Forked Thread: PC concept limitations in 4e

[thecasualoblivion]

I would like to point out that its a lack of imagination that got us all these editions in the first place. There was a time when imagination was king and the action took place in the mind of the participants. At some point imagination became not good enough, more substance and complexity and options were desired. These options and complex systems continued to grow until imagination became subservient to them. Being a fighter and imagining him as a fierce gladiator was suddenly not good enough. We had to have all kinds of special rules and build options to make him a "real" gladiator. Imagination stopped serving a great many roleplayers a long time ago.

If imagination were enough to give us everything we wanted then we could just all play OD&D and call it a day. To often when an inquiry about what is wrong with older editions is brought up, 3E and 4E players are quick to respond that don't want a game of " I hit" " I miss". Ok then, fair enough but if everything you do in 4E deals damage then, in effect, you are right back to " I hit" "I miss". If nothing you do is ultimately going to do anything other than reduce hit points then the added complexity adds nothing but length to combat.

If imagination serves well enough on its own to flavor a character then lets play OD&D. I'm up for it.

To this I ask, why not have both? Why not have imagination and lots of character choice and customization? I would argue that the imagination killing factor in 3E was not the choices or system, but the fact that the mechanical results varied to the extent that they did. The wide power disparity inherent in 3E encouraged optimization above imagination. Optimization just worked too well.

On valid choices:

There is so much talk about how edition Y gives fewer choices but they are all valid choices. Edition X gave a whole slew of options but most of them were invalid.

I don't get it. A choice in character options is valid if a DM permits it in the campaign. Is optimized a dirty word? Just come out and say the choice is not optimal rather than invalid. Sub-optimal invariably means not as able the kick as much raw ass as another option. In this case then any option that makes you a less efficient meatgrinder should be abandoned.
Eventually, playtest and communication will reveal the "best" combination of class, build, and power selection for each role. Classes will be irrelavant and there will be a default Defender, Melee Striker, ect. that emerges as the only one worth playing. What then? When the "valid option" for each role is down to one choice where then will one go for choices? The next edition?

Again, its not optimization that is the issue, but the level of disparity between optimized and unoptimized, and in 3E's case the lack of transparency in the choices. Sure, some things in 4E are more optimized than others, but the difference between optimized and unoptimized is MUCH closer. In 3E, the difference between the two extremes could break the game.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

To this I ask, why not have both? Why not have imagination and lots of character choice and customization? I would argue that the imagination killing factor in 3E was not the choices or system, but the fact that the mechanical results varied to the extent that they did. The wide power disparity inherent in 3E encouraged optimization above imagination. Optimization just worked too well.

I think a "killing" factor might be - when we decide we want certain aspects not just left to the imagination, and we figure out that some ideas work effectively, and others just suck if we use the mechanics.

We have a mismatch - in our imagination, both ideas are equally valid, but if we actually use the rules to implement something according to the original imagination, it just sucks.

If you want to play a bow-wielding warrior, there is no need to make it a Fighter. You can take the Ranger and it will fit your idea.
If you want a character that blends swordplay with magic (before the FR book), you can play a Fighter/Wizard multi-class (depending on your focus, Fighter class, Wizard multiclass or the other way around), and the character will not be sucktastic or overpowered. If you try the same in 3E, you will be severely disappointed. You need some kind of "fix" - a Prestige Class or an entirely new class. Now, 4E also gives you a new class, but if you wanted a "Gandalf-like" Wizard that uses spells and swordplay, the Swordmage might go too far, and a Wizard/Fighter multiclass might be more to your liking.

 

[Alas]

Riddle me this

I've had certain character concepts in mind for so long that the separation between the character and the mechanics has blurred for me somewhat. Let's say I wanted to bring a few of my favorites over into 4th:

1) The adventuring polymath. I loved the factotum-- especially a certain changeling factotum. Mechanically, I loved the inspiration points and the chance to try out a different wacky Skill application every encounter because I just could. Being able to trot out a spell in a pinch was fun (though I confess, it was most often polymorph), and it was comforting to know that just about any weapon I chose to include in a disguise was more than a prop. Conceptually, I guess this would be a less- fisticuffs-more-book-quoting Indiana Jones, or alternately, a more-fisticuffs-less-cocaine Sherlock Holmes (who was quite the disguise artist, some people forget).

2) The angelic avatar. Another oddball I loved for all its faults was the incarnate. Leaving aside legitimate concerns about soul-sandals and obsessions with the color blue, I really dug how incarnum worked, and the fact that a low-level character had access to some pretty dramatic soulmelds. In particular, I wrote up a good-aligned incarnate who, using the Incarnate Avatar and Incarnate Weapon melds, did a pretty good job of impersonating a Shavarath angel or solar (see: Eberron cosmology) at an early level. Conceptually, this is a hardcore soldier-for-good who looks like a peaceful and un-armored fluffy, and is all the scarier for it when swooping down into the fray and brandishing the righteous sword of the Silver Flame. (Note: Incarnate Avatar didn't really grant flight until later levels, so getting any sort of non-cosmetic effect out of the wings before, say, 15th level would be groovy with me.)

3) The firebreathing squad captain. Coming on the heals of the 3.5 warlock, I was also impressed by the dragonfire adept. Great utility invocations and an area attack breath weapon-- what's not to love? I tended to come back to a human House Deneith dragonfire adept (again, see Eberron) who approached the class as a warmage tradition-- leading by example on the front line and breathing fire all over the damned place. ("Stand behind me-- this is going to get hot. Or cold, depending on their resistances.") A somewhat limited toolset, come to think of it, but very good at rephrasing every screw problem in nail terms. Target exclusion and element resistance a plus!

 

[Voadam]

I played a smart 2e human barbaric fighter who traveled widely eventually learned 1e OA martial arts then switched class to mage fairly early in his career. He continued on in a 1e campaign gaining a lot of levels of magic user but rose as a merchant prince and defined mostly for his politics. In 3e I recreated him as a ranger/monk/wizard eventually moving to harper mage and loremaster focusing on him as a political mover and monster hunter. When the same campaign converted to 3.5 he ditched monk for an unarmed feat, and loremaster for eldritch knight becoming a knowledge expert who focused on magically powering his melee attacks but using a lot magic for defense and divinations. He did a lot of planning and tactics for both combat and plots. I've used him in a number of 3e campaigns starting over at lower levels where he focused at times on politics and magic, sometimes focusing on monster hunting other times on investigations.

I've done translations of him to Shadowrun and GURPS and seen him used as an NPC hunter in a vampire game I played in.

In 4e I was thinking wizard multiclassed to some martial class to be primarily a caster with a secondary role as a martial combatant. Mechanically it is really not viable to try to do that kind of a route. Multiclassing from a martial to wizard and picking up rituals is viable and the route I now focus on.

Fighter really focuses on being a heavily armored tank and using yourself as a combat sponge which was never really the style I used in playing the character.

Lightly armored striker is more the style he mechanically used before so I was looking over ranger and rogue but they don't really feel right, if ranger had more non specific weapon style based powers it might have worked better.
Rogue had great skills but the combat stuff is all small blades and dex with surprisingly no int based options.

Warlord and leader role is looking like the closest fit I can find with a ton of feats spent on appropriate skill development.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Again, its not optimization that is the issue, but the level of disparity between optimized and unoptimized, and in 3E's case the lack of transparency in the choices. Sure, some things in 4E are more optimized than others, but the difference between optimized and unoptimized is MUCH closer. In 3E, the difference between the two extremes could break the game.

Transparency in choice is a fancy way of saying the choice isn't really meaningful.

The wider the variety in actual effect of these choices the more meaningful they become.

Man........telling someone to embrace "trasparency of choice" in character concept is like telling the old indian chief from The Outlaw Josey Whales to
" endeavor to perservere".

 

[Thasmodious]

I would like to point out that its a lack of imagination that got us all these editions in the first place.

No. Imagination has never been divorced from gaming. What got us new editions was a desire by game companies to remain game companies and game designers desire to eat and interpose a barrier between rain and their bodies.

Gaming, like anything else, evolves. The industry as a whole learns from every game system that comes out and developments in design improve games as a whole, learning from each other what works, what doesn't.

Through all of that, imagination remains the cornerstone of gaming. It is the central appeal. A miniature doesn't kill imagination anymore than a character sheet. If it was only about imagination, we could just play a freeform improv game with no books, dice or rules at all. Rules provide structure and game design evolves.

 

[ExploderWizard]

No. Imagination has never been divorced from gaming. What got us new editions was a desire by game companies to remain game companies and game designers desire to eat and interpose a barrier between rain and their bodies.

Gaming, like anything else, evolves. The industry as a whole learns from every game system that comes out and developments in design improve games as a whole, learning from each other what works, what doesn't.

Through all of that, imagination remains the cornerstone of gaming. It is the central appeal. A miniature doesn't kill imagination anymore than a character sheet. If it was only about imagination, we could just play a freeform improv game with no books, dice or rules at all. Rules provide structure and game design evolves.

When game design begins to evolve into a form wherein the game exists to serve the rules then its time to climb back into the trees and rethink a few things.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Transparency in choice is a fancy way of saying the choice isn't really meaningful.

The wider the variety in actual effect of these choices the more meaningful they become.

So a choice is only meaningful if you must study the system to discover what choices lead to effective characters and which choices lead to ineffective characters?

3E includes choices that when combined do not lead to a satisfying play experience. New or returning players could become frustrated when they discovered that the choices they made resulted in a far inferior charcater than those players with rules mastery. The evidence of such dissatisfaction has been expressed on these boards and I have personal experience with friends who became dissatisfied with 3E gameplay and stopped gaming. 3E makes character design choices more meaningful if you enjoy consequences for making bad choices.

Players who enjoy rules mastery seem dissatisfied with 4E. 4E makes choices more meaningful in the sense that most choices result in a satisfactory character. The system appeals more to players that do not wish to master the system to make an effective character.

The competitive nature of 3E character builds is what turned 3E into a game I no longer enjoy.

 

[Cadfan]

2) The angelic avatar. Another oddball I loved for all its faults was the incarnate. Leaving aside legitimate concerns about soul-sandals and obsessions with the color blue, I really dug how incarnum worked, and the fact that a low-level character had access to some pretty dramatic soulmelds. In particular, I wrote up a lawful good incarnate who, using the Incarnate Avatar and Incarnate Weapon melds, did a pretty good job of impersonating a Shavarath angel or solar (see: Eberron cosmology) at an early level. Conceptually, this is a hardcore soldier-for-good who looks like a peaceful and un-armored fluffy, and is all the scarier for it when swooping down into the fray and brandishing the righteous sword of the Silver Flame. (Note: Incarnate Avatar didn't really grant flight until later levels, so getting any sort of non-cosmetic effect out of the wings before, say, 15th level would be groovy with me.)

There is a clerical paragon path that you might like. Starts out like a regular cleric, but eventually starts sprouting wings, smiting people, and burning all enemies in a 40' radius with elemental damage. I don't think this one needs to be too complex.

3) The firebreathing squad captain. Coming on the heals of the 3.5 warlock, I was also impressed by the dragonfire adept. Great utility invocations and an area attack breath weapon-- what's not to love? I tended to come back to a human House Deneith dragonfire adept (again, see Eberron) who approached the class as a warmage tradition-- leading by example on the front line and breathing fire all over the damned place. ("Stand behind me-- this is going to get hot. Or cold, depending on their resistances.") A somewhat limited toolset, come to think of it, but very good at rephrasing every screw problem in nail terms. Target exclusion and element resistance a plus!

The simplest would be a dragonborn warlord. That does exactly what you're asking for. If you don't want it to look like a dragon, well, pretend it doesn't, I guess.

Here's a fancier option: start with a genasi. Go warlord. Multiclass into Spellscarred. Take fire related spellscarred powers, and when you hit paragon tier, take the Wildfire genasi paragon path. You'll have a whole suite of flame based powers to complement your warlord abilities. I'm not sure whether you'll actually be able to breathe fire per se, but you'll be able to light people on fire all kinds of different ways, multiple times per fight, and really, really well once or twice a day.

I don't know what to do about your Factotum idea. I don't know much about the Factotum.

 

[Phaezen]

Some tough ones. Too be fair your first two are based off mechanics/concepts that cam fairly late in the 3.0/3.x product cycle, but I will have a bash anyway. Can't promise anything.

I've had certain character concepts in mind for so long that the separation between the character and the mechanics has blurred for me somewhat. Let's say I wanted to bring a few of my favorites over into 4th:

1) The adventuring polymath. I loved the factotum-- especially a certain changeling factotum. Mechanically, I loved the inspiration points and the chance to try out a different wacky Skill application every encounter because I just could. Being able to trot out a spell in a pinch was fun (though I confess, it was most often polymorph), and it was comforting to know that just about any weapon I chose to include in a disguise was more than a prop. Conceptually, I guess this would be a less- fisticuffs-more-book-quoting Indiana Jones, or alternately, a more-fisticuffs-less-cocaine Sherlock Holmes (who was quiet the disguise artist, some people overlook).

Heavily Multiclassed Bard? Shifter race for the "polymorph"?

2) The angelic avatar. Another oddball I loved for all its faults was the incarnate. Leaving aside legitimate concerns about soul-sandals and obsessions with the color blue, I really dug how incarnum worked, and the fact that a low-level character had access to some pretty dramatic soulmelds. In particular, I wrote up a lawful good incarnate who, using the Incarnate Avatar and Incarnate Weapon melds, did a pretty good job of impersonating a Shavarath angel or solar (see: Eberron cosmology) at an early level. Conceptually, this is a hardcore soldier-for-good who looks like a peaceful and un-armored fluffy, and is all the scarier for it when swooping down into the fray and brandishing the righteous sword of the Silver Flame. (Note: Incarnate Avatar didn't really grant flight until later levels, so getting any sort of non-cosmetic effect out of the wings before, say, 15th level would be groovy with me.)

Not too familiar with the incarnum rules, as I have never used them in a game, so I am going to base this off the imagery you have given. Base it off a Paladin, or possibly swordmage, focus on movement related powers. Not too sure where to go with the PP, posibly look at Astral weapon for paladin, but look at the demigod epic destiny?

3) The firebreathing squad captain. Coming on the heals of the 3.5 warlock, I was also impressed by the dragonfire adept. Great utility invocations and an area attack breath weapon-- what's not to love? I tended to come back to a human House Deneith dragonfire adept (again, see Eberron) who approached the class as a warmage tradition-- leading by example on the front line and breathing fire all over the damned place. ("Stand behind me-- this is going to get hot. Or cold, depending on their resistances.") A somewhat limited toolset, come to think of it, but very good at rephrasing every screw problem in nail terms. Target exclusion and element resistance a plus!

A bit easier, I think - you have several options here, the most basic being a dragonborn warlord, your other options are likely to be a warlord with a wizard/warlock/cleric multiclass. Season with powers and feats to flavour.

I hope this helps a little?

Phaezen