D&D 4E Fixing 4e

[Ruin Explorer]

I wanted to give this troll 0/10, but guys, guys, guys, gals, guys, sheesh, you've given him a magnificent response, worthy of a post of utter seriousness, which his so clearly was not. So, to the OP, I say, well-played sir, unexpectedly well played. 8/10.

You're no Bugaboo, but give it a few more years!

 

[Tony Vargas]

1) Characters are defined entirely by their combat role; i.e. there is no "ranger" outside of combat.

Rangers still have thier woodsy (and/or dungeony) skills for out of combat Skill Challenges, and they have at least a few utility powers that also aply outside of the tactical game.

2) Combats take way too long and are not dramatic enough.

Have you played through many combats with a group that's at least slightly vested in thier characters yet? I admit that I get the same impression looking at the capabilities of 1st level PCs and the hps and abilities of 1st level monsters, but I've heard claims that the game plays better than it reads.

3) Characters do not have "weak" ability scores to contrast their "strong" ability scores. No PC I have yet seen has multiple negative ability modifiers.

Did you really see much of that in 3.5? The new 'stat polarity' phenomenon could readily lead to characters having as many as three 'dump stats.' True, you start at 10, so they won't be negative, but they'll still be low compared to others'.

4) Maps and miniatures can get expensive to collect and inhibit the player's imagination.

One option is to use more abstract means of tracking tactical position. Counters or coins instead of miniatures on a blank grid, for instance. You can use a piece of graph paper with 'x's PCs and 'o's for monsters, if you don't have anything else.

5) Knowing the magic items in the PHB, being able to identify items immediately after the battle and being able to break magic items down into Residuum kills all the mystery in the magic items.

It's not like we aren't all reading the DMG, too. Making up new items (like cursed items) is always an option.

6) Damage and healing has been reduced to simple hit points, with no injuries, scars etc.

Been reduced? There's never been any rules for persistent injury, scaring or anything like that.

2) Reduce starting HP to equal your Constitution ability score. Reduce monster HP appropriately.

I certainly get the sense that monster hps are too high - at least, if you want quick combats. Minions are an option, of course, but an extreme one. Considering that no one's belting out 20d spells or 120 point leap attacks anymore, the monsters really shouldn't need 800hps. But, again, I'd like to see how combats work out before doing anything quite this drastic.

3) Either generate abilities with 3d6 or have a 6/8/10/10/12/14 array.

The classes as listed need multiple good stats. Not really high, but at least one high, and two decent - three 14+, at minimum. Feat preqs often push that up to all stats 13+ (which is doable by 11st level, actually).

4) Removing many of the Powers will allow you to play without maps. Other rules like Marking can also be dropped to make this easier.

That's not so much 'fixing' as chucking it and playing a different game. Storyteller, maybe? I hear Exalted's pretty popular.

5) Magic items must be identified by a Wizard (a one-time per item per Wizard Daily spell) or a sage.

This would add more anoyance than mystery, but, certainly, if you wanted to creat additional items, you could inject some mystery - and suspense if you also created cursed items. Turning back the clock a bit, but it is a classic aspect of the game.

6) Each time a character takes a significant amount of damage, he suffers an injury that penalizes him some how in and out of battle (up to the GM).

I've played with such variants in the past, and they are very frustrating. Once you PC gets 'injured' he's meat for the monsters, so you're getting screwed just when things are at thier worst. Leads to players turning gun shy, healing and resting after every battle, etc.

Healing Surges are once per day and do not restore injuries.

If you're substantially reducing monster hps, so fights are shorter, and PCs can potentially escape from some of them unscathed, this could work. There is some non-healing-sure healing in the game, which you might want to expand.


So, what do you think?

 

[mach1.9pants]

Sahr-kah-zum.

Hey, I am sure my party went there once and defeated a great king known as 'the peasant of wit'

 

[Galadrin]

Hi everyone, I just started to read the first few responses (that was fast!). I don't have time to get to all of it right now, but a lot of good suggestions. I think baberg's comment about play balance is quite good; how could I make fighter types more... fighty? If arcane and divine characters get their spells, perhaps only martial characters add 1/2 level to their attacks? LostSouls question about what each class should "feel like" out of combat is also really thought-inspiring, I will have to sit down and work on that I think, but a lot of fun stuff is coming to mind.

Anyway, I have noticed that I have been accused of trolling and I really hope I don't come off that way... I don't mean to criticize 4e, I just want to fix it more to my expectations of classic fantasy adventure.

As to simply picking a new game, there are a lot of reasons for me to stick with 4e! One, it's new and will be well supported. Two, and most importantly, there are a lot of things I really like about 4e... including the basic framework of the game (aka the new d20 system). I think it would be more of a challenge to take that skeleton and apply it to another game than to simply change a few of the outlying mechanics in 4th Ed.

For instance, I like skills, the task resolution system (roll 1d20, add modifiers, compare to target number for all tasks), the basic battle system (grab, slide, shift etc), the four defenses (probably my favorite thing) and I am really liking the multi-class system and rituals.

I don't mean for my entire post to be responding to the trolling claims of course... I just felt that I had posted a rather well thought out set of ideas and was a little disappointed when people didn't feel they were so well thought out : (

 

[Ourph]

I think you'd be better off playing a different game.

1000% this.

 

[smathis]

1) Remove Daily, Encounter and At Will powers except for racial powers, magic item powers and Encounter/Daily spells and prayers. In their place, each class gets appropriate out-of-battle storyline abilities (perhaps like Non-Weapon Proficiencies in 2e); the player need only ask "my guys a fighter, can I give tactical advice to the king?" and the GM will consider it (when a roll is involved, such a class will get a significant bonus).

All around bad idea. Completely blows the balance of the game out of the water -- in terms of character-to-character and PCs-to-Monsters. What is it you want to keep from 4e that you're interested in gutting 25-30% of the PHB?

2) Reduce starting HP to equal your Constitution ability score. Reduce monster HP appropriately.

No need. Basic algebra here. If I subtract 15% from starting HP and monster HP, what am I gaining? A zero sum. If you want combats to be shorter, I have three words for you...

Exploding.

Damage.

Dice.

It would throw off the balance some but in a way that would be fun. And it would be easy to mitigate or scale down -- only one damage die in a roll explodes, player chooses.

That and lethality would go through the roof -- which seems to be where you're going with this...

3) Either generate abilities with 3d6 or have a 6/8/10/10/12/14 array.

Unnecessary. I'd go with 4d6, drop the lowest or the standard arrays. No need to gank the PCs out of the gate like this. 4d6, dropping the lowest, will produce wide enough fluctuations that you'd still get some pretty odd scores --- like a PC with 2 18s or a 5 and a 6.

I'm inclined to pass on a suggestion from Mearls' blog where he states that giving all PCs 10 pts of GURPS disadvantages is a nice touch. I tend to agree.

No one ever plays a 6 Cha or an 8 Int. At least no one I've ever known who used them as a dump stat.

But if they have the disad "Likes to Gamble" or "Dark Secret". Yeah, those are the ones that tend to make it to the table.

4) Removing many of the Powers will allow you to play without maps. Other rules like Marking can also be dropped to make this easier.

Basically, removing the powers is akin to removing Magic Items in 3e. A complete rewrite. Reference: Iron Heroes.

There are better ways to go without a grid in 4e.

The real trick is to figure out what all this forced movement and shifting translates to in your head. I mean, this powers say that you can move 2 squares before an attack and such. But what does that mean? How would a PC or monster use that to advantage?

Once those things are understood, 4e is no more difficult to run without a grid than 3e. And if you follow the "Say Yes" advice in the DMG, you'll run into significantly fewer headaches.

More here

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=4112306&postcount=25

5) The magic items in the PHB do not exist (they are just legends you heard of as a child). Magic items must be identified by a Wizard (a one-time per item per Wizard Daily spell, with a percent chance equal to 3x his level - i.e. Wizard 10 has a 30% chance) or a sage (some wise man, based on storyline goals the GM has in mind and perhaps for a price). Residuum doesn't exist.

I have the same problem with Identify, Magic Items and Residuum. In fact, I've had a problem with the Magic Item Economy since it was brought to the forefront in 3e.

Basically, I plan to treat Residuum as the D&D equivalent of Deadlands' Ghost Rock. I plan to be traipsing around in the Wilderlands of High Fantasy so that's not a big deal for me. They have a similar substance called "Magicum".

I want to give Magic Items the Stormbringer treatment. Basically an item grows in power with you. So a Paladin may pick up a magic sword at 1st level. But by the time he reaches 25th the sword will be a Holy Avenger.

I reviewed the Magic Items last night and this doesn't look too hard.

Neither does completely removing Magic Items and just giving the PCs a straight bonus to Attacks and Defenses (AC too) at all the levels divisible by 5. I'd also throw an extra d6 per tier on crits too. But that's me being nice.

6) Each time a character takes a significant amount of damage (perhaps a quarter or half his total HP in one hit), he suffers an injury that penalizes him some how in and out of battle (up to the GM). Healing Surges are once per day and do not restore injuries.

Yeah. This will suck more than you realize. I know that 4e PCs look uber from the perspective of previous editions. But they're not.

If you want gritty and desperate combat...

Every time a PC is dropped below zero they lose a Healing Surge. Ouch.

Every time a PC fails a Death Save, the total surges they can have are lowered by one until they can make it back to town and rest up. Those are your wounds right there.

I'm not sure I'll be using either of those variants, though. I think they'd just be too rough.

Here's how I planned to handle the full refresh issue...

A full refresh only happens when the PCs get a full rest back in town. When they're out adventuring -- sleeping in the woods or in a labyrinthine crypt -- they only recover their Bloodied score in HPs (up to their max) and their Con bonus +1 in Healing Surges (again up to their max). Oh, and their Action Point.

Believe me, that's all you'll really need for grit.

I planned on allowing a full refresh during an extended rest once per adventure, following a PC-narrated Flashback or some sort of tale about their past and why they're in the dungeon. But that was for flavor and to lessen (somewhat) the effect of not having a full refresh every day.

 

[SweeneyTodd]

I think baberg's comment about play balance is quite good; how could I make fighter types more... fighty? If arcane and divine characters get their spells, perhaps only martial characters add 1/2 level to their attacks? LostSouls question about what each class should "feel like" out of combat is also really thought-inspiring, I will have to sit down and work on that I think, but a lot of fun stuff is coming to mind.

Well, if you do, say the change in base attack bonus, then you're looking at a +5 difference in to-hits at level 10. That's a large enough difference that the magical guys with all those neat spells either will never land them, or that fighters will not really have to worry about ever missing.

One way to make fighters more "fighty" would be to say that they're so good at fighting that they are occasionally able to strike decisive blows. Those blows could have some kind of extra mechanical effect. Then you'd want some way to balance them, so you might say they only happen a limited amount, to make it fair with spellcasters. You could, say, let those bonuses come into play a few times per fight, or maybe even once per day.

That sounds sarcastic, but my point is that fighters explicitly *don't* have magical powers just because their class features include special abilities with use limits.

I think that a large amount of the things you'd like to be different in 4e can be visualized the way you want them to work, without changing the mechanical effects. For instance, the complaints you have about hit points vs. a realistic wounding and recovery system? Those can probably be applied to any version of D&D, really to almost any game with hit points. One way to address it that allows you to change your visualizations and not the mechanics is just to decide that when it comes to PCs, they're only actually physically injured (as opposed to losing HP due to fatigue, luck, "just missed me" or have you) when they are bloodied. Then you could run the game such that characters who've been bloodied in a fight have some kind of wound that requires treatment. There are a lot of interesting mechanics that interact with the bloodied condition, so it might be a good place to start.

 

[The Little Raven]

Sahr-kah-zum.

I just found the name for the villain in my upcoming adventure. Thanks, Lizard!

 

[Sanzuo]

...

Hey, you should write your own source book. It might catch on, you never know.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I've just moved this to the 'Houserules' forum, where it belongs.

Cheers