D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how D&D 4E could have looked

OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them." Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better...

OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them."
Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better idea so that your hero can adjust role to circumstance. I have to defend this NPC right now vs I have to take down the big bad right now vs I have to do minion cleaning right now, I am inspiring allies in my interesting way, who need it right now.

and the obligatory
Argghhhh on this. " I wanted classes to have different power acquisition schedules"

And thematic differences seemed to have been carried fine.
 
Click to expand...

Shasarak

Shasarak

Banned
Banned
pemerton said:
I don't have any views about 3E. I've played only a very small amount of it, and as a design I think it has a number of well-known problems.

The most interesting thing to be about 3E is that if you apply a level-bonus to AC but call it "natural armour" then many RPGers will regard that as a simulation even though it is just a label with no meaning in the fiction whatsoever (ie the best possible magic armour is +5 plate for around +14 AC, while there are natural armour bonuses in the 30s - what is "natural armour" that is so much better than what the best smith can possibly forge?). Mutatis mutandis for many other aspects of 3E.
Click to expand...

Why would the best possible magic armour that you could make for a human be the best possible armour? Logic tells me that bigger creatures with higher strength could have an armour that is better then the best human armour. For example why would Dragons be limited to wearing human armour?

I think a muich bigger problem is when you can have a naked human with a better AC then a human wearing the best possible human armour. That is a massive derp for me.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

P

pemerton

Legend
Imaro said:
TFrom the 5e DMG... Levels 17-20 Masters of the World

"...characters have superheroic capabilities, and their deeds and adventures are stuff of legend. Ordinary people can hardly dream if such heights of of power...or such terrible dangers."

It's nearly the same description word for word.
Click to expand...
[MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has already pointed out that the words are the same.

What are the superheroic capabilities of a 17th level fighter in 5e?
 

P

pemerton

Legend
Sadras said:
So what would you do in 4e with a 1st level PC attempting to strike a Pit Fiend? Not use AC? Skill challenge the entire combat? Minionise the Pit Fiend?
Click to expand...
I can't imagine that even coming up.

A question that makes more sense to me would be what would you do in 4e with a paragon gropu of PCs fighting a pit fiend? And the answer is, to rewrite it as a solo creature: a pit fiend is the sort of foe that can be defeated only if a whole group of paragon characters gives it their all.
 

P

pemerton

Legend
Imaro said:
4e gave you one choice... implement mythical fantasy or stop playing at a certain level.
Click to expand...
Why not just ignore epic destinies if you don't like them? That doesn't seem like a super-hard variation to implement.

Imaro said:
Honestly this is baffling me we have @pemerton claiming mythical fantasy is an inherent part of 4e but then you're saying it's casually easy to remove or ignore it... which one is it?
Click to expand...
I've never used the word "inherent".

I've said that there is a clear mechanical framework which allows (i) ascertaining what is feasible by reference to the fiction, then (ii) assigning an appropriate DC by reference to the DC-by-level chart, then (iii) resolving the situation via the skill challenge (closed scene resolution). Notice that it's fiction first. If someone wants to use "mundane" fiction they can do so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Imaro

Imaro

Legend
Greg K said:
I am one of those people, but then I also disliked paragon paths as well and wished both had been optional as were 3e PrCs.
Click to expand...

Apparently they were optional?? I don't remember them being presented that way but maybe in a later book or Dragon article this was explained...
 

Imaro

Imaro

Legend
pemerton said:
Why not just ignore epic destinies if you don't like them? That doesn't seem like a super-hard variation to implement.
Click to expand...

Are they optional? Do they provide a power boost that is necessary for the higher levels? From what I remember the books presented them as a non-optional part of character advancement.
 

P

pemerton

Legend
Imaro said:
Are they optional? Do they provide a power boost that is necessary for the higher levels? From what I remember the books presented them as a non-optional part of character advancement.
Click to expand...
Hang on - so you don't want superheroics but you do want a power boost?

You said this:

Imaro said:
Epic Destinies are part of the game... you are required to select one... correct? That's not strongly supporting that's requiring it. Sure anything can be changed with enough houserules and reskins but the point is that that isn't easy
Click to expand...

But in fact it's trivial to just not use an epic destiny. Or, as [MENTION=12749]MwaO[/MENTION] pointed out, you might mandate use of the same epic destiny for everyone (eg Destined Scion was mentioned).

I think anyone who found that hard wouldn't be up to the task of modifying 5e in the sorts of ways that you and [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION] are saying can be done for those who want play experience X or Y.
 

P

pemerton

Legend
Jester David said:
Example Time!
Working on a revision of my Tactician class. (You can see earlier iterations somewhere in this thread.)

I'm poking away at a better 10th level ability for the "lancer" subclass. Little features that improve defence or mobility. And I had the idea for a pole vault feature. You plant your lance and add it's height to your high and long jump abilities.
That sounds pretty cool, right?
But... if I codify that, it means prior to 10th level, you cannot pole vault. And since it's a class feature, presumably you can't pole vault without that option or a comparable class feature. Suddenly, I've taken away a potential improvisational move, locking it behind a class feature.

That's the problem...
Click to expand...
This example doesn't seem to raise issues that aren't already raised by (say) a thief's second story work ability. But in any event it is not an example of close scene resolution giving less room to improvise.
 

Imaro

Imaro

Legend
pemerton said:
Hang on - so you don't want superheroics but you do want a power boost?
Click to expand...

Yes... 5e provides alternatives in place of 5e Epic Boons if you want something lower powered/less mythic in scope. Does 4e?

pemerton said:
You said this:

​

But in fact it's trivial to just not use an epic destiny. Or, as [MENTION=12749]MwaO[/MENTION] pointed out, you might mandate use of the same epic destiny for everyone (eg Destined Scion was mentioned).

I think anyone who found that hard wouldn't be up to the task of modifying 5e in the sorts of ways that you and [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION] are saying can be done for those who want play experience X or Y.
Click to expand...

I think it's easy to yank anything out of a game... it's understanding the consequences that I am asking about. Especially as it relates to combat and task resolution... are you saying a character with an epic destiny and one without are comparable in power?
 

Jester David

Jester David

Hero
pemerton said:
This example doesn't seem to raise issues that aren't already raised by (say) a thief's second story work ability. But in any event it is not an example of close scene resolution giving less room to improvise.
Click to expand...
How do you figure?

One ability makes you literally climb faster and jump farther. The other says you need a specific ability to attempt a task, that prior to an ability being written could theoretically be attempted by anyone.

Question
Would you let a rogue player use a quarterstaff to pole vault as an improvised move?
Would you still let that same rogue do so if a monk ability granted you the ability to pole vault? How about a feat?
If yes, what is the benefit of taking that subclass or feat or you can just gain the benefit for free?
 

Similar Threads

M.T. Black
Dragon Reflections #74
2 3 4 5
Replies
49
Views
11K
Oryzarius
Oryzarius
E
D&D 4E Guide to Itemisation in 4e
2
Replies
13
Views
2K
Exocist
E
darjr
D&D General The Resurrection of Mike Mearls Games.
23 24 25 26 27
Replies
264
Views
33K
Zaukrie
Z
M.T. Black
Dragon Reflections #71
2 3
Replies
21
Views
7K
Marc Radle
Marc Radle
Alzrius
D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023
350 351 352 353 354
Replies
4K
Views
228K
Zardnaar
Zardnaar

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top