D&D 4E How would 4E improve my game?

[Serensius]

Thanks for the input

I've skimmed through the Pre-Release Rules Compilation and I have mixed feelings about 4E.
*schnip*

Dungeon-bling Well put, sir. I think that pretty much sums up my thoughts on some of the character art (especially the one on the PHB-cover). What happened to drawing characters as they actually would look in a medieval-ish world? I agree about the combat-focus too. Here's hoping they will provide more fluff for different things and more crunch than just the skill challenges for situations that don't involve whacking ugly humanoids with a stick. The rules seem too focused on creating a balanced combat system, rather than something that's rooted in a believable, flavorful world.

Regarding soloing, small parties: I think it will be a lot easier than 3E, in fact. With the new xp-rules and the 'one-monster-per-party-member' philosophy, as well as actual guidelines to how much damage a monster should approximately deal at a certain level, it seems very easy to adjust/scale down according to your amount of players. Minions and healing surges seem well-suited for this type of play, too. There was a post on here somewhere about someone who ran a solo-adventure for a warlock or wizard character, and it seemed like it went pretty well.

Also, I totally agree about the 'Lance of Faith'-BS. Seems too much like (dare I say it) WoW. It's just a little hard to imagine a servant of a god going around blasting people with big, shiny rays. Glad no-one in my group ever play as a cleric.

 

[Shades of Green]

Unless you have players with their hearts set on being something like a Druid, Monk, Barbarian or Bard, the core books should have everything you need.

I don't think I'll need any of these; a witch or shaman class might be needed, but I could probably create it by myself long before it'll be published in PHB3 or so.

I'm actually wondering about this as well. I wanted to make a solo pre-4E adventure to introduce my girlfriend to the game, but found myself having difficulty designing interesting combat options. Like 3E, these situations will hopefully be easier to design for at slightly higher levels, but it's about my biggest worry so far, as I'm unsure how large a group I'll be able to get to play regularly(my regulars have joined the Marines...).

Hmmm... don't Healing Surges make this easier, now that you don't have to add the mandatory healer you had to have in almost any party in previous editions?

Long term effects seem to be out for the most part, with the elimination of level drain in particular actually being one of 4E's design tenants. Admit it; level drain sucks. I've never seen it do anything other than frustrate players.

Level Drain was a very annoying mechanism, and replacing it with something more elegant is nice. However, removing all or most long-term (read: lasting more than the encounter) effects is BAD for the suspension of disbelief. Some things should have lasting consequences, especially poison and disease.

 

[Derren]

WHA??!?!

From everything I've read, 4E's magic is much more balanced than 3.5's. There's a reason fighters are really awful after about level 7, and that's because magic starts making them obsolete. Who needs a meatshield with a sword when you can cast Shapechange and otherwise command reality to bend to your whim?

One can say that magic is more balanced because it is nerfed into oblivion. But your example is a bad one as in 4E fighters will be balanced by getting spells too.

 

[Shades of Green]

I thought that the various fighter abilities would be more akin to special moves and sword forms - tricks of the trade of a skilled warrior - rather than actual magic spells. At least this is how it looks from the v2.1 Pre-Release Rules Compilation and its fighter.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I thought that the various fighter abilities would be more akin to special moves and sword forms - tricks of the trade of a skilled warrior - rather than actual magic spells. At least this is how it looks from the v2.1 Pre-Release Rules Compilation and its fighter.

Yes, that's the idea.

Higher levels (Paragon and Epic tiers) might make them a little more "fantastic" (Wuxia? Quasi-Magical), but they will still be grounded on doing fightery stuff. How fantastic they actually will feel or look like remains to be seen...

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Something I think you need to be aware of is that there has been a very fundamental shift in the principle of 4e, compared to 3e.

4e's rules are focused on the story and the game first and foremost - not believability or the suspension of disbelief.

What this means is that it's better for the game that you can retrain your skills and abilities - after all, what's the point of a 20th level character with a power from 1st level? They're never going to use it as it's likely to be much less effective, so why not just take it off the character sheet? It also means that when designing a character who starts at 20th level, you don't need to worry about how they got there - all of their powers are appropriate to their level.

To take an example of how this serves the story, I'll use an example from the TV show Buffy The Vamprie Slayer. In series 1 and 2, Willow uses her hacking skills a fair amount to gain information. Later in the show, her skill in magic is much more important to the story, so her hacking skills are effectively 'taken off the sheet' as she's not using them. It doesn't stretch credibility - it just serves a good story.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Another point - if you can learn heavy armor profiency or 2 spells of a new spell level in one level (or, say, one week?), why couldn't your training atrophy at a similar rate?

 

[Shades of Green]

I have no problem with a low-level power gets replaced by an improved higher-level power of the same kind - such as Mage Hand replaced by Telekinesis or Healing Word replaced by a stronger healing power. The powers aren't gone in this way - they're upgraded. But I won't like the idea of Mage Hand being replaced by Fireball - telekinetic power are too cool to lose at any level. The same goes to various other cool utility spells and powers.

 

[Knightlord]

One can say that magic is more balanced because it is nerfed into oblivion. But your example is a bad one as in 4E fighters will be balanced by getting spells too.

Umm...I don't think Fighters receive spells. Unless, of course, they multiclass into a caster class (Wizard, Warlock, Cleric, Paladin).
If you're talking about "Exploits" then, yeah, they get those, but those are not magical in nature and certainly not spells.

 

[Derren]

If you're talking about "Exploits" then, yeah, they get those, but those are not magical in nature and certainly not spells.

There isn't really a difference between spells and exploits. Both are limited resources and both do the same things. And the easiest way to explain why exploits are limited per day is to say that they are Ki powered which is simply a other way of saying its magic.

The biggest difference is that spellcasters get the ritual feat for free but we do not know if fighters can also get this feat.
When you compare 4E spells and 4E exploits you will see that the difference is in name only. The Lich can even use his spellmastery power to recharge exploits.