Even if there was some confusion between "dealing damage" and "combat focused" there are still plenty of spells that are either 1) equally useful both in and out of combat; or 2) useful primarily out of combat. I'm still not sure how anyone could read through the utility powers for Clerics, Warlocks and Wizards and come away with the idea that every spell is combat focused.
Forked Thread: Name exactly what 4E is "missing"
- Thread starter Daniel D. Fox
- Start date
Maze doing damage and having such an incredibly short timer was one of the really bad defining moments of 4e for me.
Fifth Element
Legend
The thread is about what exactly is missing from 4E. Care to elaborate?
El Mahdi
Muad'Dib of the Anauroch
I think he was just trying to say that some (and probably him although I don't want to completely put words in his mouth
) feel that 4E isn't D&D, therefore what it's missing is D&D (or most of it). I'm not sure if it's really possible to define what D&D is. It's had so many versions, and so much evolution of concepts and rules, that I don't think there is one definition of what's D&D. (I think there was a thread about this not too long ago.) I don't agree with that view, however. I don't prefer 4E, and I feel it has a lot missing, but I wouldn't call 4E "not D&D".I miss fast and cool combat. In 3.x as a DM I am able to goad the players along and make a combat be as fast or as slow as needed. That conjured creature taking too long? Well I'll help you get the stats and everything up and going and the combat will be ticking along quite quickly. As for the cool part practically everyone had about 3 times as many options in combat as these new classes, and critical hits were actually eventful and exciting, not just another one tenth of the Mobs HP.
In 4e even if we come across some stupid goblin sentries that used to take 10 seconds to exterminate we instead spend an hour slowly beating them to death and it seems only one encounter in 10 is any fun to play. The rest are just being pounded on in preparation for the boss battle. It feels exactly like playing an mmorpg. I open every battle with my encounter powers and then hit my at wills repeatedly until everything is finally dead, every combat is exactly the same and then all of our resources reset and then we do the exact same thing in the next encounter. What happened to everyones uniqueness, all the classes have been homoginized.
In 4e even if we come across some stupid goblin sentries that used to take 10 seconds to exterminate we instead spend an hour slowly beating them to death and it seems only one encounter in 10 is any fun to play. The rest are just being pounded on in preparation for the boss battle. It feels exactly like playing an mmorpg. I open every battle with my encounter powers and then hit my at wills repeatedly until everything is finally dead, every combat is exactly the same and then all of our resources reset and then we do the exact same thing in the next encounter. What happened to everyones uniqueness, all the classes have been homoginized.
Last edited:
Engilbrand
First Post
When large battles happen, we all have a lot of fun, on both sides, doing interesting things and hurting one another.
Something humorous: Someone mentioned "There aren't a lot of ways to do 2w and push, but there are a lot of ways to name it." I originally saw that as a positive thing. While the person was actually talking about just changing names and everything being blah because of it, I misinterpreted as reflavoring things.
"Large hands from from the ground and throw the enemy a bit into the air. While he manages to land on his feet, it's obvious that he's a bit shaken from the impact and has slightly twisted his foot."
"You step up and put a boot right into the enemies chest. As he stumbles backwards, you manage to strike out and catch him on the arm."
For me, both of those do some damage and move the target a bit. They cause different things to happen in the game world, even if the mechanics are the same.
Something humorous: Someone mentioned "There aren't a lot of ways to do 2w and push, but there are a lot of ways to name it." I originally saw that as a positive thing. While the person was actually talking about just changing names and everything being blah because of it, I misinterpreted as reflavoring things.
"Large hands from from the ground and throw the enemy a bit into the air. While he manages to land on his feet, it's obvious that he's a bit shaken from the impact and has slightly twisted his foot."
"You step up and put a boot right into the enemies chest. As he stumbles backwards, you manage to strike out and catch him on the arm."
For me, both of those do some damage and move the target a bit. They cause different things to happen in the game world, even if the mechanics are the same.
Fifth Element
Legend
Heh. There's a thread about that every week or so.
At least the Fifth Element dude has the cajones to say he hasn't played 4e, the rest of the replies sound like they haven't really played the game.
While there are some things missing, most of that will be covered by time. Rules wise, the foundation has been laid.
I find many of these posts incredibly frustrating, not from a 4e fanboy POV, but from a common sense POV.
If you don't want a dragon to be tripped, role-play it. If you think the rulebooks need more common sense... you're the DM! Your job is to be the common sense. If you thought the 3e core books had varied attack patterns and combat options and quick combats (early, yes they were fast; mid and late, no)... I think you're memory has tricked you. I hear a lot of griping and not a lot of... I hear a lot of fluff, and not a lot of crunch.
I'll grant the PHB might be lacking options, but the Class section is a huge chunk of the book, and the design space is obviously wiiiide open. We'll have an Illusionist style spellcaster soon enough, and a Summoner too, heck, maybe even a Necromancer.
Some complained about the lack of fluff, then others complained the fluff in the Barbarian class ruined it. LOL.
I think the only thing 4e is missing is a forum for the 12-22 yr olds that are having a blast with this game.
While there are some things missing, most of that will be covered by time. Rules wise, the foundation has been laid.
I find many of these posts incredibly frustrating, not from a 4e fanboy POV, but from a common sense POV.
If you don't want a dragon to be tripped, role-play it. If you think the rulebooks need more common sense... you're the DM! Your job is to be the common sense. If you thought the 3e core books had varied attack patterns and combat options and quick combats (early, yes they were fast; mid and late, no)... I think you're memory has tricked you. I hear a lot of griping and not a lot of... I hear a lot of fluff, and not a lot of crunch.
I'll grant the PHB might be lacking options, but the Class section is a huge chunk of the book, and the design space is obviously wiiiide open. We'll have an Illusionist style spellcaster soon enough, and a Summoner too, heck, maybe even a Necromancer.
Some complained about the lack of fluff, then others complained the fluff in the Barbarian class ruined it. LOL.
I think the only thing 4e is missing is a forum for the 12-22 yr olds that are having a blast with this game.
ExploderWizard
Hero
For the record I have played the game and we are continuing to play and experiment with it. So far, playing KOTS we have not been overly impressed. Combats eat up way too much game time which is one reason we were tiring of 3E. 4E has taken the mid-level 3E combat times and dropped them on 1st level. For a game that wants to showcase its non-combat features ( and I think skill challenges are a great concept that were not tested or developed well enough) it certainly makes the combats grind out way too long.
I'm an old fart and I'm loving 4e. Stick that in your emo haircut and smoke it!
Similar Threads
