Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Keenath" data-source="post: 4191465" data-attributes="member: 59792">I actually disagree with that fear.  That is to say -- assuming a new player starts out at level 1, you really have only five things to keep track of (two at-will powers, two encounter, and one daily), and a brand new fighter can easily have that many combat options -- it's just that they're spread across his feats, any non-feat class abilities, and the combat chapter, where most of them won't even show up in the game, rather than written up right there in one place.I won't say 4e is simpler -- but I don't think selecting powers will be a barrier to entry the way a wizard's spellbook is.  Picking five options out of a list of ten possibilities is pretty easy, and two of them (the at-wills) can't be replaced or added to for a long time, so I just don't see that being problematic.  I mean, it's really a minor complication when compared to learning the system overall, and at least this offers you all your options on the page in front of you rather than page hundred-someodd of the PHB.  (Huh? What's Bull Rush?  Wait, I can DO that?!)I can't speak for anything but my group, but I've DMed with a mat and without one, often within the context of a single session (I often won't set up the mat for a minor battle), and in my experience the players won't use tactical positioning or even very basic movement unless I prompt it.  With no play mat, I almost never hear, "Can I flank this guy?" or "Do I have a clear path to charge the shaman?"  My players are pretty good at playing tactically with the mat, but without it they hardly do more than line up and roll attacks until the other guy is dead.I think you're intended to use them as much as you can.  At the same time, it's my understanding that you'll never have more than a handful of encounter powers at a time, and some of them will be utility or reaction powers that are only useful under certain circumstances, so it'll still feel special when you get to pull off a counter-charge or perform a deadly riposte.And really, are encounter powers supposed to feel "special"?  Is Cleave "special" in 3e?  Is Powerful Charge "special"?  Is Fireball "special" (assumimg you're 10th level or so and a fireball isn't a significant resource)?  My feeling would be that dailies are supposed to be really special, while encounter powers are more like your defining class abilities.Oh, I don't see that being an issue. As far as the preview stuff we've seen daily powers aren't head-and-shoulders above encounter powers.  They're better, but they're only somewhat better.  They're not the difference between a 3rd level spell and a 5th level spell, in 3rd edition terms.For example, look at Skamos, the pregen wizard.  Compare his daily to his encounter powers -- The Acid Arrow daily deals almost the same damage as the Force Orb encounter, but adds in ongoing damage on all the hit targets and deals half on a miss.  Yes, the arrow is strictly better than the orb -- but it's not so much better as to encourage you to take six hours out to recharge it.  It's more complex to keep track of though, with all the saves and such to see who's still burning several turns later.If nothing else, it replaces dexterity in your reflex (and maybe AC) defense, if it's better than dex.  I'm sure it comes in elsewhere too.I'm kind of with you on this, but maybe not.  I'll have to see the DMG's section on creating new monsters.IIRC they're going to try to avoid redoing the same power over and over -- partly by making a lot of what used to be "new classes" into paragon paths and keeping the base classes a little more generic.  A ninja need not be a class, for example, if the rogue can fight pretty well, and you can make a Ninja paragon path that focuses on stealth and speed... or on mystical ki-magic, if you prefer (depending on which of the two ninja archetypes you pick).Just gonna tell you now -- based on my 4e preview game, not at all.  We were going around the table in literally a third of the time it took in 3e, even with everyone still unsure and learning the system.  (And just my opinion, I think that time was more evenly distributed among all the players, rather than having two players who take a long time to look over their spell list and two who just wave a hand and say, "I full attack again.")We did have a few "marks" that got lost in the shuffle, but I'm planning to get some poker chips or those magnetic disc doohickeys from Paizo to stick under the minis so I won't forget that stuff.  (It was my fault, that; the pally marked one guy and I thought later she'd marked a different guy, but she set me straight.)Edit: I wanted to expand on this just a little, and more directly address what you mentioned.  Yes, there were a number of "finicky little bonuses", but most of them were either encounter duration or one-turn duration, so they were a lot less of a problem to keep track of.  Nobody had to have a counter and remember to count it down every round, or anything like that.  I think token-based methods (like handing out index cards that say "+2 AC" or whatever) will work even better in 4e than they used to, where you pretty much hang on to the token until the fight's over or give it up as soon as your next turn is over.At my table, social encounters are just the bane of my players' existence -- they always get very quiet and hesitant when they have to talk, with one exception.  Anything that gets everyone involved will be awesome, because once they're throwing dice I can prod them into some RP with questions-- "What're you going to bluff?"  "Okay, how are you going to try to convince him?"  "What's your cover story, then?"Not to get into a political discussion, but from what they said on the last "The Tome" podcast, WOTC got very upset that so many lousy products were being released with the D20 trademark symbol on them.  It was supposed to be a mark of quality, but it turned into the opposite, a warning that this isn't offical so it might suck.Paizo's comments seemed... more than a little whiny to me, since WOTC is trying to work out a license that'll be in force for the duration of 4e.  That's not a simple matter you can toss together in a week; it requires a lot of give and take with the 3rd party designers who'll be operating under its auspices.  And they've already got some bad blood over losing Dragon mag, so they aren't really impartial here.Ah, I don't think that's really 'unnecessary'.  It makes sense to make powers that reflect quick, accurate attacks require small, swift weapons like daggers, while powerful stunning attacks require big, heavy weapons like hammers.  That doesn't seem unnecessary to me, any more than it's unnecessary distinction to say wizards shoot fireballs while fighters swing weapons.If they decide to make the switch later, they can come under the GSL any time they want.  If they stubbornly refuse to make the change even when they can see 3e material isn't selling, then that's a foolishly run company and probably deserves to die off.  A lack of business sense has killed more than a few game companies (*coughTSRcough*) who had good writers and designers in their stable.Getting under GSL just requires that they fulfill the requirements of doing so, such as stopping sale of their 3e products.  And remember, they can always negotiate with WOTC to get waivers on some of that if it's a problem -- getting permission to continue warehouse sales of 3e stuff for a certain time period while also releasing 4e product, for example.  Businesses make exceptions all the time.  It's just like the rules of 4e -- the GSL is the "rules as written" that specific agreements can override on a case-by-case basis.</blockquote>

Verification