D&D 4E 4e With No Casters?

[pukunui]

One of the nice things about the roles is that they let you play around with power sources without messing up the basic structure of the game. You can totally do a no magic game with the PH by sticking to the fighter, rogue, warlord, and ranger. You wouldn't have a controller, but it is possible to create a martial one.

You can also roll things back another step and do some crazy stuff with the structure of the classes. Since many of the elements of character progression are unified, you could run classless D&D by allowing players to select maneuvers and spells from any class they want, mingling the two together, or start everyone with access to all heroic abilities and grant access to divine and arcane via feats.

The really nice thing is that this structure allows you to better depict many classic D&D settings and fantasy worlds. You can run pre-War of the Lance adventures in Dragonlance without clerics. You could run Conan with just the heroic classes for PCs and NPC spellcasters as villains and allies.

The one stumbling block is that the game expects fighters to wear heavy armor, but you could get around that by building a simple house rule (a fighter in light armor gets a flat bonus to AC to make up the gap).

Hey that's pretty cool. Quite a bit of useful info there ...

1) Rangers won't have spells
2) 4e rules are super customizable
a) it will be easy to increase or decrease magic use in a campaign (eg. high-, low-, no-magic campaigns now possible with the core rules)
b) it will easy to customize classes (eg. just replace fighter's heavy armor dependency with flat AC bonus)
3) An adventuring party without a "healer" is a viable option (you can in the Dragonlance setting during the time when there were no magic-using clerics)

4e is more and more shaping up to be my kind of game! Even the anti-4e people should be getting a little excited by this ... it sounds like 4e will be easy for them to plunder and/or house rule to their heart's content.


@ the OP: you commented on the lack of non-adventuring skills. Although no one at WotC has said anything more than Craft and Profession are gone, that doesn't mean there won't be something to fill the gap. We know there's going to be a social encounter system. It's quite possible there will be some sort of craft/profession/way to earn money thing as well ... it's just that it may not be a "skill". Maybe it's like how there are now spells and rituals. Perhaps there are also skills and something else ... you can do crafting and make money but you don't need a skill, you do it in some other way.

 

[Cadfan]

You wouldn't have a controller, but it is possible to create a martial one.

I guess I lose on this question. I wonder how Mearls envisions a martial controller. Quasi-magical ki user? Or something more mundane, like a reach weapon specialist.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Hmm... With this whole mix-and-match system I can finally create a actually interesting/workable urban-ranger.

 

[Lizard]

But...the wizard remains the only "controler". If the wizard is dropped, the ability to deal with large number of opponents is reduced. That is probably not insurmountable, but has to be considered.

Ah, but in low fantasy type games, you're supposed to flee when the entire city watch is after you, or you face a horde of orcs -- even if you can take them on one-by-one.

It will be interesting if minion-level monsters have some kind of ganging up rule, i.e, +1 to attack and damage for each one that threatens the same opponent over the first.

 

[WhatGravitas]

The really nice thing is that this structure allows you to better depict many classic D&D settings and fantasy worlds. You can run pre-War of the Lance adventures in Dragonlance without clerics. You could run Conan with just the heroic classes for PCs and NPC spellcasters as villains and allies.

The only reason why they don't stick you into the WotC PR section is that we need your crunch. Badly.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Sitara]

One of the nice things about the roles is that they let you play around with power sources without messing up the basic structure of the game. You can totally do a no magic game with the PH by sticking to the fighter, rogue, warlord, and ranger. You wouldn't have a controller, but it is possible to create a martial one.

So the Paladin is still going tohave 'spellcasting' (aka powercasting). Crap! I washoping it owuld be optional at best!

The one stumbling block is that the game expects fighters to wear heavy armor, but you could get around that by building a simple house rule (a fighter in light armor gets a flat bonus to AC to make up the gap).

Dang! See now that takes some freedom away from players. Sure its what every iteration of dnd epects, but even then 4e is supposed to be about options. What if you want light armored fighters? I mean, light armor vs heavy was a HUGE debate of 3E. I had hoped this would be adressed. Is it too late to address this? Or will light armored fighters be forced to take and use the combat expertise/melee defenses feat (or its equivalent, whatever it is)?

Everything else is cool though. Classless dnd was quite interesting, I can understand how it could be done though (I have SAGA),. Thanks for the input Mike!!.

 

[pukunui]

Dang! See now that takes some freedom away from players. Sure its what every iteration of dnd epects, but even then 4e is supposed to be about options. What if you want light armored fighters? I mean, light armor vs heavy was a HUGE debate of 3E. I had hoped this would be adressed. Is it too late to address this? Or will light armored fighters be forced to take and use the combat expertise/melee defenses feat (or its equivalent, whatever it is)?

How is this a problem? Mike's just told you how to have a lightly-armored fighter (give them a flat AC bonus). Easy! Who knows, there might even be little variant rules sidebars in either the PHB or DMG suggesting these very things ...

 

[sirwmholder]

I guess I lose on this question. I wonder how Mearls envisions a martial controller. Quasi-magical ki user? Or something more mundane, like a reach weapon specialist.

Why not a ranged weapon specialist? Someone who can lay down enough suppression fire to make the enemies go prone? or better yet hit the ground in the center of a group of baddies with a large tanglefoot bag. Why would you need magic to accomplish this?


William Holder

 

[Lord Zack]

It makes me happy too, because it suggests Martial Controllers and lightly armored Defenders may be possible. Though if I'm going to allow lightly armored Defenders in a normal campaign like I plan to I'll have figure out some kind of trade off.

 

[Sitara]

Its a problem because its a variant (which will probably not be in the PHB, or even in the DMG). Its easy to houserule sure, but something this important should be taken into consderation in the core. (there should be a way for warriors to be as effective in light armor without houseruling. Maybe they recuperate that AC by moving fast due to light armor or something)