Core mechanic changes?

Mercurius said:
Secondary rules (core rules that aren't necessary to game play): lots of change
Optional rules (later rule books and options): to be determined
Default setting (game atmosphere, default races and pantheons): moderate+ change

On a basic level, these categories represent a difference without distinction. Outside the core mechanic, everything is optional rules.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Dragonblade said:
Perhaps a wyrmling. Great wyrms are still titanic foes that can take down an entire party of high level characters.
Agreed. I don't think it counts as "fighting dragons" if all you're fighting is a newborn. You might as well say that in 3e, a level 1 commoner can "fight and kill dragons" because he pushed a dragon egg off a cliff once.
 

Gort said:
Agreed. I don't think it counts as "fighting dragons" if all you're fighting is a newborn. You might as well say that in 3e, a level 1 commoner can "fight and kill dragons" because he pushed a dragon egg off a cliff once.

I'll betcha he never made it to level 2 though. :p

As for mechanical changes, I'd say the move away from Vancian casting to the per day/encounter/at will model is a fairly significant change. Likewise for the loss of iterative attacks.
 

Gort said:
Agreed. I don't think it counts as "fighting dragons" if all you're fighting is a newborn.
Yep. Even when that dragon the size of a housecat has the HP of an ogre, It does not feel anythere near heroic. When the title of "Dragonslayer" is just as deserved as "Babykiller", it loses something...

svp4404at0.jpg
 

Sitara said:
All characters can heal themselves.
The old concept of 'healing' is no longer applicable in 4E. In 4E, you don't need healing in order to recover hit points. In 4E, there are more ways you can recover hit points than in previous editions, where you needed a cleric or a potion (or a night's rest for a few points).

This reflects the fact that hit points were never meant to reflect only the physical capability to withstand damage. Magical healing (and rest) being the only option implies hit point loss reflects only physical damage. To make the game more internally consistent, they needed to either change what hit points represent, or change the way hit point recovery works. They opted for the latter, and I think the game will be better for it.
 

Fifth Element said:
To make the game more internally consistent, they needed to either change what hit points represent, or change the way hit point recovery works. They opted for the latter, and I think the game will be better for it.
Hey, some of us would not mind the game being renamed "Decapitations and Dismemberments"
 

To me, one of the most fundamental rules changes is being made on the Monsters end of the scale. With roles, and a change in the formula to not make them "like PCs", I think encounters are going to feel fundamentally different.

Attacks of Opportunity will be changed as well.

Magic will be less Vancian, which is a pretty big change.
 


Mistwell said:
To me, one of the most fundamental rules changes is being made on the Monsters end of the scale. With roles, and a change in the formula to not make them "like PCs", I think encounters are going to feel fundamentally different.
I don't know if fundamentally different is the word for it. I mean, you are still attacking the monsters, doing damage and trying to reduce them to 0 hitpoints. They are still attacking you with various attacks.

I think that people who didn't overly analyze the rules in 3.5e won't notice that much difference. It will instead be things like: certain monsters have 4 or 5 times the hitpoints they might have had in 3.5e, you'll hit enemies more consistently no matter what class you are, the DM won't be looking up what spell-like abilities do in the PHB anymore, and so on.

However, to the average player I don't think they'll notice any real difference.
 

Remove ads

Top