D&D 4E What I want from 4E DnD in 3 simple steps.

[Aegeri]

Looking over my posting since maybe about November or early December last year - I can't help but notice I really do come across as really bitter (for lack of a better word). Personally I really hate the current direction of the game for a multitude of reasons, but in reality there are only a few very specific things that vastly annoy me so much that I actually want to stop playing. So if Wizards wants me to continue buying their stuff, there is a simple 3 step plan to make me happier (probably not actually happy, but you know I just want a few things that will make me think continuing to support 4E is worth while).

1) I want a definitive 100% clear with utterly no bollocks answer if classes like the runepriest, seeker and artificer are ever going to see support again. It's been asked constantly and Wizards have constantly ignored giving a definitive answer. If everything in future is just going to be more bloody Wizard builds, I'd like to know so I can cease wasting my money buying and my time allowing further PC option books in my games.

2) I want some kind of epic tier support on the way. Either a DMG3, a monster vault that actually realizes epic needs more monsters than demons (they did so well with MM3 and then... I dunno..) or even just consistent dungeon articles. Just something. This is mandatory really and both my games have plenty of time before epic tier. There is lots of time for this!

3) A working monster builder. That's all. Just a working monster builder. I really am very angry about the fiasco with the original monster builder and then the joke of a "monster builder" they released recently.

Do those three things and I will be happy enough with things to just do my own thing like I was originally anyway. Am I truly being unreasonable with these?

 

[kaomera]

Am I truly being unreasonable with these?

I don't think that wanting any of those things is unreasonable. However, as you yourself have pointed out, you're coming across as very bitter about it. I don't know if you actually are that bitter, but when I've gotten that way in the past I've found it helpful to step away from aggravating factors, even if only for a very short while.

As for your "3 simple steps"...

1) IMO you aren't going to get a definitive answer. IIRC WotC has more or less stated that they want to throw every bit of "support"* that players could possibly want out there, and they also want to make it good. (And IMO bad material is just flat out wore than no new material.) However, even they do not have unlimited resources, and it really looks to me like their resources are a lot more limited right now than they where a year ago. I also do not believe that WotC is deliberately favoring the wizard or cleric or any other class right now; those just end up being the classes that the material they are putting out falls at the feet of.

Now, on the subject to the three specific classes you mentioned: I do not think we're going to see much "support" for the seeker, runepriest, or artificer any time soon unless someone out there writes it up and submits it to Dragon. Especially right now, WotC needs to focus on "bang for buck" (and it seems to me like there may be some business decisions regarding which products come out and which don't being made from "on high"), and I don't think any of those three are seeing tons of play. Of course, that's self-fulfilling, but I think that they're going to continue putting off building them up at least as long as their resources are limited.

Now, on the subject of someone writing something up for Dragon, I'll note that the artificer has been a round for quite a while now. And there are a few articles already published on them, but overall the feeling is that they are still under-supported. Well, I would tend to attribute that to a lack of submissions, in part because I myself have no idea how to "support" the artificer. I mean, an arcane leader is a pretty neat idea (I like the bard, minus the singing and dancing), but the artificer IMO belongs in Eberron. The fluff, IMO, is just a bit skewed compared to what I would feel comfortable calling "core D&D", and there's nothing about the class that is at once unique and mechanically satisfying to me.

So, personally, I feel like the lack of "support" for some classes comes down, at least in part, to the fact that a lot of players aren't really that impressed with them. IMO "support" would be someone coming to your house, holding your hand, and telling you it's OK that you like the seeker, that it doesn't automatically make you a bad person. I think what you mean is more along the line of more powers, feats, etc. I think WotC is more interested in supporting the game as a whole than any particular element(s) within it, because that way they can appeal to (almost) all players, and not just the ones that like that particular thing.

2) This would be nice, and in particular I'd like to see an actual book (doesn't have to be DMG3, could be smaller) devoted to epic play. But I think that, again, this runs into a limit of available resources and perceived value. I think that ideally, WotC should be working on convincing more players that epic tier (and maybe even paragon tier - although I'd argue that paragon paths are much better selling points than EDs) is actually worth the time and effort, or at least worth as much as a concept like "shadow / Shadowfell" or "Feywild". And I think that may be an uphill battle because (IME) it becomes a harder and harder sell even as you get up in levels in paragon tier just because of complexity issues. And nevermind that 10 levels of "capstone" is IMO far too much, and maybe even a bit messed up - I do not want to end up with an "endgame" ala MMOs...

3) Yeah, unfortunately the DDI has proved to a huge thorn in the side of 4e from day 1. I love what they where trying to do, but any actual ability to do it I really can't much support the effort they've put in. I would much rather be wrangling characters by hand and not have to deal with all of the baggage that has come along with the project, myself... I mean I'm sure they will get it done, eventually, but IMO they actually went past the point that anything they accomplish with the online tools, etc. is anything better than damage control. There was a time when I really wanted the VTT, now I just expect it to be disappointing, and I think it would take quite a while for me to actually be able to just enjoy it and not worry about what's going to go wrong next.

 

[Tony Vargas]

1) No. Not, 'no they will never be supported' (though that's likely), but 'no, they will never give you a definitive answer.' They probably just don't know what they're going to do. They probably couldn't tell you 100% for certain they'll still be working for Hasbro next year, let alone what they might be working on.

2) That'd be nice, but WotC seems stuck in this analysis-feedback loop, in which they look at what people are playing (or building in CB), note that it's not Epic, so don't make any epic stuff, but check back later to see - surprise, still not much 'interest' in Epic.

3) This really isn't too much to ask. All you have to do is find an old copy of the client version, it works fine.

 

[Colmarr]

3) This really isn't too much to ask. All you have to do is find an old copy of the client version, it works fine.

Except for frequently dropping the recharge scores of powers, you mean?

Of course, having said that, I'm still not jumping to the online builder any time soon.

 

[Derulbaskul]

My list is down to one item.

1. I want a working monster builder. That's all.

Of course, I would love to see Dungeon and Dragon with content again but I doubt that will happen. For me it's simply about having the tool that saves me some time and I will just play the game that I have grown to like. I have enough 1E, 2E and 3.xE products to muck around with until the day I give up D&D entirely (or go to Swords & Wizardry: White Box- I'm starting to understand diaglo after all these years...).

 

[Mapache]

Except for frequently dropping the recharge scores of powers, you mean?

And resistances. And the trigger conditions for powers. And other stuff I can't remember that makes it completely unusable because it winds up erasing half your monster.

 

[Aegeri]

3) This really isn't too much to ask. All you have to do is find an old copy of the client version, it works fine.

No it doesn't. When I was building monsters for a thread on this forum, I would routinely need to make many versions of them. Not because of the fact that comments made me change it, because every single time the MB screwed something up and broke it. So I would need to edit it, breaking a new thing, requiring me to edit it AGAIN to break something new. Some of my monsters I had to post upwards of 7 times before I finally got one that didn't break something on the stat block somewhere. That is the distinct "opposite" of fine.

Additionally the original builder still cannot get the correct maths for monsters damage right. Plus it's still confused on simple things like attack bonuses in some cases, requiring me to manually edit things when I shouldn't have to.

Essentially, it is the complete and utter opposite of fine. I can't help but notice all these bugs were added to it just before they dropped support.

I don't think that wanting any of those things is unreasonable. However, as you yourself have pointed out, you're coming across as very bitter about it. I don't know if you actually are that bitter, but when I've gotten that way in the past I've found it helpful to step away from aggravating factors, even if only for a very short while.

Oh I am and I am more than willing to admit that. I've invested a lot of time, effort and money into running DnD, something that I have really enjoyed immensely. But since the farcical online fiascos of last year following into the various essentials nonsense, I've been enjoying myself less and less. I've disliked having nothing to look forward to and that what I do want, is actually not going to leave me satisfied anyway (the lack of epic monsters in Threats to Nentir vale is just going to put major disappointment onto a product that should be pure excitement for me from all other indications). I'm sick of the lack of direct answers with regards to support for older classes and if they are going to bother publishing anything in epic tier. In reality 1 and 2 people do try to excuse, but they are ultimately Wizards doing and self-fulfilling prophecies. If you ignore it and don't support it, then it's no surprise that everyone else is going to as well. Any DM for epic tier is still looking at making - I estimate - 50%+ of their own monsters unless they use demons. Demons are the only adequate race of antagonists represented in the epic tier in 4E. The variety simply sucks and isn't there, unlike the heroic and paragon tiers (where there is plenty).

On specific points:

1) On Dragon, a lot of people I know have submitted articles on artificer/runepriest/seeker and had them rejected. It isn't that people are not submitting these, because I know they are - but Wizards aren't taking them. So IMO this is something that Wizards has to do themselves, because I know players who have wanted to play a runepriest or artificer, but didn't because they simply didn't have enough appealing options to them. I think that's a damn shame.

2) Given how often I've gave advice to people running epic games and how often this is requested in general, I find it hard to believe. A DMG3 can justify its existence with updated rules for monsters, traps and hazards in one place alone.

 

[RangerWickett]

My list?

1. House rules in the CB. Something as simple as "grant bonus feat," "add blank power - edit the text yourself," and "add blank item."

2. Monster builder. If it had an 'Export to Word' function, I'd love you.

3. Smart phone character sheet apps that track HP and power usage.

 

[Matt James]

Smart phone character sheet apps that track HP and power usage.

I've been dying to use my latest clip from Scooter!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tktuGaxLTL8]YouTube - Nerdier than we thought...[/ame]

(yes, Scooter is yours truly)

 

[ppaladin123]

There some pieces of errata I'd add to the list that I've mentioned in other threads (e.g. give the battlemind his darn MBA option already, fix the racial power hit bonus scaling, etc.) but otherwise I agree completely.

Incidentally, Mike Mearls promised to look into the battlemind thing for me a few months ago when he responded to a thread of mine. He doesn't seem to post here anymore though. I have no idea what is going on at WotC.