Wizards in 4E have been 'neutered' argument...

[Garthanos]

9th level in 1E AD&D was getting close to epic 4E by comparison. The number of normal playable levels has gone up so each "bracket" has more levels in 4E than 1E had but the power curve is similar. AD&D 1-4= heroic, 5-8= paragon, 9+= epic.

Interesting ... I think the coversion is more like add 4 levels to the above... wizards in 4e start out playably competant in feel. Fighters and rangers have attacks starting out like cleave that damage more than one enemy (but it doesnt cascade as fast). At epic level my swordmage will beable to attack everyone he sees.... atleast once ;-) Bring on that army of minions I really want to use that power.

 

[StarFyre]

People complain that this or that isn't fun...stuff like losing a spell while it was cast in older editions.

One of best battles, and memories of D&D, was a huge, epic clash, at a mountain fortress, where we ended up defending (with our PC's bodies!!) the cleric trying to finish a 1 turn (10 rounds in 2e) casting of a scroll.

It was brilliant, with lots of true tactics (setting up trip wires, archers on the battlements, a shield wall (ala Gladiator), etc) and it was tons of fun.

It's sad that anything that requires a bit more of true tactics, skill or thought is considered unfun...

Sanjay

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

You could have the exact same play experience today by protecting the guy casting a ritual. The only problem with a sustained combat like that is you run out of encounter and daily powers eventually and fall back on repetitive at wills.

On the other hand, that's no different than the Fighter making a full attack every round.

 

[Garthanos]

One of best battles, and memories of D&D, was a huge, epic clash, at a mountain fortress, where we ended up defending (with our PC's bodies!!) the cleric trying to finish a 1 turn (10 rounds in 2e) casting of a scroll.
Sanjay

Sounds fun, I think there has been a lot of cool ideas around use of specialized rituals as plot devices and similar things in 4e. And it is exactly talking about ways to allow all the characters to be enablers and involved in the process of completing those rituals ...its about a we win philosophy.
Which is very much 4e in spades. Delaying the enemy, aquiring components(could involve bloodying them so you have a blood sample), doing research and making bargains to acquire a true name... then travelling to the right location and preventing interuption of the final special..and situationally useful magic... which wins the day... with a lot of help from your friends. Is very much something 4e can simulate very very well.

OK "very very" is an exageration and some of the mechanics for it seem to be in the forever adjusted category ;-). I mean a skill challenges flux a lot. (they probably werent play tested enough using newbies and havkers).

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I have a minion costume in my closet for you...I always despised playing a peasant. I do NOT get the appeal of playing a character who dies at the drop of a coin.

The appeal for me is part challenge and part the satisfaction of earning special abilities rather than having them handed to you on a silver plate to begin with. I enjoy lots of different styles of character growth but that's why occasionally I enjoy to play that one. Variety...spice...life... and all that.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Dausuul]

I've often wondered about this - compared to AD&D casters, PCs can't attack multiple times in a round, fly for more than a few minutes, teleport more than 30 or 40 feet, or target anything more than about 50 feet away in most cases. They have to get in the mid-teens before they can even think about flying or teleporting more than 5 minutes away, whereas casters from 5th to 10th level in AD&D can do all these and more. They can toss fireballs half a football field away; some spell effects go the length of football fields even at 2nd and 3rd spell level. Heck, a 9th level caster can (rules as written) use teleport and summon monster as offensive weapons. I know it's just an opinion, but to me the power curve to me went WAAY down as opposed to up.

The power level starts out higher, but the slope of the curve is much shallower. I think the break-even point is around level 5. Below 5th, 4E characters are stronger than 1E-3E characters of the same level. Above 5th, they're weaker.

 

[Voadam]

Fair enough, everyone is entitled to an opinion. I definitely found that 3rd Edition, and the emphasis on optimization - as well as the requirement of having different roles, rather than just the guidelines for it - had a far more video-game/super-hero feel to it, in my experience.

Are you saying 4e has guidelines for roles while 3e has requirements of different roles?

Could you explain that a little? I'm not seeing the basis for such a statement.

 

[TwinBahamut]

Are you saying 4e has guidelines for roles while 3e has requirements of different roles?

Could you explain that a little? I'm not seeing the basis for such a statement.

I can understand that. Basically, the rules of 3E really require that the team have at the very least a primary Divine caster such as a Cleric or Druid, and strongly recommends a Wizard (though a Sorcerer or Psion may suffice). This is not explicit, but your average group of players will have a very hard time going through the game using the rules as written without those specific classes. If the game is heavy on stealth and traps, than either a caster skilled with anti-trap utility spells or a Rogue is pretty necessary.

Really, the 3E designers have admitted several times that the game was basically entirely designed with a four person team of a Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, and Cleric in mind. For example, designers spoke about how the rules in Savage Species were only written and tested based on how monster PCs would work using those four classes, and they didn't really examine how a Druid or Ranger monster PC would play out (even though those classes probably make more sense for the average monster PC than Rogue or Wizard). They just didn't bother to tell anyone that in the game books themselves. This had some messy repercussions regarding the design of most of the later classes, in my opinion. It is because of the problems caused by 3E's party assumption that 4E developed explicit class roles, which ultimately allows more flexibility in the class composition of the party.

In short, where 3E basically forces you to have a Wizard and Cleric and assumes you also have a Rogue and Fighter, 4E only requires a Leader and Defender at minimum, with a balanced team of all four roles being recommended.

Of course, because of things like healing surges and rituals, a 4E party really doesn't need to have any class in particular, or even a particular role, in order to get by.

 

[Victim]

The power level starts out higher, but the slope of the curve is much shallower. I think the break-even point is around level 5. Below 5th, 4E characters are stronger than 1E-3E characters of the same level. Above 5th, they're weaker.

I don't know about 4e characters being more powerful at low levels. I don't recall seeing many 3e characters have trouble besting equal numbers of kobolds in relatively even ground. 4e characters are on the whole more durable, especially at low levels, but their standard opponents are similarly tougher and tend to have better damage.

 

[Cadfan]

People complain that this or that isn't fun...stuff like losing a spell while it was cast in older editions.

One of best battles, and memories of D&D, was a huge, epic clash, at a mountain fortress, where we ended up defending (with our PC's bodies!!) the cleric trying to finish a 1 turn (10 rounds in 2e) casting of a scroll.

It was brilliant, with lots of true tactics (setting up trip wires, archers on the battlements, a shield wall (ala Gladiator), etc) and it was tons of fun.

It's sad that anything that requires a bit more of true tactics, skill or thought is considered unfun...

Sanjay

How much of that tactical activity was the cleric involved in? Not counting table talk.

I think your example is probably unrepresentative. By this logic being in a coma could be a fun and exciting game mechanic, as long as all the players who weren't in a coma were doing something awesome.