Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 3952353" data-attributes="member: 58197">I am also optimistic, but for a very different reason.&nbsp; I consider the changes in store for 4E to be at least as dramatic as the changes that were made in 3E; however, I think the art of game design has improved greatly over the past few years, and I also think the new system will be much more unified than the old.The change from 2E to 3E was mainly about revising the game &quot;engine,&quot; while keeping the details of the specific system.&nbsp; The class rules for fighters, wizards, and clerics in 3E are not all that different from the same classes in 2E; it's the game engine underneath them that changed.A lot of the balance problems of 3E stemmed from this.&nbsp; For example, consider the way arcane casters in 3E can dominate combat by using save-or-lose/save-or-suck spells in place of direct damage.&nbsp; This happened because most of the spell list was carried over wholesale from 2E.&nbsp; Back in 2E, hit points didn't scale nearly as fast.&nbsp; At the same time, all saving throws had fixed DCs, meaning that a powerful monster was almost guaranteed to make its saves.&nbsp; Therefore, direct damage was stronger and save-or-lose was much weaker.&nbsp; The changes to the 3E game engine cranked up the power of save-or-lose magic to insane levels, while cutting direct damage off at the knees.In 4E, the game engine is staying largely as is, but the details of the system are being totally redone.&nbsp; It's a mistake to suppose that the details are any less important than the engine.&nbsp; However, the new details are being designed to match the engine, rather than being carried over from an earlier edition.&nbsp; Because of this, the system ought to run much more smoothly than it did in the hybrid beast that was 3E.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 3952353, member: 58197"] I am also optimistic, but for a very different reason. I consider the changes in store for 4E to be at least as dramatic as the changes that were made in 3E; however, I think the art of game design has improved greatly over the past few years, and I also think the new system will be much more unified than the old. The change from 2E to 3E was mainly about revising the game "engine," while keeping the details of the specific system. The class rules for fighters, wizards, and clerics in 3E are not all that different from the same classes in 2E; it's the game engine underneath them that changed. A lot of the balance problems of 3E stemmed from this. For example, consider the way arcane casters in 3E can dominate combat by using save-or-lose/save-or-suck spells in place of direct damage. This happened because most of the spell list was carried over wholesale from 2E. Back in 2E, hit points didn't scale nearly as fast. At the same time, all saving throws had fixed DCs, meaning that a powerful monster was almost guaranteed to make its saves. Therefore, direct damage was stronger and save-or-lose was much weaker. The changes to the 3E game engine cranked up the power of save-or-lose magic to insane levels, while cutting direct damage off at the knees. In 4E, the game engine is staying largely as is, but the details of the system are being totally redone. It's a mistake to suppose that the details are any less important than the engine. However, the new details are being designed to match the engine, rather than being carried over from an earlier edition. Because of this, the system ought to run much more smoothly than it did in the hybrid beast that was 3E. [/QUOTE]

Verification