D&D 4E Some Thoughts on 4e

[Callowbran]

Wizards were (especially by the end of 3.5) able to do anything, at any time, in any situation better than any class. Even those that specialize in those things that specialize in that role.

...

In short, I think that neither cleric nor wizard needs help to feel more like they used to...clerics had the illusion of option and wizards had simply way way way too many options.

DC

This is so true of 3e. Wizards were incredible jacks-of-all trades who couldn't melee fight well, but they frequently could launch the biggest munchkin spell of all time (3e fireball).

Every party had to have a cleric, and the cleric spent most of her time healing the fighter.

I haven't yet found anything hugely unbalanced in 4e -- my enthusiasm for the new rule set is strong and growing. This game is a keeper.

 

[Plane Sailing]

frequently could launch the biggest munchkin spell of all time (3e fireball).

I beg your pardon? The 3e fireball was virtually useless! tops out at average 35 damage when you are 10th level, in 3e-land where everything had expanded hit points including Con bonuses?

You could perhaps argue that it was over-useful in earlier days when it wasn't capped at 10d6, but surely not in 3e.

Much bigger munchkin spells would be polymorph, righteous might, 3.0e blade barrier, miracle...

 

[Benimoto]

I find myself on KarinsDad's side here - to me, having any class or race that can be teleporting around an essentially limitless number of times a day breaks ranks with all fantasy literature that I've ever read (i.e. pre-1980) and conceptually with all swords and sorcery that I've read or played.

The whole "shifting into the shadowfell" thing, I think, has an uncanny resemblance to Bilbo Baggins using the One Ring in The Hobbit. Maybe it doesn't to you, and I admit it's far from an exact match, but that's what I thought about when I first read it.

And eladrin fey step absolutely obviates climb and jump for many typical low level obstacles - climbs and crevasses. Not to mention bars and grills.

And again, maybe it's a difference in DMing style here. I've rarely been particularly successful at injecting these kind of low-level, dead end obstacles with much drama. Thus, it's absolutely fine with me that the burden of negotiating the obstacle is shifted from the guy who can climb/jump really well to the eladrin.

Unless you planned for it to be an impassable obstacle (Kamikaze Midget's "wrought iron fence made of tigers"), in which case I can see and share in your annoyance, then you want the party to get across these kind of obstacles. In most cases, all the eladrin is doing is skipping either a die roll, or the need for a specific piece of equipment. I think that's okay. That's his racial ability, and he's paying the opportunity cost for it.

Furthermore, I don't know what kind of game was being played by those who claim that wizards could outdo every other class in 3e, but frankly I never saw the 3e wizard get close to the functionality and survivability of 3e clerics or druids. Yes, there was a problem with casters vs non-casters in 3e relating to what they could potentially accomplish, but that was true for all casting classes (and more so for the divine casters).

And finally, as a both as a player and a DM of paranoid 3e wizards, I can say that short of an extreme ambush situation, the wizard is easily the most survivable member of the party. As an optimized wizard, my AC was always through the roof. High Dexterity, mithril buckler/shield spell, (greater) mage armor, protection from evil, and spells like dragonskin or pre-errata alter self all provided a plethora of stacking AC bonuses. And I was a crafting wizard, so my save-increasing stats were high, and I had the best cloak/vest of resistance. Plus, you have spells like (greater) invisibility, (greater) mirror image and (mass/overland) flight making you unhittable to begin with. And then if all else fails, you're the party member who can instantly dimension door/teleport away in an emergency.

Again, if you don't think the Wizard was the most powerful member of a 3e party, you were playing them with self-imposed restrictions which were not part of the rules of the game, or not part of the social contract in all groups.

 

[KarinsDad]

And finally, as a both as a player and a DM of paranoid 3e wizards, I can say that short of an extreme ambush situation, the wizard is easily the most survivable member of the party. As an optimized wizard, my AC was always through the roof. High Dexterity, mithril buckler/shield spell, (greater) mage armor, protection from evil, and spells like dragonskin or pre-errata alter self all provided a plethora of stacking AC bonuses. And I was a crafting wizard, so my save-increasing stats were high, and I had the best cloak/vest of resistance. Plus, you have spells like (greater) invisibility, (greater) mirror image and (mass/overland) flight making you unhittable to begin with. And then if all else fails, you're the party member who can instantly dimension door/teleport away in an emergency.

Again, if you don't think the Wizard was the most powerful member of a 3e party, you were playing them with self-imposed restrictions which were not part of the rules of the game, or not part of the social contract in all groups.

I don't quite remember any of our games like this.

We always start campaigns off at first level. So, all of these wonderful spells and items are not available until many months or even a year plus of gaming down the road. There were lots of opportunities to not even survive that long for a Wizard, especially at low level.

For example, an 8th level Wizard usually had about 16 spells. If he preps half of them for defense as per your paranoid model, that allows for very few encounters because he runs out of offensive spells in 2 or 3 encounters. And if he is casting 1 minute per level Protection From Evil in combat, then he is wasting a round where he is not adding to the survivability of the group and putting more of a strain on the Divine PCs to cure.

Sure, if the Wizard survives to about 11th level or so, he starts getting ahead of the curve of many other PCs because he has enough spells to be both offensive and defensive. But at least in our games, that's a very small percentage of the lifetime of the character. The vast majority of any PC was from level one to ten, and at those levels, the PC Wizard was not Superman.

I agree with Plane Sailing. Until higher levels, most PC Wizards did not steal the show. And they were nowhere near as durable as a Sorcerer or Psion or Cleric or Druid.

 

[Bond James Bond]

Until higher levels, most PC Wizards did not steal the show. And they were nowhere near as durable as a Sorcerer or Psion or Cleric or Druid.

So we agree than, that 3.x had not just balance issues with wizards, but with all casting classes, at least on higher levels?

 

[ExploderWizard]

The whole teleportation thing is only an issue because its part of a system that likes to punish movement rather than encourage it. Opportunity attacks, interrupts, and such things make moving a tedious process and draws too much focus to the "game board" requiring every step to be analyzed and considered. For an abstract, multi second combat round system this level of detail is out of place.

 

[CubeKnight]

I don't quite remember any of our games like this.

We always start campaigns off at first level. So, all of these wonderful spells and items are not available until many months or even a year plus of gaming down the road. There were lots of opportunities to not even survive that long for a Wizard, especially at low level.

For example, an 8th level Wizard usually had about 16 spells. If he preps half of them for defense as per your paranoid model, that allows for very few encounters because he runs out of offensive spells in 2 or 3 encounters. And if he is casting 1 minute per level Protection From Evil in combat, then he is wasting a round where he is not adding to the survivability of the group and putting more of a strain on the Divine PCs to cure.

Sure, if the Wizard survives to about 11th level or so, he starts getting ahead of the curve of many other PCs because he has enough spells to be both offensive and defensive. But at least in our games, that's a very small percentage of the lifetime of the character. The vast majority of any PC was from level one to ten, and at those levels, the PC Wizard was not Superman.

I agree with Plane Sailing. Until higher levels, most PC Wizards did not steal the show. And they were nowhere near as durable as a Sorcerer or Psion or Cleric or Druid.

Just my personal anecdote: We just ended a campaign at level 18 that started at level 5, IIRC. I played as a Kobold Sorcerer. Guess how many times I got hit during the campaign? 10 times top, I'd bet that it wasn't even 5. From the start, Invisibility rules. Then, you get things like Fly. Ruin Delver's Fortune. Wings of Cover. At higher levels, Ghostform and Improved Invisibility. And many others. You can avoid most attacks, and flat out deny those that can target you.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Just my personal anecdote: We just ended a campaign at level 18 that started at level 5, IIRC. I played as a Kobold Sorcerer. Guess how many times I got hit during the campaign? 10 times top, I'd bet that it wasn't even 5. From the start, Invisibility rules. Then, you get things like Fly. Ruin Delver's Fortune. Wings of Cover. At higher levels, Ghostform and Improved Invisibility. And many others. You can avoid most attacks, and flat out deny those that can target you.

My guess was that this was a 3.X campaign?

3.X overcomplicated invisibility and thus overpowered it.

Basic D&D (Moldvay) invisible targets are -4 to hit. Good benefit but surely not overpowered and no " you can't even think about targeting me because you can't see me and I am attacking you" crap.

 

[CubeKnight]

My guess was that this was a 3.X campaign?

3.X overcomplicated invisibility and thus overpowered it.

Basic D&D (Moldvay) invisible targets are -4 to hit. Good benefit but surely not overpowered and no " you can't even think about targeting me because you can't see me and I am attacking you" crap.

Yeah, D&D 3.5.

 

[KarinsDad]

So we agree than, that 3.x had not just balance issues with wizards, but with all casting classes, at least on higher levels?

Absolutely, for higher levels.

The problem for me (and for 3 other people in our group) is that 4E threw out the baby with the bathwater (it looks like we will be switching over to Pathfinder for our medieval FRP which is unfortunate since we spent quite a bit of money on 4E products). In order to correct the high level balance issues, WotC enforced a very strict "spells = powers = damage" paradigm. Sure, it's more balanced. At the cost of enjoyment. IMO. YMMV.

4E makes for a great pickup game. Kill things and grab their loot. It makes for a lacking campaign game for some people who like to play spellcasters because combat = damage and rituals = cost. There is virtually no middle ground of casting miscellaneous spells in combat or without a cost.