D&D 4E The Indispensable 4e

[Savage Wombat]

I'm concerned with Caster Attack rolls for two reasons -

1) Doesn't the need to make "to-hit" rolls regularly require the +X implements? I don't think the "+3 holy symbol" thing sounded very popular, especially with those 4e-leery.

2) I may be wrong, but I worry that, while my players might like being able to roll dice to cast spells, they would miss being able to roll dice to resist spells. "I know you have a good Fort defense, but I rolled a 19, so you die." And as a DM who wants to have fun too, I don't care for the "players roll all the dice" suggestion.

 

[jshaft37]

This thread is making me pumped about 4E all over again!

I thought Essentials was a huge step in the right direction. WotC needs to keep moving forward! I wish that Next would take the Essentials design (especially in regards to martial characters) and adapt it to play a B/X style game. It's not too far off, in my opinion; dial back the necessity for the grid along with reduced conditions, triggers, etc and a few other tweaks and I believe you'd have a really strong system.

 

[amerigoV]

I don't think I saw it on the list, but Skill Challenges. I did not play much of 4e so I cannot comment too much on its current design, but having a structure that you can use outside of combat is a great GM tool. The implementation of 4e's mechanism had a lot to be desired from what I saw earlier on, but its new to D&D fold so it may take a few iterations to get it to work smoothly.

What brought this to mind was playing Savage Worlds last night. SW has a number of these structures (Chase Rules, Social Interactions, and Dramatics Tasks) which fall under a Skill Challenge umbrella. The GM made great used of these structures that got everyone involved in a session long scenario that in traditional (non-skill challenge) D&D would have fallen dis-proportionally on one or two characters and a couple of die rolls.


My other vote would be DM prep side!

 

[jshaft37]

Doesn't the need to make "to-hit" rolls regularly require the +X implements? I don't think the "+3 holy symbol" thing sounded very popular, especially with those 4e-leery.

Not required if all the math is in order and flattened by the Next system. The "to hit" bonus could be similar to any other ranged attack. Furthermore, with the current 4E system, my games use the inherent bonus system, so magical items are minimal and character's keep up. WotC is much better at the math behind the game these days, I trust they can make it work.

 

[Sunseeker]

I'm concerned with Caster Attack rolls for two reasons -

1) Doesn't the need to make "to-hit" rolls regularly require the +X implements? I don't think the "+3 holy symbol" thing sounded very popular, especially with those 4e-leery.

2) I may be wrong, but I worry that, while my players might like being able to roll dice to cast spells, they would miss being able to roll dice to resist spells. "I know you have a good Fort defense, but I rolled a 19, so you die." And as a DM who wants to have fun too, I don't care for the "players roll all the dice" suggestion.

Didn't having spell DC's call for people to try and pump their caster level through magic items? No matter which way you do it, magic items are a way to make you better.
-Personally through using 4e's Monster Builder, I tailored my NPC's to the fact that I give out very little magical treasure.

You could have both at the same table. NADs are really just a averaged d20 roll+mod, players/DMs could have the choice to choose to make saves, or to use NADs.

 

[Wulfgar76]

I'm concerned with Caster Attack rolls for two reasons -

1) Doesn't the need to make "to-hit" rolls regularly require the +X implements? I don't think the "+3 holy symbol" thing sounded very popular, especially with those 4e-leery.

2) I may be wrong, but I worry that, while my players might like being able to roll dice to cast spells, they would miss being able to roll dice to resist spells. "I know you have a good Fort defense, but I rolled a 19, so you die." And as a DM who wants to have fun too, I don't care for the "players roll all the dice" suggestion.

I've discussed this very concern with my group:


1) This problem is mirrored on the melee side as well. Needing a +4 sword to effectively hit a monster's AC is just as problematic as needing a +4 staff to hit a monster's Reflex with your lightning bolt. The solution is not assuming +X to hit weapons/implements in the game math.

To me, the '+3 Holy Symbol' is no more odd-sounding than the '+3 Battle Axe', as I dislike plussed magic items in general. However I think most players would agree that finding a 'Holy Symbol of Luminous Radiance' is just as exciting as finding a 'Flametongue Longsword'.


2) Not all magic spells would use an attack roll to see if they hit. Makign a saving is more fun and probably even more realistic for certain types of magic and effects. Both should exist, and which one is used should be dependent on the nature of the attack being made.

For magical attacks that resemble weapon attacks, things like lightning bolts and acid arrow, the monster making an attack roll to hit a defense makes more sense. Rays, bolts, missiles and other magical projectiles, and touch spells, should all require attack rolls.

Less 'aimed', indirect spells like hold person, confusion, stinking clouds and power words should require the target to make a saving throw.


An example of both mechanics coming into play would be something like magical rays that carry an additional effect or condition i they hit the target – such as disintegrate and Finger of Death. The caster, PC or NPC, should make an attack roll against the target's Reflex defense to hit initially and do damage. The target then should make a save (perhaps Fortitude) to resist the effect and avoid being instantly disintegrated or slain.

-Wulfgar76

 

[OnlineDM]

Lots of good stuff above. The big ones for me are:

- Ease of monster creation. I've got the straightforward math (post MM3), so I can use my own creativity to quickly make something new that will be balanced and cool.
- At-will spells for wizards.
- Options for non-casters to have cool choices just like casters, but also versions of non-casters that are more straightforward (Essentials martial classes).
- The character builder. Yes, I preferred the downloadable version, but the fact that it exists at all is wonderful.

 

[Zireael]

Idk about Skill Challenges, but those get my vote:
- flexible DC
- minions
- easy monster creation
- progressive AC
- action economy
- same mechanics for everyone, no "linear warriors quadratic wizards" anymore
- At-wills, Encounters, Dailies - extension of the 3e Tome of Battle system, which I liked [personally, I'd shuffle Utilities into rituals]
- no save-or-suck/die
- bloodied condition
- end-of-turn save

Possibly also rituals.

 

[CroBob]

I suppose it's pointless to ask for people to refrain from flaming or trolling, but what the hell, I've always enjoyed tilting at windmills.

NO FLAMING OR TROLLING!

With that out of the way, nobody's going to get everything they want in a compromise, gestalt edition like 5e. Therefore, I'm asking 4e enthusiasts what they feel are the key, essential elements of that edition that ought to be ported to 5e, at least in some form. Why do you pick those elements? And, if you have familiarity with previous editions as well, what problems do those elements solve? I look forward to your responses.

The single most obvious thing is class balance and all classes having something copl to do. I think all classes having attack Powers of some kind is vital. I would get rid of Vacian altogether, and I think 4th turned power sources into mere keywords that didn't actually mean anything, and that may have been a mistake. All keywords should have a meaningful impact on the power's mechanics or use. Fourth did have a distinction in countering or being weak against them, but that was it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Class balance
Fixed math
Transparent math - the game text tells you what numbers everything is expected to have
Game-breaking spells restricted or pushed up level
Interesting, challenging tactical combat
Restricting the gamism (the part of the game where the players are challenged) to combat
Monsters - roles, minion/normal/elite/solo, abilities and presentation
Encounter design easy for the GM
Tiers
Dedicated healer (or wand of CLW) no longer a requirement
At-will magic powers for the magic guys
Lots of hit points at 1st level
Simplified skill system, no skill points
No huge spells known lists for the wizard, cleric and druid
Alignment decoupled from mechanics so it's easy to remove altogether
Monstrous PC races that work, no LA
Cosmology closer to that of real-world myth and folklore
1-1-1 diagonal movement