Simplified monster creation: While I still want the option to create a 10th level fighter naga, I like the idea that I can quickly assemble an encounter without needing dozens of largely meaningless stats.

2) Better balance at first level.

3) Distinct difference between heroes and everyone else. Solves the 12th level commoner problem.

4) Combat and non-combat roles for everyone. I think this is great, but I think the consistency between classes has gone over-the-top and is threatening to make classes completely bland.

5) Points of light. Yeah I like this too, though it's largely fluff that anyone could implement.

6) Reduction of magic item importance. Remains to be seen if this will actually come through, but I'm a big fan of this.

7) Reduction in number of spells and spell choice. One of the biggest timekillers in the game as everyone paws through 4 books trying to find the perfect spell, and then figure out how it works in combat. Unfortunately I think they may be going too far, and designing this around just flooding us with more spells in future supplements.