Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Phlebas" data-source="post: 3966570" data-attributes="member: 23810">OK - been lurking in 4E forum rather than getting involved since i'm basically neutral to 4E but these lists seem to sum up most of the key issues so here's my humble opinion. Btw i've played most editions from the basic boxed set onwards and generally enjoyed the improvements (and house ruled anything i don't like the feel of) and suspect in a few years time i'll be doing the same to 4E.... thanks to previous posters for the list!<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE LEVEL DRAIN - Good, once you have restorations available its just an awkward mechanic and i much prefer ability drain....</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE (temporary) ABILITY DRAIN - Bad - ability drain is scary to PC's regardless of level, and simple to work out the impact on the fly. As a DM its a great way to threaten the party in alternative ways, as a player its a scary threat requiring different tactics. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE SAVE-OR-DIE - Good - I don't mind the odd 'make this roll or die moment', but it should be at the end of the encounter, not at the start. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE ETHICAL ALIGNMENTS - Good / Bad -  Good in that i never played or DM'd it as written and prefer shades of gray in my own campaigns / Bad in that its a useful shorthand for monster / encounter / NPC / Church etc attitude. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> SNEAK ATTACK ON ANYTHING - Neutral - yes it would be nice to have less things immune but it does make for variety in encounters if some things are. Why not allow charm or sleep spells to work on Zombies if you don't like general immunities? </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> FASTER GAME MECHANICS - Good. Hmm, waiting to see since every game promises this and very few deliver but the combat in 3E, though a lot more tactical, is much slower than prev edtions (though still faster than some dice pool / hit location systems) it would be nice to have a "combat lite" option to allow for better pacing of minor encounters.....</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> FASTER (N)PC CREATION - Neutral : PC - low level PC's are easy - high levels are more complex. Seems a fundamental that wont change. Biggest improvement would be handing out some simple function spreadsheets that did the number crunching for the math-averse. Hopefully included in the online section. Hope that the points / dice options remain.... NPC- since you have the std NPC's in the DMG, and lots of free software for NPC creation I've never seen this as a major problem. worried about skills? just give them level bonus in class skills and don't worry overmuch about something that will rush into combat and die without using 90% of its abilities. If its a major NPC then take the same time you would on a PC - it deserves it. My (& others) biggest problem as a DM is when you have mid - high level encounters and you need to spend a lot of time just understanding their abilities and working out tactics and i don't see that changing unless you're going to oversimplify every monster</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE EXCESSIVE AMOUNTS OF MAGIC ITEMS - Good. I always disliked the christmas tree impact, and body slots seemed artificial so the idea of fewer, more powerful items i like. Not sure what the final mechanic for making items will be so staying neutral on that. xp wasn't brilliant but gp is very campaign dependant</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE (or less) VANCIAN CASTING - Bad / Neutral. I thought the sorcerer/bard mechanic of 'cast anything you know' in 3E solved the book-keeping issue for those that disliked it, while allowing those who like the resource management bit to carry on using it.  I've been toying with allowing cantrips at will in my current game so i'm interested to see what they do with the at will / per encounter abilities. But I really get annoyed by the argument that having to rest after every few encounters is a system problem - learn how to conserve ammo people! </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> NO MORE SPELL SCHOOLS - Neutral - I like the idea of specialist spell-casters and having a mechanic to reward those who theme rather than cherry pick - I've seen alternatives based on elemental lists before so I'm not too attached to the current schools - but I'll need to see the alternatives in detail first before making any judgement</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> FOCUS ITEMS - Good - less magic items and gives flavour. concerned they will end up like familiars and be forgotten about 90% of the time....</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> SKILL SYSTEM REVAMP - Neutral - current skills don't seem particularly broken to me at the moment but be interesting to see what the alternative is</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> BASIC RACES CHANGES - Neutral - not because i'm fond of gnomes (though Zilargo has dramatically improved my opinion of them) but because I would have preferred to see a proper mechanic merging LA and Racial levels so that pretty much any race from the MM could be played and so allow DM's to choose for themselves what exotic creatures you can use. No problems with the new races proposed but seems a wasted opportunity</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> RACIAL PANTHEONS GETTING THE BOOT - Neutral - this is something you can homebrew or not as suits - there's nothing fundamental or rules based in this decision - in fact you could argue that other than a couple of examples all pantheons should be in a campaign sourcebook rather than the core rules but its only a page or twoand does help DM's who don't feel the need to world-build.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> ELIMINATION OF PRESTIGE CLASSES - Neutral. The prestige classes were getting slightly out of hand with all the add on books but it was a relatively simple mechanic to create variety. I certainly preferred it to most of the 'new' base classes that came out of various books. If the 'Paragon' mechanic is better then no problems</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> EFFORT TO BALANCE FEATS - Neutral - The great things about feats is their variety and the fact you have a huge number to choose to create the character you desire. If you have a huge number then some will be better than others depending on your PC build / campaign / party mix / style of play etc.  Not sure how 4E will change this but interested to see attempt. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> PARTY ROLES - DEFENDER, LEADER, ETC. - Neutral - ok its nice to give a general guidance on how to make an effective party, but this seems really unnecessary and potentially restrictive. D&D at its core has always been class & level based. not sure what the Role adds</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> POINTS OF LIGHT SETTING DESIGN - Neutral- the beauty of previous editions was that you could use the same rule systems for anything from stone age to renaissance settings, urban to wilderness. If this is just fluff/flavour then its not a problem and helps newcomers but if starts affecting rules too much....</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol"> LACK OF BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY - Good / Neutral / Bad : Good that they've told us up front, Neutral in that most DM's will find a way to convert as has been done for basic to AD&D to 2nd ed to 3E to 3,5E,  Bad in "Buy all our new stuff and throw away the £'s you've spent in the last 5 years"</li> </ol></blockquote>

Verification