D&D 4E An in depth rules discussion on the mechanical problems and breakthroughs of 4e

[Sadrik]

4e has been a blessing for me as 3e had some pretty devastating problems from its inception some of which eventually got work-arounds: multiclassing spell-casters, a skill system that was ripe with skills like: forgery, use rope and escape artist, a class and PrC glut that strained the playtestability of every combination which lead to exploding damage potentials and uber-broken combos, and then just the annoyingly endless amounts of requirements that needed to be checked and rechecked.

So, what mechanical breakthroughs has 4e brought? Here is a small list in no particular order.
1. The evening out of the BAB and level bonuses
2. Streamlining of the skill system
3. Saves as Defenses
4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no endless class based sub-systems)
5. XP system, including no losing XP
6. Monsters, how they are different than PC's, the endless variety of each type
7. Ritual system for out of combat spells and magic item creation
8. PoL setting
9. Actions (Standard, Move, Minor)

Everything is not hunky dory though. Like everything in life this RPG it is not perfect. It has some flaws some more serious than others. Here is a list of system problems potential or otherwise.
1. Stat polarity- tough or strong, smart or quick, perceptive or social
2. A clear focus on STR, CON, DEX (feats, what each stat does in general)
3. Weapons- sizing for small creatures, damages for various weapons, weapon uniqueness
4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no excellent unique sub-systems)
5. Class imbalance (Ranger)
6. Non-Weapon attacks missing a "weapon training" bonus to hit
7. Endless magical at-will attacks, should a wizard be able to magic missile all day?

Discuss and add your concerns and affirmations.

 

[Duelpersonality]

6. Non-Weapon attacks missing a "weapon training" bonus to hit

Just a quick skim through, but I don't think this is actually a problem, though I'd like to hear what your reasoning behind this is.

Basically, non-weapon attacks almost never target AC (I don't think I've seen one that does). AC is usually 2-3 points higher than other defense scores on any monster or NPC, which works out to be the proficiency bonus that weapons get. So non-weapon attacks that target other defenses (especially reflex and will) will hit on roughly the same die roll as weapon attacks targeting AC.

 

[Cadfan]

Regarding the breakthroughs

1. Agreed.
2. Agreed.
3. Agreed.
4. Mostly agree. This is far better design for most players, but subsystems were fun for the tinkerers amongst us.
5. Agreed.
6. Agreed.
7. Agreed, except that the 10 minute minimum time for a ritual shouldn't be a hard and fast rule, it should be a guideline for designers. I expect to see this changed over time.
8. Sort of agree. Technically, PoL was already the default setting. This edition just made it explicit.
9. Very much agreed.

Flaws
1. I don't think this exists. I understand why people think it does- the save system. But there's so much going on besides that. Occasionally when I design a character I give a nod to stat polarity, but its rare, and it usually only happens between stats that would have been dump stats anyways. For any given pairing of related stats, the polarity effect shows up only in a few builds, not across the board. For example, Fighters attack with Str, and have reason to prioritize it over Con, except that a lot of Fighter powers and feats base themselves in Con.
2. I don't find this all that surprising, and part of it is an artifact of the age of the system. Generic feats tend to be basic physical abilities. The PHB is the home of generic feats, and all adventurers have some minimal need of basic physical abilities.
3. Some weapon issues bug me. I keep wanting the greatsword to be the uber weapon. Its not. I should give up that sacred cow, and rejoice that polearms are good again.
4. See 4, above.
5. Not sure what this means. Yes, the ranger has high damage output. I'm not convinced he's broken yet, I'll have to look more deeply.
6. I don't know what this means.
7. This is not a flaw.

 

[Obryn]

Interesting list! By and large I agree with the advantages, even though some of them - like the setting - aren't really mechanical. I may think differently had I not spent some 6 months recently playing SWSE.

1. Stat polarity- tough or strong, smart or quick, perceptive or social

I'm indifferent to this. It will be interesting to see how it works in play... The biggest change I can see is that there's no set dump stat. I guess I'm not wedded to some of the standard 3e stereotypes, and throwing a 10 in Intelligence doesn't bug me.

2. A clear focus on STR, CON, DEX (feats, what each stat does in general)

Yep, that's a big problem for me.

3. Weapons- sizing for small creatures, damages for various weapons, weapon uniqueness

I loved 3.5's weapon sizes. 3e loses something here. I think, though, that the designers picked a very adequate selection of weapons that can cover most categories.

4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no excellent unique sub-systems)

I disagree on this one. I love the way each of the characters technically operates the same, but has a different feel in play. You play a fighter like a fighter, but you play a wizard like a wizard - even though you have the same categories of powers.

5. Class imbalance (Ranger)

I'm giving this one some time. As yet, I'm unconvinced.

6. Non-Weapon attacks missing a "weapon training" bonus to hit

Given that AC is generally 2-4 points above other defenses, I think this balances out...

7. Endless magical at-will attacks, should a wizard be able to magic missile all day?

That's a flavor issue. I have no problems with it.

I'd add...

8. (or whatever) Lack of clarity on which portions of a power are linked to which keywords (based on the Tarrasque thread).

-O

 

[Mengu]

4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no endless class based sub-systems)

4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no excellent unique sub-systems)

Well, for decissions like these you pick the lesser of two evils. When doing some demo games, I rather enjoyed being able to talk through how the system works, addressing everyone's questions at the same time since they were all on the same page when I talked about what a Daily Power was. Huge time saver. I have some players who have been playing 3.x since it was released, and will shamelessly tell me they don't know how to play a cleric or a wizard. Gone are those days. Good riddence.

5. Class imbalance (Ranger)

Not sure what you mean by this. There is a slight problem with Twin Attack, that's not difficult to fix, is that what you're referring to? Or am I out of the loop on something else?

6. Non-Weapon attacks missing a "weapon training" bonus to hit

I think this is compansated generally by the lower defense values for Fort, Refl, and Will.

7. Endless magical at-will attacks, should a wizard be able to magic missile all day?

I say yes please, I much prefer not having to resort to a crossbow after firing one magic missile for the day. It's no different than a Ranger shooting his bow all day, or a paladin trucking around in his full plate all day. I like it.

 

[Boarstorm]

6. Non-Weapon attacks missing a "weapon training" bonus to hit

I'm interpreting this differently than others in this thread.

If you mean there's no proficiency bonus for unarmed attacks, I think I'm right there with you.

Edit: Aaaand I'm wrong. Poo.

 

[Sadrik]

Just a quick skim through, but I don't think this is actually a problem, though I'd like to hear what your reasoning behind this is.

It is true that generally AC is 2-3 points higher than defenses. However, everyone seems to have at-will powers that attack one of the other defenses --> and gain their weapon training bonus apply when doing that. Meanwhile, wizards, warlocks and clerics are left standing there holding their wand --> which has no training bonus.

Using method 1 and playing a race that does not give +2 to your primary stat will leave you with a 16 (+3). Going against saves that will generally be 12+ roll a 9 or better for your power to work.

Meanwhile, a rogue with a 16 dex and a dagger has +7 vs a 12+ needs to roll a 5 or better.
A fighter with a 16 str and a sword has +7 vs an AC of 14+ needs a 7 or better.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

I'm not sure that we can know the breakthroughs and problems of the system without some serious playtesting (i.e., at least 3 months of hundreds of people reporting on their experiences).

That said, I always enjoy a discussion!

1. Stat polarity- tough or strong, smart or quick, perceptive or social

I almost wish they had gone with 3 stats instead of 6, but I don't think we're quite there yet. 6 stats gives the system a more granularity that I like. For instance, I might have an 18 Str for bonus to hit/damage and Fort Defense, but that 13 Con is still pretty helpful for my hitpoints. And it doesn't automatically mean super strong = super tough.

3. Weapons- sizing for small creatures, damages for various weapons, weapon uniqueness

I'm glad that weapons are simplified now. I don't want a lot of complex implements and items that make things whacky. Save that for the powers. Items should be vehicles to deliver those powers. Magic items do this better, and sometimes have neat tricks associated with them (by the way, I think we got a nice chunk of magical items, and enough examples that creating new ones shouldn't be too difficult).

The sizing issue is a bit annoying, but I think it's easy to fix. A halfing versatile longsword does 1d6 damage. A greatsword, 1d8. Etc.

4. Streamlining all powers from all character types into one system (no excellent unique sub-systems)

What you see as a problem I see as a major step forward. All characters operating on the same system means it's much easier to balance, not just between players, but across the entire game. Likewise, "unique subsystems" tend to be holdovers from the past or favorite pets of the designer's preference, and either add nothing to the game or break it entirely (I'm looking at you, Mr. 3.x Cleric!)

7. Endless magical at-will attacks, should a wizard be able to magic missile all day?

Yes. Wizards are conduits of magical force in the universe. They should never, ever be without some sort of magical effect that can be accessed all the time.

 

[Mengu]

It is true that generally AC is 2-3 points higher than defenses. However, everyone seems to have at-will powers that attack one of the other defenses --> and gain their weapon training bonus apply when doing that. Meanwhile, wizards, warlocks and clerics are left standing there holding their wand --> which has no training bonus.

If by at-will you mean per-encounter, you are correct.

I think generally the difference between AC and Defenses is 0-5, which is a reasonable spread, given proficiency bonuses are 2-3.

 

[Sadrik]

Flaws
1. I don't think this exists. I understand why people think it does- the save system. But there's so much going on besides that. Occasionally when I design a character I give a nod to stat polarity, but its rare, and it usually only happens between stats that would have been dump stats anyways. For any given pairing of related stats, the polarity effect shows up only in a few builds, not across the board. For example, Fighters attack with Str, and have reason to prioritize it over Con, except that a lot of Fighter powers and feats base themselves in Con.

I have had the lucky opportunity to build several characters recently and it was very apparent in the decision making process as to how you would assign your stats to the character. Stat polarity is pretty rough and a big pill to swallow and always on your mind when designing a character.

Player: "I want to make a smart fighter who will go into being a wizard with ritual casting and stuff but my stats are all screwed up."
DM: "Have you seen the warlord?"
Player: "Yeah but I don't want to do that stuff. I want to blast heads with my greatsword and make these challenges."
DM: "Well then, you will have to have screwed up stats."


Problems/Flaws
9. Multiclassing- yeah, this one is still not fixed.