D&D 4E How To Clone 4E Using 5E Rules

Tony Vargas · May 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
Not including the Warlord put that out as an obvious lie to 4e fans.

Mearls really went out of his way to INCLUDE anything/everything fans of the Warlord said the game needed the Warlord /for/. The game needs to be able to model an Inspiring Leader! Ok, here's a feat /called/ Inspiring Leader, it's completely passive & blah, yet even a tad broken, there, you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. You need to be able to rally allies to return to the fight! OK, here's a BM maneuver called 'Rally,' it's explicitly useless for getting a fallen ally back into the fight, but it's called Rally, so you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. And, Commander's STrike, it was iconic! OK, here's a BM maneuver you can use half as often as an encounter power in 4e, that's not much like it at all, but is called Commander's Strike, so you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. That's still not a martial leader. OK, ANTOHTER fighter sub-class, what's coming out next? SCAG? OK, Purple Dragon Knight, obscure PrC, it's totally martial, it leads, (Kobold Press, make that happen!) we even slipped in a little-w 'warlord' typo, so you know what it's for, there, you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. There's still the tactical genius concept who helps his allies out that way. Way ahead of you, also in SKAG: the Mastermind, a Rogue sub-class with juiced-up Help actions, there you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. We need the Warlord as a martial class that fills the support roll. Just re-skin a Valor Bard or War Cleric or Paladin, they're good in melee, great at support, just close your eyes and pretend it's not really magic! But none of that is anywhere near a Warlord. Fine! Fine! Here's half-finished fighter sub-class that's actually straight-up called a Warlord, there you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone.
Why not just a Warlord /class/?
Oh, it's too narrow a concept, couldn't possibly have enough sub-classes to fill it out, can't justify adding it to the game.

Final score:

Feats: 2 (inspiring leader, martial adept)
Maneuvers: 2-6, depending on how generous you're feeling (Commander's Strike & Rally at a minimum).
Sub-classes: 3-8 (Fighter: PDK, BM and Rogue: Mastermind, at a minimum. But each of the following have also been suggested as Warlord stand-ins: Fighter: Cavalier, Samurai; Cleric: War; Bard: valor; Paladin: Oath of the Crown)

Warlord: 0

Immortal Sun · May 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
Not including the Warlord put that out as an obvious lie to 4e fans.

While I'm not a huge stickler for including the Warlord, there are a number of elements that clearly mark 5E as "the edition for everyone but 4E fans". The fact that it doesn't include the AEDU system, or any way to even remotely replicate it and does include the Vancian casting system was pretty telling on its face who the intended target audience was.

Heck I'd even have been more accepting of the spell points system.

dave2008 · May 29, 2019

EzekielRaiden said:
If I may, I'd like to test a theory. So I'd like to ask two questions:
1. How long had you been playing, prior to the attempted 4e game?
2. How long did you attempt to play 4e?

I of course have a hypothesis, and this is a rather meager attempt to test it, but it's what I have.

Ok, OK, you built enough tension / anticipation - what was your hypothesis!?

Garthanos · May 29, 2019

4e heroic begins closer to level 5 in 5e.

dave2008 · May 29, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
While I'm not a huge stickler for including the Warlord, there are a number of elements that clearly mark 5E as "the edition for everyone but 4E fans". The fact that it doesn't include the AEDU system, or any way to even remotely replicate it and does include the Vancian casting system was pretty telling on its face who the intended target audience was.

Heck I'd even have been more accepting of the spell points system.

IDK. I came back to D&D with 4e and I don't feel that 5e doesn't include a bit of 4e in it. I don't think it needs to model the AEDU system to have been influenced by 4e. In fact, I think there are traces of it (AEDU design principles) in their, but I don't know how you could fully incorporate it and also not have it (for those who didn't like it). I personally feel 5e did a pretty good job of incorporating parts of 4e along with parts of other editions. Is it full on 4e, no - but that would be really odd if it was.

PS, isn't there a spell point system included in the DMG?

Garthanos · May 29, 2019

Tony Vargas said:
Mearls really went out of his way to INCLUDE anything/everything fans of the Warlord said the game needed the Warlord /for/. The game needs to be able to model an Inspiring Leader! Ok, here's a feat /called/ Inspiring Leader, it's completely passive & blah, yet even a tad broken, there, you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. You need to be able to rally allies to return to the fight! OK, here's a BM maneuver called 'Rally,' it's explicitly useless for getting a fallen ally back into the fight, but it's called Rally, so you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. And, Commander's STrike, it was iconic! OK, here's a BM maneuver you can use half as often as an encounter power in 4e, that's not much like it at all, but is called Commander's Strike, so you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. That's still not a martial leader. OK, ANTOHTER fighter sub-class, what's coming out next? SCAG? OK, Purple Dragon Knight, obscure PrC, it's totally martial, it leads, (Kobold Press, make that happen!) we even slipped in a little-w 'warlord' typo, so you know what it's for, there, you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. There's still the tactical genius concept who helps his allies out that way. Way ahead of you, also in SKAG: the Mastermind, a Rogue sub-class with juiced-up Help actions, there you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone. We need the Warlord as a martial class that fills the support roll. Just re-skin a Valor Bard or War Cleric or Paladin, they're good in melee, great at support, just close your eyes and pretend it's not really magic! But none of that is anywhere near a Warlord. Fine! Fine! Here's half-finished fighter sub-class that's actually straight-up called a Warlord, there you can't ask for that any more, you have it, done, leave me alone.
Why not just a Warlord /class/?
Oh, it's too narrow a concept, couldn't possibly have enough sub-classes to fill it out, can't justify adding it to the game.

Final score:

Feats: 2 (inspiring leader, martial adept)
Maneuvers: 2-6, depending on how generous you're feeling (Commander's Strike & Rally at a minimum).
Sub-classes: 3-8 (Fighter: PDK, BM and Rogue: Mastermind, at a minimum. But each of the following have also been suggested as Warlord stand-ins: Fighter: Cavalier, Samurai; Cleric: War; Bard: valor; Paladin: Oath of the Crown)

Warlord: 0

That soup is indeed a mess ...

Garthanos · May 29, 2019

Yaarel said:
So, 4e-esque.

HEROIC
1-4 (Student)
5-8 (Professional)

PARAGON
9-12 (Expert)
13-16 (Luminary)

EPIC
17-20 (Legend)
21-24 (Immortal!)

I was trying to respond to this earlier

i think if you consider 1 to 4 of 5e to have no analog in 4e you are closer to hitting the mark. They are not heroic.

Yaarel · May 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
I was trying to respond to this earlier

i think if you consider 1 to 4 of 5e to have no analog in 4e you are closer to hitting the mark. They are not heroic.

I was thinking 4e-esque *5e*, but I agree with your assessment. So.

STUDENT
1-4 (Student)

HEROIC
5-8 (Professional)
9-12 (Master)

PARAGON
13-16 (Luminary, Great/Grand/Arch, Noble/Lord/Lady)
17-20 (Legend)

EPIC
21-24 (Immortal)

If so, it means that 4e Epic and 5e Epic are the same thing, with 5e still lacking rules for immortal characters of various flavors.

Garthanos · May 29, 2019

Yaarel said:
I was thinking 4e-esque *5e*, but I agree with your assessment. So.

STUDENT
1-4 (Student)

HEROIC
5-8 (Professional)
9-12 (Master)

PARAGON
13-16 (Luminary, Great/Grand/Arch, Noble/Lord/Lady)
17-20 (Legend)

EPIC
21-24 (Immortal)

If so, it means that 4e Epic and 5e Epic are the same thing, with 5e still lacking rules for immortal characters of various flavors.

Maybe depends on whether you consider 5e to have true Epic. If we take their proposed flavors at closer to its word it works out closer to 1 per 2 levels. But yes I think I see how maybe 5e characters are missing the sense of over all awesomeness that trading off either a feat or attribute in crease and the Missing story elements of paragon paths and Epic Destinies. And I have been considering adding to 5e things like "General Competency" so that heros get better faster and do indeed really outclass lower tier enemies.

Heck to be honest I thought there were issues of game board interfering with Epic being true to scale in 4e as well. In other arenas Rituals should be summoning armies of zombies and other elements not really fully developed like Martial Practices filling the same niche.

Yaarel · May 29, 2019

Garthanos said:
Maybe depends on whether you consider 5e to have true Epic. If we take their proposed flavors at closer to its word it works out closer to 1 per 2 levels. But yes I think I see how maybe 5e characters are missing the sense of over all awesomeness that trading off either a feat or attribute in crease and the Missing story elements of paragon paths and Epic Destinies. And I have been considering adding to 5e things like "General Competency" so that heros get better faster and do indeed really outclass lower tier enemies.

Heck to be honest I thought there were issues of game board interfering with Epic being true to scale in 4e as well.
In other arenas Rituals should be summoning armies of zombies and other elements not really fully developed like Martial Practices filling the same niche.

4e "Epic Destinies" puts the finger on what is missing from 5e.