D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023

[pemerton]

why should who controls a character make any appreciable difference to that character in terms of its game mechanics?

This is like asking why should the handball rule in soccer apply differently to a goalie and a striker. I mean, these are game and we can make up whatever rules we like! The soccer rule appears to produce pretty compelling field sports (judging by popular enthusiasm). The 4e rules produce pretty compelling FRPGing (judging from my own experience).

 

[pemerton]

Except with what I'm speaking of the skill challenge is abandoned before it resolves, during the rolling process.

In your examples, the skill challenge wasn't abandoned. Eg you had the Baron coming back on the morrow. That would be a quite reasonable narration for a failed Diplomacy check which isn't the third (and hence final) failure. It wouldn't bring the skill challenge to an end.

 

[pemerton]

The game assumes you're playing one of the setting inhabitants who has decided to pick up a class.

But consider this (and it's happened in my games more than once): the characters meet an NPC. They have dealngs with that NPC, and get to know it some. It becomes an ally, or a known contact, or whatever. Let's say the PCs know it to be a Thief.

Then, out of the blue a player says "Can I take over that Thief to play as my character?".

In my view, I-as-DM should be able to say "Sure, here you go, feel free to flesh out my bare-bones notes on it". I shouldn't need to make any changes to the character's underlying mechanics in order to flip it from an NPC to a PC.

Here are some RPGs where what you've described as your approach doesn't happen: Agon 2nd ed (NPCs don't have PC stats); In A Wicked Age (ditto); HeroWars/Quest (frequently ditto); Apocalypse World (NPCs don't have stats); Torchbearer (most NPCs are statted up on a streamlined chassis); 4e D&D (ditto).

None of these RPGs has any issues with playability or with the coherence of their fiction. That they aren't to your taste doesn't change that.

 

[pemerton]

With "NPC classes" - why do they have levels that are weaker than PC classes? Why not just have them as balanced classes and build the NPCs to a lower level?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I did quite like the 3e NPC classes as a means for describing NPCs that weren't quite up to the PC class standard. The different NPC design philosophies of 4e/5e rendered them obsolete, but I still wouldn't mind seeing an NPC class, if only for a different style of game (common people thrown into a dungeon)

The character funnel of DCC also accomplished that goal.

 

[darjr]

I did quite like the 3e NPC classes as a means for describing NPCs that weren't quite up to the PC class standard. The different NPC design philosophies of 4e/5e rendered them obsolete, but I still wouldn't mind seeing an NPC class, if only for a different style of game (common people thrown into a dungeon)

Side kicks have taken some of this space.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean, asking "Why can't I win in the scene if there are still successes to be accrued" is like asking "Why can't I kill the Orc if it still has hit points left". At the level of structure, they're identical.

I think there's some rather big differences there.

1. There is no kill the orc skill or action. Contrast with the task level skill system in 4e, where a single skill check often does open a chest, break down a door, persuade the local noble to grant you a favor, etc.

2. What's not clear on the player side is why sometimes things are resolved with a single check and other times they are resolved in an entirely different way. There's no proper reason for why the skill check mechanic was used in one instance and the skill challenge in the other.

3. The fictional explanations for why an attack hasn't killed an orc yet are trivial, you missed, orc deflected, orc was barely grazed, etc. The fictional explanations involved in any kind of interesting skill challenge require a much greater amount of fictional 'change' - otherwise you just end up with the thief picking lock on the chest, honoring that and yet finding some reason the contents of the chest are still out of reach - most of which aren't going to be particularly interesting fictional reasons - The most obvious example would be a locked chest inside the chest- but that kind of on the fly complication is the antithesis to most D&D play - where an impartial referee is supposed to know the obstacle or be able to extrapolate details for it and then make rulings about what the players are doing to overcome it.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I ran an underwater session in 4e once, where I was asked how both the PCs and their fishy enemies were regularly being knocked prone while floating underwater. There was a beat, and then all of our heads exploded simultaneously.

We were never able to take 4e seriously after that.

On the other hand, there's a power called 'Bat Aside' (Rogue Daily Attack 5); "you ram into your foe, sending it flying into one of its allies." The halfling rogue player in one of my games LOVED this power, but he would completely reskin it every time. The very first time he charged into a room and triggered it and he described it exactly by the color. The next time he acquired a bullwhip and used that to swing into the middle of his opponents and kick one of them into the others. The time after that he snatched the pumpkin head off a Scarecrow and tossed into the middle of the other monsters. Another time he was underwater and he opened his bag of holding, a giant bubble came out, and it engulfed several enemies, throwing them into confusion. I mean, he played that PC for at least 6 months, every week, maybe longer, I don't remember for sure, but he had that power for most of that time, so he must have used it 20 or more times, easily. That was a super awesome halfling badass! Never had to say a word about rules and fiction getting in each other's way. Offline Compendium

 

[Micah Sweet]

On the other hand, there's a power called 'Bat Aside' (Rogue Daily Attack 5); "you ram into your foe, sending it flying into one of its allies." The halfling rogue player in one of my games LOVED this power, but he would completely reskin it every time. The very first time he charged into a room and triggered it and he described it exactly by the color. The next time he acquired a bullwhip and used that to swing into the middle of his opponents and kick one of them into the others. The time after that he snatched the pumpkin head off a Scarecrow and tossed into the middle of the other monsters. Another time he was underwater and he opened his bag of holding, a giant bubble came out, and it engulfed several enemies, throwing them into confusion. I mean, he played that PC for at least 6 months, every week, maybe longer, I don't remember for sure, but he had that power for most of that time, so he must have used it 20 or more times, easily. That was a super awesome halfling badass! Never had to say a word about rules and fiction getting in each other's way. Offline Compendium

Clearly some people with that sort of thing, and others aren't. Good for your halfling friend.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Except in the example presented, how are you supposed to encourage players other than the blindingly obvious ranger to take actions?

I know the thread has leapt on to 'new' things, but what COULD NOT happen in a forest? A cliff, a river, a wind storm, a bear, quicksand, a trap, some pixies who might help you if you amuse them. I came up with that much clean off the top of my head as fast as I could type. Yes, I think the ranger is going to be the star of that show, but isn't that OK? I find it likely a fighter, barbarian, rogue, druid, and potentially members of any of the other classes COULD effectively respond to most of these. Obviously survival, orienteering, gathering food, tracking, etc. are PROBABLY all ranger stuff, but even there its quite possible another PC has a better chance at one or two of them.