Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 4542342" data-attributes="member: 59506">How would you have done 4e's Powers?I know it's two pages into the thread already, but I'm going to post to the OP first with my ideas, and then read the rest of the thread.&nbsp; Sorry in advance if this mirrors any other posts.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;I would have done a few things about this - not all of these are specifically about powers, but they all relate to the perceived problem (my perception that there's a problem also).&nbsp;<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">I would have kept spells basically the same as they were in 3.5 for spellcasting classes (i.e. descriptions, basic structure, etc.), but I would have eliminated Vancian casting for more of an at will type system and I would have implemented the Ritual concept also.&nbsp; However, I would have put some work into simplifying spells and spellcasting mechanics (but not oversimplifying as they are now).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">Added powers for all classes, even for spellcasting classes (special attacks and maneuvers, just not as many for spellcasters), but I would have made them more generalized (a little less class specific) and made far less of them (so characters are less build dependent on powers and more on skill and feat selection).&nbsp; Since there would be less powers to choose from, I'd make them usable more often, but basic attacks would still be the most common attack form - Not Powers.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">With less work needing to be devoted to Powers development, I would have done more work on class and race development (so the game could have the same level of options and flexibility 3E had out of the gate).</li>
</ol>If they had done something along these lines, along with NOT oversimplifying mechanics (grapple, charge, etc. - simplifying: Yes, Oversimplifying: No), and keeping the ideas that really work (simplified monster statting and creation, better underlying math, minions, healing surges, death and dying, action points), then I'd probably be playing 4E right now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="El Mahdi, post: 4542342, member: 59506"] [b]How would you have done 4e's Powers?[/b] I know it's two pages into the thread already, but I'm going to post to the OP first with my ideas, and then read the rest of the thread. Sorry in advance if this mirrors any other posts. I would have done a few things about this - not all of these are specifically about powers, but they all relate to the perceived problem (my perception that there's a problem also). [LIST=1] [*]I would have kept spells basically the same as they were in 3.5 for spellcasting classes (i.e. descriptions, basic structure, etc.), but I would have eliminated Vancian casting for more of an at will type system and I would have implemented the Ritual concept also. However, I would have put some work into simplifying spells and spellcasting mechanics (but not oversimplifying as they are now). [*]Added powers for all classes, even for spellcasting classes (special attacks and maneuvers, just not as many for spellcasters), but I would have made them more generalized (a little less class specific) and made far less of them (so characters are less build dependent on powers and more on skill and feat selection). Since there would be less powers to choose from, I'd make them usable more often, but [I]basic attacks[/I] would still be the most common attack form - Not Powers. [*]With less work needing to be devoted to Powers development, I would have done more work on class and race development (so the game could have the same level of options and flexibility 3E had out of the gate). [/LIST]If they had done something along these lines, along with NOT oversimplifying mechanics (grapple, charge, etc. - simplifying: Yes, Oversimplifying: No), and keeping the ideas that really work (simplified monster statting and creation, better underlying math, minions, healing surges, death and dying, action points), then I'd probably be playing 4E right now. [/QUOTE]

Verification