D&D 4E Forked Thread: Some Thoughts on 4e

Such non-buff defensive tactics have been a niche tactic in all versions of D&D, and Dispel Magic typically had a 50% or more chance of failing even under optimal conditions.

Sure, it was a niche tactic. But, it was an option. Now, the main option is to do damage. Illusions? Nope. Enchantment? Not really. Summons? Nope. Protections? For a round.

All of these were niche tactics, but they were niche tactics that allowed flavor and diversity in combat.

The complaint is not about not having broken abilities (as Gort claims). It's about not having a variety of options. Every encounter is practically a mirror image of previous encounters. The only real diversity is in which monster the PCs are fighting and the shape / properties of the room. zzzzz There is very little PC diversity.

It's ok to have some classes that are very vanilla for people who enjoy using the same tactics over and over again. But, it sucks for people who actually like PC options and variety in their game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I agree, that magic in 4E was somewhat more "spectular". And people who love high powered magic, might miss countless (sometimes abusive) options the wizard had in 3.5.

But:

1. 4E has just started. Plenty of things to come.
2. Do not forget, that in previous Editions, a wizard was just spectacular for 1 or 2 encounters of the day. Then he usually was out of high powerd spells and couldnt do much at all.
3. Spectactular in a pen an paper rp often comes at the cost of other players. If one player is "in the spotlight" most of the time, the other player usually aren´t (How many spectacular moments did the average pure Fighter got in 3.x compared to caster, for example?)

I can understand, if somebody prefers 3.5 over 4E. But nobody should forget the inevitable drawbacks of high powered magic, which often was a problem in previous editions, like annoying save-or-die spells, buffs stacking ad nauseam, trivializing non-combat encounters (why walk through the dangerous desert if you can just teleport, etc.) and the like.
 

Then, how do you explain the fact that the Jump spell, which often will not work because the roll is failed, is a second level Per Encounter power whereas Misty Step is a Class ability? Auto-teleport, 3 spaces up versus a chance to jump up 3 feet. Ethereal Stride works every time and is also a second level Per Encounter power, and also gives a bonus to defense.

How is this balanced when compared to the character who invested in movement skills like Athletics?

Athletics is an AT-WILL ability ... tied with certain tricks tied to class, you don't need to rest every 5 minutes to get it back.

Teleport is handed out like candy at low levels. How does this compare to Jump (either the skill or the power)?

Which class gets teleport like candy? Warlock. It's a striker [unlike the wizard] and thus needs maneuverability. The ranger gets movement powers as well, but as a non-magical person, he gets it via shifting. Wizards, outside of being eladrin, don't exactly get access to teleportation, and other members of the party may also lack it. For those characters, jumping as part of athletics, or using the spell, are both posibilities. Interestingly enough, getting ONE person across the pit doesn't mean the entire party is across the pit. Getting the warlock to where the bad guys are isn't a good as say, helping to get the defender to where the baddie is.

Teleport is typically more potent and useful than Levitate, but Levitate is 6th level.

Ok, this I have to question.

Levitate can put you out of melee range of most creatures, unless they have a reach of 3, or they can fly. And, if they aren't flying next to you, or have threatening reach, this also puts you out of OA range of them. All of those things are GREAT for a wizard. You can levitate the ENTIRE COMBAT, vs. teleporting once.

But, you accept Teleport as balanced.

Teleportation is just another form of movement ... there is a LOT of movement in the game. While it's given out like candy, it's given out to specific races and classes.

Part of the problem with 3.5 was that the wizard was the one who got to be good at anything, as long as he was able to put the spell down and prepare it. Wizards get some tricks in 4e that no one else can do. Warlocks get some tricks, that no one else can do, etc, etc, etc.

And is your argument that "well, they broke teleport, so why not just break everything else?" or is it that teleport is not broken, and neither were the other effects? Also, as of Adventurer's Vault and Martial Power, they are reintroducing concepts like the Animal Companion and summoned monsters. Certain tricks were taken away from the wizard simply because, the wizard did everything. Any magic user that came after the wizard was, for the most part, a specialist wizard knock off of some sort. So, the wizard and warlock split up some of the powers, and when, for example, the bard comes along, suddenly illussion and enchantment can have a good home.
 

So, the wizard and warlock split up some of the powers, and when, for example, the bard comes along, suddenly illussion and enchantment can have a good home.

I can live with this mentality. I don't mind that the "generalist" wizard has been slain to create a series of class based on the schools...as soon as the other schools arrive. Once I have a real illusionist and a real summoner, I think that will fill a lot of the gap
 

I can live with this mentality. I don't mind that the "generalist" wizard has been slain to create a series of class based on the schools...as soon as the other schools arrive. Once I have a real illusionist and a real summoner, I think that will fill a lot of the gap

I hope illusions and summoning are cool but I have feeling that we will get:

Illusions: variable psychic damage combined with an array of save ends sustained status effects.

Summoning: calling forth creatures much weaker than the caster then a choice of spending all useful actions 'piloting" the summoned creature or having it scratch its butt on guard duty while the character does stuff.

The problem with a "real" summoner in 4E is that it would get a lot more actions to do per turn which would be unfun for everyone else and thus broken.

Hopefully this will not be the case. :)
 

I'm with you Karinsdad. 4E magic system is boring. The only people that like the new magic system are those that weren't particularly good at the old one or never bothered to play a caster.
That is just flat wrong. And a little insulting in its arrogance.

I played casters in almost every prior edition of the game. I was pretty good at them, too -- probably not outstanding, but pretty solid. I've had a couple runs with the same character

I still hated playing casters. I hated using them as a DM. I really can't stand the Vancian system. It's one of the things that kept pushing me away from D&D over the years.
 

After thinking some more about what motivated my OP here, as well as looking at all the good responses, I think one of the things I was trying to express earlier that didn't get through was that in 3.x, with a Wizard/Sorceror who had decent access to scrolls and wands, magic was the answer to EVERYTHING after about level 5. Gaping Ravine? Potions of fly for everyone! Guards? Mass invisibility! Cluster of orcs? Spam sleep spells, or illusions, or whatever. Need to convince the king of something? Glibness!

Unless the monsters had good enough saves or good enough spell resistance, you could literally have a spell for any situation you ran into. And when magic turns into Batman's utility belt, and the only time you're stumped is because you didn't bring the right spell today, then magic feels less special and magic and more like a tool-belt. Gandalf didn't teleport to the other side of the Grey Mountains, or cast Mass Protection from Cold when they were caught in the blizzard trying to cross them - for most situations, he relied on his skills and heroism; magic was something special he busted out in key situations, and it wasn't guaranteed to work even then (yes, I know, flip-side of that is that he used his sword to fight most of the time - I don't have a problem with spamming scorching burst and magic missile though - call me a hypocrite if you want, but it feels different). I know that's not precisely what I laid out in the OP, but I think it's what I was trying to get across.
 

I can handle a "broken" rule that makes a game session memorable a lot better than a "balanced" game that is going to feel the same every session.

At the same time, it's easy to see that a "broken" rule can make every encounter end with the same application of the "broken" rules, while a balanced game will encourage a certain diversity in outcomes.

All the positive anecdotes about 3e wizards seem to assume that there is only one main wizard in the party, and that the wizard has at least some sense of fair play. I've had experiences playing as a wizard or with wizards where the wizard used his spells to help people out or solve problems that the party faced and it was extremely fun. I've also seen situations where several wizards formed a kind of "firing line", demolishing encounters before any of the other characters could do anything meaningful.

Obviously, I'd like to see more of the first situation and less of the second. To me, the changes to the 4e wizard were a mixed bag, but overall tending towards the positive. Like KarinsDad, I miss the versatility of the old wizard, who could previously concentrate on offense, defense, buffing, debuffing, reconnaissance, transport or general obstacle removal, sometimes all in the same encounter. At the same time, I recognize that parceling out some of that functionality to other characters is a good thing.
 

And when magic turns into Batman's utility belt, and the only time you're stumped is because you didn't bring the right spell today, then magic feels less special and magic and more like a tool-belt.

Although I understand your point, I see exactly this in 4E.

Every combat, every PC busts out their "magic" (i.e. powers).

Paladins can now Teleport. Many classes can heal. Martial Powers has a Ranger power where the Ranger hits a foe with an arrow and the foe teleports a square.

Everything is now magic, so magic is no longer special.
 

Although I understand your point, I see exactly this in 4E.

Every combat, every PC busts out their "magic" (i.e. powers).

Paladins can now Teleport. Many classes can heal. Martial Powers has a Ranger power where the Ranger hits a foe with an arrow and the foe teleports a square.

Everything is now magic, so magic is no longer special.
The difference, I'd say, is that now *all* classes have a Batman Utility Belt, instead of a single class having it and all others just being spectators.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top