Concerned About Character Creation

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I believe by "path" he means things like "brawny rogue" vs "tricky rogue." This is a choice which does in fact have an effect in the game, since it grants a class ability and affects how some later powers function.

"Brawny" and "Trickster" are the suggested character types. They don'r predetermine anyhting. It's just a list of suggested skills/feats/powers that a character of that type might take.

 

[Celebrim]

The designers have been pretty open about the fact that character creation is now a more complicated process. I don't think streamlining character creation was a high priority.

And AFAIC, that's perfectly justifiable. Rich detailed character creation is better than the alternative, and its a 'one time cost' over the course of a campaign. There isn't alot of benefit to be gained by making character creation quicker.

And even 3.X character creation is 'light' in terms of time invested compared to typical rules heavy systems.

 

[Victim]

"Brawny" and "Trickster" are the suggested character types. They don'r predetermine anyhting. It's just a list of suggested skills/feats/powers that a character of that type might take.

The brawny option gave bonuses to many damage dealing powers, and the trickster option gave bonuses to movement related options.

 

[Voss]

The designers have been pretty open about the fact that character creation is now a more complicated process. I don't think streamlining character creation was a high priority.

And AFAIC, that's perfectly justifiable. Rich detailed character creation is better than the alternative, and its a 'one time cost' over the course of a campaign. There isn't alot of benefit to be gained by making character creation quicker.

And even 3.X character creation is 'light' in terms of time invested compared to typical rules heavy systems.

To me though, now that we've finally seen most of it, it doesn't look the complicated
<RP stuff: background, gender, history, etc>
Stats
---same as it ever was
Race
---adjust stats, skills, write down static bonuses and power (if any)
Class
---bonuses/defenses
---write down class features
---choke down the pre-chosen skills, pick a handful of others
pick:
---2 at will powers
---1 encounter power
---1 daily power
---a feat

choose equipment

Done!

Unless I'm missing something, it seems...easy. And I doubt that the different power groups (at will/encounter/daily) will be all that large at first level. At least to begin with.

 

[Kordeth]

The brawny option gave bonuses to many damage dealing powers, and the trickster option gave bonuses to movement related options.

No, the Rogue Tactics class feature gives these bonuses. "Brawny rogue" and "trickster rogue" are merely suggested archetypes, each of which happens to recommend that you pick one specific version of Rogue Tactics.

To use a 3.x analogy, it's a bit like taking the statement "brawny, two-handed weapon fighters should have a high Strength and good armor, and should select the Power Attack feat" and interpreting it as "brawny, two-handed weapon fighters can take a penalty to hit and add a corresponding bonus to damage." A subtle distinction, perhaps, but a meaningful one.

 

[Cadfan]

You are correct, I used the wrong words.

I should not have said that "brawny" and "trickster" were the paths to which I think he was referring. I should have said that "brutal scoundrel" and "artful dodger" were the paths to which I think he was referring.

My faulty memory is to blame for the mistake.

 

[Doug McCrae]

That sounds like a lot of "cool stuff" to keep track of.

Yes. PCs will be about as complex as they were in 3e. But this is less of a problem for two reasons:

1) You can start at 1st level where the complexity is at a minimum and build up over time. 3e really needed to begin at 3rd or 4th level to stay in the 'sweet spot'.
2) Death is rarer so you don't need to generate a new PC as often.

 

[CleverNickName]

I don't think they ever intended to simplify character creation. My guess is that the intent was to make most character creation choices more meaningful while minimizing accounting, moving away from choices that are objectively poor, normalizing character complexity to a middle ground most people can accept, and making planning ahead less necessary.

You know...now that I think about it, I can't remember ever reading anything "official" about how 4E was supposed to make any part of the game "easier." I guess I just inferred that from various comments and threads out there on the Internets. A pretty common mistake: putting too much stock in rumors.

Which makes me wonder how many threads will pop up later this year, with statements to the effect of "hey, nobody said <game element X> was going to be easier...just more fun with less bookkeeping!"

 

[malraux]

Also, from the sounds of it, 4e characters won't build up as much stuff to keep track of over the levels. From my 3e experience, it's not too hard to create a 15th level cleric. But then you have to start picking magic items and figure out how much to wealth to put into each item (which 4e simplifies by standardizing the magic weapon/defense/AC progression) and having to figure out what 6 or 7 3rd level spells are still relevant at that level.

 

[psionotic]

There is absolutely nothing to confirm this, but I would guess that paragon paths and epic destinies do not have bizarre, arbitrary requirements in order to qualify for them, like 3.x prestige classes do. If so, much less character planning would be required than in 3.x, where many people feel the need to plot out feats, skills, and spells or similar abilities, sometimes all the way to 20th level and beyond. Of course, I could be wrong, just a feeling I have.