• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

5E How To Clone 4E Using 5E Rules

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
In a system where +1 is as big a jump as it is in 5e? It should be plenty to have +3. That’s Legendary magic weapon territory.

Though that isnt where I am thinking about too much... i am concerned how much is +3 added to non-proficient activity Intimidate or Deception use for my Chosen one I have using in my example. I guess it does make her as able as someone with basic proficiency in say Heroic from the default rules. Which hmmmm .
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
So in 4e we have an Inherent Bonuses rule 5e has since the beginning talked the talk of magic item bonuses being "not needed" is that actually true and How?
 

Yaarel

Explorer
Lets think carefully about bounded accuracy.

At level 1, it is possible to have a total of +0 (average score, nonproficient) or worse.

At level 1, the highest bonus is +7 (+5 score, +2 proficiency).



Im less fond of the Expertise ‘doubling’ proficiency, because I like bounded accuracy for skills too, and I like to use skills in combat, so like combat and skills to have the same math.

The maximum score is 20, until Epic tier. What about regulating scores at lower tiers?

Novice: max score 16
Hero: max score 18
Paragon: max score 20

Because the ‘4Ever’ system will probably use point-buy, it is easy to regulate Novice ability scores.

I also suggest no ability improvements from races. Make races have score prerequisites, rather than improvements. This resolves a number of problems, especially making any race useful for any class since theres no dependence on the highest bonus. Also, the absence of additional bonuses helps control bounded accuracy. For example, rather than the Mountain Dwarf granting +2 Strength score and +2 Constitution, it instead requires a minimum of 13 Strength and 13 Constitution in order to choose this race. Prereqs tend to be 11, 13, or 15 (such as extreme Dex of a Drow, or extreme Str of an Orc).



Novice tier maximum bonus +6
+0 tier
+3 score
+2 proficiency
+0,+1 magic

Heroic tier maximum bonus +11
+1 tier
+4 score
+3,+4 proficiency
+1,+2 magic

Paragon tier maximum bonus +16
+2 tier
+5 score
+5,+6 proficiency
+2,+3 magic

Epic tier maximum bonus +19 or higher
+3 tier
+6 or higher score
+7 or higher proficiency
+3 magic



Note, even with the very modest availability of bonuses, above, the bounded accuracy still gets blown out of the water.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
So in 4e we have an Inherent Bonuses rule 5e has since the beginning talked the talk of magic item bonuses being "not needed" is that actually true and How?
Maybe the magic bonus and the tier bonus are the same thing? If using magic bonuses, then treadmill the tier bonus. If without magic bonuses just add the tier bonus directly?

Novice: +0 magic or tier
Hero: +1 magic or tier
Paragon: +2 magic or tier
Epic: +3 magic or tier
 

Azzy

Explorer
At this point I believe many here believe it is doable in principle. We just disagree on how. How about we make it a challenge? NaNoWriMo Style? (Ok, not exactly that). We establish an start point and an end point (could be two weeks, could be a month). The challenge, to write a clone using OGC, four races, four classes, combat rules, skill rules, ten levels of feats and support, and a sample bestiary with ten monsters (1 per level). Then we share back and have the community vote on a poll?
I don't get why you guys just don't hew as closely as possible to 4e to begin with, just to get it all in order and in place, and then fork from there to meet personal preferences.... I mean, it makes sense to have OSRic in place before you start working on Adventures Dark & Deep.
 

doctorbadwolf

Explorer
I don't get why you guys just don't hew as closely as possible to 4e to begin with, just to get it all in order and in place, and then fork from there to meet personal preferences.... I mean, it makes sense to have OSRic in place before you start working on Adventures Dark & Deep.
This makes a lot of sense. A document parsing each of the 4e PHB classes and races, and the general rules, plus enough monsters to run a quick level of a dungeon with a boss fight, using the 5e OGL, would be a basis from which every other 5.4e variant could diverge, while having some common ground for discussions. I do think even THAT conversion should tighten up the numbers treadmill dramatically, but I'd be willing to compromise on that.

Though that isnt where I am thinking about too much... i am concerned how much is +3 added to non-proficient activity Intimidate or Deception use for my Chosen one I have using in my example. I guess it does make her as able as someone with basic proficiency in say Heroic from the default rules. Which hmmmm .
Seems about right to me. If she has decent Cha (and any 4e retro-remix will have ASIs separate from Feats, I imagine), she should be pretty good at those skills. An epic Bard will have full training in every skill in the final tier of play, which feels right to me.

If you feel like a Chosen should have exceptional force of personality, that can be part of the Chosen Epic Destiny. Those will need a different name, obviously, but there's no reason that a 5e chassis can't handle having the Theme/Paragon Path/Epic Destiny layer added to it.

So in 4e we have an Inherent Bonuses rule 5e has since the beginning talked the talk of magic item bonuses being "not needed" is that actually true and How?
It's definitely true that you don't need magic item bonuses in 5e. I have one campaign where no +x items have ever shown up, and it runs just as well as the campaign that has several, and the campaign that has a few. How noticeable the difference is tends to be dependent on how finely tuned the optimization of the PC group is.

Now, for a 5.4e, I'd consider simply making the Tier Bonus not stack with +x magic items? So, you might get ahead of the curve, but there is no need really to have an item that is JUST +x. Instead, we can gather a wishlist of the more interesting magic items of 4e, pair it down to a list of about 100 items at most, and convert them without any +. We can work out a system for determining +/level once we have solid items that should scale well in a simple or at least rational manner.
 

doctorbadwolf

Explorer
Question for anyone intersted.

How do you feel about the expanded weapon properties of 4e? I rather liked all of them, especially Brutal and High Crit. A scimitar, rapier, longsword, etc all really felt different in 4e, both on paper and in play.

How do we feel about how crits should work? I rather like "max damage +1d" but others swear by 5e double dice, while other pine for the days of doubling the whole result.
 

Zardnaar

Adventurer
Prefer 5E crits. Some form of 4E weapon properties should make it in but not gonna bother with the plus 2 and plus 3 parts though.
 

doctorbadwolf

Explorer
Prefer 5E crits. Some form of 4E weapon properties should make it in but not gonna bother with the plus 2 and plus 3 parts though.
I wouldn’t call the differing proficiency bonuses a weapon property, and I agree that having different accuracies between weapons is a bad way to go.

One thing that a 4e remix of any kind needs, IMO, not matter how far toward “clone” you wanna go, is fewer sources of stacking static modifiers.
 

GreyLord

Adventurer
So, not that it is going to make much difference, but I am currently working on a 4e clone with the OGL. After working on it with the original OGL versions...I've come to the conclusion it would be a LOT EASIER simply to use 5e rules (SRD) and create some classes that play in the "STYLE" of 4e.

What I mean is that they use the powers system, or a simulacrum of it, while utilizing the 5e rules. This would be a LOT easier for me to do than from the OGL that I'm using currently.

Thus, I've decided after I've finished with the OGL version which I am creating a clone of 4e, that I will convert some of it to a 5e version and post it up for those who wish to play 5e but with a 4e style of play.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
I don't get why you guys just don't hew as closely as possible to 4e to begin with, just to get it all in order and in place, and then fork from there to meet personal preferences.
It is necessary to plan ahead carefully.

Because mechanics depend on other mechanics, once we build it, it becomes painful or impossible to personalize.

If we want ability scores to be equally balanced with each other, then we must build the system that way from the bottom up.

If we want characters that are easy to customize, then we must build the system that way from the bottom up.

If we want the game to play easily without a grid, then we must build the system that way from the bottom up.

And so on.

Before wasting energy, it is necessary to decide what we want.
 

Yaarel

Explorer
For theater of the mind, it helps to ballpark all distances for weapons and spells as:

‘melee’ (within 3 feet)
‘reach’ (within 10 feet)
‘close’ (within 30 feet)

‘far’ (beyond 30 feet)
‘same plane of existence’

Far ranges that sometimes happen beyond a combat encounter:
within 30 feet (close, move, accurate thrown weapon)
within 100 feet (typical combat encounter, where opponents are within three moves away)
within 300 feet (accurate arrow shot, modern city block, diameter of many castles)
within 1,000 feet (farthest arrow shot, diameter of many ancient townwalls)
within 3,000 feet (1 kilometer, diameter of many largest ancient townwalls)
within 10,000 feet (farthest modern rifle shot)
within 30,000 feet (10 kilometers, diameter of many large medieval cities)
 
Last edited:

Yaarel

Explorer
For 4e, it helps to think in blocks of four levels.

• level 1: class archetype specialization power (at-will, short rest, long-rest)
• level 2: utility (defend, move, detect), skill (background), cultural power (race, region)
• level 3: class power (at-will, short-rest, long-rest, sometimes extra-attack)
• level 4: feat/ability-score customization

This block repeats for levels 5 to 8, and again 9 to 12, 13 to 16, and up.

This 4-level block is what 4e looks like. (Each 10 level tier in 4e goes: block, block, level 1, cap.) (5e wiggles this block around.) In 4e, at-wills and dailies are assigned at level 1, while encounter powers are assigned at level 3, and utilities are assigned at level 2. However, in the spirit of 5e, it is better to allocate any kind power at these levels, whether at-will, encounter, or daily. This means gaining a new spell at a new spell level might be an atwill cantrip or a spell that refreshes after a short rest or a long rest. This fluidity also makes it easier to assign appropriate powers for a Fighter concept, and so on.

The first level of a character creation tends to be front loaded with extra features. In this case, it helps to think of the character as having already gone thru this block at level zero and earlier, thus has a rudimentary version of this block, plus the new first level in the class. In other words, every level 1 character gets a free feat, as well as three class powers including standard and archetype, noncombat skills, a ‘cultural’ power, and so on.



I would like to see a race or ‘cultural’ power plugged somewhere into this block. So, features from race, subrace, region, or special group, that are powerful can come online at higher levels, such as flight, a special attack, or on. One could use a feat for this, but I would rather leave the feat to be ‘nice’ for truly free choice, and build in this cultural advancement for everyone. Maybe at level 2, when one gets some noncombat feature, one can also gain a cultural power.

Likewise, I would like noncombat skills to continue to develop at higher levels, maybe also at level 2 within the block.
 
Last edited:

muppetmuppet

Explorer
I'm not sure what we are trying to fix. Other than feats which are too numerous and 90% of them at least are useless I am not sure what is wrong with 4th edition.
Maybe skill challenges aren't great but that may be just because they are hard to make believable.

What other things are actually wrong with 4e?
 

Yaarel

Explorer
I love 4e. It is my favorite edition of D&D. ‘Errata’ that I would like to improve include.

• Make the abilities (Dexterity, Intelligence, etcetera) more salient and more equal in power.

• Consolidate AC and Reflex into a single defense. Make Perception a formal defense.

• Make power choice fluid. Where 4e had specific usage types (at-will, encounter, daily) at specific levels, it became awkward. Allow any kind of power, when a power becomes available.

• Make 4e depend less on a grid. Use consistent ballpark measurements, and powers friendlier to theater of mind.

• Build Psionics into the core gaming system as a normal part of the game. It handles all mental magic, telekinetic force.

• Make 5e-style feats, equal to a +2 ability score boost.

• More customization, swapping class and race features.

• Continuing to gain powerful race and cultural features at higher levels. (Besides taking a race as class).

• Drop the word ‘race’ from D&D, and instead use ‘ancestry’, ‘heritage’, ‘culture’, or so on.

• Include Clerics for nonpolytheistic spiritual traditions. 5e Xanathars has good wording, Eberron has good play.

• Elf as ‘type’, so different elven ‘cultures’ can have very different mechanics. Compare Dragon, Giant, Elemental, as types.



I am sure I will recall more wishes as I think back to 4e.



This is a pretty good time for everyone to post their wish lists for the 4e update.
 
Last edited:

doctorbadwolf

Explorer
I'm not sure what we are trying to fix. Other than feats which are too numerous and 90% of them at least are useless I am not sure what is wrong with 4th edition.
Maybe skill challenges aren't great but that may be just because they are hard to make believable.

What other things are actually wrong with 4e?
Math. The game is vastly too bloated mathematically, and it is a huge glaring flaw in the system.

It needs less scaling of basic numbers, and vastly fewer stacking sources of static modifiers that can apply to a single resolution. The complexity of numbers, in terms of the number of sources of modifiers, or moving parts, also is one of the main reasons that there are "math fix" feats that turn into feat taxes.

Also, there are later developments that can be retrofitted into the primary game, consolidation of things like very similar powers (and just let classes share some powers) and most players I know would like to see an extra at-will power, and an extra utility power. Maybe a Skill Power as a separate category that doesn't compete with other utility powers.

Many people want to see PHB style classes that can just take the same encounter or daily power multiple times, because they don't want to have to sift through 5 powers every turn.

1/2 level, inherent bonuses, and +x magic item bonuses, are too much for generally little to no benefit.

in short, there is a lot of chaff, and it's not all just redundant or "weak" or boring individual distinct options.
 

Zardnaar

Adventurer
Math. The game is vastly too bloated mathematically, and it is a huge glaring flaw in the system.

It needs less scaling of basic numbers, and vastly fewer stacking sources of static modifiers that can apply to a single resolution. The complexity of numbers, in terms of the number of sources of modifiers, or moving parts, also is one of the main reasons that there are "math fix" feats that turn into feat taxes.

Also, there are later developments that can be retrofitted into the primary game, consolidation of things like very similar powers (and just let classes share some powers) and most players I know would like to see an extra at-will power, and an extra utility power. Maybe a Skill Power as a separate category that doesn't compete with other utility powers.

Many people want to see PHB style classes that can just take the same encounter or daily power multiple times, because they don't want to have to sift through 5 powers every turn.

1/2 level, inherent bonuses, and +x magic item bonuses, are too much for generally little to no benefit.

in short, there is a lot of chaff, and it's not all just redundant or "weak" or boring individual distinct options.
My plan would be eliminate all the +1 bonuses with the exception of +1 weapons. The bonuses are a 1d4, advantage or +2.
 

doctorbadwolf

Explorer
My plan would be eliminate all the +1 bonuses with the exception of +1 weapons. The bonuses are a 1d4, advantage or +2.
I'd go further and say reroll take second, reroll take higher, or 1d4. No static bonuses outside of the basic numbers of the game and your stats, proficiency, etc. But I can compromise on a few sources of +x, as long as we keep the list very very small.
 

Advertisement

Top