D&D 4E 4E sceptics - what do you like?
- Thread starter Geron Raveneye
- Start date
GnomeWorks
Adventurer
I really like the at-will/per-encounter/per-day setup. While I was a bit skeptical at first, the concept has grown on me.
I like that fighter-types have something "interesting" to do, and I like that magic has been very toned down. I don't know if I'll necessarily agree with how these things were accomplished: I want my martial abilities to be martial, not sorta-martial-sorta-magical; and I like magic having a variety of things to do, rather than just be solely focused on combat. But it's definitely a step in the right direction, IMO.
I like the supposed toning down of the importance of magic items. I say "supposed" because we haven't seen anything to support or contradict the idea, but I definitely like the idea, either way. Just have to wait and see if they went as far as I hope they did.
I like that fighter-types have something "interesting" to do, and I like that magic has been very toned down. I don't know if I'll necessarily agree with how these things were accomplished: I want my martial abilities to be martial, not sorta-martial-sorta-magical; and I like magic having a variety of things to do, rather than just be solely focused on combat. But it's definitely a step in the right direction, IMO.
I like the supposed toning down of the importance of magic items. I say "supposed" because we haven't seen anything to support or contradict the idea, but I definitely like the idea, either way. Just have to wait and see if they went as far as I hope they did.
DarkKestral
First Post
OK, I'll bite. Things I like...
I like the unified defense and attack progressions. It simplifies things down a bit, and probably helps maintain balance.
I like the bloodied condition. This is tempered by the overall lack of a condition track for other effects...
I like that Fort, Ref, and Will are now based on 2 different ability scores each, which makes MAD a little less of a problem. I'm just hoping that there's also something to reward people who invest in stats other than the ordinary ones too.
I also appreciate that skills have been consolidated and in some cases renamed for clarity.
Action points: Ever since d20 Modern, I've kinda felt that they should have been in D&D. They provide some needed backup for when the dice are against you but you really want to succeed.
I like some of the armor rules. I don't like the new masterwork armors in general (some of the names are pretty good, but a lot of seem wonky) but I appreciate the ideas behind the new armor categories.
I like that the default is per encounter balancing with some longer recharge resources to let combats go for a while, but eventually make it so players want to quit for the day.
I like that 4e gives both spellcasting and martial classes choices about what to do from round to round, so it puts both at roughly similar levels of complexity.
I like the unified defense and attack progressions. It simplifies things down a bit, and probably helps maintain balance.
I like the bloodied condition. This is tempered by the overall lack of a condition track for other effects...
I like that Fort, Ref, and Will are now based on 2 different ability scores each, which makes MAD a little less of a problem. I'm just hoping that there's also something to reward people who invest in stats other than the ordinary ones too.
I also appreciate that skills have been consolidated and in some cases renamed for clarity.
Action points: Ever since d20 Modern, I've kinda felt that they should have been in D&D. They provide some needed backup for when the dice are against you but you really want to succeed.
I like some of the armor rules. I don't like the new masterwork armors in general (some of the names are pretty good, but a lot of seem wonky) but I appreciate the ideas behind the new armor categories.
I like that the default is per encounter balancing with some longer recharge resources to let combats go for a while, but eventually make it so players want to quit for the day.
I like that 4e gives both spellcasting and martial classes choices about what to do from round to round, so it puts both at roughly similar levels of complexity.
Last edited:
DaveMage
Slumbering in Tsar
Likes:
-Improved racial distinctive abilities
-More hp at 1st level
-Rituals (at least, I like the potential of what these may be)
-Loss of iteritive attacks at high levels
That's all I can think of, although there is potential that trap machanics will be improved. We'll see.
-Improved racial distinctive abilities
-More hp at 1st level
-Rituals (at least, I like the potential of what these may be)
-Loss of iteritive attacks at high levels
That's all I can think of, although there is potential that trap machanics will be improved. We'll see.
lutecius
Explorer
first off, I've never cared for many of the so called dnd traditions so it's easier for me to like things that would horrify others, as long as they make sense story-wise.
fluff (I actually like a lot of the changes, but those could have been done without much effort in any edition):
- Feywild & Shadowfell, getting rid of the Great Wheel and racial pantheons, reshuffling devils & demons.
- “neutering” alignments (just discarding law & chaos would have been enough for me)
races:
- the elf /eladrin split and the tiefling’s mechanics (I hate the look, though)
- significant, active racial powers like FeyStep, InfernalWrath, 2ndChance (but not racial bonus for allies)
classes:
- general stantardisation of classes, unified defence progression
- tiers replacing random prestige classes
- the idea of powers for everyone (but not the mark system and per day/encounter martial powers)
- at will powers, rituals (potential like) for spellcasters (pity they did not drop “Vancian” altogether)
- multiclass "dips" sound good
- I hate power sources for spawning mongrels like the martial healer, but they do have the advantage of making the divine/arcane division somewhat less significant. They’re more like 2 schools among others now and every caster class doesn’t have to be lumped into either artificial cosmic category anymore.
combat:
- touch attack vs reflex (I wish they hadn’t dropped the ball on armor as damage reduction)
- bloodied condition could trigger many nice effects that make sense on both tactical and simulationist levels.
And random things like consolidated skills, fixed HPs, no more level drain.
As for the professed balance, faster or simpler gameplay, easier encounter design, extended sweet spot… they all sound good but I'm not sure I can take their word for it since we don’t seem to have the same notion of things like ”fun” or ”cool”
:\ I realise now that there are lots of “but”s even in things I like about 4e.
fluff (I actually like a lot of the changes, but those could have been done without much effort in any edition):
- Feywild & Shadowfell, getting rid of the Great Wheel and racial pantheons, reshuffling devils & demons.
- “neutering” alignments (just discarding law & chaos would have been enough for me)
races:
- the elf /eladrin split and the tiefling’s mechanics (I hate the look, though)
- significant, active racial powers like FeyStep, InfernalWrath, 2ndChance (but not racial bonus for allies)
classes:
- general stantardisation of classes, unified defence progression
- tiers replacing random prestige classes
- the idea of powers for everyone (but not the mark system and per day/encounter martial powers)
- at will powers, rituals (potential like) for spellcasters (pity they did not drop “Vancian” altogether)
- multiclass "dips" sound good
- I hate power sources for spawning mongrels like the martial healer, but they do have the advantage of making the divine/arcane division somewhat less significant. They’re more like 2 schools among others now and every caster class doesn’t have to be lumped into either artificial cosmic category anymore.
combat:
- touch attack vs reflex (I wish they hadn’t dropped the ball on armor as damage reduction)
- bloodied condition could trigger many nice effects that make sense on both tactical and simulationist levels.
And random things like consolidated skills, fixed HPs, no more level drain.
As for the professed balance, faster or simpler gameplay, easier encounter design, extended sweet spot… they all sound good but I'm not sure I can take their word for it since we don’t seem to have the same notion of things like ”fun” or ”cool”
:\ I realise now that there are lots of “but”s even in things I like about 4e.
JRRNeiklot
First Post
Kunimatyu said:
I have always interpreted hit points as partially a wound, partially greater skill in avoiding a wound. The sword thrust that would have skewered you at first level, is turned aside partially by a last second parry and it merely slices across your ribs leaving a painful wound, but nothing you can't grit your teeth against and fight on. It's HIT POINTS, thus it suggests you were hit any time you lose them. It doesn't mean you can take 12 swords through your chest, but it does mean you took a hit each time.
JRRNeiklot
First Post
Celebrim said:
See, I've never understood this problem. In any game I run - no matter the version - house cats cannot do damage at all. They can scratch you and cause pain, but it's not actually any hit point loss. Neither should stubbing your toe cause any loss of hit points. The disease, is a different matter, however....
Vegepygmy
First Post
I agree, though I am very unhappy with the other changes to the skill system.The Thayan Menace said:
I kinda like maximum damage on a crit instead of multiplying it, but I detest the elimination of confirmation rolls.
I think the new death and dying rules are, on the whole, an improvement.
And I'm theoretically in favor of replacing Vancian magic with at-will/per-encounter/per-day spells, though what I've seen of its actual implementation doesn't please me, and I am dead-set against all classes having such abilities.
There may be one or two other ideas I like from 4E, but honestly, I can't think of another one right now. Certainly not any of the ones other posters have listed above.
Similar Threads
