Speculation about "the feelz" of D&D 4th Edition

[doctorbadwolf]

The martial classes were for people who didn't want the full option overload of 4e. I'll almost certainly never play either a Slayer or a Scout - but I have seen players who were massively more comfortable with them than they are with classic 4e characters. The big problem with Essentials is that the wizard in it was the mage and not the Elementalist; simplified classes are a good thing as long as we also have the full versions.

The problem there is that the scout and slayer and the like could have had simple powers that could optionally, as purely a buying decision, be swapped with earlier powers, and a person making a scout would have no added overhead. They just play it as presented. While I, on the other hand, could grab regular ranger or fighter powers because I like that choice complexity. Basically, the stupid feat they put in should have just been how the classes worked.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Pi = 4 is either funny or appalling, yeah.

I never got this whole complaint. Scribe a circle that covers an area burst 3 (5x5 squares, so starting from the middle of a square you'd be scribing a circle with a radius of 2.5 squares). This circle will touch EVERY SINGLE SQUARE IN THE 5x5 BURST ZONE. Admittedly, the corner ones are mostly outside the circle, but not entirely. So, all that 'square fireballs' is is a convention that any square touched by any part of a zone is in the zone. It has to be either in or out (or something more complex, but lets eschew that level of complexity). There are actually VERY few powers that are bigger than area burst 3. Several of those really aren't intending to emulate a circle/sphere, so its not clear that they would be different even if Pi were some other value.

Skill Challenges improved dramatically, though barely began to realize anything like their potential, even at their best.

Eh, I feel like RC's skill challenge mechanics are pretty darn tight.

 

[Manbearcat]

IMX, successful entry-level DMing was downright unprecedented. But, I doubt there were as many people trying the game in 2008-12 let alone trying to DM it cold, as in 1979-87 (or 2014-present), just far fewer walking away mumbling 'never again.'

I only have a few paltry anecdotes of some wee ones getting into the game heavily and all 6 bravely stepping up to try their hand. I'll defer to your experience as I know you're plugged into the AL and hobby-shop scene.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I only have a few paltry anecdotes of some wee ones getting into the game heavily and all 6 bravely stepping up to try their hand. I'll defer to your experience as I know you're plugged into the AL and hobby-shop scene.

I suppose it's not a fair comparison, but back in the fad years, there were just huge numbers of people trying the game. Most didn't ever play it again, but it was outselling Monopoly for crying out loud.

Eh, I feel like RC's skill challenge mechanics are pretty darn tight.

Oh, they were quickly fixed up to where they worked just fine. I just feel like more could have been done with them. Same with the disease track, for instance. Same with healing surges, to an extent, though they did get used quite a few places...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The martial classes were for people who didn't want the full option overload of 4e. I'll almost certainly never play either a Slayer or a Scout - but I have seen players who were massively more comfortable with them than they are with classic 4e characters. The big problem with Essentials is that the wizard in it was the mage and not the Elementalist; simplified classes are a good thing as long as we also have the full versions.

The problem there is that the scout and slayer and the like could have had simple powers that could optionally, as purely a buying decision, be swapped with earlier powers, and a person making a scout would have no added overhead. They just play it as presented. While I, on the other hand, could grab regular ranger or fighter powers because I like that choice complexity. Basically, the stupid feat they put in should have just been how the classes worked.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem there is that the scout and slayer and the like could have had simple powers that could optionally, as purely a buying decision, be swapped with earlier powers, and a person making a scout would have no added overhead. They just play it as presented. While I, on the other hand, could grab regular ranger or fighter powers because I like that choice complexity. Basically, the stupid feat they put in should have just been how the classes worked.

Gonna disagree hard with you there. One of the reasons the e-martial classes generally worked despite being AEU classes rather than AEDU classes was that there was a lot more fine tuning allowed when you hard-code that way and you can give boosts that might get slightly out of hand when e.g. an optimiser was allowed to combine the Slayer chassis with the Rain of Blows encounter power. And far more importantly one of the things that the e-classes offered was choices for people who didn't want to either go wading through powers or end up in newbie traps. You have 20 classes geared to your taste and what you are complaining about is that people who have different tastes from you have classes that fit their preferences better and you less well.

One of the things I wanted was a string of "class packages" a la the warpriest. "You take this combination of thematically linked powers and you get this bonus". Giving advantages to people who don't normally optimise and to people who just want simple abilities (for example you can easily use such pregens to break the "each encounter power only once").

 

[Tony Vargas]

You have 20 classes geared to your taste and what you are complaining about is that people who have different tastes from you have classes that fit their preferences better and you less well.

The concern is more that no one be punished for their preference, IMHO.

The problem there is that the scout and slayer and the like could have had simple powers that could optionally, as purely a buying decision, be swapped with earlier powers, and a person making a scout would have no added overhead. They just play it as presented. While I, on the other hand, could grab regular ranger or fighter powers because I like that choice complexity. Basically, the stupid feat they put in should have just been how the classes worked.

It'd've taken a little more than the stupid feat, but, yeah. The simple fighter rubric could always have been handled with a pre-build. Completely choiceless to make such a character (just like a classic fighter). If you ever got bored, you could look up the real fighter and start making choices.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I suppose it's not a fair comparison, but back in the fad years, there were just huge numbers of people trying the game. Most didn't ever play it again, but it was outselling Monopoly for crying out loud.

I can't help feeling that a set of rules as clear as 4e's, though fairly with better explanations of the style of play envisaged and how the rules tied to it, would have made that fad 'stick' a lot more. D&D in the Red Box days had a rep as something completely obtuse that most people just couldn't 'get'. I'm sure the majority of people would never stick to RPGing regardless, but I think D&D could have kept a larger fraction of people interested if it had been easier to USE.

Oh, they were quickly fixed up to where they worked just fine. I just feel like more could have been done with them. Same with the disease track, for instance. Same with healing surges, to an extent, though they did get used quite a few places...

Well, I think in some sense there's too many of those possibilities. Having played around a lot with the elements of 4e, and the various things that could have been elements of 4e, I think there's actually 3 or 4 games worth in there. My main task with my own game is getting rid of stuff, not having to find more ideas. I have far far too many just riffing off what was in 4e.

Not that I disagree here in any blanket way. I just don't think any reasonable game could have extended ALL of those things. They all have huge potential. You can literally build a game around the disease track!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Gonna disagree hard with you there. One of the reasons the e-martial classes generally worked despite being AEU classes rather than AEDU classes was that there was a lot more fine tuning allowed when you hard-code that way and you can give boosts that might get slightly out of hand when e.g. an optimiser was allowed to combine the Slayer chassis with the Rain of Blows encounter power. And far more importantly one of the things that the e-classes offered was choices for people who didn't want to either go wading through powers or end up in newbie traps. You have 20 classes geared to your taste and what you are complaining about is that people who have different tastes from you have classes that fit their preferences better and you less well.

One of the things I wanted was a string of "class packages" a la the warpriest. "You take this combination of thematically linked powers and you get this bonus". Giving advantages to people who don't normally optimise and to people who just want simple abilities (for example you can easily use such pregens to break the "each encounter power only once").

You keep citing the need for an option for people that don't want to wade through powers, ignoring that allowing slayer players to use regular encounter powers instead of power attack would not interfere with that. You just don't present regular encounter powers in the heroes of x books, and design the CB exactly as it was. Ie, options from pre-essentials 4e only show up if you click a drop down.

I'm not saying they needed to be AEDU. I'm saying there were many points where they restricted them for no good reason, in ways that doing otherwise would not have increased complexity for players that want a simple option.

And more importantly, the non magical guys shouldn't be the simple options, whilenthe magic guys are complex. That is lazy design that restricts play styles to no benefit.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I can't help feeling that a set of rules as clear as 4e's, though fairly with better explanations of the style of play envisaged and how the rules tied to it, would have made that fad 'stick' a lot more. D&D in the Red Box days had a rep as something completely obtuse that most people just couldn't 'get'. I'm sure the majority of people would never stick to RPGing regardless, but I think D&D could have kept a larger fraction of people interested if it had been easier to USE.

Sure, sounds like a plausible 'what might have been.' Players coming to Encounters with past experience with M:tG, CRPGs, & MMOs may also have helped, though.

Well, I think in some sense there's too many of those possibilities. Having played around a lot with the elements of 4e, and the various things that could have been elements of 4e, I think there's actually 3 or 4 games worth in there. My main task with my own game is getting rid of stuff, not having to find more ideas. I have far far too many just riffing off what was in 4e.

Too much for me to tackle, that's for sure.