PrecociousApprentice
First Post
Thinking about the various problems that players are having with the possibility of converting their favorite character to 4e rules, I have come to a few conclusions. From what has been shown in the limited data set we have been given about the rules, I have concluded that converting virtually any character from virtually any fantasy source (whether role playing or literature) will be relatively easy to do with the 4e rules, compared to most other RPGs. I have also concluded that there could be many approaches to each character, and that if someone is having a hard time with the process, it is likely that they are focusing way too much on the mechanical description of their character from another edition/game, and not enough on what matters. I have seen many posters challenge the boards to convert their character to 4e asserting that it can’t be done. Then they complain that they can’t convert because there is no 50/50 multiclass split or a limit of only one extra class for multiclassing, or rogues can’t sneak attack with greatsword, or whatever, even after they have been presented with appropriate builds based on their description of what they wanted. I think that I can help these people will try to help these people despite difficulties and all the unknowns.
To start the conversion process, remove all game mechanics concepts from your mind. These will only hinder you. The constructs of the past do not map perfectly to the ways of the future. Your preconceived notions will diminish your satisfaction and lead you down a road to frustration. Do not approach 4e as you have always approached D&D. It is a different system with a different philosophy. But if you are open minded, the system seems to be very robust and flexible, and it can give you anything that you could want, as long as you accept a level of balancing that makes it fun for the whole group.
There are several reasons for this relative ease for conversion. First, there has been a divorce between what a character does in combat and what a character does out of combat. Second, retraining better reflects the changes that happen to a character as s/he grows throughout a campaign than previous editions’ versions of multiclassing, and retraining will be a core part of 4e. Third, removal of Vancian casting will allow more archetypes and characters from other forms of literature than just D&D derived literature. Fourth, the new multiclass rules combined with paragon paths and epic destinies will likely allow characters to mix caster and non-caster concepts without gimping either side too drastically. These ideas should help those wishing to convert their beloved characters to 4e.
At this point you need to become more familiar with the tools that 4e seems to have made available for you to create characters that are both mixed concept and effective. These may seem limited in the context of previous games, but in the context of 4e they are extremely flexible and will give you anything that you can reasonably imagine. Add to this the possibility to retrain and you are able to create character concepts that have the possibility to evolve through game play and advancement.
Now to start with your character creation process, you need to understand the difference between character concept, class, combat role, and out of combat capability. Character concept is your character’s place in the world. It’s who they are, how they behave, where they come from, where they have been, and where they are going. This is the RP idea of your character. Many people only flesh this part of the character out through play, and so they do not need to come up with this from whole cloth. If you are converting a character, this is a good part of what you will be bringing forward through the edition change. The idea of retraining also allows you to have a history to your character that is not reflected in his current character build. Just because you started as a thief does not mean you are forced to add the thief (rogue, whatever) class to your character sheet. Concept is not necessary to write on your character sheet, it reflects little in the form of mechanics, and is easily ported to a new game/edition.
Your character’s combat role is also likely to be brought forward through the editions change. This is how your character behaves in combat. This is what most players are talking about when they describe their character. Many people get this part all mixed up because there wasn’t ever any explicit explanation of combat role in previous editions, and most characters’ combat role just happened to emerge through game play, or is assumed because of character class. Combat role most likely is going to be the most important aspect of your character to pin down perfectly in order to convert your character to the new edition in a satisfactory way.
The thing that most frustrates peoples’ attempts to convert their characters is the idea of class and both their character’s in- and out-of-combat role. Many of the archetypes in previous editions were created with a certain class, and these classes all came with pretty specific in- and out-of-combat roles built in. If you wanted to have skillz, you went with the rogue class, with the most likely creative alternatives to this being the ranger and the high Int wizard, and this was largely limited by the game concept of skill points assigned by class. If you wanted a character that had any skill at all with arcane magic, you had to add an arcane class to the mix. No other classes had access to arcane magic. In 4e, class only gets you a combat role, there are no skill points, and out of combat role can emerge from many game elements besides class. Getting skills outside of your options from your class will be allowed by multiclassing or Skill Training feats, and many 4e skills are much broader in scope than their 3.x ancestors, so it may be possible that you can get two for ones from old skills to new skills. From the best guesses so far on rituals, out of combat magic will be handled by some form of feat or skill, and will most likely only tangentially be tied to class. (No citing on this. Sorry, we still know too little, but I am asserting it anyway.) This all adds up to relative freedom from class when deciding on character concept and out of combat role as compared to 3.x.
If you can honestly pin down your combat role, recognize that retraining will allow for character growth, and creatively design your out of combat role, then it seems that most if not all characters will be easier to create in 4e as compared to 3.x. Becoming familiar with the rules and philosophy of 4e will be the first step, and understanding which elements of a character are gamist elements, which are RP, and which are based solely on mechanics from other games will help you to get the character that you were most likely trying to create all along. And now you might even get that at first level!
Take this as you will, cut me some slack on the things we don’t really know, keep an open mind, and exercise some creativity before you say that your character can’t be properly created in 4e. I honestly think that this edition will become known as the greatest leap forward in game design since the jump from wargame to RPG, and if given a chance, most people will like it.
EDIT: Hopefully added some clarity at the suggestion of some posters.
To start the conversion process, remove all game mechanics concepts from your mind. These will only hinder you. The constructs of the past do not map perfectly to the ways of the future. Your preconceived notions will diminish your satisfaction and lead you down a road to frustration. Do not approach 4e as you have always approached D&D. It is a different system with a different philosophy. But if you are open minded, the system seems to be very robust and flexible, and it can give you anything that you could want, as long as you accept a level of balancing that makes it fun for the whole group.
There are several reasons for this relative ease for conversion. First, there has been a divorce between what a character does in combat and what a character does out of combat. Second, retraining better reflects the changes that happen to a character as s/he grows throughout a campaign than previous editions’ versions of multiclassing, and retraining will be a core part of 4e. Third, removal of Vancian casting will allow more archetypes and characters from other forms of literature than just D&D derived literature. Fourth, the new multiclass rules combined with paragon paths and epic destinies will likely allow characters to mix caster and non-caster concepts without gimping either side too drastically. These ideas should help those wishing to convert their beloved characters to 4e.
At this point you need to become more familiar with the tools that 4e seems to have made available for you to create characters that are both mixed concept and effective. These may seem limited in the context of previous games, but in the context of 4e they are extremely flexible and will give you anything that you can reasonably imagine. Add to this the possibility to retrain and you are able to create character concepts that have the possibility to evolve through game play and advancement.
Now to start with your character creation process, you need to understand the difference between character concept, class, combat role, and out of combat capability. Character concept is your character’s place in the world. It’s who they are, how they behave, where they come from, where they have been, and where they are going. This is the RP idea of your character. Many people only flesh this part of the character out through play, and so they do not need to come up with this from whole cloth. If you are converting a character, this is a good part of what you will be bringing forward through the edition change. The idea of retraining also allows you to have a history to your character that is not reflected in his current character build. Just because you started as a thief does not mean you are forced to add the thief (rogue, whatever) class to your character sheet. Concept is not necessary to write on your character sheet, it reflects little in the form of mechanics, and is easily ported to a new game/edition.
Your character’s combat role is also likely to be brought forward through the editions change. This is how your character behaves in combat. This is what most players are talking about when they describe their character. Many people get this part all mixed up because there wasn’t ever any explicit explanation of combat role in previous editions, and most characters’ combat role just happened to emerge through game play, or is assumed because of character class. Combat role most likely is going to be the most important aspect of your character to pin down perfectly in order to convert your character to the new edition in a satisfactory way.
The thing that most frustrates peoples’ attempts to convert their characters is the idea of class and both their character’s in- and out-of-combat role. Many of the archetypes in previous editions were created with a certain class, and these classes all came with pretty specific in- and out-of-combat roles built in. If you wanted to have skillz, you went with the rogue class, with the most likely creative alternatives to this being the ranger and the high Int wizard, and this was largely limited by the game concept of skill points assigned by class. If you wanted a character that had any skill at all with arcane magic, you had to add an arcane class to the mix. No other classes had access to arcane magic. In 4e, class only gets you a combat role, there are no skill points, and out of combat role can emerge from many game elements besides class. Getting skills outside of your options from your class will be allowed by multiclassing or Skill Training feats, and many 4e skills are much broader in scope than their 3.x ancestors, so it may be possible that you can get two for ones from old skills to new skills. From the best guesses so far on rituals, out of combat magic will be handled by some form of feat or skill, and will most likely only tangentially be tied to class. (No citing on this. Sorry, we still know too little, but I am asserting it anyway.) This all adds up to relative freedom from class when deciding on character concept and out of combat role as compared to 3.x.
If you can honestly pin down your combat role, recognize that retraining will allow for character growth, and creatively design your out of combat role, then it seems that most if not all characters will be easier to create in 4e as compared to 3.x. Becoming familiar with the rules and philosophy of 4e will be the first step, and understanding which elements of a character are gamist elements, which are RP, and which are based solely on mechanics from other games will help you to get the character that you were most likely trying to create all along. And now you might even get that at first level!
Take this as you will, cut me some slack on the things we don’t really know, keep an open mind, and exercise some creativity before you say that your character can’t be properly created in 4e. I honestly think that this edition will become known as the greatest leap forward in game design since the jump from wargame to RPG, and if given a chance, most people will like it.
EDIT: Hopefully added some clarity at the suggestion of some posters.
Last edited:
