D&D 4E Rich Baker on his 4e Warlord

[Lonely Tylenol]

Possibly. He could have written it more clearly if he meant that.

Well, he did say he can't get into it, since the multiclassing rules haven't been revealed yet.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I may be misremembering, but haven't we seen some indications that:

1. Lower ability scores still gain you positive stat modifiers in 4e? and
2. Your stat modifiers also increase with your character level?

Wouldn't these factors also help mitigate any issues with MAD?

Well, it's a guess of course, but I think you're mis-interpreting the Spined Devil stat block. There was a listed modifier next to each of the Stats that looks really off by 3E standards, but if you subtracted 3 from each one (1/2 the Spined Devil's "Monster Level"), it lined up perfectly.

Now, you could interpret that as Stat Bonuses increasing with level, but the attack damage didn't show an increased modifier. Instead, what I think it means, is that monster stat blocks list the "Untrained Skill Modifier" next to each stat, because you don't actually need the flat stat modifier 90% of the time, but you do need to know what it's Jump and Spot checks are.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Abilities that happen a number of times a day equal to X + STAT BONUS are already common in 3E. There's no reason to expect that the designers will choose to go with a system that gimps characters with low or average stats. You're freaking out based on an assumption that the designers will take the worst of the 3E designs and make them standard, when you've got no real basis to believe that at this time.

There's also the issue of talent trees. If a class relies on Int, Wis, and Dex, but your Int is sort of crappy, maybe you can choose not to take any Int-based talents, or fewer of them. Then it won't show up on your character sheet, and you can get through life without ulcers.

 

[Rechan]

Yet, it doesn't really say they are set in stone either.

Or even if it was, if they are active abilities you still choose whether you use them or not. Unlike the passive benefits of the charisma bonus for paladins or wisdom bonus for monks, you could actually dump one stat you could use for an optional ability and still be just as effective.

The problem is that, once more, this is a hypothetical.

If that's how it is - if you CAN drop Bad Stat Dependent Ability X, great.

But we don't know if you can or not. And I don't want to bet the farm on that just yet.

And my main issue is, again, abilities that sit there, pretending to provide Balance, when they really are just dead weight.

Let me use the Monk as another example. The monk can't wear armor - he loses his abilities if he does. So, to balance this, Monks can add their wisdom to AC. Which means that if a monk Doesn't, then he's going to get schivved because Monks are going to be in melee; so that's Yet Another stat they have to throw their ability stats in. So something that is put in to balance out the monk makes him weaker because he has to spend an important stat because he can't wear armor and without that stat there he's gunna get stabbed.

 

[Irda Ranger]

The other assumption you can make is that all 4E characters will be underequipped to face challenges that they are supposed to be able to face.

(emphasis mine)

But even in that case, all characters would get the same amount of shaft. So, IOW, it would be balanced.

 

[Rechan]

Because it makes sense to assume that if they design every character to use more than just one or two abilities, that assumption will inform the design of the rest of the game, and characters designed that way will be well-balanced in the new edition. The other assumption you can make is that all 4E characters will be underequipped to face challenges that they are supposed to be able to face.

That doesn't tell me how to compare things in 4e by way of examples.

 

[Pazu]

I've never seen indications of this.

Source?

These possibilities were suggested by the Spined Devil 4e preview stat card, which described it as a "level 6 skirmisher" and gave stats like: STR +7 [19] INT +5 [14] etc. (all of the stats other than STR had a +5 modifier and were either 14 or 15, IIRC).

Now, obviously we know in 3.5e that a STR of 19 gets you a +4 modifier, not a +7; and stats of 14-15 get you a +2, not +5. So there's a number of possible interpretations:

1. Positive stat modifiers start at lower ability values.
2. Your level also affects your stat modifiers (note that adding level/2 to the expected base stat modifier consistently yields the numbers we see above).
3. Positive stat modifiers still start at 12, but ramp up more quickly (seems awkward).
4. Something special that only applies to Spined Devils, Devils in general, or some other special-case pleading.
5. Something else I'm not thinking of.

I personally think it's either 1 or 2 (although I'm open to #5. )

 

[Pazu]

Well, it's a guess of course, but I think you're mis-interpreting the Spined Devil stat block. There was a listed modifier next to each of the Stats that looks really off by 3E standards, but if you subtracted 3 from each one (1/2 the Spined Devil's "Monster Level"), it lined up perfectly.

Now, you could interpret that as Stat Bonuses increasing with level, but the attack damage didn't show an increased modifier. Instead, what I think it means, is that monster stat blocks list the "Untrained Skill Modifier" next to each stat, because you don't actually need the flat stat modifier 90% of the time, but you do need to know what it's Jump and Spot checks are.

Hmm. I didn't notice that when I made my preceding post. Whoops. :\

Of course, we also don't know at this point if many abilities are going to be based on X + (stat modifier) either...

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

(emphasis mine)

But even in that case, all characters would get the same amount of shaft. So, IOW, it would be balanced.

Well, the implication I'm trying to make is that this would be functionally identical to decreasing the CR of 3rd edition monsters by a uniform amount across the board, and continuing to run encounters based on that CR system so that 1st level PCs were facing, for example, ogres instead of goblins.

But that would be completely nuts. So they can't be doing it. So my first proposition must be the one that's right.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

That doesn't tell me how to compare things in 4e by way of examples.

Perhaps, but you don't need to do that in order to evaluate the likely effect of multiple ability use in every class.