Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="NMcCoy" data-source="post: 4990170" data-attributes="member: 61546">Interesting that some things called out here as negative aspects are positive ones in my personal experience. Mainly for me, it's &quot;things WotC would have done differently knowing then what they know now&quot; - V-shaped classes, math quirks, understanding of the Controller role, unifying weapon and implement powers a bit more.I could personally do without level-ups raising ability scores, thus staving off the stat-skew that leads to NAD imbalance; I'm not hugely attached to the sacred cow of +X items either. (This would also fix the clunky attack roll modifiers on things like dragonborn breath weapons.)The Character Builder should have a dedicated &quot;Conditional Bonuses&quot; panel on the character sheet, with footnote-type references on things like skills. The action point card really ought to have AP-relevant bonuses on it (paragon path, etc).A somewhat more solid foundation for dealing with timing quirks would be good. (Even WotC forgets the rules for Immediate actions at times - e.g., the Sivak Draconian.) Does a paladin's Divine Challenge damage negate the triggering attack if it drops the marked creature? It's not an Interrupt or Reaction, just a &quot;when&quot;. (This would be as simple to fix as creating Free Interrupt and Free Reaction keywords for triggered free actions...)They've got a start at getting things solidly keyword-codified, but dropped the ball on some really important things (like &quot;Attack&quot;). Some have complained that it's too much like Magic: the Gathering; personally, I feel that it's not quite enough like Magic. Compare the wording of Alpha-set cards with modern ones - the rules-tech of D&amp;D 4e is not yet as precisely honed as modern Magic currently is, and having certain things tagged/structured to make them more easily parseable by humans and machines would be fantastic. (For example, the Character Builder doesn't pick damage rolls out of powers as well as it should - consider Dragonflame Mantle, and the fact that it's not an implement power but it is an arcane power, so I add Sorcerous Power to it but not my +3 dagger... right?) This should be as simple as something like &lt;damageroll annotation=&quot;to a creature that hits you with a melee attack&quot;&gt;1d6 fire damage&lt;/damageroll&gt; in the CB database.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="NMcCoy, post: 4990170, member: 61546"] Interesting that some things called out here as negative aspects are positive ones in my personal experience. Mainly for me, it's "things WotC would have done differently knowing then what they know now" - V-shaped classes, math quirks, understanding of the Controller role, unifying weapon and implement powers a bit more. I could personally do without level-ups raising ability scores, thus staving off the stat-skew that leads to NAD imbalance; I'm not hugely attached to the sacred cow of +X items either. (This would also fix the clunky attack roll modifiers on things like dragonborn breath weapons.) The Character Builder should have a dedicated "Conditional Bonuses" panel on the character sheet, with footnote-type references on things like skills. The action point card really ought to have AP-relevant bonuses on it (paragon path, etc). A somewhat more solid foundation for dealing with timing quirks would be good. (Even WotC forgets the rules for Immediate actions at times - e.g., the Sivak Draconian.) Does a paladin's Divine Challenge damage negate the triggering attack if it drops the marked creature? It's not an Interrupt or Reaction, just a "when". (This would be as simple to fix as creating Free Interrupt and Free Reaction keywords for triggered free actions...) They've got a start at getting things solidly keyword-codified, but dropped the ball on some really important things (like "Attack"). Some have complained that it's too much like Magic: the Gathering; personally, I feel that it's not quite [I]enough[/I] like Magic. Compare the wording of Alpha-set cards with modern ones - the rules-tech of D&D 4e is not yet as precisely honed as modern Magic currently is, and having certain things tagged/structured to make them more easily parseable by humans and machines would be fantastic. (For example, the Character Builder doesn't pick damage rolls out of powers as well as it should - consider Dragonflame Mantle, and the fact that it's not an implement power but it is an arcane power, so I add Sorcerous Power to it but not my +3 dagger... right?) This should be as simple as something like <damageroll annotation="to a creature that hits you with a melee attack">1d6 fire damage</damageroll> in the CB database. [/QUOTE]

Verification