D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked

[Garthanos]

The improvised use of healing surge was also part of that picture... and its comparable impact to the effects of rituals.

The above is explicitly mentioned in the DMG2.

 

[cbwjm]

I keep seeing that forge scene pop up. Honestly, if someone asked to do this in 5e, I'd say "Sure, each round you hold it, you take fire damage." The limiter would be hit points, not ability checks which means that the high level fighter will be able to accomplish the feat while the low level one would not because they'd run out of hit points faster. I'm not even sure if I'd add on any significant penalties beyond hit point loss, possibly some penalties until some healing magic or herbalist concoction to heal the hands is used but maybe not even then.

 

[Garthanos]

I keep seeing that forge scene pop up. Honestly, if someone asked to do this in 5e, I'd say "Sure, each round you hold it, you take fire damage." The limiter would be hit points, not ability checks which means that the high level fighter will be able to accomplish the feat while the low level one would not because they'd run out of hit points faster. I'm not even sure if I'd add on any significant penalties beyond hit point loss, possibly some penalties until some healing magic or herbalist concoction to heal the hands is used but maybe not even then.

And actually if you note Pem sees as a part of the problem that the response from extant 5e people is completely erratic mostly a "just say no" gut reaction with your reaction rare.

 

[Garthanos]

Which is why I was replying specifically to [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] who seems to want a different conversation than you do.

I admit to liking both conversations

 

[MwaO]

On a side note I find it interesting that the game that supposedly "corrected" this still had fighters with the lowest amount of skills, nealry all combat focused powers, nothing equivalent to rituals, and still ultimately relied on DM fiat to allow things like [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s forge scene. You want to know what baffles me? How proponents of 4e can claim that edition actually fixed this supposed disparity between the magic wielders and the martial classes.

Anyone could be a ritual caster. Just take one of a handful of ritual casting feats and boom, you're a ritual caster. Or buy ritual scrolls. Anyone could take a range of highly useful multi-class feats for an extra skill among other great benefits. This was PHB.

And two months later, any Fighter as of August 2008, two months after release date could be trained in any number of skills via Forgotten Realms backgrounds. Which are similar to 5e backgrounds. So a Fighter with an MC feat+background could be trained in 2 Fighter skills+2 other skills. Number of skills sound familiar? Literally 4e 2 months after release.

Also, ritual casting tended to be expensive enough in Heroic that it usually was rare and 4e took a giant nerf hammer to 'negate plot' options. So there were limits compared to other editions.

 

[Parmandur]

It occurs to me I have been assuming level 20 in 5e is the direct analog to 4e? Are their narratives supposed to be the same?

No, not directly. 5E has four "Tiers," mostly in the background though explained in the DMG:

1-4 = Basic
5-10 = Expert
11-16 = Companion
17-20 = Master

Past that, the DMG has guidelines for progress thtoughBoons, Charms, etc.

 

[pemerton]

I keep seeing that forge scene pop up. Honestly, if someone asked to do this in 5e, I'd say "Sure, each round you hold it, you take fire damage." The limiter would be hit points

How many rounds does it take for artificers to grasp a magic hammer with their tools so that they can start working it?

 

[pemerton]

Which is why I was replying specifically to [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] who seems to want a different conversation than you do.

You mentioned me. Hence I replied to your post.

 

[Garthanos]

And two months later, any Fighter as of August 2008, two months after release date could be trained in any number of skills via Forgotten Realms backgrounds. Which are similar to 5e backgrounds. So a Fighter with an MC feat+background could be trained in 2 Fighter skills+2 other skills. Number of skills sound familiar? Literally 4e 2 months after release.

The Forgotten Realms and the Scales of War backgrounds were quite analogous in value to spending a feat in 4e - we used them exclusively.

 

[Jester David]

The way that it came up in this thread was that a poster - @Jester David, I think - said that the 4e system (of codified powers, codified DCs, etc) inhibited player choice.

Go back and reread. I called 4e on that... and 3e and Pathfinder. And I commented how I liked 3e/PF.
(And, really, PF was such much worse than 4e in this regard.)

But codification limited options. It reduces player choice from “whatever you could imagine” to “whatever feats/powers you have”.
I’ve see too many Living Greyhawk and Pathfinder Society Games where people never looked beyond their character sheets too see otherwise. Played too many adventures where we were just running a game via the system entirely by the RAW with no DM adjudication or imput. Just the rulebook and zero imagination.
If you don’t have the “improved _____” feat, don’t bother asking...

Because no matter how many powers you have... they were always a finite number. And a finite number is always less than the infinite options of imagination.