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

[Vaalingrade]

It feels like, forcefield that stops everything except some "conditions" until it goes down (risking the death of whoever was protected by it) is the only thing that makes sense. Otherwise we're left with it being an unspecified mishmash of meat, luck, stress, divine gifts, exhaustion, etc... put together in a way that makes it easy to run a game and make stories. That can't possibly be right.

Well yes. everything that makes the game easier to play or run--or that even acknowledges it's a game is obviously bad and wrong. Everyone knows this.

 

[Undrave]

I think there are two reasons for that. One is the low resolution of bonuses in 4e – it's basically advantage or nothing (or sometimes an added die). And advantage is a pretty chonky bonus, so if you want advantage to be a rider on another ability, that ability has to be either very weak or highly limited. But at the same time, giving someone else advantage is generally not as good as what you could do yourself – at best it's a 50% increase in hit probability. There could be some room in setting someone up with advantage for use with a powerful but limited-use ability, but 5e doesn't have many of those that use attack rolls (I remember considering this for a wild mage, but pretty much all spells that deal decent damage use saves – and that's fair, because that generally means you don't waste a slot on a miss).

The other is that combat is usually over pretty fast in-game. Is spending an action and a 1st-level spell slot (and concentration) on giving allies +1d4 to hit with bless better than casting guiding bolt for 4d6 damage and giving an ally advantage on the next attack? Bless math gets wonky because of probabilities, but I figure it should be about a 10-20% increase in damage per target, so how many attacks do your party need to make to balance out the 4d6 damage + 50% boost to a single attack?

And that's why playing a Cleric is BOOOOORING in 5e. Advantage/Disadvantage seemed like a good idea but it really kneecapped any subtlety in terms of support moves. Also, Guiding Bolt can miss and be basically useless while Bless is much more reliable.

And, of course, the return to the stupid Saving Throw system instead of the simpler 'attacker rolls everything', means that buffs that can bridge the Caster/Martial divide are super rare. Maybe some damage buffs could have worked when attached to like cantrips or attacks?

In 5e, without making much effort, the vanilla martials can move around to flank so folks get advantage, the cleric pops up the downed person, and can't paladin's take hits designed to hit someone else (say the caster who is conentraing)? That feels like more than we did for each other back in the B/X, 1e days (except for the Cleric) in terms of going together in combat.

Flanking is an optional rule and Paladins taking attack for someone else is not default, I have no idea what ability you're talking about. I believe the Battlemaster has something for that but reactions are so rare...

 

[zakael19]

And that's why playing a Cleric is BOOOOORING in 5e. Advantage/Disadvantage seemed like a good idea but it really kneecapped any subtlety in terms of support moves. Also, Guiding Bolt can miss and be basically useless while Bless is much more reliable.

And, of course, the return to the stupid Saving Throw system instead of the simpler 'attacker rolls everything', means that buffs that can bridge the Caster/Martial divide are super rare. Maybe some damage buffs could have worked when attacked to like cantrips or attacks?

Flanking is an optional rule and Paladins taking attack for someone else is not default, I have no idea what ability you're talking about. I believe the Battlemaster has something for that but reactions are so rare...

Paladins have a fighting style they can take, as does anybody else who can take fighting styles that lets them intercept damage in that way given certain riders.

Flanking is absolutely optional, and most guides will tell you "don't, or make it a +2 unless you want things to get stupid in a hurry." A casual +5 effective to nearly all attacks on a multi attacking character is incredibly strong. A fighter can already nova super hard.

Man NADs are just such a better way of handling things, so much smoother. While lots of other stuff in 4e gets fiddly, the combo of NAD + flat saving throw apart from unique abilities makes that sort of housekeeping so simple.

 

[Undrave]

Paladins have a fighting style they can take, as does anybody else who can take fighting styles that lets them intercept damage in that way given certain riders.

Oh yeah the Protection Fighting style, you give disadvantage to an attack on an adjacent ally. I used it on a Fighter and it's nice but it scales very poorly with multple attacks and multiple enemies because you only get 1 reaction. And it does nothing for abilities with saving throws. I liked the concept and it came in handy but I could tell it wouldn't last long...

Man NADs are just such a better way of handling things, so much smoother. While lots of other stuff in 4e gets fiddly, the combo of NAD + flat saving throw apart from unique abilities makes that sort of housekeeping so simple.

Yessss! I miss NADs. It was fun to give the martials attacks that targetted REF or FORT to give them a little flexibility too.

 

[Chaltab]

Paladins have a fighting style they can take, as does anybody else who can take fighting styles that lets them intercept damage in that way given certain riders.

Interception fighting style is useful enough at early levels but it scales poorly. Reducing damage by 1d10 + Proficiency just isn't enough compared to how monster damage scales.

 

[Undrave]

Interception fighting style is useful enough at early levels but it scales poorly. Reducing damage by 1d10 + Proficiency just isn't enough compared to how monster damage scales.

Why did they invent that style when we already had Protection style?

 

[Cadence]

Flanking is an optional rule and Paladins taking attack for someone else is not default, I have no idea what ability you're talking about. I believe the Battlemaster has something for that but reactions are so rare...

Edit: Ninja'd by a couple of posts above.

It was used all the times we played, so I was surprised to learn just now flanking was optional. Apparently not only do folks not read the DMG they don't read the PHB either. I wonder if I was remembering PF.

For the Paladin, it's been a couple years since that game. Digging through that players sheet it looks like it was the Interception Fighting Style from Tasha's combined with memories of their use of Warding Bond (2nd level) .

 

[Chaltab]

Why did they invent that style when we already had Protection style?

Protection only works if you have a shield. Interception works if you have a shield or a melee weapon, so GWF and dual wielders can also make use of it... for journeyman and expert tiers at least.

Honestly I think it would be better if Protection just worked with a shield or a melee weapon

Edit: I reread it and it actually works with any simple or martial weapon, so an archer can also use it if they're unfortunate enough to be on melee. Not that you would when Archery is right there.

 

[Undrave]

Protection only works if you have a shield. Interception works if you have a shield or a melee weapon, so GWF and dual wielders can also make use of it... for journeyman and expert tiers at least.

Honestly I think it would be better if Protection just worked with a shield or a melee weapon

Aaah... I didn't even noticed that difference.

 

[DinoInDisguise]

Advantage/Disadvantage seemed like a good idea but it really kneecapped any subtlety in terms of support moves.

I've never heard anyone, from 5e or any other system, with anything but positive things to say about Advantage/Disadvantage. So this surprises me.

Sorry this is a bit off topic;

Spoiler: Ramblings

If you took, the three action economy of PF2e, Proficiency bonus, and Advantage/Disadvantage. I think you can make an incredible simple, and deep, ttrpg.

If I was WotC I'd make 6th edition based on just those and swapping attributes to just the modifier. The math, assuming bounded accuracy, writes itself. It provides 3 tiers of effectiveness, PB, Adv, Adv+PB. It does everything you need out of the math.

The three action economy lets you drop weird rules like the restrictions on a second spell in a turn. Assuming WotC follows their own math, the home-brewing for this system is dead simple. Disadvantage on subsequent attacks is a cleaner solution then PF2e's current multiple attack penalty, you could also just deny PB on those attacks depending on how you balance it.

Adding complexity is easy with the 10 over or 10 under system on skills and statblocks. Kobold press is already using it in their new Monster Vault. On these items it doesnt have the memorization requirement of attaching it to various skill checks.

It's so clean. The basic rules could fit on 1 page. If WotC decides to do 6e without inventing anything new, I think this system writes itself.