D&D 4E Throwing ideas, seeing what sticks (and what stinks)

MoutonRustique · Sep 19, 2015

Hello!

This will be my repository for all the random ideas I get. Criticisms are welcome. Since this may end up being full of really dumb ideas (I get those a lot), feel free to share your own.

The goal is a slow re-work of 4e, but the base hypothesis is that the ideas should be applied to the game w/ minimal fuss (however, some may drastically change various aspects... which is something that you should feel free to point out if you think it pertinent.)

Final note : my native language is French, I think in both English and French (depending on subject) and RPGs tend to percolate more in the English section, but it's likely that some mix may seep through as I probably won't edit/correct/review most of what I'm throwing in the thread (that being kind of the point of this exercise...), FYI.

To get started : DEATH TO ABILITY SCORES (sort of...)
[sblock]Aucun "ability scores" - remplacés par "ability values"
3 niveaux de "ability value" : high, very high, et low. (+2/+5/-2)
Starting abilities : 3 high *ou* 1 very high et 1 low (variations to taste)
Attacks bonus = niveau
Defense bonus = 10 + niveau

Effets des abilités:
HIGH - bonus to checks, 1/enc adv on check
VERY HIGH - bonus to checks, adv on all checks, 1/enc reroll check
LOW - penalty to checks, 1/day DM force reroll

Effets spécifiques: (order: Power, Agility, Resistance) (note: cumulative)
PHYSICAL STATS
Force (HIGH) +to dmg weapon, +to shield DR, +to grab DC
Force (VERY HIGH) 1/enc reroll weapon dmg
Force (LOW) -to dmg weapon

Agility (HIGH) 1/enc force attack reroll
Agility (VERY HIGH)
Agility (LOW)

Fortitude (HIGH) 1/enc ignore one condition for 1 round
Fortitude (VERY HIGH)
Fortitude (LOW)

MENTAL STATS
Charisma (HIGH)
Charisma (VERY HIGH)
Charisma (LOW)

Intellect (HIGH)
Intellect (VERY HIGH)
Intellect (LOW)

Will (HIGH)
Will (VERY HIGH)
Will (LOW)[/sblock]

B - EVERYBODY'S A PSION! or ENCOUNTER POINTS
[SBLOCK]The idea is a simple one :

Characters gain a number of "encounter points" (EPs).
These "EPs" can be spent to use an encounter power.
To encourage variation : once you have used an encounter power, it costs 2 EPs to use.
Variant : same goes for daily powers

Goal: allow more freedom in encounter power usage.
Why: sounds like a good idea.
Why not: encounter powers are built on the assumption they will only get to be used once. Otherwise, you spam your best one.
So why do it then? No real answer to this... just seems like it could be cool.

Side goal: in the 4.5e I'm imagining in my head, some "Essentials" concepts are applied to more classes. This sort of option would work well with my hope of having "role-granting" templates for the different base classes (i.e. controller wizard, striker wizard, leader wizard - defender priest, striker priest, etc.)
[/sblock]

starkebn · Oct 25, 2015

There's things here I also have in mind for a rebuild of 4e, like encounter points and DTAS (of course), so keep posting!

MoutonRustique · Oct 29, 2015

TO DR OR NOT TO DR - AS AC*
[sblock]
The quasi-infinitely-looping question of AC as Damage Reduction, my potential take on it :
Precepts:
- use fixed damage on the DM side of things
- keep variable damage on the PC side of things
- use fixed damage reduction values on the DM side of things
- use variable damage reduction on the PC side of things
- default damage reduction (armour, level) is "resist all"
Implementation :
- level = one die of damage reduction
- armour = one die of damage reduction (based on type of armour)
- armouring "effects" = "perhaps" one die of damage reduction (may also be subsumed into the "class" portion)
- resist X values converted to die value (1d8, 2d6, etc.)
- use average + level for monster dmg (8+2xlevel? ... ask "Yak of GitPG" for what that should be - he's impressive at "math cruching"!)
- use "what feels right" for monsters (might have to adjust hp...)

Consequences :
- might take a bit longer to calculate final damage
- brings in "armour as DR" w/o overhauling the whole thing
- we get an additional "lever" to play with (magic items, effects, itemization, etc)
- might "require" a table of reference for die values (if modifications in-game became a thing - note to self : it will.)
- adds in a layer that is fairly superfluous (the proof being: it's not in there and the game works fine)
- multiple attacks are reduced in relative potency a bit (but I'm not seeing this as a bad thing in 4e...)

Justifications/concessions :
- I like it!
- It's not that hard to use
- It can give the illusion of player agency during the enemies' turn
- It does require a bit of fiddling with monster hp (unless...?*)
*increase PC damage by +level?
- I'm not a fan of the "multiple attacks = king of dmg" thing going on right now, something that hits multiple attacks harder than single attacks feels like a good thing to me.
- I really want dragons (and galeb dhurs) with very high resist values that "require" special items or preparations to be able to pierce (I know I can do this now... I know... but this way, it's "baked in" and well... ... ...yup, that's the whole of my argument.)

Options :
- remove AC as a defense**
- replace "target other defense than AC" as "ignore DR for this attack" in pertinent powers
- attacks target Fort or Ref (defender's choice)***

***this would mesh very well with my goal of having more attacks simultaneously target many defenses : hit AC to deal dmg, hit Fort to push, hit Will to daze, hit Ref to ...

**We'd use Ref for most "touching", Fort for "power through", Will for... well, Will is pretty obvious...
[/sblock]

That's my "blargh" for today.

MoutonRustique · Dec 31, 2015

will sort it out later - yeah, right... no I won't.

A DREAM... SHALL IT ALWAYS REMAIN BUT A DREAM?
[SBLOCK]Road-map for my 4.5e:
Classes :
- a class is a vehicle for a feel and a mechanical way of doing. As opposed to doing "x" this way
- each would have a variety of "templates/builds" that would allow for role choice

Powers :
- based on power-source
- as a general rule, access to power source = access to relevant power
- some exceptions could exist : their role would be to create highlights (very tight control on what can be restrained)

Random ideas
- power pre-reqs : some powers need a specific X or Y before they can be learned (power chains or something)
- use psionics as a baseline : at-wills are boosted into encounters or dailies (works well for settings or classes where magic or other power is more "organic" as opposed to "secret formula allows to do X")
[/sblock]

JUDGE ME BY MY SIZE DO YOU?... ACTUALLY, YES. YES i DO.
[SBLOCK]
Use the 13th age concept of hp from size
[/sblock]

"ROAD MAP" PART 2
[SBLOCK]

very tiered
narrow progress within same tier
many (all/some/most?) classes can learn as many powers as they get access to
training, downtime use and requirements are an important thing
characters get access to encounter uses and daily uses
it costs more to use the same power again
escalation die is central to many class abilities (momentum)
ONE instance of damage per turn
social "combat"
??? categories of "hp" (a la Skyrim) ???
quest/achievement based progression (3(?) significant quests per level)
gain "skill" = level
base skill = +2
active defense : use "reaction" to add skill to defenses
full attack : use "reaction" to add skill to attacks this turn (thus preventing a defensive use)
auto (and "free") multiclassing based on party members (as default) or based on story or background
no opportunity attacks - use the "quick damage" from 13th Age(?) : a known and "static" value
use more "auto punish" abilities for defenders (more paladin, less fighter) - perhaps precalculated values...
trait requirement for "off-class" powers are [key word] based : Learned-High Int | Strong-High Str | Deft, etc
if you do not meet the trait requirement, you cannot add your skill when using it (or some other penalty)
warlock-type = NO trait requirements
priest-type = invested spark requirement
spirit-type = "communement" req.
warlock have granted power - the kind of powers learned/granted are tightly tied to the "granter"
warlocks are based on the idea that those without access to power by their own merits will get them by bargains and such - this makes it so that there cannot be a trait or other required to make a powerful warlock.
once granted, nurtured and "grown" a warlock's power can be used to fuel all kinds of spells and powers - if the character can get access to them and learn them

[/SBLOCK]

SO BORED... DOWNTIME
[SBLOCK]

downtime est divisé en "slots" et est en fonction du lifestyle choisit (et payé!)
each daily slot corresponds to an activity worked towards
most activities do not benefit from multiple daily slots
ex : poor = 2 daily slots, wealthy = 6 daily slots
??? weekly, monthly slots as well ??? (leaning towards no for the moment)
certain classes will affect these parameters : ex - Monks have 4 daily slots in poor lifestyles
la qualité du downtime peut facilement devenir une récompense pour des quêtes
certains lieux peuvent offrir des "bonus slots" de certains types tel que la recherche, l'introspection, etc
ou encore sous la forme de bonus hebdomadaire (1 slot per day = 10 slots per week : a +3 day bonus)
base training = 50(?)
traits : Strength, Agility, Endurance, Intellect, Will, Perception, Presence (others?)
some traits are : primary, secondary and tertiatry(?)
when learning new "not-my-class" at-will, it starts as a encounter power, after 5+ uses and a level up, it becomes at-will
large amounts of downtime can also be used for this (much more than base)

[/SBLOCK]

AbdulAlhazred · Jan 7, 2016

MoutonRustique said:
Hello!

This will be my repository for all the random ideas I get. Criticisms are welcome. Since this may end up being full of really dumb ideas (I get those a lot), feel free to share your own.

I must have missed this thread previously. I've done a lot of hacking on my own '4e', and it touches on a lot of these points in various ways.

ability scores
Solution here was to obliterate penalties, so the lowest possible adjustment is 0, and the highest is +5. We also felt it necessary to have a special category beyond +5, "Godlike" which in effect allows for infinite unmatchable capability in that ability. We divvy up these adjustments with adventurers having a base +2 in each stat. You can take 5 points worth of increase, and its possible to reduce a stat by 1 or 2 points. This allows for up to 2 maximized stats, 5 +3s and a +2, etc. In effect this gives you +3 as roughly the baseline for an adventurer, with +4 being quite good, and +5 obviously being spectacular. I'd also note that there's something of an assumption of 'scaling' here, you can't get bonuses above +5, but that doesn't mean a giant isn't any stronger than the strongest hero, just that beyond a certain point it doesn't 'help'. You still can't win an arm wrestling contest against said giant, he can just toss you aside.

B - EVERYBODY'S A PSION! or ENCOUNTER POINTS

Here the concept was a little different. Instead of HS, AP, and perhaps other sorts of points, like PP, there is simply one pool of hero points. You can activate a 'daily' power using one, or a bonus action, or heal your surge value (or whatever else things HS work for in 4e). Its just simpler and it allows for more interesting trade offs. Encounter powers remain as-is, though you could certainly allow for their recharge using a hero point since they should be strictly inferior to 'daily' powers. I'd note that in our play we've made daily powers both less common, and a little more potent. If you break one out, the results will be interesting, not a dud.

Finally I'd note that we don't have ability score increases either. What you start with is what you get, though it isn't impossible to achieve an increase of a point. This both cuts scaling problems that 4e has greatly, and makes ability scores closer to their intent, RP metrics that help you understand the things that your character can do well, not just added bennies you pick up as you level.

AbdulAlhazred · Jan 7, 2016

TO DR OR NOT TO DR - AS AC

This is similar to our approach, replace AC with DR, but we did away with all damage dice from weapons. Individual weapons either do 1, 2, or 3 points of damage, depending on whether or not they're particularly heavy or light weapons, so there's not a HUGE advantage to using a 2-handed sword vs using a dagger, about the difference between a d4 and a d8 on average, but without the potentially high damage outcomes for the larger weapon. Characters then have an ability score bonus for all attacks, plus a 'damage die' which is determined by things like class, fighters just simply do more damage with melee weapons than wizards do, doesn't really matter WHICH weapon it is, the effect is the same. The DR values for armor are fairly small, not greater than 4 points. Enough to be quite useful, but not overwhelming.

Attacks target one of the 3 defenses, FORT, REF, or WILL, and a shield will provide a bonus on the first 2. This allows for a nice set of variations of attack routines as well, they can be 'beat downs' going against FORT, or based on quickness and going against REF, or generally magical or etc vs WILL (though maybe a really terrifying weapon display might count here, lack of an AC defense makes all this more clean).

Clearly high level figures will have somewhat higher DRs, but there's no need for them to drastically increase, and in general continuing to wear the same old leather armor you bought at level 1 when you're 10th level isn't going to be a real big problem, it will be proportionately less effective, but so will everyone else's plate armor. Specific monsters could also have higher DRs, which allows for a bit more variety of tactical challenges, though anything above single digits will make things start to get rather wonky (you could maybe do this for minions though to make 'tough' minions).

AbdulAlhazred · Jan 7, 2016

MoutonRustique said:
will sort it out later - yeah, right... no I won't.

A DREAM... SHALL IT ALWAYS REMAIN BUT A DREAM?
Classes

In our system there are effectively 3 classes, the warrior, the mystic, and the trickster. Powers come from various sources, there are some which obtain from class, some from power source, and some from theme, which conceptually sits about halfway between class and theme in 4e. In addition many powers are simply granted by 'boons'. Each theme has a role and power source, like 4e classes, and they largely have the same roster, though they can afford to be more specific than their 4e counterparts.

Powers
Based more on power source than class or theme. Warriors have weapon-based exploits, etc. Each theme has a role feature that attaches some sort of role-relevant effect to their power uses. Some themes also have a few 'signature' powers, like Knights can pull some shield tricks, or mounted combat exploits. Powers SCALE, so there are MANY fewer of them! Power pre-reqs are in the form of boons that have powers attached to them. A 'sword mastery' boon for instance has some fancy sword trick powers associated with it. PPs and EDs are effectively just particularly significant boons, so there are no longer powers specifically associated with those, but the same effect is achieved.

As a general point, this system GROSSLY reduces the total numbers of powers. Where 4e has some 10,000 powers, our hack requires no more than 200 at most to achieve the same level of coverage. There are a number of design features which collectively get you there

1) There are 20 levels, level 20 is the top of epic tier, this gets rid of 1/3 of all powers, most of which were really just 'level filler' anyway.
2) Previously mentioned scaling. While there may be SOME "stronger version of a power with extra sauce", in general each power simply stays relevant. This is a factor of 4 savings.
3) Near-duplicate powers moved from class to source, plus broader use of many fewer classes. This is huge, almost every power is now truly special and occupies an exclusive space in the system. I'd say this is at least a factor of 5 improvement.

This means a roughly 30x decrease in power count, which puts you down to around 300 powers, roughly, but given more focused power design, 200 is perfectly adequate.

JUDGE ME BY MY SIZE DO YOU?... ACTUALLY, YES. YES i DO.

Well, we assigned hit points based on race, which definitely allows for this sort of concept, but isn't locked into it.

"ROAD MAP" PART 2
[SBLOCK]

very tiered

narrow progress within same tier

many (all/some/most?) classes can learn as many powers as they get access to

training, downtime use and requirements are an important thing

characters get access to encounter uses and daily uses

it costs more to use the same power again

escalation die is central to many class abilities (momentum)

ONE instance of damage per turn

social "combat"

??? categories of "hp" (a la Skyrim) ???

quest/achievement based progression (3(?) significant quests per level)

gain "skill" = level

base skill = +2

active defense : use "reaction" to add skill to defenses

full attack : use "reaction" to add skill to attacks this turn (thus preventing a defensive use)

auto (and "free") multiclassing based on party members (as default) or based on story or background

no opportunity attacks - use the "quick damage" from 13th Age(?) : a known and "static" value

use more "auto punish" abilities for defenders (more paladin, less fighter) - perhaps precalculated values...

trait requirement for "off-class" powers are [key word] based : Learned-High Int | Strong-High Str | Deft, etc

if you do not meet the trait requirement, you cannot add your skill when using it (or some other penalty)

warlock-type = NO trait requirements

priest-type = invested spark requirement

spirit-type = "communement" req.

warlock have granted power - the kind of powers learned/granted are tightly tied to the "granter"

warlocks are based on the idea that those without access to power by their own merits will get them by bargains and such - this makes it so that there cannot be a trait or other required to make a powerful warlock.

once granted, nurtured and "grown" a warlock's power can be used to fuel all kinds of spells and powers - if the character can get access to them and learn them

[/SBLOCK]

SO BORED... DOWNTIME
[SBLOCK]

downtime est divisé en "slots" et est en fonction du lifestyle choisit (et payé!)

each daily slot corresponds to an activity worked towards

most activities do not benefit from multiple daily slots

ex : poor = 2 daily slots, wealthy = 6 daily slots

??? weekly, monthly slots as well ??? (leaning towards no for the moment)

certain classes will affect these parameters : ex - Monks have 4 daily slots in poor lifestyles

la qualité du downtime peut facilement devenir une récompense pour des quêtes

certains lieux peuvent offrir des "bonus slots" de certains types tel que la recherche, l'introspection, etc

ou encore sous la forme de bonus hebdomadaire (1 slot per day = 10 slots per week : a +3 day bonus)

base training = 50(?)

traits : Strength, Agility, Endurance, Intellect, Will, Perception, Presence (others?)

some traits are : primary, secondary and tertiatry(?)

when learning new "not-my-class" at-will, it starts as a encounter power, after 5+ uses and a level up, it becomes at-will

large amounts of downtime can also be used for this (much more than base)

[/SBLOCK]

Click to expand...

Other than the above we've stuck pretty close to the core 4e design. There have been a few tweaks.

Use of 5e style advantage/disadvantage - this replaces pretty much ALL situational modifiers, either you do or you don't have a situation worth calling a significant problem or significant help, everything else is noise.
4 bonus types - Ability, Permanent, Level, and Proficiency (always +5). There is NO stacking whatsoever. You get your ability, level and proficiency bonus, which are static, and a 'permanent' modifier, of which the best available applies. The permanent modifiers are highly keyword driven, so they can represent a lot of different things, but the non-stacking 'use best' insures that your character's key traits are emphasized. If you're a dwarf you're always going to be REALLY hard to poison, just because, though its POSSIBLE that some tremendous magical effect could improve on that (though its pretty unlikely).

Boons - These are central. There are no XP, no items, nothing. Just boons. Every time you get a 'major boon' you go up a level. These can be training, items, permanent magical effects, even plot-related things like "appointed captain of the guard". Any other reward is a 'lesser boon', which may be quite handy, but doesn't increase your character's ties to destiny or justify added 'plot armor'. The beauty of it is, it motivates players to do stuff, and you can make different things major boons for different PCs, or at least make their benefits more desirable to those whom they are appropriate for. It makes 'treasure' a narrative focus, you want training in how to turn undead? OK, you can go seek out the Altar of Lir and get that boon, if you're worthy... etc. It works great!

Done some work also on focusing more on 4e's encounter mechanics and promoting the idea that everything significant IS a challenge of some kind, there aren't any checks that happen outside of challenges, and every challenge is a scene of some sort, or groups scenes together perhaps (like a long travel scenario). Challenges are categorized as either 'action sequences' or 'abstract' (maybe there's a better term). An action sequence has rounds, movement, etc, and probably initiative as well, so basically combat but with the implication it needn't be strictly fighting, something 4e seemed to forget to emphasize.

Skills work as normal, but DCs are strictly given a level, making it clearer what is and is not appropriate for a given PC to face. The progress of levels vs DC numbers (DVs) is potentially mutable, and the scaling between check values and outcomes also, so that you can tune the tone of the game, less crazy super heroic just gets smaller results for a given result. Note that without ability score increases and with only 20 levels characters typically don't get worse at off skills and the entire modifier range is greatly cut back. A 20th level PC could have +5 for training, +5 for ability, +10 for level, and generally not more than +3 permanent, for +23, and that's the extreme. A completely unskilled character would be at +10 and realistic spreads are in the 10 point range at all levels. High skill characters however can count on getting better check results and exceeding a DV by 5 or more can produce 'extra benefits', while failing by 5 or more can produce 'plot complications'.

I'm sure where I'm at is rather further out from what many would call '4.5e' though. This game is really no longer compatible with 4e, though it plays pretty much the same in most respects, just a little faster and looser.

MoutonRustique · Jan 7, 2016

AbdulAlhazred said:
[...]
I'm sure where I'm at is rather further out from what many would call '4.5e' though. This game is really no longer compatible with 4e, though it plays pretty much the same in most respects, just a little faster and looser.

"Mechanical" compatibility with 4e is certainly a plus (especially for the amazing mass of monsters and foes), but "conceptual" is more important in my book.

This sounds very much like a 4.5 to me! (If you evolve from 4e as 4e did from 3e, a 4.5e would have some pretty important modifications indeed.)

Anyway, do you happen to have a written down version of all this (other than these posts... even if they would serve pretty well, actually) in a sharable format anywhere?

Manbearcat · Jan 8, 2016

AbdulAlhazred said:
I'm sure where I'm at is rather further out from what many would call '4.5e' though. This game is really no longer compatible with 4e, though it plays pretty much the same in most respects, just a little faster and looser.

MoutonRustique said:
"Mechanical" compatibility with 4e is certainly a plus (especially for the amazing mass of monsters and foes), but "conceptual" is more important in my book.

Honestly, the more I think about it, I would just hack Dungeon World with the following:

1) Add Healing Surges, Second Winds, and class moves that trigger the use of surges in combat.

2) Give all monsters stuff that front-loads their payload (eg first damage is either best of 2 dice or +1d6 or something).

* Those two should engender the "Rally Narrative" that is quintessential 4e combat.

3) Deepen and broaden the tags and their usage (the Forceful tag becoming even more rampant than it already is - it is effectively "forced movement") and have synergy with the usage of tags (eg they trigger player moves).

4) Have each player start combat with 1 Prep (basically the encounter power facet of play).

Dungeon World (GMed correctly and deftly) hews so much to 4e's high-octane, push play toward conflict aesthetic and its action/adventure, big-damn-hero genre tropes (PCs start out extremely robust and merely broaden their resource-base as play progresses) that the only thing it is really missing is the "Rally Narrative" and some more depth in "team synergy" (it is already there, but to 4e-ify it, it needs to be amped up).

AbdulAlhazred · Jan 9, 2016

MoutonRustique said:
"Mechanical" compatibility with 4e is certainly a plus (especially for the amazing mass of monsters and foes), but "conceptual" is more important in my book.

This sounds very much like a 4.5 to me! (If you evolve from 4e as 4e did from 3e, a 4.5e would have some pretty important modifications indeed.)

Anyway, do you happen to have a written down version of all this (other than these posts... even if they would serve pretty well, actually) in a sharable format anywhere?

I've written down a lot of messy kinda this and that. We have had little chance to really PLAY of late, a foray into 5e intervened, and then there was a general "lets play something else besides D&D for a while" sentiment. Really what I'm missing is a lot of the nuts and bolts. I mean I have devised a set of core rules, not hard given they're basically 4e with a few minor tweaks, and some different progressions and whatnot. Its certainly a pretty big mess, and some parts have been revised based on different experiments and discussions, while other parts are no longer consistent with those parts, etc. Not that I can't share it, but it may not make a huge amount of sense in total.