Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
The wrath of the gods!
Thor, smite my foes! *fizzle, a raining cloud appearing over MRs head for a moment*
Thanks, that was impressive. I shouldn't have declared myself atheist, right?
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Forked Thread: Did 4e go far enough or to far?
- Thread starter Najo
- Start date
Thor, smite my foes! *fizzle, a raining cloud appearing over MRs head for a moment*
Thanks, that was impressive. I shouldn't have declared myself atheist, right?
dm4hire
Explorer
I agree that they didn't go far enough. The game feels like it is missing something and at the same time like it holds back.
However, a lot of changes have been made to the game to the point that it doesn't feel like D&D at times. 3.x seemed sacred cow dependant, trying to hold onto as much as possible and this time they just about slaughtered the whole herd. Almost a "D&D, it's what's for dinner" mentality.
I'd like to have seen a doubling of at-will, encounter, and dailies. Utilities just give three more so the total for everything would be 4/8/8/10, doubling each should be a sufficient increase. When you run out of everything but the at-will the game starts getting boring cause you're doing the same thing without any real diversity. Also for the at-wills I would have liked to see them divided along this line, two from class, one from race, and the last one from the paragon, giving race another step-up in importance of selecting one.
I don't like that multiclass requires you to burn a feat to swap abilities and you don't get anything from it outside of the first feat which gives you a free skill, access to one of that class' abilities and you gain a benefit. You should be able choose which powers your character uses without burning the extra feats and gaining nothing beyond the swap ability. Feats are meant to enhance your character and the multiclass aspect doesn't do that. I'm waiting to see if it gets revamped in a later book, maybe PHBII.
Wizard’s spells should get progressively better as they level. If they increased the damage so that it rose by tier that would be enough I think. Look at the iconic spell Fireball; it no longer retains that usefulness as you level like it did before. All it would take to fix the spell would be to add: Increase damage to 6d6+ Int at level 15 and 8d6+ Int at level 25. I like that they gave wizards the ability to swap out their dailies, but hate that they are still limited to whatever their limit is. I'd like to see the wizard’s powers more in tune with previous editions so that they have access to more powers but still limited to the daily use. Wizard picking out two dailies is in a world of hurt if he picks two fire base spells and suddenly comes face to face with something immune or resistant to it. However if they could choose from more powers so that a wizard with two dailies could access four different spells that would be another story I am sure.
The skill system is a little weak also. Taking away the importance of skills tied to a specific class was a mistake I think though I understand the logic; however there were other ways to work around it. The best example here would be rogues no longer needed for traps and such. Removing the need for having a rogue in a party to disable traps seems less significant if you make them available to everyone to use, but they didn’t; instead they gave multiple classes the option of taking the skill related without any benefit. All it would take would be to increase the difficulty of a give challenge type by plus five and give those classes that either, gain a given skill as part of its features or choose it as a class skill, a plus five modifier. I know they already do this, but not exclusively to the point it reflects the need of having the given skills for a given class, increasing the difficulty of everything would balance that. The current progression and difficulty tends to allow parties to endure without a given skill. Another trend with skills in the challenge system is the introduction of challenges where the use of a given skill actually causes a detriment without any warning to the characters. As an example I refer to a challenge against a local lord who if intimidated automatically draws a failure or another where you might intimidate, but only after doing another skill first. These types of encounters penalize what could be justifiably role-played out in the game. I don’t care how powerful a person is, someone can find a way to intimidate them and there are multiple ways to intimidate. Seduction can be a form of intimidation for example as well as persuasion.
I also agree that as it stands now every class is the same. If you can play one class you can play them all. Some classes were an art form to be played by the right person when you watched or played at a table.
Overall I think the best steps to improve the game would have been to do more open beta testing, cut the levels in the PHB to 20, using the space to increase the number of powers available for those levels, and flesh out the differences between the races more.
However, a lot of changes have been made to the game to the point that it doesn't feel like D&D at times. 3.x seemed sacred cow dependant, trying to hold onto as much as possible and this time they just about slaughtered the whole herd. Almost a "D&D, it's what's for dinner" mentality.
I'd like to have seen a doubling of at-will, encounter, and dailies. Utilities just give three more so the total for everything would be 4/8/8/10, doubling each should be a sufficient increase. When you run out of everything but the at-will the game starts getting boring cause you're doing the same thing without any real diversity. Also for the at-wills I would have liked to see them divided along this line, two from class, one from race, and the last one from the paragon, giving race another step-up in importance of selecting one.
I don't like that multiclass requires you to burn a feat to swap abilities and you don't get anything from it outside of the first feat which gives you a free skill, access to one of that class' abilities and you gain a benefit. You should be able choose which powers your character uses without burning the extra feats and gaining nothing beyond the swap ability. Feats are meant to enhance your character and the multiclass aspect doesn't do that. I'm waiting to see if it gets revamped in a later book, maybe PHBII.
Wizard’s spells should get progressively better as they level. If they increased the damage so that it rose by tier that would be enough I think. Look at the iconic spell Fireball; it no longer retains that usefulness as you level like it did before. All it would take to fix the spell would be to add: Increase damage to 6d6+ Int at level 15 and 8d6+ Int at level 25. I like that they gave wizards the ability to swap out their dailies, but hate that they are still limited to whatever their limit is. I'd like to see the wizard’s powers more in tune with previous editions so that they have access to more powers but still limited to the daily use. Wizard picking out two dailies is in a world of hurt if he picks two fire base spells and suddenly comes face to face with something immune or resistant to it. However if they could choose from more powers so that a wizard with two dailies could access four different spells that would be another story I am sure.
The skill system is a little weak also. Taking away the importance of skills tied to a specific class was a mistake I think though I understand the logic; however there were other ways to work around it. The best example here would be rogues no longer needed for traps and such. Removing the need for having a rogue in a party to disable traps seems less significant if you make them available to everyone to use, but they didn’t; instead they gave multiple classes the option of taking the skill related without any benefit. All it would take would be to increase the difficulty of a give challenge type by plus five and give those classes that either, gain a given skill as part of its features or choose it as a class skill, a plus five modifier. I know they already do this, but not exclusively to the point it reflects the need of having the given skills for a given class, increasing the difficulty of everything would balance that. The current progression and difficulty tends to allow parties to endure without a given skill. Another trend with skills in the challenge system is the introduction of challenges where the use of a given skill actually causes a detriment without any warning to the characters. As an example I refer to a challenge against a local lord who if intimidated automatically draws a failure or another where you might intimidate, but only after doing another skill first. These types of encounters penalize what could be justifiably role-played out in the game. I don’t care how powerful a person is, someone can find a way to intimidate them and there are multiple ways to intimidate. Seduction can be a form of intimidation for example as well as persuasion.
I also agree that as it stands now every class is the same. If you can play one class you can play them all. Some classes were an art form to be played by the right person when you watched or played at a table.
Overall I think the best steps to improve the game would have been to do more open beta testing, cut the levels in the PHB to 20, using the space to increase the number of powers available for those levels, and flesh out the differences between the races more.
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
Yes that would have been a helpful time to have a few, I know a few witches and a druid maybe I can hook ya up.
Or find a mage that can cast lighting bolt.
TheNovaLord
First Post
i agree with some above
there are woefully few at will choices.
they should have added racial at-will powers, maybe a few racial ecounter powers, racial utilties.
A racial powers book i would purchase.
there should be some non-combatty/semi-combatty at wills, just something to add bit more flavour choice.
i like 4e very much, but it just lacks a few bits n pieces at the moment.
there are woefully few at will choices.
they should have added racial at-will powers, maybe a few racial ecounter powers, racial utilties.
A racial powers book i would purchase.
there should be some non-combatty/semi-combatty at wills, just something to add bit more flavour choice.
i like 4e very much, but it just lacks a few bits n pieces at the moment.
Fifth Element
Legend
Based on my impressions (and bear my sig in mind), I agree they didn't go far enough with alignment. Should have been out completely. Also not far enough with the power source + role system. Not sure why we have ranger and rogue powers, rather than martial striker powers.
Based on my impressions (and bear my sig in mind), I think they probably went too far with the damage (+ effect) paradigm of most of the powers. There seems to be a lot of sameness.
Based on my impressions (and bear my sig in mind), I think they probably went too far with the damage (+ effect) paradigm of most of the powers. There seems to be a lot of sameness.
Aeolius
Adventurer
That about sums it up for me, as well.
When 2e came out I bought the new Players Handbook and didn't care for it, so I stuck with 1e. When 3e was announced, I ranted and raved like the rest of the grognards but I took a look anyway and liked what I saw. I bought the 4e core books the day they were released and they have been collecting dust beside my desk ever since.
4e is the new 2e. I used to call myself a leap-grognard; leaping from 1e to 3e. I have now been replaced by the new generation that skipped 3e, leaping from 2e to 4e.
JDJblatherings
First Post
too far.
It's a playable fantasy game, it just isn't really D&D. The balance is extreme, no class really stands out much in different situations compared to another classes (play experience could change this). Wizards are just not as versatile and powerful. Most of the non-fighters fight as well as the fighter.
A lot of tactics that people used when playing D&D for 35 years are simply gone, some say they are nerfed, they are gone. Really cool magic items...really suck; ring of invisibility lasts at most 2 rounds, once a day.
I like and dislike the rituals. D&D certainly needed a mechanic that aped a lot of fiction and film where a charcater is sent off to complete a ritual hmmmm..."Klatuu, nicto...barrack...ooops" ...good stuff. But the way it is applied to situations that aren't rituals...tensers floating disk? is weak because of the all damage all the time aspect of powers.
It was possible to spend days planning a wizards spell selection for an upcoming conflict anf really get into it. Sure some people don't like lot's of planning...go play a sorceror. But it let a wizard player really get into playing a wizard. Now..not so much, you're just like everyone else but you get to swap out your powers...oooh awesome.
Monster HP. In stretching out "the sweet spot" they overdid it. Monsters have too many hp. They covered it up with minion concept.
Where did Hit Dice go?
It's a playable fantasy game, it just isn't really D&D. The balance is extreme, no class really stands out much in different situations compared to another classes (play experience could change this). Wizards are just not as versatile and powerful. Most of the non-fighters fight as well as the fighter.
A lot of tactics that people used when playing D&D for 35 years are simply gone, some say they are nerfed, they are gone. Really cool magic items...really suck; ring of invisibility lasts at most 2 rounds, once a day.
I like and dislike the rituals. D&D certainly needed a mechanic that aped a lot of fiction and film where a charcater is sent off to complete a ritual hmmmm..."Klatuu, nicto...barrack...ooops" ...good stuff. But the way it is applied to situations that aren't rituals...tensers floating disk? is weak because of the all damage all the time aspect of powers.
It was possible to spend days planning a wizards spell selection for an upcoming conflict anf really get into it. Sure some people don't like lot's of planning...go play a sorceror. But it let a wizard player really get into playing a wizard. Now..not so much, you're just like everyone else but you get to swap out your powers...oooh awesome.
Monster HP. In stretching out "the sweet spot" they overdid it. Monsters have too many hp. They covered it up with minion concept.
Where did Hit Dice go?
Psion
Adventurer
Too far or not far enough: I like alignment. For the sort of game I like with a "tangible moral reality", alignment is great. But I'd rather have no alignment system than what they have in 4e now. It's a joke, a hash up, that lacks any sort of internal logic.
Too far:
Not far enough:
I'm struggling here. All I'm coming up with is "meaningful electronic support". That was my shining hope for 4e.
Too far:
- Sacrificing simulation for ease of use (1-1-1 diagonals, I am looking at you)
- Simplifying skills
- Reinventing the metasetting
- Parsing out the core
- "Homogenizing" the play experience
- Emphasizing combat
- Making classes fit "roles"
- Plugging all classes into the same power mechanic
- Nerfing magic
Not far enough:
I'm struggling here. All I'm coming up with is "meaningful electronic support". That was my shining hope for 4e.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
If I look at your list, I notice that some of the "too far" stuff seems exactly what I like so much. (Simplifying Skills, New Metasetting, Making Classes Fit Roles, Power Mechanic, Nerfing Magic) (though I might describe things with different words occasionally)
I think such stuff is again a pointer to me that let me to believe that the idea of appealing to a broader audience is futile.
RangerWickett
Legend
I don't mind playing 4e. I just don't like the aesthetics of the books: visual presentation, mostly (art, the ridiculous overabundance of monochromatic bars on half the pages of the PHB and the entire MM, the fact that WotC employs a bajillion artists for Magic: the Gathering but isn't showcasing their diversity in D&D), but also small stuff like how you heal perfectly from death after 6 hours of napping, or that I can't stab a guy in his foot to slow him down more than once in a 5 minute period, or that the DMG gives little attention to crafting a world.
It's a great game for combat and action, but the world it portrays and the world I want to run are very dissimilar.
It's a great game for combat and action, but the world it portrays and the world I want to run are very dissimilar.
