D&D 4E The Best Thing from 4E

[pemerton]

you've got a bard

My group has a sorcerer. He's a multi-class bard (1x/day Majestic Word) who has an epic feat that lets him swap in two (?) powers: Climactic Chord, and Rhythm of Disorientation.

The sorcerer's most consistent leader function is +3 to hit for everyone when he spends an action point (Demonskin Adept).

 

[keterys]

Ah, my bad. Sorcerers do have some pretty vicious tricks of their own as well, but that's not quite the same.

 

[pemerton]

Sorcerers do have some pretty vicious tricks of their own as well

I don't know what the upper end of optimisation looks like, but he is the most optimised PC in our group.

His main trick is having static damage mods of around +50 to +60 (it varies a bit across damage types).

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I also accidentally answered with more than three choices not wanting to read the responses before I gave my own.

As a permanent DM, my single favourite thing about 4E are the stat blocks for monsters and NPCs. This is the only edition where I can think of a concept for a monster or NPC and stat it out such that the mechanics match the flavour without wasting an entire day looking for feats and class/prestige class abilities only for it to last 1 round (3.xE/PF) or simply writing flavour text and then rolling an attack and then damage (BECMI and the three editions of AD&D [with 5E being the third edition ]).

4E stat blocks are simply a thing of beauty, and I cannot help but think how easy it would be to design simpler PCs in much the same way.

Aside from that, the online tools deserve a lot of praise despite the tortuous road that was taken to get there and the fact that they are now online only. DMing any edition of D&D requires good information processing abilities and being able to look everything up, build characters and print out professional-looking character sheets, and create monsters with professional-looking stat blocks using those utilities is a godsend for a busy DM.

The fact that the game is so mechanically solid means I can spend a lot more time on RP and story, and my players can take RP risks with their characters knowing that they are not simply a single saving throw away from a TPK which is very different to the other editions.

As a group, we basically stopped dungeon crawls after the padded, poorly-designed, partly randomly-generated, and incomplete T1-4 Temple of Elemental Evil way back in the 80s. Our game has "evolved" into a more cinematic collection of set-pieces, a process that began in 2E, began to be further refined in 3.xE until it became too much work, and has reached its apotheosis in 4E. It's the edition that best delivers our preferred playstyle and a large part of that is because the stat blocks really make the monsters/NPCs come alive.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Write-in options

1: The monster statblocks - they both show how the monsters behave and mean that there is no time wasted flipping through various volumes
2: Balance. This doesn't mean all fights have to be balanced - it means that monsters behave the way I expect them to. A game run in 4e will do what I want without fudging and in combat I don't have to hold back
3: Skill Challenges when used fluidly. With them I can handle the most insane of PC plans.

 

[keterys]

I don't know what the upper end of optimisation looks like, but he is the most optimised PC in our group.

His main trick is having static damage mods of around +50 to +60 (it varies a bit across damage types).

Yeah, sorcerer is a great damage dealer. Being able to kill a standard monster the first round of every encounter is a game changer.

The upper end of optimization for sorcerers is a bit silly. There's a degenerate dragon sorcerer build that can potentially end an encounter on its own on its first turn, but even a less questionable build like combo-ing flame spiral and demon soul bolts to take out ~2 guys or an elite at the start of every combat, plus more with a little bit of ally support.

Yeah, sorcs can optimize pretty strongly

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yep, I was at a table that wanted to see how tough Lolth was, at level 22 - autowon initiative, buffed ~+9 to hit, -10 to her defenses, autoknocked her unconscious, flurry of CdGs and she never got off a single attack.

It's very possible to cope with the problem, though I don't consider the above entirely a feature

Yep, the trick is to have a few characters who focus; take both +4 to a defense feats in one defense, for instance, then Mantle of Unity (everyone uses highest defenses in the group). Adding another 7-9 on top of that (Valorous Charge is an easy example) or giving the enemies -4 or so to hit (my controller tended to prone, daze, -2 attack the board when I brought him out) is just further icing on the cake.

I'll say, you've got a bard. If he built his character differently, he could do what I describe.

Agreed that the buffs/debuffs are the bigger problem, though I'll note that it gives you strangely divergent play.

Lolth's guards, for instance, will end up harder to hit than her because people use the limited use powers on her. A group holding themselves back might even have to grind an average encounter down for a bit, while the "boss fight" is trivialized. Much like you saw.

I'd have been fine if the math from expertise/defense feats had been baked into the system (and maybe fix that your 3rd defense drops precipitously vs monster attacks over time), if the rest of the system were a little more reined in. For example, let's say you hit an average opponent of your level on a 6. That'd keep you at around 65% average for epic, with spikes to 40% to 20% for the bosses, which you could pull out limited resources to get back to 60-80% success rate.

Yeah, but I always felt like that's all you really needed, was maybe 5 options per PC, several that are tactical variations of doing your basic fighting, and a couple that provide a variation or two on "hit the big bad really hard" which are daily or otherwise limited. There just got to be too many choices, and a lot of the choices were interesting but they weren't THAT distinct. Of course you can then have your utility stuff and some sort of effect/stance, like RoS gives you a zone or the forms that the warden has. Wizards in particular could get some added flexibility as their shtick. The point being to cut things down to a few highly differentiated choices, each of which is useful in a distinct way.

 

[pemerton]

Yeah, sorcerer is a great damage dealer. Being able to kill a standard monster the first round of every encounter is a game changer.

<snip>

even a less questionable build like combo-ing flame spiral and demon soul bolts to take out ~2 guys or an elite at the start of every combat, plus more with a little bit of ally support.

The sorcerer in our group used to have Flame Spiral, but I think has dropped it now.

His nova round is action point, Demon Soul Bolts, quickened Blazing Starfall (which is a burst 2 with push due to thunder admixture), then another standard action as seems appropriate: another Blazing Starfall, or Thunder Summons, or Lightning Daggers which also gives a free action attack. Lots of damage.

I think, through good fortune as much as (or more than) good planning, our group has hit upon a collection of builds that play to the strengths of the 4e system without having fully broken it.

 

[Manbearcat]

It's uncomfortable to acknowledge, but, yes, you're likely onto something there. Your 'illusionism' is probably only one example of a questionable playstyle that 4e's in-play transparency made too obvious to easily get away with.

Yup.

That said, your 'illusionism' isn't such a terrible play style. Indeed, for some games - like most other versions of D&D, and, I'm rapidly deciding, 5e, is arguably the /best/ way to deliver a positive experience to your players. If you can't depend on the rules to deliver a fair, genre-supporting resolution, breaking out the smoke & mirrors (and DM screen, and conveniently (un)lucky dice), and applying liberal DM fiat may be the best way to save the experience. As long as you don't make it too obvious...

I agree that 5e is very vulnerable to illusionism GMing. It hits all the marks that I noted above. Further, from a cultural perspective, it definitely seems to harken back to that 90's era of WW/AD&D2e play that was the epicenter for illusionism; "roleplaying not rollplaying", utterly metagame averse, its the GMs game and they have absolute authority.

And I don't have a problem with that. I mean, while I absolutely abhor the practice (while basically have a PHD in it), it is all well and good that plenty of folks do it. Just admit what is going on. But therein lies the rub, the house of cards illusionism is built upon comes tumbling down the moment that you're honest with your players (that is unless they're welling co-consiprators; participationists). And I have to say, most, but not all, of the illusionist-heavy GMs that I watched run games had toxic, paranoid, passive-aggressive relationships with their players simmering just below the surface. The table dynamic just oozed it.

All that being said, while 5e has a lot of embedded vulnerability to illusionism, it is infinitely more robust, clear, and coherent than AD&D. I think after 6 months of running games or so, I could easily pick out the most vulnerable areas and hem them in to make it mostly illusionism-proof.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

(snip) And I have to say, most, but not all, of the illusionist-heavy GMs that I watched run games had toxic, paranoid, passive-aggressive relationships with their players simmering just below the surface. The table dynamic just oozed it. (snip)

Great post and I particularly want to single out this observation because it so true. I have never thought of it like before but that's exactly how it is. Well said/written.