My group quite likes milestones, and we still use the pre-Essentials item limits. The paladin also has Meliorating Plate (+1 AC per milestone reached).
D&D 4E 4E's "Proud Nails"
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
I'll also bring up milestones, specifically with rings. Rings love slaughter, and only let you use their superpowers when you've killed enough bad guys?
Intelligence bonus adding to AC.. kinda bugged me.
Monsters with two different initiatives that played havoc with effects you had previously relied on.
The funny XP shift that happened when you jumped a tier.
Intelligence bonus adding to AC.. kinda bugged me.
Monsters with two different initiatives that played havoc with effects you had previously relied on.
The funny XP shift that happened when you jumped a tier.
Tequila Sunrise
Adventurer
Wow, a lot of these proud nails are stuff that makes 4e my favorite rpg...shared power structure between classes, smooth math, and monster castes (minion, elite, etc.) continue to be big hits for me. But I guess that's why I'm not much concerned with 5e.
It works great!
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
I don't think these issues are proud nails, as defined by the OP. I think they are a legitimate way to run an RPG, but they are not to everyone's taste. (Also the math is not smooth!)
All-in-all I think that 4E had a lot of great ideas, but some of the implementations stick out as "proud nails" to me:
Healing Surges - Essentially reserve hit points...good idea for tracking longer-term attrition, but poorly implemented in my opinion. I take issue with everything resetting at full after a night's rest. Also, I feel that the mechanic could have been expanded to encompass other resources. For instance, healing surges (tangent: terrible name) could have been used in place of action points and to fuel rituals.
Rituals: Separating game buggering story powers into rituals was a great idea, IMO. However, they were cost prohibitive in games that prominently featured magic item marts and strictly observed treasure parcels. Also, I would have liked to see rituals take on a more skill-challenge-esque approach so that multiple party members could participate. I feel that the thematic limitations of: "Guy who stabs things real good" could be overcome if stabby guy can help his wizard friend open a portal to valhalla somehow.
Skill Challenges: Another great idea, but lackluster implementation I feel. My main gripe here is that the intended purpose was to get ALL party members participating in the event, through creative skill usage, but the mathematical reality is that the system encouraged players to spam their highest skill again and again, or else you were actively contributing to the party's failure. Good DM's can run interesting skill challenges, but the system isn't "idiot proof" enough for my tastes. I think it would have been better to guage victory through some metric besides simple success counting. Also, I dislike the idea of scaling DC's.
Power Structure: Personally, I don't find the classes to be as same-y as people claim, even if they all use the AEDU structure. I've found that Fighters play significantly different from Paladins, who play significantly different from clerics, who play differently than Bards, who play differently Rogues, who themselves are perfectly distinct even compared to Rangers. No, my problem is that: 2[Damage Die] + pre-rendered effect is boring to metied tooclosely to grid/minis. I would rather have seen powers that were designed more narratively than tactically.
Number/Option Bloat: I used to use the character builder, because it was easier than poring through two or three books to build a character. Now I pore thorugh two or three books to build a character, because it's easier than sorting through hundreds of available feats and powers. Seriously, I would rather see fewer options with stronger decision points than a bloated, tumorous mass of options. It's like trying to pick all of the pineapples out of a jello salad...and who even takes guild feats anyway? On that note, I would also like to see numbers bloat mitigated. I would be happy if a character's total modifiers were less than the range of the randomizer (d20).
Healing Surges - Essentially reserve hit points...good idea for tracking longer-term attrition, but poorly implemented in my opinion. I take issue with everything resetting at full after a night's rest. Also, I feel that the mechanic could have been expanded to encompass other resources. For instance, healing surges (tangent: terrible name) could have been used in place of action points and to fuel rituals.
Rituals: Separating game buggering story powers into rituals was a great idea, IMO. However, they were cost prohibitive in games that prominently featured magic item marts and strictly observed treasure parcels. Also, I would have liked to see rituals take on a more skill-challenge-esque approach so that multiple party members could participate. I feel that the thematic limitations of: "Guy who stabs things real good" could be overcome if stabby guy can help his wizard friend open a portal to valhalla somehow.
Skill Challenges: Another great idea, but lackluster implementation I feel. My main gripe here is that the intended purpose was to get ALL party members participating in the event, through creative skill usage, but the mathematical reality is that the system encouraged players to spam their highest skill again and again, or else you were actively contributing to the party's failure. Good DM's can run interesting skill challenges, but the system isn't "idiot proof" enough for my tastes. I think it would have been better to guage victory through some metric besides simple success counting. Also, I dislike the idea of scaling DC's.
Power Structure: Personally, I don't find the classes to be as same-y as people claim, even if they all use the AEDU structure. I've found that Fighters play significantly different from Paladins, who play significantly different from clerics, who play differently than Bards, who play differently Rogues, who themselves are perfectly distinct even compared to Rangers. No, my problem is that: 2[Damage Die] + pre-rendered effect is boring to metied tooclosely to grid/minis. I would rather have seen powers that were designed more narratively than tactically.
Number/Option Bloat: I used to use the character builder, because it was easier than poring through two or three books to build a character. Now I pore thorugh two or three books to build a character, because it's easier than sorting through hundreds of available feats and powers. Seriously, I would rather see fewer options with stronger decision points than a bloated, tumorous mass of options. It's like trying to pick all of the pineapples out of a jello salad...and who even takes guild feats anyway? On that note, I would also like to see numbers bloat mitigated. I would be happy if a character's total modifiers were less than the range of the randomizer (d20).
wedgeski
Adventurer
I have a couple, but again, what some see as flaws in the system, I see as strengths. Anyway:
- Milestones. A valiant attempt to encourage continuous play without resting, but not interesting enough given their effect on magic item use. All-but gone from my game already.
- Feats. Too many; way, way too many. Feat choice when building a new character is insane. I'm not against feats as a concept, though.
- I also agree that Skill Challenges aren't idiot proof, but after four years, the concept of a self-contained, collective challenge with multiple players and branching options is now well and truly entrenched in my brain. For that reason I have to say they were an excellent addition to the game.
- Milestones. A valiant attempt to encourage continuous play without resting, but not interesting enough given their effect on magic item use. All-but gone from my game already.
- Feats. Too many; way, way too many. Feat choice when building a new character is insane. I'm not against feats as a concept, though.
- I also agree that Skill Challenges aren't idiot proof, but after four years, the concept of a self-contained, collective challenge with multiple players and branching options is now well and truly entrenched in my brain. For that reason I have to say they were an excellent addition to the game.
I tried a skill challenge at the very start, but then it didn't make enough difference from my previous 10 years of "players decide and narrate their actions and you call for a skill check when success is in question". The game worked fine without them for the next 4 years.
Really, I never thought skill challenges were more than a nice little subsystem that you can add if you think you need it, but according to the Internet they are kind of a big deal in 4E.
Really, I never thought skill challenges were more than a nice little subsystem that you can add if you think you need it, but according to the Internet they are kind of a big deal in 4E.
A
amerigoV
Guest
This is also a 3e Nail as well - CR/XP budgets for combats coupled with XP for defeating monsters. At first, I loved them. It both made perfect sense and helped balance out some of the encounters. But then it basically lead to expectations from players that every single encounter was there to be won by combat. Sure, you could overcome an enemy in non-combat ways, but that did not always guarantee the DM would count it.
All in all, it created a more sterile game IMO (level 1, fight 8 goblins, level 3, fight 8 orcs, level fight 8 ogres, etc).
All in all, it created a more sterile game IMO (level 1, fight 8 goblins, level 3, fight 8 orcs, level fight 8 ogres, etc).
Crazy Jerome
First Post
There are two problems with milestones, that stand out for me:
1. The proud nail part is that they are not very adaptable as a mechanic. The concept is easy enough to adapt to various styles, but the mechanics don't give you much to work with. And that directly ties into the second part ...
2. Milestones represent a failure of nerve. They are too weak to do what they set out to do--which is to encourage continuous play, but too ticky-tacky in their implementation to blend in seamlessly with everything else.
A truly great mechanic is one that is subtle in appearance, but profound in its implications and effects. Most mechanics will fall short, but Milestones manage the amazing trick of precisely reversing that--an "in your face" mechanic that does very little. Contrast this, for example, with something like healing surges--in your face, but also very strong at doing exactly what it sets out to do. Or at the opposite extreme, combining various skills into Athletics--not terribly important, but nonetheless with real, subtle implications.
D'karr
Adventurer
I think my biggest problem with milestones is that as defined they don't accomplish, at all, what they set out to do. Action Points are not the defining "attribute" that will determine whether the party will continue forward with their adventuring day, it's daily resources.
The milestone is a stumbling block in the narrative, as well as the mechanics. There is nothing noteworthy about the milestone, per se, as they are mechanically expected. You get them every two encounters. That in itself is a mechanism that robs the DM of pacing variability.
What if the DM wants the party to deplete itself of Action points and not get any until an actual encounter deemed a milestone? The expectations of the mechanic now interfere with the desired pacing for the adventure.
In my game I changed things around. Milestones are truly treated as milestones. The PCs get them when they achieve something noteworthy. In addition to the Action point recovery they also can choose to recover one daily resource. The choice is either 2 healing surges, or a daily power.
With this change the DM is once again in control of pacing. He can have an adventuring day that lasts exactly as long as he thinks is worthwhile.
Similar Threads
