D&D 4E Let's Talk About 4E On Its Own Terms [+]

[James Gasik]

As far as all classes playing the same, you have to look beyond the powers. A Fighter marks anything he attacks, which is an additional consideration for his or her powers, but also means you might actually make a ranged basic to mark a foe out of reach.

Rogues need combat advantage to get their full damage, so they have to move around and flank or work with allies- they have some powers that give them on demand advantage, but it's far better to not need them.

Rangers and Warlocks had a built-in incentive to prioritize targets, etc., etc.. And that's not even getting into the "subclasses", where you're rewarded for doing different things. There was a Barbarian that exploded with thunder damage when they murdered something, and another Barbarian that granted leader style buffs to their allies- despite being the same class and having the same powers, both versions had a very different playstyle.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The Monk is fine, if you can wrap your head around it's Full Discipline mechanic. I saw a few people struggle with it.

The Psion isn't actually bad, but it suffers mostly because the Wizard exists, with better powers and more support. That's true for most Controllers, mind you, outside of the Invoker, who wasn't as powerful, but could do things the Wizard couldn't.

psions were not bad, they performed well enough, but they were invariably IME one-trick ponies. There was literally almost no reason to even look at your other powers, you just spammed one at-will all day and night, with more or less enhancement as needed. I guess there might have been some high level daily/encounter powers that were more attractive? Psionic Power is basically the only supplement I never got a copy of, so I am pretty ignorant of what that did to the equation.

And I agree, the monk is fine, it just isn't psionic.

 

[Kannik]

"WTF, so I don't get to do anything this turn. Fantastic." And then had all the enemies try to hit me to no avail.

This reminds me of the best description I read on the character roles:

A striker is there to deal damage.
A defender is there to take damage and hold attention.
A leader is there to relieve damage and help others.
A controller is there to make the DM pull their hair out.

"Alright, I have this great plan..." (Controller takes their turn) "Well, that doesn't work now."

"Excellent, next turn this monster will lay the smack down on..." (Controller takes their turn) "Uh, ok, nope..."

"Oh yes, you've all fallen into my traps you little pretties... (Controller takes their turn) [Sound of paper being torn up]

Though, that could happen with leaders too!

"Alright, you are hit and the enemy does..." (Leader goes "Nope!") "Excuse me, what?" (Leader describes their power nullifying the whole thing...)

And as a DM I LOVED IT.

(Also liked it as a player, to be sure, but seeing clever players with clever plans and clever powers messing up my own clever plans and clever powers always made me laugh.)

 

[Aldarc]

And I agree, the monk is fine, it just isn't psionic.

I thought that making the monk psionic was brilliant.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I thought that making the monk psionic was brilliant.

?

 

[James Gasik]

I thought that making the monk psionic was brilliant.

You can draw parallels to psionics and ki- it's not a one to one, obviously, but both are systems of largely internal power that are distinct from magic. I didn't mind the Monk having the Psionic power source. But I do think that nothing about the result particularly felt psionic.

The Ardent is manipulating emotions and thoughts, the Psion is using traditional Esper powers, and the Battlemind is doing...Battlemind things.

Meanwhile, the Monk is using evocative martial arts styles and techniques. I would have imagined a Psionic Striker to be something like the girl from Firestarter, using psychokinetic powers to create flames or hurl objects at people.

Basically, nothing wrong with the class or power source choice, it just felt like more attention was given to capturing traditional "Monk" flavor than "Psychic" flavor.

 

[pemerton]

The first D&D-ish thing to link monks to psionics - as far as I know - is the early 80s Dragon article "He's got a lot to kick about". Rolemaster also flagged a possible link, in one of the Character Law options.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Now, see, I always thought that Martial essentially is 'chi'. A monk and a fighter are fundamentally similar. One might achieve his mastery in a more systematic way through a codified set of training and maybe the other just got tougher and tougher by figuring it all out on his own. They are still both drawing on 'internal power'. If you do NOT ascribe to the view that Martial is some form of internal power, then what is it? The power of mundanity? That's not a power source I want! That smacks of all the "but fighters are just normal guys" crud that I most want to AVOID. So I inevitably see the monk as simply just another evocation of martial power, and everything I see of, for instance, Chinese fantasy reinforces that view! Now, maybe in other games that might not be as good an interpretation, but I think it works well in the context of 4e.

 

[Zeromaru X]

I don't think psionics in general really worked that well in 4e, lol.

They may not work too well mechanically, but they work really well lorewise. I believe 4e is the only edition where psionics doesn't feel out of place. Like in other editions psionics just feel like they have no real place in the world. They are an alternative to magic, but you can replicate all their effects with magic, to the point 5e has struggled a lot to implement them in this edition.

While in 4e they are a well defined power source that is different to arcane and divine magic thanks to its usability (and unique albeit weird mechanics). The psionic power is also tied to the fiction, and you why it exists and why it's different to magic.

 

[Eric V]

The first D&D-ish thing to link monks to psionics - as far as I know - is the early 80s Dragon article "He's got a lot to kick about". Rolemaster also flagged a possible link, in one of the Character Law options.

In the old Wizardry game 'Crusaders of the Dark Savant' monks would end up learning psionic spells...

...in unrelated news, I am old.