Forked Thread: Name exactly what 4E is "missing"

[Irda Ranger]

In fact, the post I was responding to said "Spontaneity? Gone. Organic character growth? Zilch." No shades of grey there.

I certainly agree that 3E characters can require a lot more advance planning, especially for certain Prestige Classes. But that's more true if you're concerned about the character's "effectiveness" and less true if you're not too worried about "balance".

My comment was influenced by the fact that I played with two guys who were optimisers. They had their feat selections planned out through level 20 and were brutally effective. That left the rest of us with the choice of matching them or practically sitting out half the fights. My character concepts were totally useless in the face of that. I had to rebuild three times in 8 levels just to participate (and I'm glad my DM let me).

Which comes back to what we all play D&D "for". Some people get a kick out of tweaking the system (just like hot rodding a car they can't legally drive or over-clocking a PC used for web surfing to 5 Ghz), and 3E was great for them, but their presence made it a lot less fun for people who were there for the roleplaying/storytelling aspects of the game. It was like showing up a friendly game of pick-up basketball only to find that one of the guys had modded his sneakers to make him run 2x as fast and jump 2x as high. It's a neat trick and cool proof of concept, but it doesn't make for good basketball.

 

[Felon]

Maybe I should have said: When every hero is special, no hero is special.

No, don't say that, because it's completely irrational. There are many different ways in which a person can be "special".

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

What do you feel 4E is missing from previous editions?

1. Bran muffins.

2. A clearly endorsed adversarial tone. Now it is merely suggested – it helps when these things are clear an unequivocal.

 

[Greg K]

My comment was influenced by the fact that I played with two guys who were optimisers. They had their feat selections planned out through level 20 and were brutally effective. That left the rest of us with the choice of matching them or practically sitting out half the fights. My character concepts were totally useless in the face of that. I had to rebuild three times in 8 levels just to participate (and I'm glad my DM let me).
.

Of course, there were other possibilities:
a. if the direction/circumstances of in game play would negate the pre-planned build, the DM could disallow the planned build.

b. if the majority of the players were building their characters under a different playstyle, the DM should have stepped in and told the optimizers to build their characters under the same style as the rest of the group.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

No, don't say that, because it's completely irrational. There are many different ways in which a person can be "special".

I'll give you that.

Now git over here for an ol' group hug.

 

[Felix]

No, don't say that, because it's completely irrational. There are many different ways in which a person can be "special".

And there are many different ways to do 2W damage and shift one square.

 

[Sanzuo]

I do love the mechanics in 4e for what I feel the game is trying to accomplish.

That being said here's what I want of: Horror, awful things, darkness, grimness and grittiness. Just like the Dark Ages really were.

 

[Fifth Element]

My comment was influenced by the fact that I played with two guys who were optimisers. They had their feat selections planned out through level 20 and were brutally effective. That left the rest of us with the choice of matching them or practically sitting out half the fights. My character concepts were totally useless in the face of that. I had to rebuild three times in 8 levels just to participate (and I'm glad my DM let me).

Okay, but that's a problem with the group, not the game. If these players were outshining everyone else in combat, and it bothered the other players (which apparently it did), something should have been done.

This is the sort of thing the 4E DMG discusses, which the 3E does not. Actual advice on how to manage the game to keep it fun for everyone involved.

 

[Fifth Element]

And there are many different ways to do 2W damage and shift one square.

I wouldn't say that. There are many ways to name doing 2W damage and shifting one square.

 

[Felix]

As to what 4e is missing, I don't think we can say it's missing much in terms of options because to be fair, it's only been out for a few months while 3.x has had 8 years. But what the base mechanics are missing is a built-in sense of flexibility.

How can I say it doesn't lack options but does lack flexibility? 3.x characters could re-invent their direction every level with their choices, or they could continue on with what they were doing; 4e doesn't straight-jacket you, and certainly gives nods to flexibiilty with retraining, but that feels more like a sop rather than a core game mechanic. 4e characters, though they may have many paths available to travel, have to choose a path and stick to it once chosen.

And spell flexibility. Dear goodness spell flexibility. Gone are the "1001 Ways To Use Prestidigitation" and similar threads where non-combat spells were given clever combat applications. There may be a ritual to summon a Leomund's Tiny Hut, but with the current ritual rules you can't use it as stationary camoflage for your firebase.

Related is the loss of the Vancian spell system. But that's an old horse I won't get into. It has its admirers and detractors, and never the twain shall meet, but it's something that 4e lacks that I sorely miss.