How Mythusmage Would Change D&D for 4th Edition if Wizards Hired Him

[delericho]

Clubs, bands, fraternal orders, and the like a PC can join so long as he meets the qualifications. Organizations provide special training and equipment which will often give a PC member an advantage over non-members of the same Character Class.

However, membership in an organization also entails extra obligations and can mean less free time to go adventuring. Thus less experience resulting in a lower level than a non-member. For example, an 8th level Knight of the Lesser Moon (not a real organization) will be better than a regular 8th level fighter, but by the time the PC in question has reached 8th his compatriots may have reached 10th.

This strikes me as a spectacularly bad idea. Rather than trying to balance a 'good' 8th level character with a 'bad' 10th level character, it seems far wiser to try to keep characters of the same level on a rough par with one another. That way, you can use the level of a character as a guide to the power level of the game, and can very quickly judge the suitability of a module by looking at the cover: "A D&D adventure for 4 5th level PCs".

Two other things: very few groups play through the non-adventuring time. If the Knight of the Lesser Moon has to spend a month of the year dealing with the obligations of his order, most DMs will say "a month passes". So, the balancing restriction you suggest has no meaning.

Furthermore, back in 2nd edition days, each class had a different XP table. Thus, a powerful class advanced more slowly. 3e moved to a unified table, which was a big step forward. You're suggesting a return to 2nd edition - powerful characters advance more slowly - but without even the consistency of having a fixed level progression.

 

[James Heard]

I'd go the other way. Make the books bigger and nonstandard sized, maybe 21x12 1/2 and put holograms on the front of upside down pentagrams, beer, and juicy new "old skool" succubus artwork. In the bindings you could put speakers like they sometimes have in greeting cards, to play some sort of soothing Muzack to lull the unwary into sleep while you're reading the books. As for the pages, tin all the way baby! My grandma has some tin pictures, and those have lasted for almost 150 years. Even if you have to change the batteries what a cool thing it would be to have your 4th edition singing Muzack to your great-great-grandkids! And there should be more recipes and coupons in the book! Maybe we could print the pages backwards and mirrored, so you would have to read it all in front of mirror and see how cool you look! And there should be a hat! A hat of great power! The artwork should be pink on baby blue and all have pictures of ME! And they should fix the bard. Again.




...Man. That was fun to write. Please, don't hit me.

 

[jmucchiello]

How so? You roll, he rolls. Whoever has the higher modified roll wins. In the case of a tie the defender wins. That's complicated?

You have apparently never played GURPS. Attacker makes attack roll. Defender makes defense roll. Combat takes twice as long as it should.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, I gotta voice a "Nay" vote to the opposed rolls idea. Take a fairly high level fighter, say 12th. Now, that fighter can add or subtract a great deal of numbers from his die roll - BAB, Str, buffs, Combat Expertise, Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus, Two Weapon Fighting, and a host of others. Now, the player of that character, if he's on the ball, can do those calculations pretty quickly because he's been playing this character for a while. The DM, who changes critters for nearly every encounter, or at least every adventure, has to keep in mind all of those same adjustments which are slightly different for each critter.

DM then says screw it, and ignores the adjustments most of the time because it's a pain in the behind.

No, fixed DC's are the way to go. It's far easier just to ad hoc a DC once in a while than have to calculate a new DC EVERY attack. DnD combat isn't exactly the speediest thing in the world. Adding a new layer for every attack is just going to slow it down incredibly.

 

[A'koss]

There is one key point on layout I wish WotC would adopt (or at least adopt with consistancy). Pertinent rules should immediately draw your eye. The fluff to elaborate on a rule is fine, but somewhere in there should be the rule broken down into consise point form, preferrably in bold, so that you can "get it" at a glance. Grappling, overruns, attacks of opportunity, skills, spell resistance etc., etc..

Eg. How to make a Spell Resistance check should just leap out at you. Complicated rules should be broken down into consise steps.

.......
.......

Caster Level Check: 1d20 + Caster Level

.......
.......

Step 1: Attack of Opportunity?
Step 2: Make opposed strength check with target.
- Size: +4 ...
Step 3: ...
Step 4: ...

.......
.......

 

[A'koss]

You have apparently never played GURPS. Attacker makes attack roll. Defender makes defense roll. Combat takes twice as long as it should.

Also agreed. Under certain circumstances, perhaps a duel of some sort, I may be more agreeable to such an opposed roll, but under normal circumstances - nooo....

One thing I might consider doing to help speed up higher level play is having just one BAB modifier. If you choose to make multiple attacks, you can, but every attack receives a cumulative -4 penalty to your attack rolls (to a min. of +0 BAB).

Eg. Say you have a base +15 BAB and another +6 in various bonuses. Your total attack adj. is + 21 for a single attack. You could choose to make 2 attacks at +17 each, 3 @ +13 each or 4 @ +9 each. You couldn't make 5 however as your BAB would now be lower than +0.

This way you don't need to make useless weak rolls against powerful opponents (especially the tricked out TW fighters), but could choose to make all kinds of attacks to mop up weak opponents.

 

[glass]

You have apparently never played GURPS. Attacker makes attack roll. Defender makes defense roll. Combat takes twice as long as it should.

...and first person to crit wins.


glass.

 

[mythusmage]

Yes. With everything else that goes into D&D combat, adding a bunch of unnecessary rolls makes it overly complicated. It would significantly increase the time combat takes, especially at high levels.

And, if the rules are written this way, then you will have feats and spells that add even more modifiers to these rolls.

So, yes, this is overly complicated and an unnecessary addition to the rules. It would be a pain in the arse to play and adjudicate.

The rolls are not sequential, they're at the same time. And I'd expect any good GM to have the mods for his critters (etc.) figured out before hand. Much as any good player would for his PC.

As anybody ever tried the active defense rules from the DMG?. I have, they don't slow down things much, and often not at all. They can also add a bit of excitement to combat as the participants fret and fuss over beating the other guy's roll. I'll have more to say on this in Combat.

 

[mythusmage]

This strikes me as a spectacularly bad idea. Rather than trying to balance a 'good' 8th level character with a 'bad' 10th level character, it seems far wiser to try to keep characters of the same level on a rough par with one another. That way, you can use the level of a character as a guide to the power level of the game, and can very quickly judge the suitability of a module by looking at the cover: "A D&D adventure for 4 5th level PCs".

Two other things: very few groups play through the non-adventuring time. If the Knight of the Lesser Moon has to spend a month of the year dealing with the obligations of his order, most DMs will say "a month passes". So, the balancing restriction you suggest has no meaning.

Furthermore, back in 2nd edition days, each class had a different XP table. Thus, a powerful class advanced more slowly. 3e moved to a unified table, which was a big step forward. You're suggesting a return to 2nd edition - powerful characters advance more slowly - but without even the consistency of having a fixed level progression.

Balance? What is this "balance" you speak of. Life has no balance. Life has opportunity. Life has opportunity to be clever and prosper. Life has opportunity to be foolish and fail. You think life is a game. Hah! game for children. Life is no game.

Okay seriously, I'm dumping balance. Balance is for tire alignment, not an RPG. You play a character living in an imaginary world. The real world is not balanced, why should an imaginary one be?

Challenges, opportunity, that is what an adventure is for. And the chance to make an ass of yourself. Furthermore, people in real life differ in their ability. Why should it be different in an RPG? Seeing that everybody participates as much as they wish to is the province of the group, GM and players alike. You can artificially balance the PCs as much as you like, it won't help a dang bit when it comes to encouraging participation.

The question is not how do you balance an 8th level Wizard of the Blushing Moon (not a real organization) against a 10th level standard Wizard, but how the 8th level WotBM can contribute to the group and participate in the adventure. Or even an 8th level standard Wizard in a 10th level party. How do you encourage participation, that is the question.

Another thing to remember here is that members of organizations gain extra skills and abilities non-members don't. So our 8th level Wizard of the Blushing Moon will be better than an 8th level standard Wizard, and possibly even a 9th level standard Wizard. But, it takes time to learn these extras, time taken away from adventuring. And they are in addition to the standard skills for the class. That means more time to advance. You concentrate on a few skills you will advance faster in them than someone learning a broader range.

It is not my purpose to make comfortable changes, it is my purpose to make effective changes.

 

[WayneLigon]

It is not my purpose to make comfortable changes, it is my purpose to make effective changes.

It's my experience that uncomfortable rules get ignored. So.. how are you going to simulate Frank the Fighter having to 'take time away from adventuring'? An n% experience penalty?