Clark Peterson on 4E

[cangrejoide]

Is this thread for real? Let me get this straight, (1) some dude on the Internet goes to his own message boards (where presumably people who like to buy his stuff hang out) and says "You know, this game some other company published is pretty cool, but it really isn't my favorite flavor. I think I can take some of its innovations and make a better game that."

If he had actually said it that way none of this would be happening. I guess its not the message but the way he expressed it, that irked people.

 

[Fifth Element]

Like I said earlier in this thread, the speed at which people who were praising Clark's name spun around to attack him is, well, kinda hilarious.

Some might say the same about how quickly Orcus' tune has apparently changed on 4E.

Who knows, maybe there's a connection there?

 

[Fifth Element]

I understand, also. I simply disagree. The warrior daily power "Brute Strike" is not a "K3WL POWERZ!!11!one!1!eleven!"

Indeed. Causing extra damage than normal on an attack certainly doesn't qualify as a KP. Otherwise Power Attack from 3E would have to be a KP.

 

[Allister]

What I want to know is why no one ever had a problem with this mechanic when it was used for 3.5E barbarians (rage), paladins (smite), samurai (kiai smite), bards (inspire), etc. There is nothing new about these mechanics. I gotta stess that: there is nothing new about powers. You always had them (unless you were a fighter).

*LOL*

As the saying goes, "You're a fighter. You don't deserve nice things"

EDIT: Actually, I think I personally was more annoyed NOT at the 4E discussion but the usual disparaging remark about anime....

 

[Fenes]

I understand, also. I simply disagree. The warrior daily power "Brute Strike" is not a "K3WL POWERZ!!11!one!1!eleven!" (henceforth abbreviated to KP so I don't have to type it out anymore) in the sense that I understand it from KP anime. To that degree, I think the term "power" was... unfortunate. "Exploit" is a much better term, with fewer negative cannotations.

What I want to know is why no one ever had a problem with this mechanic when it was used for 3.5E barbarians (rage), paladins (smite), samurai (kiai smite), bards (inspire), etc. There is nothing new about these mechanics. I gotta stess that: there is nothing new about powers. You always had them (unless you were a fighter).

"Exploit" has a rather negative cannotation in the computer gameing scene.

I don't have a problem with fighters having powers - I run Bot9S, and all the PCs are melee fighters, and have been since oh, 2001 - I have a problem with fighter powers being treated like spell slots. I consider the various recharge mechanisms of Bot9S far superiour to the "once per day/encounter" method.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Clark I'm psyched for your rules variant! 3.x was barely for me, and 4e was definitely not D&D to me, too many sacred cows slaughtered, so I'd like to see what you can do.

Why is everyone so worried about other people's opinion on how they play?

 

[Orcus]

Some might say the same about how quickly Orcus' tune has apparently changed on 4E.

Here's the thing, my tune hasnt changed. Its just how people are interpreting my tune.

I support 4E. I play 4E. I support advancements to the game. I support growth and development of the game. I happen to feel the soul of D&D was captured in AD&D, but I dont want to play AD&D. I like the new advancements. Kinda like old cars. I love the look of an old corvette, but I want the modern engine and modern steerings and electronics and systems.

But, though I support 4E and am a big cheerleader for it, it DOES NOT FOLLOW that I must accept whatever is included in 4E as perfect and the ultimate expression of the game.

The fact that there are things I want to change does not mean that I "dont support 4E" or I've "changed my tune" or I'm a "hater" or "anti-4E" or "criticizing 4E." I'm not doing those things. I am, instead, engaging in the very advancement and development that I support--the betterment of the game. And I am not saying how you play is bad and how I play is good. I am just saying that I see some changes to 4E that I can make that would make the game better for me and more the way I want it. That may work for you, it may not. And I am not presuming to know.

4E did alot right. But it did some things wrong, in my view (YMMV).

It seems one of my biggest problems here was my "anime" comment, and for that I appologize. It was poorly said and made me sound crusty and out of touch, as many have commented. Those are fair observations. "You kids today, get off my lawn!"

What I was objecting to and wanting to change was the 1st level power creep issue that I dont like. And I used the ranger "split the tree" power as an example. I shouldnt have called it what I called it. But they were my words and I am a big enough boy to take the blame for saying something stupid (which I did).

That said, the "split the tree" power is what I am talking about. Shure, mechanically it may be similar to Rapid Shot, but I hope that people can see the difference in feel and flavor of being able at 1st level to fire two arrows from your bow at once at two different targets

In any event, I have not done a turn around or a change of position. My position is the same. I am a huge cheerleader for 4E. I love it. I love the advancement of the game. I dont want to go backwards. But that said I think there are some things that I want to change to make it "done right" for me (and I am not presuming to speak for you, you can either agree or disagree and I expect you would).

Clark

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

Biggus Clarkus -

I'm a 4e cheerleader too. I love it too. And here's one guy who sees no problem with anyone - anyone - trying to improve it or tweak it in any way they deem fit.

And since I'm a born and bred 1e guy, I'm very interested to see what you do with it.

The engine is there. It's the best engine we've ever had in D&D. I'd love to see someone build a 1e-style car around it.

WP

 

[Orcus]

If he had actually said it that way none of this would be happening. I guess its not the message but the way he expressed it, that irked people.

I probably should have done just that. My bad... But that would require me to be alot smarter than I acually am.

Clark

 

[Mercule]

Eh. I like 4e. It looks like I'm going to enjoy it a whole lot more than I did 3e. That said, there are some flavor (and mechanical) issues with it because *gasp* no game is perfect. I'd rather have balance defined as "time in the spotlight" or "over-all coolness and potential for remenising" than "hit points of damage in combat".

Clark, if you finish your idle hands project and it does those things, I am sooo.... buying it. Flavor is a fickle thing. I think the 4e system is pretty darn good, but I also think the flavor you're talking about is what I want out of a game.