D&D General 4e Healing was the best D&D healing

It comes close in application, but no, it has a different feel at the table IME.
Yes, because it actually feels that the creatures have some objective permanent existence.

Ultimately a system where you literally cannot answer a question 'what are the stats of Bill the Ogre' is highly unsatisfactory to me. 'It depends on who Bill is fighting,' really doesn't cut it. And of course the whole approach utterly collapses if your party contains characters of different power level. This might be unlikely between PCs, but you can easily have lower level henchmen, allies, pets etc. It may make sense for your epic demigod character to be oneshot Bill, but Bill should still be a 'normal' monster against Sir Egbert, the guard captain, 'elite' against your Valet Harold and 'boss' against, Scrappy the spaniel.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Yes, because it actually feels that the creatures have some objective permanent existence.

Ultimately a system where you literally cannot answer a question 'what are the stats of Bill the Ogre' is highly unsatisfactory to me. 'It depends on who Bill is fighting,' really doesn't cut it. And of course the whole approach utterly collapses if your party contains characters of different power level. This might be unlikely between PCs, but you can easily have lower level henchmen, allies, pets etc. It may make sense for your epic demigod character to be oneshot Bill, but Bill should still be a 'normal' monster against Sir Egbert, the guard captain, 'elite' against your Valet Harold and 'boss' against, Scrappy the spaniel.
IMO, the 4e model provided a better play experience at the table, and that's what matters most to me. A boss ogre could be extremely fun to fight. Throwing an ogre against a 1st level party in any other edition simply isn't the same. In 4e it's a tough fight. In any other edition it's essentially rocket tag.

YMMV
 

The monster manual had plenty of examples of low-strength small humanoids who would deal 1 damage with a club attack. The designers are fully aware of what a 1 damage attack actually looks like. This is entirely within the context of what the game rules should be able to describe.
Based on that reasoning, an average adult human will be killed by 4 to 5 whacks from a toddler with a stick.

I have little nephews, so I've been hit by multiple toddlers wielding plenty of things. It's is sometimes unpleasant, because they can be surprisingly strong, but I've never once been meaningfully injured as a result. Given the choice, I'd rather they hit me a dozen times with a bat, than have an adult hit me with a bat even once. The former is an nuisance, whereas the latter is potentially lethal.
 


Seriously. BA is way overstated as a feature. Sure, orcs are technically still a threat, but rolling 20+ times for the orcs attacks to only hit on 18+ is a sloooooog.

Minions give the same "one hit, one death" feature" while actually remaining relevant on the battlefield.
Using minions requires me to accept that the same creature is represented different ways depending on who it's facing. High level minions are particularly brain-breaking that way. I'd rather just use a die roller for groups.
 

I thought minion rules in 4e were great, you could throw a horde of enemies against the players knowing that with a single hit they'll go down meaning the players are unlikely to be overwhelmed. I like minion rules so much that I've looked at importing something like them into 5e. I've used them one and will likely keep working on improving them.
 

I thought minion rules in 4e were great, you could throw a horde of enemies against the players knowing that with a single hit they'll go down meaning the players are unlikely to be overwhelmed. I like minion rules so much that I've looked at importing something like them into 5e. I've used them one and will likely keep working on improving them.
Fighting minions never made me feel that my character was powerful, it made me acutely aware that I was playing a game against intentionally nerfed target dummies.

In 5e when I am able to easily dispatch the same monster that was an utter terror at the lower levels it actually feels like I have become more powerful.
 

Based on that reasoning, an average adult human will be killed by 4 to 5 whacks from a toddler with a stick.
If it takes them five hits to beat an adult human into unconsciousness, then that outcome is significantly less ridiculous than allowing them to instantly kill an armored soldier in one hit.

If you want to argue that toddler-sized humanoids with sticks are outside the purview of the game rules, or that they couldn't reasonably kill an adult human regardless, then the setting details disagree with you. Kobolds and goblins exist in most published settings, and are considered to be a notable (potentially lethal) threat to non-adventuring NPCs.
 

Fighting minions never made me feel that my character was powerful, it made me acutely aware that I was playing a game against intentionally nerfed target dummies.

In 5e when I am able to easily dispatch the same monster that was an utter terror at the lower levels it actually feels like I have become more powerful.
And that's fine, minion rules aren't for everyone, at my table they tend to work well and players love mowing through them.
 

IMO, the 4e model provided a better play experience at the table, and that's what matters most to me. A boss ogre could be extremely fun to fight. Throwing an ogre against a 1st level party in any other edition simply isn't the same. In 4e it's a tough fight. In any other edition it's essentially rocket tag.

YMMV

Maybe! Perhaps it depends on the medium?

After all, I don't mind the inverse ninja law too much when it comes to movies, but I really really hate it when it comes to TTRPGs.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top