D&D 4E [Continuation 4e] - a manifesto

[GreyICE]

Pure thought dump as I'm going:

Stats

Lets stick to 3-18. I know it's been stupid for a long time, but it's traditional, and some traditions are just not worth fighting. Plus it lets you do +1 to 2 stats every 4 levels, which everyone I know enjoyed.

Defenses

I think we shouldn't include that line about flat footed. I think being surprised grants Combat Advantage is fine, and the Combat Advantage mechanic has been solid since forever.

Resting

I think this is actually TOO setup. I'd just say "GM's discretion on what a prolonged rest is." We can also discuss optional fatigue mechanics (I love Wikis, you can have optional mechanics with zero clutter), etc., but the fact of the matter is "what is a prolonged rest" is something GMs should answer on a campaign-by-campaign basis. Give them some guidelines.

Healing

The more I look at it, the more I think the name "Reserve Surges" is nonsensical. It needs a name like "Stamina Pool" or something like that. Something that shows it's the long-term effect of battle wearing you down. As your stamina depletes, you eventually become unable to be healed.

Hmm, we could probably have mechanics for abilities that only effect adventures below 50% stamina. Interesting.

Robust Saves

This is all fluff. We have fluff in our mechanics.


Skills

Lets leave the skill mechanic off for a bit. I actually have an interesting idea for a Apprentice/Journeyman/Master system that would give +3/+5/+7 to a skill when you roll it, to represent different levels of advancement, and which would be more interesting than the flat +5 (everyone who is good with Arcana is equally good with Arcana...) without introducing 3E levels of 'goddamn mishmash.'

But I will note +3 as the total you can ever get is totally inapporpriate. With abilities scaling to +6 eventually, training in a skill will seem inconsequential next to having a core stat. This kills the ability for a fighter to be a great negotiator, or a Wizard to pick up skill with Thieving because of a lowly origin - you'll just never be "up to snuff" in any way with the people who have a core stat there - EVEN IF THEY DIDN'T TAKE THE SKILL

Techiques

Ohhhh god utility powers. Can we kill the system off and replace it with something better?

Too much cruft in descriptions too, but style issue.


Weakness/Resistance

I dun like it. Half/double is HUGE. If we assume an average hit does 10-25, double damage is 10-25 more damage. If I wanted to make an item "Heart of the Fire Lord" that did cool things but gave you cold vulnerability, for flavor, it would result in you being STEAMROLLED against cold sources. Cold Vulnerability 5 would be perfect, on the other hand - you'd feel the pain, but it wouldn't be 'character death' levels of pain.


It's a good starting point. Now we need a gdoc or wiki...

 

[Xethreau]

Might I again reiterate that this was written from a 3e -> 4e perspective, and not the revers? These entries are what are to be published as "OGL" as rule variants.

The OGL says that one has to disclaim which parts of the published material are Product Identity, and which are open. As such, I there would be a footer at the beginning of the document that said "Chapters X, Y, and Z (Feats, blah, and the Appendix) are submitted under the OGL. Though these rules are incorporated in other parts of the book, they appear in those parts therein to represent a wholistic approach to explaining the rules system, and are not OGL." Or something like that. Which means that we need to explain the rules twice: Once for players playing our game, and once for people adopting the rules for their rulebooks.

Yes, once these rules are OGL, other people will be able to create 4-esque suppelements as well.

Stats
Yes, they are 3-18. Review the point-buy rules in the link: they are identical to the ones presented in the PHB.

Flat Footed
That is just a notice for the OGL publication. The rules as they will read in the rulebook proper can ignore such conversions, as we will be teaching the "right" rules from the beginning.

Prolonged Rest
GM fiat, fair enough. We then describe it as a tool for the GM to quickly get the action back on pace.

Reserve Surges
I am fine with adjusting the name to Stamina Pool - in fact I think that is great. However, if we are trying to stay as 4e mechanics as we can (See "second wind" argument), at least for now, then we need to take that approach holistically. Same goes for Utility powers. Pick your poison.

Robust Saves
Again, this is for 3.5 -> fourth. But isn't there somewhat of a demand for fluff? I say, so long as you can distinguish fluff from mechanics, then fluff is fine. Keep in mind that this indistinction is what made 3e bad, but the complete lack of fluff in 4e turned people away.

Skills
Number adjustments, whatever. I was just doing the normal 3.5 math, but using training instead of skill points. As you say, we can adjust it when we get to it. But let's do remember that flat DC's are part of our design goals.

Weakness/Resistance
My argument for this is that that while it does make sense for normal 4e resistances to go up as you level, it does not make sense for weaknesses to go up as you level. A lich takes more bonus radiant damage than a zombie.
What is more, bonus 5 damage is not worth very much past heroic tier. It is an appropriate standard vulnerability at heroic tier. But at paragon tier, one hardly notices a 5 point difference. (I would argue that a fire artifact would grant resistance to cold anyway. )
I could see the opposite arguement being used against resistances: If an epic level creature attacks a level 1 creature with an attack by which the weak creature is resistant, it takes half damage; even though the creature would probably die one way or the other, the disparity in damage is eye-catching.
In my GM experience, doubling and halfing damage are far more noticable and exciting, and are easier to keep track of than specific plus or minus values.

 

[GreyICE]

The reason I like "Second Wind" is that it's absolutely evocative of what's happening. You're getting your "Second Wind."

Healing Surges was always an awful name because it didn't ENABLE healing, it RESTRICTED it. Reserve Surges just feels different. It's your reserve of... surges? What's a surge? Well it's something you spend to heal... it's not an improvement on Healing Surge.

Stamina Pool absolutely captures the flavor of what it is - the limits to your endurance. No matter how many wands of Cure Light Wounds the cleric drags out of his backpack, past this point you should go no farther.



---

The rest

If this is just a quick and dirty document to register this project with the OGL, it's awesome! We can work out the math later, and certainly they can't say it's entirely different if a +3 becomes a +5 or something.

 

[Xethreau]

Cool, I am glad we are on the same page.

Speaking of quick and dirty, here is the google doc. If you want to edit it, you have to have that link.

I have some other things to do right now, but there is that for if anybody wants to work on it in the mean time.

 

[Xethreau]

Ultra crazy idea. What if spells did not have set damage, but were varied based on the implement used, like weapon attacks? Each implement family would have different traits, and may even (akin to superior implements) would vary based on material used, or something like that.

So lets say we have
Wand - damage dice: 1d8 - Range 20
Rod - damage dice: 1d10- Range 10
Symbol - damage dice: 1d6 - Range 10 - Special: Can be worn instead of held
Orb - damage dice: 1d6 Range 20 - Special: [some sort of bonus to control]
Staff - damage dice: 1d8 - Range 10 - Special: Used as weapon
Tome - damage dice: 1d6 - Range 10 - Special: Can be hidden on person instead of held

Or something like this. Thoughts

 

[GreyICE]

I think players would just gravitate towards the implement with the biggest damage numbers (or possibly biggest +hit numbers if we varied that). It's only a minor action to switch weapons if you really wanted the range.

Plus it would be really hard to balance the 25% less damage thing for area attacks that way - one of the ways its done right now is handing out d6s and d8s for area spells.

 

[Xethreau]

I had the same thoughts. Glad we agree.

 

[Xethreau]

As was suggested earlier, the 13th age sounds incredibly helpful in the war-efforts!

 

[Xethreau]

Back from Dragon*Con, and with a vengeance! The Basic Rules and Character Creation sections are effectively complete. The next chapter to be done is the combat chapter, and then the rough framework for the adventuring chapter, which I hope, like the OGL Index, is edited by GMs based on their experiences.

This project is alive, well, and on its way.
Maybe we should think of a new name? xD

 

[drothgery]

I kind of like what you guys are saying. So it would look like:

At-Will powers - unified by power-source, some classes get unique additions
Encounter Powers - Unique to class, but many scale with level
Daily Powers - Unique to class

FWIW, what I'd suggested when I was hand-waving how I would have suggested doing 5e was
at-will powers - by class/unique (make sure every primarily melee class has a built-in way to melee basic attack with their primary stat, and every primary ranged class has a way to ranged basic attack with their primary stat)
encounter attack powers - by power source
daily powers - by class/unique (some classes may not have any)
utility powers - by skill (and maybe by race)