Forked Thread: PC concept limitations in 4e

So a choice is only meaningful if you must study the system to discover what choices lead to effective characters and which choices lead to ineffective characters?

3E includes choices that when combined do not lead to a satisfying play experience. New or returning players could become frustrated when they discovered that the choices they made resulted in a far inferior charcater than those players with rules mastery. The evidence of such dissatisfaction has been expressed on these boards and I have personal experience with friends who became dissatisfied with 3E gameplay and stopped gaming. 3E makes character design choices more meaningful if you enjoy consequences for making bad choices.

Players who enjoy rules mastery seem dissatisfied with 4E. 4E makes choices more meaningful in the sense that most choices result in a satisfactory character. The system appeals more to players that do not wish to master the system to make an effective character.

The competitive nature of 3E character builds is what turned 3E into a game I no longer enjoy.

I think you might have misunderstood where I was coming from. I was merely pointing out that transparent choices are not much choice at all.
I am not a fan of competetive character builds or "rules mastery" either.

I think that the competetive nature of character builds in ANY edition can make for an unenjoyable game.

Please do not confuse me for some rabid 3E fan.

I am a rabid Basic D&D fan thanks.:angel:
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There is a clerical paragon path that you might like. Starts out like a regular cleric, but eventually starts sprouting wings, smiting people, and burning all enemies in a 40' radius with elemental damage. I don't think this one needs to be too complex.

The Angelic Avenger PP, good thinking. Will work with the paladin as well, just take the cleric multiclass feat. Radiant servant isn't a bad match either.

Phaezen
 

Some tough ones. Too be fair your first two are based off mechanics/concepts that cam fairly late in the 3.0/3.x product cycle, but I will have a bash anyway. Can't promise anything.
To be fair, feel free to step outside the PHB for these. If I'm picking from Dungeonscape, Magic of Incarnum, and Dragon Magic, I'm hardly playing by "core" rules.

:eek: :confused: :erm: :hmm:
Heavily Multiclassed Bard? Shifter race for the "polymorph"?
The polymorph isn't the focus, so much as the "watch me pull a spell out of my hat" stunt. I only mentioned polymorph because quite simply, nine times out of ten, that's the only spell a dabbler needed.

I hope this helps a little?
It helps.
 

Is that "invalid options" nonsense still going on?
That is pure powergamer talk, nothing more. A option does not have to make you do you 50d12 damage to be valid. It just has to lead to interesting characters which most choices in 3e does.
So stop with all that "4E is so much better because every choice makes me kill things better" nonsense. Not everyone sees killing power as ultimate goal in their role playing game.
 

The answer to 'How do I do X?' always seems to be: Easy! Take race A and pretend it doesn't look like it looks. Now take class B and rewrite it's fluff and change all it's powers. Now multiclass with C and ask your GM (only now do we ask?) if you can take paragon path Q. Simple!

...

And what exactly is 4e bringing to this process? I can reskin or rewrite or make my own material in any system. It's no special virtue of 4e that allows this. The fact that it seems to be so utterly necessary in 4e is the stand out fact here.

It is a simple fact (hold your breath if you want, it won't change) that the 4e design philosphy deliberately prevents certain charater archtype and playstyles. No Summoner/Necromancers with their hordes of minions. No out-of-combat specialists. No one trick ponies. No hyper specialists. No unusual applications of existing abilities beause they specify everything. (Rogue weapons I'm looking at you.)

Now you may cheer the loss of some of these things, but don't claim they still exist in the same breath.:uhoh:
 

1) The adventuring polymath. I loved the factotum-- especially a certain changeling factotum. Mechanically, I loved the inspiration points and the chance to try out a different wacky Skill application every encounter because I just could. Being able to trot out a spell in a pinch was fun (though I confess, it was most often polymorph), and it was comforting to know that just about any weapon I chose to include in a disguise was more than a prop. Conceptually, I guess this would be a less- fisticuffs-more-book-quoting Indiana Jones, or alternately, a more-fisticuffs-less-cocaine Sherlock Holmes (who was quiet the disguise artist, some people overlook).

That one is tricky. The factotum is a class designed within the 3e system, a class built for the rules mastery subset. That's why the CO guys loved it so much.

That said, I see a few ways to go about it. Doppleganger as a race is a start, and with the +2 int and cha, it will work well with class choices and the skills you want to emphasize (change shape, a decent Cha, and a high bluff skill and you will be a master of disguise). Jack of all trades is a necessary feat, making you half trained in everything you aren't trained in. Class is giving me a bit of trouble. It'd help to know exactly what you want out of combat with this one. If you literally mean "a spell in a pinch" then wizard multiclass onto something else would be really good, as it gives you exactly that, a wizard at-will as an encounter power with the the option to pick up a couple more spells via feats. OTOT, wizard has the best set of utility powers for a character like what you describe, and you can only get one of those with multiclassing. Plus, rituals would be useful. So maybe wizard main class and multiclass something else appropriate, any multiclass feat gives you some power from another class, which is a part of the factotums "thing".

You know, for a minor rules tweak you could go pretty far with this. It's a rule that you can only take one multiclass feat, but with a DM that gives you an exception to that, you could just take them all (or near enough), gaining a whole suite of other classes basic powers and a bunch of trained skills. If that's the case, your main class could be something more martial, to give you that weapons knowledge, then you'd end up with a couple spells, a bit of healing, some one shot tricks for extra damage (limited mark, quarry, sneak attack). I'd allow it as it would be an interesting character. But if not, wizard/x or x/wizard would be good. Ritual caster and/or alchemist would enhance the variety of "tricks" at your disposal.

2) The angelic avatar. Another oddball I loved for all its faults was the incarnate. Leaving aside legitimate concerns about soul-sandals and obsessions with the color blue, I really dug how incarnum worked, and the fact that a low-level character had access to some pretty dramatic soulmelds. In particular, I wrote up a lawful good incarnate who, using the Incarnate Avatar and Incarnate Weapon melds, did a pretty good job of impersonating a Shavarath angel or solar (see: Eberron cosmology) at an early level. Conceptually, this is a hardcore soldier-for-good who looks like a peaceful and un-armored fluffy, and is all the scarier for it when swooping down into the fray and brandishing the righteous sword of the Silver Flame. (Note: Incarnate Avatar didn't really grant flight until later levels, so getting any sort of non-cosmetic effect out of the wings before, say, 15th level would be groovy with me.)
I'm not very familiar with the incarnate at all, so I don't know how much help I can be on this one. Hardcore soldier for good would be a LG Paladin. Is there glamored armor yet in 4e (don't have AV nearby)? No currently available race fits very well, you'd have to reflavor something - maybe Eladrin as the base, but angelic and with wings, you could flavor your feystep into limited flight, even from 1st level. That's about all I got on this one not being familiar with it at all, but it seems a hard conversion.

3) The firebreathing squad captain. Coming on the heals of the 3.5 warlock, I was also impressed by the dragonfire adept. Great utility invocations and an area attack breath weapon-- what's not to love? I tended to come back to a human House Deneith dragonfire adept (again, see Eberron) who approached the class as a warmage tradition-- leading by example on the front line and breathing fire all over the damned place. ("Stand behind me-- this is going to get hot. Or cold, depending on their resistances.") A somewhat limited toolset, come to think of it, but very good at rephrasing every screw problem in nail terms. Target exclusion and element resistance a plus!

This one is a bit easier. Dragonborn warlord/wizard (take thunderwave as your encounter power, a front line bad ass nail if there ever was one). Couple feats for a couple more useful, front line wizard powers like Burning Hands or Fire Shroud (color to match with your breath choice). Flavor your warlord powers to be a bit more arcane, perhaps. Or for a more caster flavor, go wizard/warlord, you gain inspiring word which is very leader-ly, focus on close burst powers, pick up a solid weapon and some armor feats.

While I don't have FR, swordmage could be more ideal for this, and likely is. Dragonborn swordmage probably fits the bill well. Multi into warlord for inspiring word and some leader powers if needed.
 
Last edited:

Not everyone sees killing power as ultimate goal in their role playing game.

And not everyone sees wanting choices that are roughly equivalent in power, especially within the same role, as powergaming. Nice way to broadly insult everyone that doesn't agree with your "being shafted by the system leads to better roleplaying" mentality.

If Class A is better than Class B in all ways, shapes, and forms, it's perfectly reasonable to be unhappy with that design.
 


The Angelic Avenger PP, good thinking. Will work with the paladin as well, just take the cleric multiclass feat. Radiant servant isn't a bad match either.

Phaezen

I completely missed that as well, nice work Cadfan. I was too focused on doing the concepts at low levels.
 


Remove ads

Top