D&D 4E 4e/Other Mechanics You Like

[NewJeffCT]

Some of the things I liked about 4E have been mentioned above -

(1) monster/encounter design was a breeze compared to 3.5E (especially for somebody anal like me that has to fill out every skill, feat, spell slot, etc for high level baddies)
(2) Racial powers
(3) every party doesn't need a cleric.
(4) Standard/Move/Minor each round

However, the big thing I liked about 4E is that it got rid of the 15 minute adventuring day, at least in my game. In every previous edition, once the cleric was down healing and the wizard was down in spells, the party would stop for the day to rest & recover. In 4E, you can keep going because a lot of those encounter powers are pretty good, and you keep going until you're out of healing surges. Most games I'd been involved with in the past from the late 70s and on were centered on (usually) one big encounter per day, then the party rests & recovers afterwards.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

Pretty much agreed (though I have no problem with Vancian magic per se)-

Neither do I, when it's a well-balanced part of a complete breakfast. Give me a Wizard/Warlock/Eldritch Theurge and Ritual Magic... and you'll never hear a word of complaint from me about the Vancian magic.

Give me a Fighter with a broader selection of at-will powers with an Encounter Pool for augments and a Daily Pool for augments... and I would be very, very happy.

... and I'll add this: the whole "1 roll/turn" in combst thing gets pretty annoying when you miss.

Yeah, I have a definite, strong preference for Fighters throwing two or three (or four or five) attacks in a turn. And Rogues, when they're making their big game-changer attack, just shouldn't miss.

Powers that do damage on a miss only muffle the complaints, but do not silence them.

Missing is supposed to suck, or else there's no tension to rolling. I like the fact that damage on a miss makes it suck less-- especially when you're expending a one-of-a-kind resource to make the attack.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Missing is supposed to suck, or else there's no tension to rolling. I like the fact that damage on a miss makes it suck less-- especially when you're expending a one-of-a-kind resource to make the attack.

And suck it does!

The problem as I see it with single-roll resolution- at least in D&D- is regardless of actual odds, it feels like a 50/50 chance. At least, that's the vibe I get from the guys playing warriors.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

Some of the things I liked about 4E have been mentioned above -

(1) monster/encounter design was a breeze compared to 3.5E (especially for somebody anal like me that has to fill out every skill, feat, spell slot, etc for high level baddies)
(2) Racial powers
(3) every party doesn't need a cleric.
(4) Standard/Move/Minor each round

However, the big thing I liked about 4E is that it got rid of the 15 minute adventuring day, at least in my game. In every previous edition, once the cleric was down healing and the wizard was down in spells, the party would stop for the day to rest & recover. In 4E, you can keep going because a lot of those encounter powers are pretty good, and you keep going until you're out of healing surges. Most games I'd been involved with in the past from the late 70s and on were centered on (usually) one big encounter per day, then the party rests & recovers afterwards.

(1) This is very true and while I haven't DMed for 3.5, I have looked through their MMs and did wonder how you made monsters xD.

(2) Racial powers are nice and I would like to expand on them too. Currently I am still in the process of making an origin myth to help with this process- will prolly post this to see what everyone thinks .

(3) This was very helpful and I hope to continue with this trend. I do sorta like the D&DN way but might modify it slightly. We will see.

(4) This is one of the things I wish would of translated to next. There are just some actions that shouldn't be used for a standard action. I was thinking of naming them Main Action, Sub Action, and Move action. Still though that is just my little quirk heh.

True that. It was nice to see groups just going and going.

Also as a sub note, what if you would be able to regain 2 of the *charges* I was talking about earlier by taking a short rest? This sorta makes them like a combination of encounter and daily design. What do you think about that?


Last note heh. Since I do like how they are making the math smaller, what if I changed it so that you don't get a prof bonus with weapons and it was baked into the class? Also here is what I would want to change the dmg to:

Unarmed- mod dmg
One-Handed Simple- 1d4 + mod
Two-Handed Simple- 1d6 + mod
One-Handed Military & Exotic- 1d8 + mod
Two-Handed Military & Exotic- 1d10 + mod

I was thinking this way so that when you get a weapon specialization feat it would do something special and increase the dmg die by 1. Also was thinking that when you duel-wielded, you can atk with both weapons and this would sorta balance out with feats. I haven't come up with any specific but I would make it so that 2 handed feats have more of a bonus with effects then 1 handed ones.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

Hey all, sorry I haven't been paying attention to this thread in a long time. Just got busy with my friends getting married and their pet dying (luckily not at the same time), so been outta it for awhile. So what I get so far from this thread is the following:

Likes- Action points
Monster and Encounter Design
Gods and Artifacts
Class Roles
Edition Language (specifically standard/move/minor action)
Racial Powers

Debatable- Skill Challenges
Healing Surges
Magic Items

Dislikes- Movement aka diagonals
Locking Down your Character too much
Too many options aka feats, etc.
Too much errata
Tracking Conditions


I agree with this list and ask you, does anything else need to be added to it and what do you think we should do to improve it? I know a few of you have already given suggestions but I want to hear from others. Also, I pose a few questions to you:

Do you think some themes could be used in a way to multiclass?

Do you agree with D&DN approach on capping ability scores and each ability score being it's own defense or do you prefer 4e's?

What is the difference between a sorceror and a wizard to you?

Do you think that the bard, paladin, assassin, and druid can stand alone as classes or would make better themes?

And to finish this off, while I do like multiple settings since they give a distinct feeling to a game, I still feel like they are a bit distracting. What I propose is a sort of timeline that could connect them and make it seem more alive as a universe. Each setting could be a different era of the universe. That is my opininon at least and would love to hear yours.

 

[erleni]

I'm pretty much in agreement with your last list, even if Healing Surges would be on my "likes" list and magic items on the "dislikes".

I would prefer 3e-like multiclassing but without too much front-loading of abilities, but won't like too much themes for multiclassing. 4e themes are an add-on to classes and I'd like them to stay at that level.

I do like D&DN's approach to use each ability score as a defense. If you use that approach you pretty much need flatter scores otherwise the differences between the different abilities become too big.

The sorcerer is what the wizard should be to me, a spellcaster that know a reasonable amount of spells. The traditional vancian wizard is an aberration and should not be allowed to live (too much access to too much power).

I'd rather have bard, paladin and assassin (4e version) to be classes on their own. 4e showed us that there is enough mechanical room to keep them up.
The 2e assassin is too close to the rogue to make sense as a separate class, but could be an interesting theme.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

I'm pretty much in agreement with your last list, even if Healing Surges would be on my "likes" list and magic items on the "dislikes".

What do you think about the hit die hp mechanic that is going on in D&DN?

I would prefer 3e-like multiclassing but without too much front-loading of abilities, but won't like too much themes for multiclassing. 4e themes are an add-on to classes and I'd like them to stay at that level.

Well I guess we want themes to be involved on different levels. While I was a fan of picking what sorta class you wanted to be aka ex infernal warlock, I think themes would be a better way to do this. This way the theme would cover all the specific features and abilities that class could learn while the base class could focus on other things like iconic abilties or something. All in all I want themes to be part of the game and not an add-on.

I do like D&DN's approach to use each ability score as a defense. If you use that approach you pretty much need flatter scores otherwise the differences between the different abilities become too big .

I agree with what you say hear and flatter math is usually always good for everyone.

The sorcerer is what the wizard should be to me, a spellcaster that know a reasonable amount of spells. The traditional vancian wizard is an aberration and should not be allowed to live (too much access to too much power).

Pretty much agree with you on this and I have a few ideas to toss around. First off, I do like the PF bloodline feats and think sorcerers should have something like that and the higher in level they get, the closer they are able to get to actually becoming what thier bloodline is related to and should only have specific powers related to that creature.

I think the wizard should have to specialize with the theme it wants, necromancer, illusionist, etc; and it can also pick spells from other specializations as it levels instead of having a billion spells. That would be my way to nerf them from being overpowered too much.

Also my last thing to add here is I do think there should be a limit of spells that you have, but you have unlimited at-wills. I think we should combine encounters and dailies. For example, lets say at lvl1 you can make 5 at-will spells into dailies. Then every short rest you regain 2 of them back and when you run out you are out for the day. How does that work?

I'd rather have bard, paladin and assassin (4e version) to be classes on their own. 4e showed us that there is enough mechanical room to keep them up.
The 2e assassin is too close to the rogue to make sense as a separate class, but could be an interesting theme.

The only one I am having trouble with is the assassin as it's own class. Maybe you could enlighten me on why you think it deserves it?

 

[erleni]

The only one I am having trouble with is the assassin as it's own class. Maybe you could enlighten me on why you think it deserves it?

The 4e assassin is quite an interesting class and I love it (I wrote the Assassin's Handbook on the Charop forum). First of all it has a short range teleport ability at level 1, a damage mechanics that builds up over time (I think it is the only example in D&D), the ability to become a sort of shadow at level 1 and a wide array of different powers take make it the sort of assassin that toys with enemies before killing them (many fear powers for example).
You can make a similar class in 3e by using the swordsage with a lot of powers form the Shadow Hand and Tiger Claw schools. Actually I would meld the two things to create a sort of gish assassin.
You can build up a lot of flavourful stuff about such a character and simply using a rogue/wizard will not make the cut.

 

[erleni]

What do you think about the hit die hp mechanic that is going on in D&DN?

I'm a bit on the door with it. Honestly I would prefer healing surges to stay. Hit Dice are healing surges in a sheepskin but I prefer fixed and known values rather than random rolling.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

I'm a bit on the door with it. Honestly I would prefer healing surges to stay. Hit Dice are healing surges in a sheepskin but I prefer fixed and known values rather than random rolling.

I agree, I just think they should get read of how many you have and set up rules to avoid abusing them like a player saying they want to take 4 short rests in a row. Just tell them it is one giant short rest