D&D General New Interview with Rob Heinsoo About 4E

[Hussar]

Huh. I had it in my head that the 5e Marilith was similar to the 3.5e one, but apparently not.

You must be mistaking me for someone with a bigger axe to grind against 4e. I'm in the "4e overall didn't work for me but it had some good ideas that I wish had been incorporated in 5e" camp. And I'm not a super-fan of 5e either – it's fine, but I miss some crunch and character options stuff, plus the good 4e ideas that got memory-holed.

In this case, I was mainly pointing out that X (the abilities of out-of-combat monsters) is an issue people have/had with 4e, explaining why I think the issue exists (combat streamlining), and suggesting a fix that wouldn't undo the intentions that caused the issue in the first place (give monsters rituals).

Sorry. Was spring boarding off your comment more than trying to paint you with that brush.

Like I said, I don’t get it. If people strongly disliked 4e but then credit 5e with “bringing them back” it just confuses me. Leave 4e for Pathfinder or OSR? I get that. That makes sense to me.

But reject 4e to the point of refusing to play it and then be happy with 5e?

 

[MichaelSomething]

Sorry. Was spring boarding off your comment more than trying to paint you with that brush.

Like I said, I don’t get it. If people strongly disliked 4e but then credit 5e with “bringing them back” it just confuses me. Leave 4e for Pathfinder or OSR? I get that. That makes sense to me.

But reject 4e to the point of refusing to play it and then be happy with 5e?

Vibes > words in the book

 

[jayoungr]

But, not liking 4e, to the point of disliking it so much that you wouldn't play it, and then claiming that 5e brought you back to D&D, when so much of 5e is brought forward from 4e. I will never, ever understand this.

There was a real sense in playtesting, IME, that everything that remotely looked, sniffed, or sounded like 4e had to be discarded regardless of their merits.

Really funny to see these two posts back to back!

 

[Alzrius]

Off the top of my head:

Skill system

Remember, we're looking for things that were unique to 4E. In that regard, the 5E skill system doesn't pass the smell test. It's certainly similar, but so is the maximum ranks, limited choices option from 3.5's Unearthed Arcana. So that one's a no.

Monster design

I'm not sure what you mean by "design," here; is that for DM's building monsters from scratch, or for how monsters are supposed to interface with the game engine?

Approach to setting- far more about it being about a place to adventure than world building

Not unique to 4E at all. Look at OD&D, Holmes Basic, B/X, etc.

Fast healing

Eh, that one's iffy at best. I can see putting Hit Dice and Healing Surges on a similar level, but that's not that much of a leap from "you regain one hit point per character level after resting for eight hours, double that if you rest for twenty-four hours," like in 3E.

A shopping list of effects with no in game relation

You mean for PCs? Because most 5E PC abilities seem to be pretty well grounded in the game world.

Monsters and pcs use different rules

Again, not at all unique to 4E. See pretty much every edition that isn't 3E.

Greatly reduced lethality

Also not unique to 4E. Between typifying that you could survive to -10 hit points, allowing Heal checks for stabilizing such characters, etc., 3E has this one.

To me, it’s baffling.

See above. This list strikes me as being very thin.

 

[Neonchameleon]

So it should also help other spells, not only Suggestion. Which was over-simplified like this because any open use of spell was anathema to 4ed design.

And it did. What it didn't help with much was combat magic because most combat magic is more about speed and accuracy than understanding.

But a lot of 4e's spells, from Phantom Steed to Teleportation Circle were rituals. And almost all rituals were based on skill checks, with the majority of them being Arcana checks.

4e skills mattered and open use of them was encouraged.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

But this only points out the inconsistency of the design and why the way 4e built is creates a disconnection. One would wonder why magical knowledge doesn't help me in better burn people alive with fireball.
Is a non-explanation, you basically have to adapt your fiction on the fact that the power is illogical and not well linked to the rest of the game and game universe.
Which is what turned off people from 4e.

You have to adapt your fiction around how being a better athlete doesn't help you do more damage.

The argument is exactly the same. Why is it valid for 4e but invalid for 5e?

And it did. What it didn't help with much was combat magic because most combat magic is more about speed and accuracy than understanding.

But a lot of 4e's spells, from Phantom Steed to Teleportation Circle were rituals. And almost all rituals were based on skill checks, with the majority of them being Arcana checks.

4e skills mattered and open use of them was encouraged.

Also this. I have nothing further to add beyond what was said here.

 

[niklinna]

My point was this:

Can you play a game without, in any way, consciously engaging with its rules?

Because picking up a die is engaging with rules. Reading a die is engaging with rules. Writing down a newly found item onto your character sheet is engaging with rules.

Nothing even remotely like this exists when listening to a person tell a story or reading a story from a book. Books and verbal storytelling are part of how we encounter all information, so there is no difference between listening to a friend recount a real event that actually happened to them and listening to a friend tell a completely fictional story. You do not have anything even like the need to interact with a rule.

Unless you believe it is possible to play a game while never even once interacting with rules as rules, it is not possible to achieve this alleged state of perfect, unquestionable Zen union with the experience. You are, of necessity, experiencing rules upon which you project a sense of meaning and value—unless, as stated, you believe that you can play a game while never once actually interacting with a single one of its rules.

If you've ever tried reading a book in a foreign language (that you have learned to some degree), you are engaging much more consciously with the rules of that language than with your native language(s). Even with your native language, particularly literary genres, and literature from particular times and cultures, have their norms that may not be things you are fluent with.

Except for the very, very lucky, perhaps, RPG rules are like foreign languages on some level to us all. You can strip to some agreed minimum, of course, but I'm not going to say anything about that, that D. Vincent Baker hasn't already said quite well.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Apples to apples - comparing a wizard that's allowed tons of home-made content to other classes that are not isn't equitable.

In 3.X you need a specific feat to scribe a scroll ... and in the PHB wizards get it for free as a class feature at first level.

Are you therefore suggesting that it is only equitable to compare a wizard to other classes if the wizard doesn't use one of their class features?

There's only a handful of spells that can be cast as rituals. All told, I think the PHB has 17 ritual spells, about half of which are 1st level. Not exactly immense cosmic power, there.

Not immense cosmic power - but non-trivial, especially at low levels when they don't have slots to spare.

Putting things into perspective here last time I played a wizard we were level 2 and I didn't use a single spell slot all session. And I was still probably the most effective party member outside combat, rivaled only by the druid's wild shape infiltration. I made good use of two alarms, a detect magic, a comprehend languages, a Tenser's Floating disc, and my familiar. Not exactly supreme cosmic power - but what do you expect at level 2?

 

[Staffan]

I am over simplifying, but not by much. Is an Int related skill used to identify magic-related stuff, recall magical info, etc. You cannot just dismiss it.
How does this help? - what happens in-universe?

Something like this (although this is more psionic than arcane, but the principle is the same):

Don't you think she looks tired - Doctor Who clips #doctorwho #shorts #scifi #drama #davidtennant

The 10th Doctor threatens Harriet Jones in the Doctor Who Christmas special: The Christmas invasion.#doctorwho #shorts #scifi #drama #tv #davidtennant * Copy...

youtube.com

There's no obvious magic here. The Doctor isn't waving his arms about and speaking words of power. He's channeling power through his voice, talking to one of Harriet Jones's underlings, which eventually results in bringing down her government (and paving the way for the Master to take over).

And 4e is full of things where you use the Arcana skill to determine how well you perform a feat of magic. There are 24 rituals in the PHB alone where you roll Arcana to determine how well the ritual works. Suggestion is no different, except on a shorter time scale.

 

[MichaelSomething]

If you've ever tried reading a book in a foreign language (that you have learned to some degree), you are engaging much more consciously with the rules of that language than with your native language(s). Even with your native language, particularly literary genres, and literature from particular times and cultures, have their norms that may not be things you are fluent with.

Except for the very, very lucky, perhaps, RPG rules are foreign languages on some level to us all. You can strip to some agreed minimum, of course, but I'm not going to say anything about that, that D. Vincent Baker hasn't already said quite well.

So people would liked 4E more if it was written in Gygaxian prose???