Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3824439" data-attributes="member: 22779">Thinking about 4e and 3e a bit and it hit me.  Perhaps its really obvious to everyone else, but, I'm a touch slow.  What design decision had the largest impact on 3e?  I thought of the usual suspects and then it came to me.  The design decision with the largest impact was the idea that the entire game should be viable for play in most groups.That decision, coupled with the fact that most campaigns have a half life of about 18 months has guided and pushed pretty much every facet of the game - from experience awards, to adventure design, to monster design and treasure rewards.Where 3e failed however, was that not every level is particularly viable.  It's perhaps better balanced at high levels than previous editions, but, high level play is not exactly a roller coaster of fun.  Combats take a long time, adventure design and DM workload is a bear, the math gets pretty complicated and the sheer number of different fiddly bits can grind the game to a screeching halt.For 4e though, what I can see is the design team taking this philosophy a step further.  The idea is that every level REALLY will be viable for play.  Workload for the DM is being reduced, the math is being reduced and legacy items, like Vancian casting is getting the boot.Take Vancian casting for a moment.  Vancian casting does work as a balancing mechanism.  However, it only really works for a fairly small subset of levels.  Wizards go from being baggage toted around by the rest of the party to being valuable contributors to pretty much single handedly dominating the entire game.  So, I can see the value in moving to a different system of casting.  If your goal is to make all levels work, you can't do it with Vancian casting.  3e proved that.So, whatcha think?</blockquote>

Verification