D&D 4E Can WotC Cater to Past Editions Without Compromising 4e Design?

[KarinsDad]

I haven't read most of the posts here, but I do think that there is a way that 5E can go back to the earlier edition roots in a few ways without losing its strengths:

1) Some of the Essentials classes are an attempt to go back to earlier editions by having simpler PCs. By removing Dailies and making many of the Encounter powers merely a damage boost, those classes are a bit simpler to play. I think 5E can have more classes with these types of features for those types of players that either cannot or do not want to handle dozens of abilities by the PCs.

2) A lot of 3.5 magic has been subverted via Rituals. Instead of it being a spell, it's a ritual and it cannot be cast within combat. By creating a system of allowing PCs to use certain low casting time Ritual Scrolls in combat (i.e. the simple rituals, e.g. Knock), it would bring back some of the magical versatility of earlier editions.

3) Combat in 4E is mostly about doing damage and about affecting foes. There is very little of the in combat magic (walls and such) that was a staple of earlier editions. There are walls and zones and auras and such, but they are very tightly connected to one or two game mechanics (often damage) and do not quite have the control feel of earlier editions (Darkness being a prime example). Zones and auras specifically sometimes have a very artificial and game mechanical feel to them (everyone in the zone gets x). For example, a zone or aura of fire sometimes does damage to enemies, but not allies. That feels artificial and totally game mechanics driven as opposed to an aura or zone of fire that is a ring of fire that hits everyone.

4) There is little magic that affects magic. The classical example is Dispel Magic which for all intents and purposes, is mostly useless in 4E. The ability to get rid of enemy offensive or defensive magic is virtually nonexistent in 4E and could be brought back.

5) The plethora of 4E conditions should be addressed. Conditions should have longer durations, but be more from Daily powers. Constantly adding and removing conditions is one of the worst changes from earlier editions to 4E and this is an area for vast improvement. A lot of care has to be taken here, but there are just too many conditions and too many current options (end of foe's next turn, saving throw, start of user's next turn, end of user's next turn, etc.).

6) A differentiation between power sources. Most sources can accomplish most effects. There could be a bit more restriction here, forcing players to multiclass or hybrid in order to get certain types of effects. And I think there could be fewer power sources (Do we really need a Shadow source? Couldn't Primal and Divine be combined into a power acquired by external entities source?).

 

[MrMyth]

I like 4E. I can see various elements I would be happy to see make a return from past editions, and other areas where I felt 4E did not go far enough. My current game is running from a solid core of 4E, but with a decent amount of homebrewing involved.

So I am certain that WotC could make a game that I would fine to provide me the blend of new and old that would make me happy. But there is no guarantee that others would find it the same - I'm sure that no matter what direction they go in, some will want it to go farther, others will want it to reverse course.

However, in terms of the actual question asked in the title of the thread - absolutely. There are many classic elements that can be retintroduced to the game without compromising the core of the system.

As an example, let's look at Crafting. I was very glad to see Crafting divorced from the standard skill system - having it competing with resources for actually useful skills was very frustrating to me. On the other hand, I wasn't a fan of it vanishing entirely. I would be glad to see it make a return as some sort of secondary skill system, perhaps one tied to backgrounds or themes. (I'm doing just that in my home game).

Would everyone like this change? Probably not. But it is a change that can be made, and doesn't mess up the basics of the system design in any way. I think similar approaches can be taken elsewhere. And many of the things we've seen develop in 4E in a 'bolted on' fashion - from Themes, to the Essentials designs, etc - could be far more fluid and smooth if built into the system from the ground up.

In my opinion, at least.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Martial Practices don't fill that itch? I could see them being reorganized somewhat if you wanted to recapitulate the way they worked in 3.5 though.

@KD
I hope never to see meta-magic raise its evil head again. While it was a fun idea it is also the sort of thing that is either broken or worthless and rarely anything in between.

I don't really agree that things like walls don't work basically the way they were INTENDED to work in the past. I think players found ways to convince DMs to let them do rather unintended things with this class of spells, but a 4e wall of fire works pretty much the same was a 3.5 or AD&D wall of fire was intended to work.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

On things like Dispel Magic, I think there is a potential role for counter magic in a 4E variant or later version extrapolated from it. Or more likely, counter powers, based on some combination of level, skills, and attack bonuses. A simple "Dispel Magic" spell is not it, though, as it doesn't have enough decision points or scope. That just leads to drawing out combat even more, as people get all defensive. You'll especially see it as a problem when one side outnumbers the other significantly. So something like "counter power" has to be built into the base assumptions of the game from the ground up, or at least compensated somehow.

Arguably, this is what the various defenses are partially doing now. That +1/2 level boost to defenses is, in part, because fighters are blocking blows directed at their friends, magicians are doing counter magic, etc. It's merely abstracted out of the direct game processes.

Ultimately, if you don't put a serious "block" in the game for weapon users, there isn't a place for a serious "dispel magic". And if you don't have a serious place for it, then it is niche mechanics way too diminished for its purported flavor--or its relegated to narrative color. And that has been the D&D way, since the start.

 

[KarinsDad]

@KD
I hope never to see meta-magic raise its evil head again. While it was a fun idea it is also the sort of thing that is either broken or worthless and rarely anything in between.

Well, 4E already has meta-magic.

Dispel Magic, Devour Magic, Stretch Spell.

There's not a lot of it.

And I don't think that just because designers had difficulty with this in earlier editions means that with the more power restricted elements in 4E, that they cannot do it well in the future. Part of the issue in the past was that spells like Dispel Magic would work on many types of magic. Limiting the magic is one way to get it under control, but the issue then becomes that the PC only has so many Daily powers, so it becomes an issue of utility. Dispel Zone isn't helpful if all you run into is Auras (assuming such a model which doesn't have to be the case).


But, one of the things I like about earlier editions is the fact that magic was distinct from mundane. Essentials, in some cases, has brought us back to that slightly. The Slayer just feels like a combat monkey with not many special super powers.