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

[KarinsDad]

The pacifist spellcaster can use effects that deal hit point damage without inflicting physical wounds.

Hit points are used as a measure of whether or not someone is still a capable opponent. You want to incapacitate them? Do it by removing their status as a capable opponent - by reducing their hit points to zero. That might be by hitting them with an axe, or it might be by sapping their morale with a pacifistic spell that inhibits their will to fight.

Hit point damage doesn't have to mean physically injuring a creature.

-Hyp.

Only if the pacifist spell caster gets the last shot in. Otherwise, if a fellow PC does the last hit point damage, the NPC is dead (shy of the fellow PC using the unconsciousness rule).

An NPC has 50 hit points and the pacifist spell caster does 45 of it, it doesn't matter. It's all normal hit point damage. There is no rule like 3E that some of it can be non-lethal. If the last 5 points is also normal hit point damage, the NPC is dead. AFAICT.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Illusions are the obvious choice in 3.x. Illusion of a floor over a pit. Levitate combined with an illusion is sometimes good.

So, you trick an opponent into falling into a pit ... causing damage and forcing them to get out of the pit. This isn't functionally that different than say, pushing someone into the pit trap [which is possible in 4th edition]. There are also illussion-esque spells that would make it harder for an opponent to notice that there is a pit there.

Illusions are definitely good against cavalry. Even if the rider knows that a wall is fake, the horse will never charge through it.

There are walls in 4e too.

Invisibility, even though nerfed in every single version, was good for all kinds of stuff.

Still in 4th.

Rock to Mud on ceiling over enemies followed by Dispel Magic.

And, so, dropping a bunch of rocks on enemies via a combination of spells instead of a single spell is different how? You are still ultimately casting, in this case, a pair of spells that will likely damage the opponents, as well as knock them prone, maybe immobilize them temporarily, and definitely create a zone of difficult terrain. This is exactly what a 4e spell is like except it isn't dependent on the terrain, thus as probably a daily spell could be used each day.

In 2E, Halfling PC casts Darkness 2 feet above the ground. Enemies are blind, Halfling ducks down a bit and can see fine. But that trick got nerfed in 3.5.

True, but the drows darkness, is basically the same thing without any "trickiness" it's just auto "only the caster can see in this particular darkness cloud". It's smaller, admitedly, but that's because it's a per encounter ability from 1st level, so it shouldn't be ridiculous.

Any sort of stunning or sleep type spell on flying creatures.

In 4e that becomes "any type of knock prone/stunning/sleep" spell on flying creatures. Heck, even dazing a flying creature means, unless it can hover, it needs to spend it's one action each turn moving to stay in the air.

We once had a player use Command to tell a guy in plate in a barroom fight to masterbate. The DM rolled to see if the guy knew what the word meant.

There are other spells that dominate or stun NPCs which is the equivalent of using command to tell someone to basically stop fighting.

Shrink Item on a boulder. Place the small cloth rock above a doorframe. If an intruder enters, say the command word. Boulder drops on foe. Cloth rock can be carried every day and put above a doorframe before sleeping every night.

So, a trap that causes damage, probably knocks a foe prone, etc, etc, etc.

Most of your descriptions are ways to take a spell and turn it INTO a way to deal damage. Most of the examples aren't something you can specifically do in 4e. Of course, you are basically combining spells or using spells differently ... to end up getting effects that are the same as a trap or attack spell. In 4e, they just cut to the chase and have the spells do what can be useful frequently [because of the limited number available, and thus you don't want to prepare a spell you don't get to use during the day]. Instead of spells that specific uses, and can be used creatively ... to be turned into a "damage dealing spell" that you loathe so much.

Grease had good uses. Nobody ever makes it up a ramp that has Grease on it.

And there are zones that can make it hard for people to pass through areas as well. And, with ALL the ramps I've seen so far in the first 2 H adventures ... icy terrain can be used in any situation, one encounter per day will probably work well with Web. You can't even expect to encounter one ramp per day with grease.

Passwall had good uses. Guy on bridge, cast Hold Person followed by Passwall. He has no chance to catch himself.

So, toss a guy off a bridge. There are spells for that. And, falling = damage.

Tiny Hut = instant invisibility / concealment. Multiple range PCs can shoot / cast spells from inside it and enemies outside have no idea which square to target.

A) Mordenkaiden's Mansion

B) Mass Greater Invisibility isn't overpowered at all ...

Charms and Suggestions are good.

They result in dominating, stunning or dazing monsters, as well as forcing them to move in certain ways. That occurs in 4e too. Heck, you can make them flank for your team, attack their teammates. Etc, etc, etc.

Even obvious stuff like summoning a monster as flank or to hold the line.

They have some summons that do that, and they've STARTED adding summoned creatures now. They needed to deal with the economy of actions, how spend one turn summoning a creature and getting to double the number of things you can do each turn.

Mounts can be used, but they share the actions of their rider. There is the bag of tricks and the figurines, and soon the ranger gets his companion back. For the conjured creatures, you spend minor actions to let them do any of their kinds of actions, keeping to their normal allotment.

So, they DELAYED summoning, in part because they needed to find out how to balance it in the new system. Also, there is likely a different kind of spellcaster they'd want to make having summoning as "it's thing".

There is just so much more to DND 3.x spells than the doing damage and moving enemies around or knocking enemies prone of 4E.

Like finding round about ways of doing damage, knocking enemies prone, immobilizing them, dazing them, stunning them, slowing them, causing them to fall off cliffs, etc. All things possible in 4e, except, instead of a DM having to decide [or having to look up] how much damage the "improvised rock slide from the ceiling caving in", there can be a spell that does exactly that including all the conditions that occur because of it [knocking prone, immobilizing, causing diffcult/hindering/whatever terrain].

 

[Hypersmurf]

Only if the pacifist spell caster gets the last shot in. Otherwise, if a fellow PC does the last hit point damage, the NPC is dead (shy of the fellow PC using the unconsciousness rule).

Yes, but it was the last PC who killed him.

The pacifist dealt 45 points of hit point damage. It is not 'lethal' or 'non-lethal'; it is a reduction in his hit point total.

The pacifist has brought him 45 points out of 50 towards being incapable of fighting, and it is described as a psychic lassitude that is sapping his morale. He is close to breaking and giving up, though there is still a spark of defiance in him.

Then next round, the barbarian with the axe deals 7 damage, taking him below zero, and it is described as opening his throat with a greataxe.

The pacifist dealt 45 hit points of damage - this is a mechanical, metagame effect. The in-game, cinematic result did not include any physical injury.

The barbarian's 7 points of damage, on the other hand, showed up in-game as an instantly-fatal wound.

The pacifist's action brought the opponent closer to being incapacitated. Whoever deals the last point of damage gets to define what form that incapacity takes.

-Hyp.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Yes, but it was the last PC who killed him.

The pacifist dealt 45 points of hit point damage. It is not 'lethal' or 'non-lethal'; it is a reduction in his hit point total.

The pacifist has brought him 45 points out of 50 towards being incapable of fighting, and it is described as a psychic lassitude that is sapping his morale. He is close to breaking and giving up, though there is still a spark of defiance in him.

Then next round, the barbarian with the axe deals 7 damage, taking him below zero, and it is described as opening his throat with a greataxe.

The pacifist dealt 45 hit points of damage - this is a mechanical, metagame effect. The in-game, cinematic result did not include any physical injury.

The barbarian's 7 points of damage, on the other hand, showed up in-game as an instantly-fatal wound.

The pacifist's action brought the opponent closer to being incapacitated. Whoever deals the last point of damage gets to define what form that incapacity takes.

-Hyp.

Then it becomes an issue of the wizard and the barbarian having to sit down and talk about their tactics. The issue of whether or not to kill your enemies is something a party has to decide together, and there is always interparty decision making conflicts.

Ultimately, the pacifist IS hanging out with a barbarian. How is it different for him to say, hold person the guy while the barbarian kills someone else, for him to try to knock a guy unconcious only for the barbarian to kill the guy. [And this assumes the rest of the party won't finish off the dying/unconcious enemies on the field].

 

[KarinsDad]

So, you trick an opponent into falling into a pit ... causing damage and forcing them to get out of the pit. This isn't functionally that different than say, pushing someone into the pit trap [which is possible in 4th edition].

Yup. You can trick them (or push them) in 3E. You push them in in 4E. The former is creative. The latter is mundane. Thanks for proving my point.

yada yada yada

You totally missed the point of his question.

It was not, "How can we sorta kinda maybe do something in 4E that gives us a similar end result to creative spells in 3E?".


The real question here is:

How many creative things could we do in 3E that we cannot do in 4E versus how many creative things can we do in 4E that we could do in 3E?


In 4E, the wall spell is just a wall. In 3E, the illusion is a wall or a floor or a table or a wide variety of other interesting and creative objects. And oh yes, we still have the wall spells as well in 3E.

There are so few spells per PC caster in 4E that by definition, it loses big time on the creativity and PC options meters to 3E. Yes, quite a few spells in 4E do damage and do something else. That does not creates skads of creativity options. It creates a small handful of the same ways to be creative. Over and over and over again, combat after combat after combat. Oh, I push him down. Oh, I create difficult terrain. Oh, I daze him. zzzzzzzz

 

[WalterKovacs]

Yup. You can trick them (or push them) in 3E. You push them in in 4E. The former is creative. The latter is mundane. Thanks for proving my point.



You totally missed the point of his question.

It was not, "How can we sorta kinda maybe do something in 4E that gives us a similar end result to creative spells in 3E?".


The real question here is:

How many creative things could we do in 3E that we cannot do in 4E versus how many creative things can we do in 4E that we could do in 3E?


In 4E, the wall spell is just a wall. In 3E, the illusion is a wall or a floor or a table or a wide variety of other interesting and creative objects. And oh yes, we still have the wall spells as well in 3E.

There are so few spells per PC caster in 4E that by definition, it loses big time on the creativity and PC options meters to 3E. Yes, quite a few spells in 4E do damage and do something else. That does not creates skads of creativity options. It creates a small handful of the same ways to be creative. Over and over and over again, combat after combat after combat. Oh, I push him down. Oh, I create difficult terrain. Oh, I daze him. zzzzzzzz

And yet, all the "creative" options were, different ways to push people off cliffs or drop rocks on them.

Creative description of how powers work in 4e can provide similar "fun" to creative uses of powers in 3.5 to have them cause a MECHANICAL result equal to damage+effect powers.

In 4e, there are fewer ways to creatively change the MECHANICAL effect of the spells ... but the mechanical end result of most of the "creative uses" are essentially the same, just the way of accomplishing it is different.

But ultimately, you aren't going to be convinced. You want for there to be more non-damaging spells, which can be "creatively" used ... to do mechanically the same thing as existing damaging spells.

You also yadayadayada'd over examples where the effect you are bemoaning to have lost STILL EXISTS.

 

[James McMurray]

I'm sorry, but using Grease to make a floor slippery is not creative. Using rock to mud to turn rock into mud, and then mud to rock (or diepl magic) to turn it back is not creative. Hardly anything you mentioned was creative. They might have been new and exciting a decade or two ago when someone first thought them up, but they're old hat now. If you need repeatble old tricks to have fun, by all means stick to the game they came from.

Karinsdad: out of curiosity, what do you hope to gain by deriding another's game on a board dedicated to that game? Surely you must see the futility of it, and realize that there are people on other boards who would love to have a waa-fest with you?

 

[KarinsDad]

And yet, all the "creative" options were, different ways to push people off cliffs or drop rocks on them.

No, they weren't. Summoning does not do that. Invisibility does not do that. Darkness does not do that. They were not all 3E effects that could be mechanically emulated with 4E effects, they were a wide variety of effects, some of which cannot be done easily or at all in 4E.

Creative description of how powers work in 4e can provide similar "fun" to creative uses of powers in 3.5 to have them cause a MECHANICAL result equal to damage+effect powers.

Creatively use how? It's one thing to say that 4E can be used creatively. It's another to do so.

And I mean creative (like Darkness two feet off the ground), not obvious (like push a foe into a flank or into a Wall of Fire).

Come up with a list of real creative things that can be done with 4E combat spells.

In 4e, there are fewer ways to creatively change the MECHANICAL effect of the spells ... but the mechanical end result of most of the "creative uses" are essentially the same, just the way of accomplishing it is different.

Except that the end result is not the same. How does one "eavesdrop" in 4E? Now compare that to how one does so in 3E?

How does the group fly 10 miles in 4E? Flying Carpet is the only solution (TMK). Mass Fly lasts for 5 minutes.

The end result is not the same because the toolbelt is so tiny. How does one be a mechanic on a car if the only tools one has is a hammer and a screwdriver? Yes, some things can be fixed or maintained on a car, but not everything. To be a good car mechanic takes many different tools.

To be a creative spell caster in an RPG takes many different spells. Not just a boatload of damaging spells with minor little side effects.

But ultimately, you aren't going to be convinced. You want for there to be more non-damaging spells, which can be "creatively" used ... to do mechanically the same thing as existing damaging spells.

That's where your position fails. I do not want to do the same thing as existing damaging spells. I want to do different things. But utimately, you aren't going to be convinced.

 

[WalterKovacs]

And I mean creative (like Darkness two feet off the ground), not obvious (like push a foe into a flank or into a Wall of Fire).

I'm sorry, but finding a way to make a spell more powerful than it was meant to be may be creative, but is also something that quite a few people frown upon, and one of the things that varies from group to group. Some DMs are permissive, other groups agree not to try to parse rules to come up with ways to make lower level spells equivalent to [if not better than] higher level spells.

Your definition of creative in this case is "make the opponent blind while I'm not". It's still a pretty obvious use of the power, just a creative way to make it more effectively do the thing it already does anyway. There are just as creative ways to cast certain area effects. While 4e may no longer allow you to be precise beyond 'squares' in terms of targetting, nor is a medium creature more than 1 square tall ... the "cubic" nature of spells and spaces means that you could, for example, cast a spell high enough in the air to hit flying creatures and large or bigger creatures without hitting your own friends below. You can similarly attack characters on different levels [depending on the range]. Levitation [or flight] can allow you to use close burst/blast powers to attack foes directly below you.

Come up with a list of real creative things that can be done with 4E combat spells.

I'll get right on that ... and wait with baited breath as you dismiss anything I deem creative as being "obvious" because it helps to win a fight [although, a creative use of a spell, in combat, that doesn't help to win the fight isn't creative, it's bad].

Wall of Fog: It's a utility power. Being inside you are concealed to both sides. Either side and you can't be seen on the other side. Enter the rogue and the warlock. They go to the side without the opponent. They are now hidden from view. They go back over to the other side and, in the case of the warlock, they can remain hidden using his concealment. The rogue can deft strike his way and get his combat advantage on someone on the other side of the wall. Heck, charging through the wall lets you also catch someone off guard.

Area effects -> Great way to find out where hidden/invisible characters are hiding. Invisibility provides a concealment bonus. Blasts and bursts ... ignore concealment. It's just as easy to hit an invisible creature with an AoE than if they were visible. And, the bigger the area, the less accurate you have to be on guessing where it is. The wizard using his area effects, not as minion killing or damage to lots of people can instead use it to play Marco Polo with a hidden monster.

Boxing opponent's in with areas and walls can supplement the other allies in the party greatly. You don't need to be pushing people into wells or flanks for this to be the case. They may be given no good places to stand or move. It may be possible to get them prone and unable to get up [at least without going somewhere bad]. You might force larger monsters to squeeze, provoke OAs, invoke the marks of defenders, etc, etc, etc.

Except that the end result is not the same. How does one "eavesdrop" in 4E? Now compare that to how one does so in 3E?

Scrying was specifically nerfed because of it's ability to disrupt DM plans if they weren't EXTREMELY paranoid or EXTREMELY creative. There is good old perception. There is invisibilty. The rogue has some great utility stealth based powers that let's it move very well. Heck, the warlock's built in ability to be constantly concealed as long as he keeps moving that, as long as he can keep making stealth checks, he can effectively remain hidden in plain sight for a while [as long as he starts completely hidden, he only needs his natural concealment, and succesful stealth checks, to remain hidden]. There are still some rituals and magic items than can help in eavesdroping.

How does the group fly 10 miles in 4E? Flying Carpet is the only solution (TMK). Mass Fly lasts for 5 minutes.

Mounts. Ultimately, if the group needs to be flying for 10 miles ... it's either high level, or they are attempting to avoid something they probably shouldn't have the ability to avoid at that tier.

Phantom Steed, a 6th level ritual. On a high enough arcana check [40+] you have up to 8 mounts, all have speed 20, and the ability to fly up to 50 feet in the air] and they last for 12 hours. Assuming you travel for 10 hours ... that's 100 miles. So, you'd get 10 miles in ONE hour on the phantom steeds. So that is one example, right out of the wizards spellbook, and assuming that you MUST fly for 10 miles [and ignores "creative solutions" for finding other ways to get where you need to go].

The end result is not the same because the toolbelt is so tiny. How does one be a mechanic on a car if the only tools one has is a hammer and a screwdriver? Yes, some things can be fixed or maintained on a car, but not everything. To be a good car mechanic takes many different tools.

Than wait for the car mechanic class.

Also, for more difficult job, they bring in a number of specialists, each person being very good at their job. I'd rather have a heart surgeon work on my heart than a general practitioner.

To be a creative spell caster in an RPG takes many different spells. Not just a boatload of damaging spells with minor little side effects.

Your presumption here is that the only way to be creative is a ton of spells that do specific things. So using the fly spell to make the group fly is creative? Some of the things you are complaining to have lost are powers that were very "exact solution to exact problem" effects. And then there are some like knock that are "a spell that does the same thing people can do without needing a spell".

Having a spell that is equivalent mechanically to the rogue picking the lock doesn't really have anything to do with being creative. The rogue could just as creatively pick a lock using his ability to pick locks as you can creatively cast knock to ... pick a lock.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Ok. Took me a while to get home While non-lethal damage can be dealt at will (which is absurd in the fireball example) that doesn't stop the need to GRIND..............THROUGH..............EVERY.................HITPOINT.

That's exactly the point, though.

In previous editions, different classes would play different games. The fighter's only REAL option was to keep hitting the enemy until it died of hitpoint damage. There were certain(fairly rare) circumstances where they could grapple enemies, or ready their actions to disrupt casters, or trip enemies. However, most of the time these options were either impractical or impossible. Most people realized pretty quickly that 10 rounds spent rolling to see if they could succeed in a grapple attempt to keep someone pinned or do unarmed damage of 1d3+7 nonlethal damage was rather pointless when the monster had an AC of 18 and 50 hitpoints. Especially when you are able to hit on a 5 with your primary attack while power attacking for full for 3d6+32. Most fighters realized that damage was the ONLY way to effectively beat enemies. Once everyone got used to the system, the ONLY people I saw grappling were those who were obsessed with being different. I once saw a player completely impressed with himself because he had kept an enemy pinned and out of the fight for 4 rounds straight without actually dealing any damage. While one of the other fighter had taken out 2 other identical enemies with damage in the same time.

Meanwhile, the casters and the fighters were out of synch. The fighters were(mostly) doing nothing but hitting and dealing damage. The casters, on the other hand, were playing the "cast and hope" game. It goes like this: Cast a spell that takes an enemy completely out of the battle and hope they fail their save. Some rounds they are extremely effective, taking out enemies that would have taken the fighter 4-5 rounds to take out with damage. Other rounds they are next to useless because their action was spent casting a spell that had zero effect.

The other method casters had of winning was ability damage. If you can get an enemy's stat to 0, then they are effectively defeated. But if you are doing damage to a stat, it tends to have very little effect until it actually reaches 0, so every round spend reducing stats was next to useless until you managed to reduce it to 0 before the rest of the party did enough damage to kill it.

If the negatives given didn't defeat the monsters and if it made all its saves against your save or suck spells then it was possible for the wizard to contribute (next to) absolutely nothing to the combat. Or their spells could take out all of the enemies without dealing any damage at all. In which case all the damage done by everyone else in the party was (next to) absolutely useless. After all, a character who fails its save or die when it is at 10 hitpoints is exactly the same as an enemy that fails its save or die when it is at 200 hitpoints.

It also created really swingy combats that were rather anticlimactic. I know, as a DM(and often as a player as well), it would be no fun to play through a long game leading up to the final confrontation against the Demon King, Demonator, when the Wizard casts finger of death and the demon rolls a 1. Sure, the players would laugh and joke about it for a long time. The time they fought the biggest, baddest, demon in the universe and it died without making an attack to a single spell. But, at the same time, it also creates a feeling that they didn't accomplish anything. I know, for me, it seems like "Why did they need us to save them from such a wimpy monster? Why did we even bother spending the last 6 months playing this game if he was so easy to beat?" For me, I would RATHER I have to wade through every last hitpoint and fight for every one.

Finally, in 4e, everyone is on the same page. Powers do damage and you use the damage to defeat the monsters. No one bypasses the damage system, they just assist each other in dealing damage and keeping the monster where they want it. Monsters are actually hard to beat and feel like you really need to be a hero to beat them and any farmer with a pitchfork would have died trying to beat them.