The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

[brehobit]

OK,
Having had a chance to now read through the books and look at people's reviews and thoughts, I figured I'd include my own.

The Good
=========

• Team tactics -- The game is fairly unique as an RPG that tactics of the group matter so much. And unlike the vast majority of board games, it really is a group working together.
• Balance -- This was clearly something they wanted to hit, and at first blush they seem to have done quite well. Having nearly identical mechanical options for the various classes and races makes things easier to balance, and it seems they largely did a good job. This one will have to wait for a while.
• Hit points/healing surges -- I really really like this. I think it not only deals with the mechanical issues of not wanted to always need a cleric, it also does a reasonably good job with "long-term" damage vs short term damage. Much better, IMO, then for example, Champions/HERO with it's Body/Stun scheme.
• Racial flavor -- I think the races are more mechanical interesting than in any other edition. The racial feats help a lot here. Nice idea.
• Layout/Format -- In my brief time with the books, I found things really easy to find and well organized. Something not even vaguely true with older versions.
• Simplification -- The cases of "stupid complex" rules, like grapple, are gone. Really needed.

The Bad
==========

• Lack of Mechanical Diversity -- One thing I liked about D&D was the ability to change characters and really change mechanical systems. If I got tired of the huge options associated with casters I could go with a fighter type (which I mostly have in the last couple of years). Now you can have any color you want as long as it's black. Oh, and the Warlock and Ranger look nearly the same mechanically. I'm pretty sure the bow ranger and warlock could have been the same class with a different special effect, and the two-weapon ranger could have been it's own class.
  
• Immersive problems -- Does my fighter know he can't attack everyone adjacent to him because he did that 2 hours ago? If so, why does he think that? If not, why isn't he trying to set it up? Same thing with the warlord, rogue, and ranger. Also, I, and those I game with, find changing back and forth from an acting game to a board game is difficult. 3e was pretty bad at this (much worse than 2e or nearly any other game). 4e seems a lot worse.
  
• Lack of options -- The advantage of playing a game with a DM is that the DM can act as an arbitrator of the world. The move from 2e to 3e to 4e seems to be trying to limit the need for the DM to arbitrate. Basically shooting for a CRPG. With no guidance on things like disarming or trying to pin someone, the DM's default ruling would almost have to be "you can't do that".
  
• Lack of options Part II -- The limited number of power options per level is a bit sad. The blandness of most of the feats are also a bit sad (they got their stuff taken by powers). Wizards and other casters are quite limited compared to previous editions.

The Ugly
=========

• There are some odd rule interactions which I suspect were not entirely indented. There is a fighter ability that lets him do [W] damage to everyone who ends their turn next to him. That's gonna wipe out minions in mass quantity, no matter their defenses.
• The multi-classing rules look pretty poor. Each of the multi-classing feats are strictly better than another feat (skill training). The next 3 feats look fairly poor on the whole, but I'm not sure. And the Paragon replacement option just looks weak. But there may well be some powerful combinations out there. Finally, the inability to really get class abilities via multi-classing is understandable but annoying.
• The magic armor rules with the "masterwork armor" look pretty odd/incomplete. I'd like some examples of how it works.
• The mount rules, where a certain level is needed to "fully" use them, look odd at best. The powers are fairly minor and the write-up in the DMG, PHB, and MM are all slightly different.
• Rituals. I like them, but trying to balance them via gold seems like a poor plan.
• Long term problems don't really exist. Poison lasts on the average 12 seconds. So does everything else. Even without magic, you can't get hurt so bad that you aren't fine after an 8 hour rest. Weird, and actually plot-limiting.

 

[Andur]

Disarming and pinning are both covered, disarming is specificaly stated in certain powers, pinning as in =helpless no longer exists outside of KO'ing them.

The fighter power is fine, it is suppose to wipe out a bunch of minions...

Immersion, it is a fantasy game, there are tons of examples from every edition that are simple solved by a suspension of disbelief...

I agree lack of options per level are a little lacking and overall it seems like everything has been pigeonholed into a combination of races and builds (the dwarven two hander will be different from the eladrion two hander build, the human two hander build will either mix and match or lean one way or the other, and there are very few powers that are useful to more than one build of any class). Course I guess it gives more room for future splat books...

 

[Byronic]

I think that immersion is an important part of RPG's. For example if I look at 3ed Vampire the Masquerade, if I play that the rules make it *feel* as if I'm playing a Vampire.

Then again Daily powers for fighters don't break immersion that much. The circumstances have to be exactly right for that power to work, the enemies have to be placed so, the ground will be just so and God it's tiring. If I did that move one more time I don't know if I'd be able to fight as well afterwards, best not risk it.

 

[JohnBiles]

Lack of Mechanical Diversity -- One thing I liked about D&D was the ability to change characters and really change mechanical systems. If I got tired of the huge options associated with casters I could go with a fighter type (which I mostly have in the last couple of years). Now you can have any color you want as long as it's black. Oh, and the Warlock and Ranger look nearly the same mechanically. I'm pretty sure the bow ranger and warlock could have been the same class with a different special effect, and the two-weapon ranger could have been it's own class.

I have the opposite reaction; I don't want a situtation where some classes had huge amounts of options and others didn't. Wizards and other casters could simply do vastly more things than non-casters and required increasing amounts of effort to track it all.

That being said, it would be nice if certain fairly basic concepts weren't mostly foreclosed by the current system. (You can't easily make a heavily armored guy who is very effective with a bow, for example)

Immersive problems -- Does my fighter know he can't attack everyone adjacent to him because he did that 2 hours ago? If so, why does he think that? If not, why isn't he trying to set it up? Same thing with the warlord, rogue, and ranger. Also, I, and those I game with, find changing back and forth from an acting game to a board game is difficult. 3e was pretty bad at this (much worse than 2e or nearly any other game). 4e seems a lot worse.

Because the really fancy stuff can't easily be done; you have to have the right conditions for it, and the time your character is using his encounter power is the time the conditions were right for it (if he's martial) or when you still had the mystic energy to pull it off (for divine and arcane casters).

It's not any less rational than spell memorization was, IMO.

Lack of options -- The advantage of playing a game with a DM is that the DM can act as an arbitrator of the world. The move from 2e to 3e to 4e seems to be trying to limit the need for the DM to arbitrate. Basically shooting for a CRPG. With no guidance on things like disarming or trying to pin someone, the DM's default ruling would almost have to be "you can't do that".

No, not at all. The defense system and the skill challenge system makes it EASIER for the DM to improvise an answer for situations like where one of the PCs wants to jump onto the back of the fire beetle and ride around on it using it as a mobile sniping platform.

This is simply the flipside of what you identified as a strength: simplification.

4E puts much more emphasis on the DM deciding this kind of thing and giving him the tools to do so.

Lack of options Part II -- The limited number of power options per level is a bit sad. The blandness of most of the feats are also a bit sad (they got their stuff taken by powers). Wizards and other casters are quite limited compared to previous editions.
[/list]

Wizards were pretty deliberately limited in order to bring them and non-casters onto the same usefulness level.

[*]There are some odd rule interactions which I suspect were not entirely indented. There is a fighter ability that lets him do [W] damage to everyone who ends their turn next to him. That's gonna wipe out minions in mass quantity, no matter their defenses.

That's probably intended, I expect.

[*]The multi-classing rules look pretty poor. Each of the multi-classing feats are strictly better than another feat (skill training). The next 3 feats look fairly poor on the whole, but I'm not sure. And the Paragon replacement option just looks weak. But there may well be some powerful combinations out there. Finally, the inability to really get class abilities via multi-classing is understandable but annoying.

Developing a really fair system of multi-classing is, I think, just about impossible. But I agree there's room for work here, though I'll have to see how it works in practice.

[*]Rituals. I like them, but trying to balance them via gold seems like a poor plan.

It looks pretty good to me; gold is one of the big resources and this ensures you can use ritual stuff a fair amount without making it unlimited.

[*]Long term problems don't really exist. Poison lasts on the average 12 seconds. So does everything else. Even without magic, you can't get hurt so bad that you aren't fine after an 8 hour rest. Weird, and actually plot-limiting.
[/list]

Gotta agree with you a lot here; you can throw off just about anything very quickly with the new saving throw system.

 

[Grazzt]

OK,
[*]Long term problems don't really exist. Poison lasts on the average 12 seconds. So does everything else. Even without magic, you can't get hurt so bad that you aren't fine after an 8 hour rest. Weird, and actually plot-limiting.
[/list]

Agree with ya here. I'm definitely not a huge fan of everything (poison, dazed, immobilized, dominated, etc) being shaken off as easy as it can be. I can see getting rid of the 'save or die' stuff (for the most part), but nerfing the hell outta just about everything else that lasted more than a round seems like they swung too far the other way.

 

[Wepfmokk]

[*]The magic armor rules with the "masterwork armor" look pretty odd/incomplete. I'd like some examples of how it works.

It actually looks pretty easy the way i understand it. Example: Cloth

Cloth armor: Armor Bonus +0
Feyweave: Armor Bonus +1
Starweave: Armot Bonus +2


Feyweave and Starweave are masterwork. They only exist as magic items.
Example: "Magic cloth armor +6" would grant a total of +6 AC
"Magic Starweave armor +6" would grant a total of +6 AC

There are also differences in weight.

 

[AllisterH]

1. If you were a non-spellcaster (or like ranger had spellcasting as a SIDE option)in previous editions and came upon the 4E version of your class, I seriously think it is "NOT CRICKET" to say that their options are limited.

2. Check the rules on Disease and the effects of Raise Dead as well as the monsters that more of less EAT healing surges. There ARE conditions/creatures that last more than a round and even require extended rests. It simply is much RARER than before (along the lnes of finding a creature with TOTAL immunity to more than 2 effects)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Gotta agree with you a lot here; you can throw off just about anything very quickly with the new saving throw system.

How do the rules for diseases look like?

Poisons are rarely long-term stuff in real life, are they?* I mean, most poisons are there to incapacitate the target now, not for a week. That's because they are usually attack or defense mechanism.

Diseases are a different matter. Disease (except for the occasional bio-engineered weapon-grade virus) don't exist to kill.

*) except for when they kill you, off course... if that's still count as real life

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

[*]The multi-classing rules look pretty poor. Each of the multi-classing feats are strictly better than another feat (skill training). The next 3 feats look fairly poor on the whole, but I'm not sure. And the Paragon replacement option just looks weak. But there may well be some powerful combinations out there. Finally, the inability to really get class abilities via multi-classing is understandable but annoying.

After working with the multiclassing abilities a bit, they're hit or miss. My Human Rogue with Fighter multiclassing works great the whole way through, in part because fighters get Close Burst 1 powers, which fix one of the worst problems when you're a rogue fighting a little off from the party - getting swamped by minions, particularly flanking minions, and the other abilities synergize well (such as the +10 to initiative utility power). The paragon thing is really nice for a rogue/fighter that wants to hit multiple targets with an at-will via cleave. Some other races/classes I haven't been able to get good results from though.

I think paragon multiclassing would benefit from granting an additional at-will from either of his classes at level 16, where the paragon multiclasser gets nothing in comparison to the paragon classes (or granting an additional at-will from the multiclass at level 11 and allowing an at-will swap at level 16).

Non-human multiclassers particularly look to be getting a bit of a shaft, with only 2 at-wills and one fewer feat, it really bites into a lot of things.

 

[Andur]

It actually looks pretty easy the way i understand it. Example: Cloth

Cloth armor: Armor Bonus +0
Feyweave: Armor Bonus +1
Starweave: Armot Bonus +2


Feyweave and Starweave are masterwork. They only exist as magic items.
Example: "Magic cloth armor +6" would grant a total of +6 AC
"Magic Starweave armor +6" would grant a total of +6 AC

There are also differences in weight.

Sorry but this is wrong...

Magic Cloth Armour +6 gives a total AC modifier of +6 (+0 AC, +6 Enhancement)
Magic Starweave Armour +6 gives a total AC modifier of +8 (+2 AC, +6 Enhancement)