Anyone else wonder why they didn't combine the 3.5 spell system and the 4th edition..

[Psion]

If you're running a bunch of non-threatening encounters most of the time, your perspective makes a lot more sense. In fairness, the system was built for that type of play, which is probably why it seems more balanced to you - you're playing it the way it was meant to be played. Most of the rest of us got bored with non-challenging fights and scrapped that system.

Conversely, that's the way I started. It used to be I didn't see the point of fighting unless I meant to draw blood. It was only after some discussion that I picked up on the "let the players show their awesome" ideal.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Conversely, that's the way I started. It used to be I didn't see the point of fighting unless I meant to draw blood. It was only after some discussion that I picked up on the "let the players show their awesome" ideal.

As a player and as a DM, I like the occasional "let the players show their awesome", but I also want to feel challenged (player) or challenge them (DM).

It appears to me as if writers of the Adventure Path from Dungeon and Paizo often thought along similar lines, since I remember a lot of overpowered encounters. But sometimes, they went a little too far. We ended our Age of Worms more or less deliberately in a TPK.

 

[satori01]

When fighters can fly, teleport and pull down walls of fire, then you will get "everyone has x amount of powers with the same effects".

Umm w/ the multiclass and ritual caster feats a Fighter can do this at the cost of 4 feats...which given 4e increased feat schedule is not that big of an expenditure.

My issue with the 4e "Magic system" is that it really is not very magical. The number of utility powers a Wizard could learn are small, and the amount they can use even smaller, and one could argue the rogue has the greater and more useful amount of utility powers with greater Hit points to boot.

4e just decided to eliminate problem areas other than fix them. Illusions....gone for the most part outside the simplest of things, Charm Person gone. Fly is moved to a much higher level.

Nuanced battles where the move of the day is casting Dimensional Achor on the BBEG that has been escaping the parties grasp for 1 year of real time gone. Likewise the group planning that is involved in spell caster spell selection,soliciting advice for spell selection gone....no more group help in trying to determine what the BBEG clerical spell caster will have covered for with Spell Immunity etc.

The Magic system went from a Market Economy w/ DM oversight, to a very controlled command economy....you will only teleport to "circles" the DM controls, your powers will only do X damage.....and frankly most have very limited to 0 secondary effects, which was the hallmark of spells in 3.5...the dmg output never matched a warriors but the secondary effects made them worth their weight. innovated spell design from later 3.5 products like channeled spells where the player decides what action the spell takes to cast (standard, minor, etc) and the damage amounts does not even make an appearance in 4e.

Bottleneck effects still happen, want to run an aquatic adventure and the ritual Water breathing is still needed.

The true positives of 4e is that "spells" work like any other powers which mean you can crit and implements act like magic swords ....which would be an easy add to 3.5

 

[Hussar]

Yeah, if you have high HD/CR (and BAB/AC) ratios, that can be bad news regardless of AC. So refresh me: many purple worms in WLD?

AC tends to be pretty effective against PC types, due to iterative attacks. Even if the first attack is pretty much going to hit, a good AC will make it more likely that attacks 2-4 won't hit.

Yeah, I think we've nailed the culprit rightly enough. This would explain to a great extent the disconnect between my games and yours. I tended to use critters much more than classed PC's.

Cool. Always good to come to some greater understanding.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Umm w/ the multiclass and ritual caster feats a Fighter can do this at the cost of 4 feats...which given 4e increased feat schedule is not that big of an expenditure.

Actually, they need at least 5 (Multiclass Base Feat, 2 Feats for power exchange, 1 for Arcana, 1 for ritual casting). A Fighter in 3E just needs one level of multiclassing and a few gold pieces for scrolls to achieve all these effects.
Multiclassing can not be taken into account here.

The Magic system went from a Market Economy w/ DM oversight, to a very controlled command economy....you will only teleport to "circles" the DM controls, your powers will only do X damage.....and frankly most have very limited to 0 secondary effects, which was the hallmark of spells in 3.5...the dmg output never matched a warriors but the secondary effects made them worth their weight. innovated spell design from later 3.5 products like channeled spells where the player decides what action the spell takes to cast (standard, minor, etc) and the damage amounts does not even make an appearance in 4e.

Secondary effects? Most spells have something like "save for half" or "save negates". What secondary effects are you talking about?
I see the secondary effects in 4E a lot more. Ongoing damage, push/pull/slide opponents around, immobilize, restrain and blinding elements.

Bottleneck effects still happen, want to run an aquatic adventure and the ritual Water breathing is still needed.

The true positives of 4e is that "spells" work like any other powers which mean you can crit and implements act like magic swords ....which would be an easy add to 3.5

Well, implementingi in 3.5 is easy, balancing is not. (oops, my 10d6 fireball just became a 20d6 fireball...)

 

[Staffan]

Actually, they need at least 5 (Multiclass Base Feat, 2 Feats for power exchange, 1 for Arcana, 1 for ritual casting). A Fighter in 3E just needs one level of multiclassing and a few gold pieces for scrolls to achieve all these effects.

You get training in Arcana for free with the wizard multiclass feat.

 

[The Little Raven]

You get training in Arcana for free with the wizard multiclass feat.

You still need four feats, which means you need to be at least 4th level (2 feats at 1st, 1 feat at 2nd, 1 feat at 4th).

And that doesn't change the fact that multiclassing into Wizard is what is giving the fighter the ability to "fly, teleport, or call down walls of fire," not anything from the actual fighter class, which is hong's entire point.

Fighters don't get those powers. Wizards do.

 

[VanRichten]

That wasn't how it was in our campaigns. I provided alot of party support such as haste and resist energy and sealed off our fighters with Walls of force so they weren't flanked. I also gave them fly spells so they could engage flying enemies. I wasn't a caster that just let my melees twiddle their thumbs while I launched nuke spells.

The best damage a caster can do is to boost his comrades.

This clearly defines the way I always played a wizard 3.X. Unfortunately from what I have seen about Wizards in 4E this is no longer the case.

Amen brother on posting what a wizard was always about.

 

[hong]

Umm w/ the multiclass and ritual caster feats a Fighter can do this at the cost of 4 feats...which given 4e increased feat schedule is not that big of an expenditure.

That's why it's called "multiclassing".