D&D 4E How would 4E improve my game?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Contrary to popular belief, not everyone here is a clone of me.

So, it's not everyone. But someone is?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

4E art surprises me; almost all of the images posted are good, relatively free of "dungeon-bling" and generally better in quality than those of the 3E core-books. The only exception is this, with too many right or near-right angles on the armor, axe and helmet IMHO, looking a bit like a robot; but even than it isn't THAT bad.

I am not sure if it's clear from the picture, but it is a Dwarf. The "blocky" style of armor will be typically dwarven. It might still be what you call "bling" or "dungeon punk", but it is not trying to be medieval, since there wasn't a dwarf culture around in the middle age.

Races & Classes contains a few tidbits on how the clothing, gear and even just facial features (beyond pointy ears) of different races are supposed to make them unique.
I am not sure how much of the original design intents will survive over the years of the edition, but I like the idea (and also most of what I have seen).

 

[ve4grm]

4E art surprises me; almost all of the images posted are good, relatively free of "dungeon-bling" and generally better in quality than those of the 3E core-books. The only exception is this, with too many right or near-right angles on the armor, axe and helmet IMHO, looking a bit like a robot; but even than it isn't THAT bad.

Exactly. While the dungeon-punk aspect is as much there as it was in 3e, the "bling" you mentioned doesn't seem to be.

As Mustrum said, everything about Dwarves is going to be based around hard angles. From their armour to their facial features. I know that won't appeal to everyone, especially those who prefer the lighter airy elven designs, but it fits the race well, and appeals to many dwarf fans like me.

But I really am interested in what art you saw that put the "bling" aspect in your mind. I haven't seen it, and I would like to understand your point better. Could you please point me to it?

 

[Shades of Green]

But I really am interested in what art you saw that put the "bling" aspect in your mind. I haven't seen it, and I would like to understand your point better. Could you please point me to it?

http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/4egreendragon.jpg
http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/4edwarves.jpg
http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/dwarfwar.jpg

On a second, thought, the dwarves aren't THAT bad this way. So 4E art is good - better than 3E art IMHO.

 

[hong]

One day, WAR is going to draw his people wearing something other than scale mail and studded leather.

 

[ve4grm]

http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/4egreendragon.jpg
http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/4edwarves.jpg
http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/dwarfwar.jpg

On a second, thought, the dwarves aren't THAT bad this way. So 4E art is good - better than 3E art IMHO.

I still don't see the bling, honestly. (Except for the various magical trinkets on the mage, I suppose. Though magical trinkets and fetishes should be pretty standard for a mage.) Though I can see how the angular designs of the dwarven armour in pics 2 and 3 could be seen as jewels or something. Without the colouring, it's very unclear.

The most disturbing part about picture 1, on the other hand, is that the dwarf's mace (and to a lesser extent the human fighter's sword) has a handle that is wider than his hand. Seriously, his fingers are going through the mace handle. The human fighter's pinky is doing the same. I don't know why, but this disturbs me.

 

[Lackhand]

One day, WAR is going to draw his people wearing something other than scale mail and studded leather.

Cover of Complete Warrior?

 

[The Little Raven]

And? What's your point?

That 4E should have never been developed and there is nothing wrong with 3E?

This is exactly the point behind each and every one of Derren's posts.

 

[Rzach]

In 3e, wisdom really wasn't that important for the cleric, because only a minority of the spells where offensive and the majority was buff and utility spells. In 4e healing and damage is based on wisdom, so I am quite sure the clerics will have wisdom as their highest score.

The cleric was a spellcasting class in 3e. They needed a high wisdom to cast upper level spells. Really I don't see much of a difference between 3e and 4e in that regard.

In fact every edition of D&D promoted this kind of play style. If a character didn't place their best stats in their primary ability scores they were simply making a weaker character than they could have. A cleric who didn't place their highest roll in Wisdom faced the very real possibility of not being able to cast 9th level spells later in the game. While I am sure some players may have done this it wasn't done in any of the groups I have ever played with.

I will admit that if your games don't go into the upper levels then this problem would not be noticed as easily. The majority of my groups games end when we are either near or past 20th level. If I played a cleric that wouldn't make it past 10th level though I would build the character differently.

Later,
Rzach

\