D&D 4E Does anyone else feel like 4ed isn't really a new edition?

[Ranger REG]

Ultimately, I'll be happy if the system changes as much as it needs to change to be more fun.

More fun means more profit.

 

[w_earle_wheeler]

It almost feels like an entirely different game from what I've read.

The genre/fluff changes seem huge to me. In a way, 3.0e/3.5e was a "back to the dungeon" edition, paying tribute to the style of 1e.

4.0e seems to be in the style of 2.0/2.5e with sweeping ideological changes (removal of core classes and races... again, reorganization of class grouping... again, re-imagining of monster roles, etc) for the game.

 

[Ranger REG]

It almost feels like an entirely different game from what I've read.

As long as "different" means "better and funner than before," then it's a good thing.

 

[Celebrim]

So, if anyone still thinks this doesn't feel like a new edition, I suggest they read this.

Seriously, it doesn't feel like the same game to me.

Err... and wasn't equipment supposed to become less important? Or did they merely mean, certain types of equipment are less important?

 

[Gloombunny]

So, if anyone still thinks this doesn't feel like a new edition, I suggest they read this.

Seriously, it doesn't feel like the same game to me.

Err... and wasn't equipment supposed to become less important? Or did they merely mean, certain types of equipment are less important?

They said magic items are less important. Fighters aren't going to stop needing swords and armor. Wizards will need their new tools, but presumably they'll get be able to get by with a regular wand and not need to replace it with a shiny new one every few levels.

(I know they've mentioned +6 wands, but that doesn't mean wands start at +0!)

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

Err... and wasn't equipment supposed to become less important? Or did they merely mean, certain types of equipment are less important?

If these replace the spell book and material components of 3.5, then they are less important. We're told that 4e wizards can use their abilities without these implements, whereas a 3.5 wizard without his spellbook and needed material components is basically a commoner.

 

[Celebrim]

If these replace the spell book and material components of 3.5, then they are less important. We're told that 4e wizards can use their abilities without these implements, whereas a 3.5 wizard without his spellbook and needed material components is basically a commoner.

I think you are quite missing the point.

A 20th level fighter with a mundane sword is still quite an effective combatant compared to just about anything except the sort of monsters 20th level fighters face. So realisitically, the 20th level fighter needs his magical garb.

Likewise, a 20th level wizard in 4e without magic orb, tome, wand, staff, robe, boots, ring, amulet, and what have you is still likely to be by any measurement a quite powerful spell-caster, but, it seems that he's still going to require that magic orb, tome, wand, staff, robe, boots, ring and amulet, because you can't really go into a serious challenge being handicapped like a near sighted person without thier glasses. In other words, it seems likely that a '+5 wand' is going to be required, if the wizard is expected to 'hit' anything with his attacks. And that is just for starters.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

I think you are quite missing the point.

A 20th level fighter with a mundane sword is still quite an effective combatant compared to just about anything except the sort of monsters 20th level fighters face. So realisitically, the 20th level fighter needs his magical garb.

Ah, now I see your point. Yes, if fighters need those items to hit, and wizards do now as well, then the promised reduction in item requirements will have not have arrived.

I don't see how this doesn't feel like the same game though. In fact it makes it seem more like the same game.

I'm not sure I ever expected +X swords and +X armour to go away in 4e, though I'd really be happier if they were bonuses to damage inflicted and absorbed, rather than to-hit and defense.

 

[Gloombunny]

So, at worst, wizards now have the same issues fighters always had.

Or, maybe they're not totally lying when they magic items aren't necessary, and high-level characters will get by just fine with the same swords and the same wands they were using at level 1.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

A 20th level fighter with a mundane sword is still quite an effective combatant compared to just about anything except the sort of monsters 20th level fighters face. So realisitically, the 20th level fighter needs his magical garb.

I believe that's exactly what they are trying to get away from. I believe they are fixing the math to fix this.

In 3e in order to fight a CR 23 creature, you needed to hit AC 48 in a lot of cases.
Even with a BAB of 20 and a 23 strength, you only had +26 to hit. With weapon focus you had +27. Still required natural 20s to hit anything around your own level.

This is because the game assumed that you'd have a +6 stat enhancer, a +5 sword, and probably +2 to hit from magical buffs. With all of these you'd have +37 and would hit on an 11 or higher with your primary attack. About what the designers were expecting.

The new idea is that Monsters designed for 20th level characters will have an ac around 38 so the math works out that they can hit without any magic at all about 50% of the time. Then, if you have a +5 sword, you hit 75% of the time...which is really nice, but not required.

Magic will likely make the difference between an average party and one that is really good. However, I've never even seen anything that would imply less magic items in the game. Just less ones that if you don't own it, you might as well not show up. One of the designers even said something to the efffect of "Magic items will still be around and players will still WANT them."