D&D 4E 4e Clone − help create it!

Xaelvaen said:

We are right now experimenting with a similar system, where you can roll a limited number of d6s (daily resource) to add to a d20 roll. The rule is, it literally increases what the dice counts as, and like a true d20, it cannot roll higher than 20.

Click to expand...

Regarding your own experiment. From what I understand, the expertise bonus is always a d6 at any tier. The improvement comes from the number of times per day the d6 gets added. Perhaps, the character gains one expertise die per number of the proficiency bonus? Like hit dice, the expertise dice renew at the end of each long rest.

In this case, the expertise dice are almost identical to the Bard inspiration dice. As such, I dont mind its total with the d20 exceeding 20 − as long as it cannot stack with Bard inspiration. In other words, Bard inspiration is specifically granting an expertise bonus type. Likewise Bless, and similar bonuses.



With regard to all of these good suggestions for how to handle expertise. The rule of thumb always boils down to combat. What does ‘longsword expertise’ look like. ... And do the players mind when the monsters use ‘longsword expertise’ against them?

My next goal is to create a Warlord class, using the Foursome Advancement chassis, and that is suitable to use in a standard 5e party.

It is difficult to decide how powerful the Warlord needs to be, because the 5e classes themselves are so imbalanced with each other.

In 5e, the features of the level-1 Cleric are worth about 4 feats. The features of the Fighter are worth about 3 feats. And the features of the Wizard are worth about 2 feats. Likewise that of the Rogue are about 2 feats. The differences in power are notable.



My assessments of the 5e classes are as follows.

• 5e is extremely careful to avoid any overpowered features.

• Oppositely, 5e has lots and lots of features that are underpowered. Sometimes even absurdly underpowered.

• So, 5e requires system mastery to avoid the less useful features.

• 5e preserves the ‘feel’ of old school AD&D by reintroducing the same imbalances that plagued AD&D.

• In 5e, the imbalances are less noticeable because the *broken* overpowered features are gone.

• But the underpowered features are still everpresent.

• The 5e Cleric is extremely difficult to kill − and in this sense is good at combat. However, its ability to deal any damage is carefully gated and oppressed. (For example, even the Flamestrike that the Cleric can access at spell level 5, is crappier than the Fireball at spell level 3 that other spellcasters can access. The spells are supposed to be class-neutral, and each spell evaluated on its own merit compared to other spells. But the design to punish the Cleric remains in full force in 5e.) Figuratively speaking, the 5e Cleric is still fighting with a mace and cannot have a nice sword. When the 5e Cleric finally does get the ability to deal reasonable damage in combat, via future 5e splatbooks, its unkillability is going to make the Cleric *brokenly* overpowered. In other words, 3e ‘CoDzilla’ all over again. It is inevitable, 5e will eventuate in a 5e CoDzilla, because dealing fair amounts of damage in combat is a reasonable request for D&D players to make, and when it is available, the overpowered Defense for a ‘selfish’ Cleric, will become broken. As of now, all armor, all healing, and no damage-dealing, is the old school ‘feel’ of ‘healbot’.

• In comparison, the level 1 Fighter seems ideal − about 3 feats. The features of the 5e Fighter are tricky to assess because there are so many different kinds of builds (Strength-Fighter, Dexterity-Fighter, Ranged-Fighter, and variations within each one). Some features get exploited, while other features become unusable. Even so, the ballpark figure of about 3 feats remains true. The Fighter gives a good sense of what competence in combat looks like − with both good Defense while dealing high damage Offense.

• At level 1, the Wizard is subpar. Because Gygax. And the ‘feel’ of helplessness and vulnerable dependency. To be sure, the patheticness is less extreme than in old school, but the design conceit of a useless low-level magic-user remains as alive as ever.

• Somewhat to my surprise, the 5e Rogue also seems subpar. This Rogue excels out of combat, but is touch-and-go in combat. The Rogue is good at avoiding being hit, but its fragility doesnt get compensated in battle in other ways, such as dealing high damage. Sneak Attack is good, but other classes deal more damage − Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, even Ranger.

• In sum, the Warlord will probably model the 5e Fighter, being worth about three feats by level 1.



Personally, I care more about characters that are equal in power in the combat pillar. I love narrative and out-of-combat. At the same time, when combat does happen I want all players to participate comparably. Similarly, I want the Fighter to do better out of combat.

Relatedly, when I create my own character to play, I care more about being able to create the kind of character concept that I have in mind − much more than I care about being forced to conform to an old school ‘feel’.

Sometimes, I want to play a ‘Jock Wizard’, a tough, melee-competent, Wizard who fights with melee spells rather than melee swords. Sometimes I want a ‘kiting’ range-attacking Wizard who is the primary healer. And so on, for the customizability of other classes.



The first goal is to get the Warlord right. With 4e in mind, my intention is for it to be with straightforward features and without Superiority Dice. But maybe Warlord fans like Superiority Dice for their Warlord?

Yaarel said:

Regarding your own experiment. From what I understand, the expertise bonus is always a d6 at any tier. The improvement comes from the number of times per day the d6 gets added.

Click to expand...

When I said 'similar system', we are currently playing a game we built from a core mechanic from Talislanta, and it is otherwise entirely a homebrew endeavor. In this, we are experimenting with a pool of d6s daily to adjust a roll, yes.

However, when I referenced for expertise using the dice addition with 5E, I did imply to use the proficiency system, just cap the d20 + expertise at a total of 20 before static modifiers.

I definitely agree with Bardic Inspiration being a form of expertise, though I waver on Bless because it requires concentration (unless that mechanic is being absolved). Being limited to 1 instance of a concentration spell means that +1d4 is slightly more earned than a bonus that once given, cannot be taken away. That's just my thoughts, anyway.

Yaarel said:

• Somewhat to my surprise, the 5e Rogue also seems subpar. This Rogue excels out of combat, but is touch-and-go in combat. The Rogue is good at avoiding being hit, but its fragility doesnt get compensated in battle in other ways, such as dealing high damage. Sneak Attack is good, but other classes deal more damage − Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, even Ranger

Click to expand...

I think they stripped the power of rogue due to Sneak Attacks very cleverly worded 'Once per Turn' instead of once per round. A simple opportunity attack can double the rogue's sneak attack output for a round. While I don't personally agree with that particular dependency on damage output, on an opportunity attack round, rogue's can seriously punish enemies. They are just fewer and far between in 5E, and hard to get advantage on.

Yaarel said:

The first goal is to get the Warlord right. With 4e in mind, my intention is for it to be with straightforward features and without Superiority Dice. But maybe Warlord fans like Superiority Dice for their Warlord?

Click to expand...

Every time I play Fighter in 5E, or anyone at my table does to be honest, Action Surge is the part that always screams at me "If a fighter could give that to someone else... we have a Warlord!". I know there's the one fighter subclass in the Sword Coast book that allows features along those veins, but it doesn't quite cut it to feel like a true Warlord.

So, giving Warlord an Action Surge they can use on someone else would be a nice start, I think.

@Xaelvaen

I am leaning toward Bard Inspiration being the Expertise bonus type.

The Bless spell can probably work as the Magic bonus type − thus would not stack with magic weapons, if any.

Bless is ‘non-broken’, but in terms of what bonuses the Bounded Accuracy normally makes available, something like Bless shouldnt really become available until level 7 (spell slot 4) (or higher!). Compare the less good Magic Weapon spell.

As such, Bless works better a class feature, rather than a spell. Otherwise, the spell would remain unavailable until at least level 7.

Interestingly enough, the Magic Weapon spell equals the Magic bonus type progression in the Advancement chassis, plus an additional plus one. So, in a high magic campaign when players already have magic weapons, the Bless feature is likely to improve this number by an additional +1.



Regarding the Warlord, yeah, the ability grant the Surge to an other character does wonders!

Also, dividing out Extra Attacks.

Probably, the Warlord can use the Fighter base class as the chassis. It looks something like the following.

Note. The Advancement chassis alternates base class features by level − specialization then standard then specialization then standard capstone. The following table only lists the base class levels without the specialization levels. All of the specialization features of the archetype to distinguish one kind of Fighter from an other will be inserted in the levels between these base class levels.

A player always can play the archetype from level 1 up, even if only in a rudimentary way, such as picking a special atwill (maneuver, cantrip) with the appropriate flavor. 5e sometimes delays this decision to level 2 or 3, with awkward consequences. For the level 1 Fighter specialization level, more choices for the ‘Fighting Style’ can explicitly implement the ‘archetype’. So for example, the ‘Fighting Style’ of an Eldritch Knight at level 1 might be Mage Armor. The ‘Fighting Style’ of the Warlord at level 1 might be Commanders Strike or other appropriate 4e maneuver.

At the moment, level 3 squeezes in both Action Surge and Extra Attack. I dont want to move Extra Attack to level 7 because it is a quintessential Fighter feature. Meanwhile, Action Surge already delays from level 2. Either I will make the balance work, or I will juggle it around later. Heh, as it is now, it is quite a capstone for the novice tier!

Finally, I am only assessing the balance at the novice tier. Each class level will have features worth about a feat. The higher tiers correlate moreorless with the standard 5e Fighter. The Fighter really is powerful, including at high tiers. Probably, I want there to be more options here or there, to trade some of this damage-dealing for various utility effects.

If any Fighter fans or Warlord fans have any ‘Wizard envy’, let me know some of the stuff that a Fighter or Warlord should be able to do!







In sum, EVERY Fighter will have the above features, regardless of archetype.

In this sense, the Warlord probably be a Fighter, but with the specialization ability to grant ones own Action Surge to an ally.

You can convert a lot of stuff from 4E to 5E as is the big rewrites are classes and monsters.

For example at will action granting is a bad idea if you rewrite the rogue and some other classes that problem goes away.

All the 4E fiddly bits like plus one or whatever goes away and becomes a d4 or advantage/disadvantage.

Healing surges become second wind a'la the fighter ability, difference is everyone gets them. Less math as well no 25% just hit dice plus level.

Most of the 5E damage dealing spells are also fine. They become your failed, the 5E cantrips can be used as is perhaps dropping the scaling part as if you keep that part you'll need to go with 5E damage on the warrior/striker types.

Encounter powers are now short rest which take 1 or 5 minutes. Or word them like Xanathars.

Action surge could carry over as is along with grant action surge.

To convert a 4E power look at what it did and convert it. As long as it's doing something similar conceptually it doesn't matter if it's slightly different like a 4E fireball or the 8d6 5E version.

Zardnaar said:

You can convert a lot of stuff from 4E to 5E as is the big rewrites are classes and monsters.

For example at will action granting is a bad idea if you rewrite the rogue and some other classes that problem goes away.

All the 4E fiddly bits like plus one or whatever goes away and becomes a d4 or advantage/disadvantage.

Healing surges become second wind a'la the fighter ability, difference is everyone gets them. Less math as well no 25% just hit dice plus level.

Most of the 5E damage dealing spells are also fine. They become your failed, the 5E cantrips can be used as is perhaps dropping the scaling part as if you keep that part you'll need to go with 5E damage on the warrior/striker types.

Encounter powers are now short rest which take 1 or 5 minutes. Or word them like Xanathars.

Action surge could carry over as is along with grant action surge.

To convert a 4E power look at what it did and convert it. As long as it's doing something similar conceptually it doesn't matter if it's slightly different like a 4E fireball or the 8d6 5E version.

Click to expand...

The translation from 4e to 5e is doable, and there are routine equivalences. Each translation needs a doublecheck to make sure that its mechanics interacts with other parts of 5e. Earlier, I wrote up a Fireball spell format that uses the 5e Fireball math − despite the fact the 4e math is more accurate. 5e designers intentionally made Fireball extra powerful for plot protection because it is an iconic part of the D&D tradition. I have mixed feelings about this because it disrupts the math of all 5e area attack spells, and likewise the math of slot 3 spells. But I hope for Foursome to be compatible with the math for 5e.

WARLORD

Warlord as a Fighter subclass looks something like this at the Novice tier. At level 1, Warlord appears as a Fighting Style. Higher levels become its own Fighter Archetype.




Archery: You began mastering the bow early in your life. Instead of proficiency with a Shield, you gain a +2 Expertise bonus to attacks with a bow.

Elven Chain: Instead of proficiencies with Medium Armor and Heavy Armor, you know the Mage Armor spell, and can on yourself as an action at-will cast it or dispel it. The armor appears in any style you wish, including an invisible force. According to high elf decorum, the Mage Armor appears as a silk-like fine chain armor tunic, worn under or over a fabric tunic of bold solid colors and intricate embroidery. You gain a Wizard cantrip of your choice. Instead of the Strength class defense proficiency, you can choose Intelligence.

Warlord: Instead of proficiency with Heavy Armor, you gain the Surveyal maneuver and the Rally Morale capability. Instead of the Strength class defense proficiency, you can choose Intelligence or Charisma.



−




In sum, the Archery style is more powerful than the other options, thus loses the less usable Shield proficiency to help ‘pay’ for it. The Elven Chain is to help an Eldritch Knight feel like an Eldritch Knight at level 1. Finally the Warlord maneuver and capability help the Warlord feel like a Warlord at level 1.

Yaarel said:

The translation from 4e to 5e is doable, and there are routine equivalences. Each translation needs a doublecheck to make sure that its mechanics interacts with other parts of 5e. Earlier, I wrote up a Fireball spell format that uses the 5e Fireball math − despite the fact the 4e math is more accurate. 5e designers intentionally made Fireball extra powerful for plot protection because it is an iconic part of the D&D tradition. I have mixed feelings about this because it disrupts the math of all 5e area attack spells, and likewise the math of slot 3 spells. But I hope for Foursome to be compatible with the math for 5e.

Click to expand...

Fireballs not even that good in 5E because of HP inflation. And it was even worse in 4E for much the same reason.