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

[Shades of Green]

I apologize for making an unclear post; my question was not about how well these fantasy/myth characters would fit into the D&D 4E rules, but how easy is it to imagine them being drawn in a "dungeon punk" art style (like the PHB's cover).

My question was about art and fashion/atmosphere, not rules.

 

[hong]

I apologize for making an unclear post; my question was not about how well these fantasy/myth characters would fit into the D&D 4E rules, but how easy is it to imagine them being drawn in a "dungeon punk" art style (like the PHB's cover).

My question was about art and fashion/atmosphere, not rules.

Just as easily as they would fit into 3E.

 

[Jack99]

I am just correcting your mistakes.

Maybe you didn't understand my posts. That's okay, no shame in that. It happens.

 

[Derren]

Maybe you didn't understand my posts. That's okay, no shame in that. It happens.

I understand your post perfectly. You (try to) make it look as if 4E is so much better because everything is just a guideline and can easily be changed.

Except that this is not a 4E advantage as you can do the same in 3E. Neither does 4E put more emphasis on teh characters and not the items as like in 3E the PCs are expected to have certain magical items at certain levels and are also expected to fill up their secondary magical item slots rather fast.
So in the end 4E is not different than 3E in this regard.

 

[hong]

I understand your post perfectly. You (try to) make it look as if 4E is so much better because everything is just a guideline and can easily be changed.

Contrary to popular belief, not everyone here is a clone of me.

 

[small pumpkin man]

I understand your post perfectly. You (try to) make it look as if 4E is so much better because everything is just a guideline and can easily be changed.

Except that this is not a 4E advantage as you can do the same in 3E. Neither does 4E put more emphasis on teh characters and not the items as like in 3E the PCs are expected to have certain magical items at certain levels and are also expected to fill up their secondary magical item slots rather fast.
So in the end 4E is not different than 3E in this regard.

Ways 4e is better....
1)class bonus to AC means you don't have to implement one yourself
2)lack of spellcasting with abilities which can duplicate magic item use, meaning using a low magic setting broadens the existing power gaps
3)more equal item dependancy accross the board

and most importantly

4)explanations in the DMG explaining how magic items affect balance, and how one removes items without upsetting the balance.

These mean that yes, it should be much easier to tone down, ramp up, or remove magic items.

Of course removing magic items may lead to completely different problems (like exacerbating the apparent "down to at-wills" problem) but they have fixed the specific problems with removing magic items that were in 3.x.

 

[Derren]

Ways 4e is better....
1)class bonus to AC means you don't have to implement one yourself
2)lack of spellcasting with abilities which can duplicate magic item use, meaning using a low magic setting broadens the existing power gaps
3)more equal item dependancy accross the board

and most importantly

4)explanations in the DMG explaining how magic items affect balance, and how one removes items without upsetting the balance.

These mean that yes, it should be much easier to tone down, ramp up, or remove magic items.

Of course removing magic items may lead to completely different problems (like exacerbating the apparent "down to at-wills" problem) but they have fixed the specific problems with removing magic items that were in 3.x.

Please point me to the DMG example chapter about magic item balance. Seeing all the secondary magical items and utility spells to check if they overlap or not would also be nice.

 

[Jack99]

I understand your post perfectly. You (try to) make it look as if 4E is so much better because everything is just a guideline and can easily be changed.

Except that this is not a 4E advantage as you can do the same in 3E. Neither does 4E put more emphasis on teh characters and not the items as like in 3E the PCs are expected to have certain magical items at certain levels and are also expected to fill up their secondary magical item slots rather fast.
So in the end 4E is not different than 3E in this regard.

You have it backwards. You are the one who criticizes the guidelines of magic items in 4e, even though your beloved 3.x had exactly the same guidelines. As I pointed out.

4e will still be too rich for most of these. But with 4e turning more towards the character's abilities being internal, rather than granted from items, it should actually be easier to model these examples than it was in 3e.

then you said:

4E still expects you to have +X Magical weapons and armor at certain levels and also expects (but theoretically not requires you to if you trust the Devs on this) to have filled all your magic item slots at the end of the Heroic Tier.

and then I pointed out that this was not a rule, merely a guideline.

Okay, so the game actually has guidelines on how much magic gear the DM should give his players, in order to keep the combats balanced and therefore fun.

Really, what were they thinking, giving us advice on how to do things. Bad design, really bad design.

.

It does seem that you indeed haven't understood my posts, or maybe your own posts. The magic item distribution is not a rule in 4e, just like it wasn't in 3.x. It is a guideline, nothing else.

Either way, I never tried to make 4e look better by invoking Rule 0, that would be an Oberoni fallacy, and thus quite worthless in a serious interweb debate... Besides, I don't need to make 4e look better, it does a fine job on it's own.

 

[Shades of Green]

As a side note, I'm still trying to find all these "bling" pictures that are mentioned.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/108652.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/111106.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/111108.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/111128.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/112909.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/112911.jpg

The closest to "bling" is the last one, with an electrically charged axe. But even then, there's weapon, armour, shield, and nothing else. The dragonborn one is downright minimalist.

I suppose there's this:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/111089.jpg
which includes a couple potions and a backpack.

And there's this:
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/RacesNClasses_Gallery/111145.jpg
which shows a fighter getting fancy, elaborate armour around epic level. (But really, he should have some nice armour by epic level.)

4E art surprises me; almost all of the images posted are good, relatively free of "dungeon-bling" and generally better in quality than those of the 3E core-books. The only exception is this, with too many right or near-right angles on the armor, axe and helmet IMHO, looking a bit like a robot; but even than it isn't THAT bad.

 

[Knightlord]

Please point me to the DMG example chapter about magic item balance. Seeing all the secondary magical items and utility spells to check if they overlap or not would also be nice.

Perhaps you should buy the book when it becomes available and check it out yourself, Derren.