D&D 4E Anyone playing 4e at the moment?

[Garthanos]

I know, it's probably the way we played it in each edition

Why exactly are you on this thread? In my experience 1e had incredible constraints on martial characters they had so little intrinsic, almost nothing that made them even as interesting as 5e ones. And poppycock about magic items making the martial characters feel mythic it made them feel like peasants dependent on DM largess compared to casters, ie the exact opposite of your assertion happened all the time see that was my experience is that wonderful how anecdotes work?

My 9th level fighter might as well had side-kick floating over his head, he had a sword with higher numbers and hitpoints... oh my how epic. /sarcasm

 

[Garthanos]

The boons are OK, what I like, and I have tried to explain to you yet you always seem to ignore, is that the structure of the game changes ( you no longer level, you no longer get hit points or feats or ASI or anything the same way). That is what I am talking about. Heck, you can't even really use the MM any more.

when I call it a poor implementation ... hey talk about guaranteeing my friends who played full on through in 4e will not play the "supposed" non-levels beyond 20 levels that could well be just part of it.

There is definitely 5e flavor text describing that level 20 is your characters destiny achieved level.

I want epic to be different, not just more cool things you can do.

In my opinion in 4e you are doing more cool things at low levels in martial types but we cannot even agree mowing down minions or decimating an army is epic or parrying dozens and dozens of arrows or similar things so not sure what "more cool things" mean to you.

And I definitely want more cool than 5e presents and I want them before level 20 (end game)

Does that make sense now?

Different for the sake of being different ... does not mean good.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

We disagree vastly the 4e fighter in mid heroic tier is more awesome in so many ways than the 5e one at twice the level. Mine can pulls a standing leap of 30 feet once per encounter by digging deep, he can mow through hoards of minions he is already going into superhuman levels of strength (my example of the Long Tooth Shifter is already strength 21 and the Dragon Born who has less diverse stats over has 23 ... yeh 5e is exactly not epic/legendary/mythic by my definitions.

It is like, it is tantalizingly close in 5e, but it just never takes that last step and yields up the real interesting stuff to non-casters. My 7th level Tabaxi Battlemaster can simply move vertically and horizontally with equal ease (I think there's an implicit interpretation that because he has a climb speed that climbing is just normal movement for him, maybe there are extraordinary situations where a check might be needed, hard to say...). He can also move at double speed (another racial trait) and thus if I double moved and burned Action Surge, I could hit 32 squares per round, though only once per combat effectively, and that could be any combination of running/climbing/leaping. That is pretty good for the equivalent of a 4e 10th level PC, but there's really nothing else he can do that is special, and short of items not much room to go up from there. AFAICT that character will be just a higher hit point, attack bonus version of the same thing at level 20, with a couple more maneuvers (which are all pretty limited stuff).

So, yeah, I don't see 5e high level as particularly crazy. My high level dwarf wizard obviously has some pretty good spells, but IIRC everyone that was playing non-casters in that game eventually picked up at least a half-casting character at some point. The non-casters were just not very interesting and couldn't do much. Even half-casters have a tough time, though they are more fun than a fighter!

 

[Garthanos]

I really don't disagree with what you are saying, that is just not what I am talking about. That is the same issue @Garthanos is having with my comments. I don't disagree with his points. My point is that 4e doesn't change. It always has the same framework from beginning to end. It is kinda always "epic," how you and G and E area thinking about it, from beginning to end. The fact that you still have levels, that you still get hit points, and you still get your powers in the same way is what makes if feel mundane and not epic to me. I guess you would say it is the meta-structure of the game that I want to change when I get to epic. It is not about the story or what the character can do (as much) to me, at least with regard to what I am talking about.

5e has this design trope if you will on insisting that something has to be mechanically represented differently (like giving monks ki points per encounter and giving fighters a die) just because its story function is different. I feel like you fell into that trap in this case. I also think you are wrong about the intended story of the tiers which is a different issue it has you comparing after destiny started with destiny achieved.

 

[Garthanos]

It is like, it is tantalizingly close in 5e, but it just never takes that last step and yields up the real interesting stuff to non-casters.

that leaves things rather distant not close to me

My 7th level Tabaxi Battlemaster can simply move vertically and horizontally with equal ease (I think there's an implicit interpretation that because he has a climb speed that climbing is just normal movement for him, maybe there are extraordinary situations where a check might be needed, hard to say...). He can also move at double speed (another racial trait) and thus if I double moved and burned Action Surge, I could hit 32 squares per round, though only once per combat effectively, and that could be any combination of running/climbing/leaping. That is pretty good for the equivalent of a 4e 10th level PC, but there's really nothing else he can do that is special, and short of items not much room to go up from there. AFAICT that character will be just a higher hit point, attack bonus version of the same thing at level 20, with a couple more maneuvers (which are all pretty limited stuff).

5 has small windows on it... or like the eldritch knight weapon bond being somewhat all in.

"If it is on the same plane of existence, you can summon that weapon as a bonus action on your turn, causing it to teleport instantly to your hand."

Now if they added the ability to use it as a heavy thrown weapon... tadah

Or even better bounce the weapon using your own move to move the weapon between attack targets.

So, yeah, I don't see 5e high level as particularly crazy. My high level dwarf wizard obviously has some pretty good spells, but IIRC everyone that was playing non-casters in that game eventually picked up at least a half-casting character at some point. The non-casters were just not very interesting and couldn't do much. Even half-casters have a tough time, though they are more fun than a fighter!

Very much not matching the language on the wrapper unless "maybe" you have a caster.

 

[Garthanos]

Here is the swordmage power I mentioned early... and my Warlord with the high Intelligence could easily spend a feat taking Blade initiate then have that power and use it very effectively. Its not even an Epic Destiny power either.

 

[dave2008]

5e has this design trope if you will on insisting that something has to be mechanically represented differently (like giving monks ki points per encounter and giving fighters a die) just because its story function is different. I feel like you fell into that trap in this case.

I am pretty sure your wrong as I only DM I don't care about the individual classes much. But it if makes fee I got suckered by 5e like I did by 4e, then have at it! Always better to feel good than not

I also think you are wrong about the intended story of the tiers which is a different issue it has you comparing after destiny started with destiny achieved.

I don't think I have said anything about the intended story. The only thing I said was that 4e advertise the epic as core and as evidence said they go to level 30. If that is what you are talking about I wasn't talking about story. I don't really care for games to give me story (like paragon paths and epic destinies), but I don't mind it having them for other people.

 

[Garthanos]

So, legends operate in a larger and less rigidly defined set of spaces. Its still nominally a grid (IE it would be exactly a grid if you were in sphereworld) but many of the spaces represent things like "that room" or "the inside of that small building" and the scale is significantly larger, so legendary fighters can control areas that are say 20x20' and the effects of powers and things become that much wider in scope. Mythic action takes place on even larger scales, and level 20 capstone abilities really have few limits in terms of merely "how much space does this cover", being more "whatever is relevant in a narrative sense" This allows you to capture really gonzo kinds of things sort of like how things can work in games like Exalted, or in the higher grades of the web novel Age of Adepts (where the grading system actually goes on up into truly godlike proportions and beyond, though they never really described the very highest grades).

That would allow the enactment of myths like heroes drinking oceans, moving mountains, killing cosmic scale monsters, 200 men with a single blow, etc. The basic structure is pretty much 4e-like though and is really just an extrapolation and refinement of things 4e already does.

Yes this there is no D&D that takes that leap at best it dabbles and sometimes feels close like the swordmage power.

 

[Garthanos]

I don't think I have said anything about the intended story.

you were claiming 4e failed its story match up that is what epic is about of course the conversation is about story and 5e succeeded by changing mechanics for plus 20 which based on game story is like saying 4e failed on levels over 30.

The only thing I said was that 4e advertise the epic

epic tier is the final progress towards an epic destiny that destiny mentioned achieved in 5e at level 20

as core and as evidence said they go to level 30. If that is what you are talking about I wasn't talking about story.

How do you decide what is epic then?

I don't really care for games to give me story (like paragon paths and epic destinies), but I don't mind it having them for other people.

The over all story describing the tiers tells that the levels 20 to 30 in has the same intent in 4e as the final few in 5e.

The player getting to pick their personal story is a subset of that.

 

[dave2008]

when I call it a poor implementation ... hey talk about guaranteeing my friends who played full on through in 4e will not play the "supposed" non-levels beyond 20 levels that could well be just part of it.

I'm sorry, but I do not understand this comment. Can you clarify.

There is definitely 5e flavor text describing that level 20 is your characters destiny achieved level.

Yes, I agree. I have said several times that 5e doesn't promise epic play.

In my opinion in 4e you are doing more cool things at low levels in martial types but we cannot even agree mowing down minions or decimating an army is epic or parrying dozens and dozens of arrows or similar things so not sure what "more cool things" mean to you.

cool things =/= epic for me. It is fine if that is what works for you. I have been pretty clear about what I want. It is just different than what you want and that is OK. I don't see why my desire for something different is so offensive for you. I have noted several times 4e is great, a great game, and I had good time playing it. In fact, it is the edition that brought me back to D&D (I skipped 2e & 3e). It is OK that 4e didn't give me what I would like out of Epic.

And I definitely want more cool than 5e presents and I want them before level 20 (end game)

That is fine, I have no problem with that. The only thing I have defended 5e about is I prefer that epic be a structure than the rest of the game, similar to what 5e does. I have other preferences that align better with 5e too, but they are my preferences and have nothing to do with quality of 4e.

Different for the sake of being different ... does not mean good.

Sure, just like being same for the sake of being the same does not equal good. And really it has nothing do with being good or not. Maybe that is why you are getting so upset as you seem to think I am making a value judgement. I am not. 4e "epic" is not good or bad, it is just not my preference. That is yours is great for you.