• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 4E 4E requisites

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
What would "wow" me if it showed up in a hypothetical 4e (assuming intelligent and useable design throughout; these are in no particular order except the last one):

- completely and only designed as a tabletop game, without any attempt to shoehorn the system so it fits with online games, miniatures games, etc.;
- spell points, even as an option;
- a character cannot have more than 2 classes, period. If you want to run another class, play another character. (I'd go so far as to say no more than *one* class, but the howls of outrage would deafen me...) :) Even in older editions, building a party out of single-class characters just works better in game play;
- then, more clearly define the roles of the different classes as per 1e - fighters fight, wizards cast (but *never* cast in melee; if you want to play a melee caster, play a War Cleric), Thieves sneak, and so on;
- stop the "power creep" idea, where all that happens at higher levels is that all the numbers get bigger to the point where the die roll is nearly irrelevant - when the "+" amount is more than the size of the die you're rolling, something's wrong;
- re-work skills completely: have a few (e.g. riding, swimming, boating) that anyone can do, remove all the diplomacy "skills" that are too often used as a shortcut around good roleplaying, and combine or remove some of the rest for everyone except rogue/thief-type classes;
- reduce and simplify feats - there are far too many to keep track of - and for what's left, come up with suggested "tracks" e.g. if you want to build an archer, take a combat class and here's a feat track by level;
- split the game into two versions defined by advancement speed - a "short" version with fast-track bumping like 3e, streamlined feats, skills, character generation, etc., designed for a 1-year-ish campaign, and a "long" version with slower advancement, a bit more optional complexity, etc. designed for a long-term (2-5+ years) campaign;
- make it as far as possible backwards-compatible with all previous editions;
- bring back the idea of casting times for spells, activation times for devices, etc.;
- use a smaller initiative die in combat e.g. d10, cap initiative at 10 or 1 regardless of bonuses/penalties, then re-roll every round to get away from the your turn-my turn feel;
- do away with stupidities like "gain a negative level" - if you lose a level, you lose a level and that's that;
- bring back the idea of items by material get different saves vs. different types of damage;
- assume reasonable player and DM intelligence - % dice are not the spawn of evil, and we *are* capable of figuring out how to roll under a stat - design the game for adults, and if kids want to play, they'll figure it out soon enough;
- and the biggest thing (and hardest to explain clearly): bring back the mystery. Where possible, move the bookkeeping away from the players e.g. why do they need to know their specific BAB. Experienced players or those who have also DM'ed will figure it out anyway, and can handle the upkeep of a complex character, but I can understand any new player running in fright from the complexity of a 3e character sheet! In 1e, it could be as simple as 6 base stats, some equipment, choose weapon proficiencies (and get spells if wizard), and drop the puck - the DM worried about the rest, and you could flesh out the character as you went along...you could get to the "wow" of learning the game, setting, etc. almost immediately. 3e has lost that, drowned in a sea of feats, skills, and numbers.

Lanefan
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Snapdragyn

Explorer
Complete class system revamp: Either scrap it completely & substitute 'feat' chains (+1 BAB costs x 'feat' points, new spell level access costs y 'feat' points) or go to the already-mentioned system of reduced base classes (4 archetypal roles, perhaps hybrids) expanding into specialized variants (i.e. fighter > barbarian or ranger or monk, etc.).

Combine the 'sneaky' skills into 1 & the 'perception' skills into 1. Combine open locks & disable device -- seriously, you can 'disable' a catapult, a cartwheel, or any sort of trap, but OMG NOOOzzz, not a LOCK! :rolleyes:

More thoughts after lunch.
 

Harmon

First Post
Arbiter of Wyrms said:
When will you be ready for 4E?

Never- I think when 4e comes out I won't bother buying it, and I might just head on back to GURPs. D&D has been fun, but GURPs is a fair better, more realistic, and cooler system. The advantage of D&D is all the critter books, the pre-made magic items, and all the modules.

Don't get me wrong I have had lots of fun playing D&D (I started with AD&D, changed to a whole lot of other systems then came back to 3e), but coming out with 4e- its just about the money.

No matter what happens to D&D in the future there are going to be those of you that just need to bitch about how screwed up the newest system is. Just get over it, house rule the hell out of your system, and let them come out with more and more new, better, editions and ignore them or write to the companies and ask them for 4e to 3.Xe translations.

Peace all.
 

Deadguy

First Post
All I can say is I hope to god that Lanefan never has any say over the direction of a putative 4e. Add in all those changes and I'd be waving bye-bye to D&D again for another 10 years or so! :)
 

JoeGKushner

First Post
Harmon said:
Don't get me wrong I have had lots of fun playing D&D (I started with AD&D, changed to a whole lot of other systems then came back to 3e), but coming out with 4e- its just about the money.

And what edition is GURPS on? :confused:

Oh yeah, that's right, 4th EDITION. :]

Must be about the money. Bigger and more expensive books from SJG as opposed to the 3rd ed counterparts. :p
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Deadguy said:
All I can say is I hope to god that Lanefan never has any say over the direction of a putative 4e.
And why would that be? :)
Add in all those changes and I'd be waving bye-bye to D&D again for another 10 years or so! :)
So what changes would you make instead?

Lanefan
 

GQuail

Explorer
This has been an oddity: a genuinely interesting 4E thread. :) It' sinteresting to read people's thoughts, some of which I agree with, some of which I find patently absurd: it shows just how daunting the task of a complete makeover for the system would be. You can't please everyone in this thread with the same product, certainly.

Not wishing to pick on another poster, but I'd have to also say that Lanefan's proposed list didn't do anything for me....

Lanefan said:
And why would that be?

....because it seemed to be mainly about reverting various changes 3E made from previous editions. If I wanted to play 1E, I got my books ony my RPG bookshelf already: I don't need to retrofit rolling under, d10 initiative, limited multiclassing and "no wizards casting in melee" into 3E to accomplish what downloading OSRIC would do instead. ;-)

---

I've got to say, I don't have any huge problems with 3.X. My edits would be more 3.75 tweaks than a real 4E, if truth be told, and thusly not very good for the WotC accounts. ;-) I would personally be quite keen on seeing the following stuff, though:

* I've never been totally impressed with the power level of the Sorcerer, and the addition of new classes like the Favoured Soul, Warmage, Beguiler and Dread Necromancer in splat books cements it for me. I like the idea of the "spontaneous wizard", and in paticular it's a good beginner spellcaster class, but I think it's a class for whom the power curve should be looked at. I might not go as far as "Add the Warlock in next edition", but I would certainly be considering applications thereof. :)
* Attack sof Oppertunity aren't that bad, really, but they're a rule that's constantly a problem for some players. You either get them or you don't, and without them D&D combat works a lot differently. A new edition should preserve them, but look at ways to explain them better or simply their execution.
* On a similar vein, some elements of the D20 system are just a bit obtuse in practice. Turn Undead is a biggie for me, which goes against the general "D20, roll high" principle of the system. Grapple checks also tend to involve me having to look up the section on the book to verify the exact events and options. I think these are areas where some work could be used to make things more intuitive.
* Epic progressions and the magic change in the game rules after level 20 needs to be looked at, since it's something of a mechanical gearchange at an arbitrary number.
* Prestige classes and templates remain some of my favourite ideas of 3.X: but the way in which the former are used needs to be considered in the new edition: they mutated from "DMs build unique ones for campaign roles" in the 3.0 DMG to the current principle of "Hey kids, buy this book to get 20 new prestige classes" we have now. Templates should perhaps have more representatives in the MM, though most of the fantasy archetypes are already covered.
* LA remains something of an issue for me. I'd like to see ECL rules race tidied up a bit to make non-standard races them a more genuinely balanced option: as it stands, they sometimes can be astounding powerful combos of SLA and ability mods, other times dubiously expensive collections of monster hit die forever languishing in BAB and caster level.
* Maybe related to the previous, but: a Base Caster Bonus stat for classes, rather than the straight "Caster level=class level" system, might be worth including, if only as an optional rule in the DMG.


Like I said, no-one else would be happy with this list, or any other that's not their own: I won't take it personally if you think it's rubbish. :p
 

mhensley

First Post
Never.

I will never buy another version of D&D again. I counted up the number of times that I have bought different versions (Basic, AD&D1, AD&D2, 3, 3.5) and I found that I have bought basically the same game at least 20 different times.

I'm done.
 

MadMaxim

First Post
Oh, I just figured out another thing that should be fixed for 4th edition. Make epic level magic kick some serious butt instead of all the weak spells that are available. Most 9th-level spells are superior to anything that epic-level magic can conjure up and it takes a huge (in-game) amount of time for the characters to make.
 

Glyfair

Explorer
Arbiter of Wyrms said:
When will you be ready for 4E?

I'm not looking for a date. Those threads grow tiresome quickly.

Agreed.

I'm looking for what conditions need to be met before most of us agree that the switch is a good one.

For me it's quite simple, it's time for 4E when one of two conditions is met:

1) A large percentage of the D&D discussions (in letter columns, here, gaming groups, etc) have people saying it's time for a new edition. That doesn't mean most believe it, but that a large group does (sort of like the calls for a 3rd edition).

2) WotC feels they need to release a new edition to continue supporting the game.

That doesn't mean I'd switch to the new system. However, when it reaches that point, it's probably time for a new edition.

In order to hold off until that point, I'm perfectly willing for future printings of the core rules updating very small sections. Adding immediate actions & swift actiions into the core rules are the sort of changes I'm talking about. Basically, changes that have been made to the game through supplements and are used so often that almost every supplement references the rules.
 

Remove ads

Top