Is 4th edition getting soft? - edited for friendly content :)

[Reynard]

Dr Fear's cockatrice. The level 4 PCs heard rumours that this crime boss could turn his victims to stone and even found a statue. One PC was bitten twice by the albino's pet in the final battle but made the (easy) save both times. At this level there was really no defence or recourse if a PC had been stoned.

Fun. Seems fair. Easy saves are good because a) the player doesn't know how easy they are, so they are still scared, and b) even if they do know how easy they are, there's still that 5% chance looming over them. Do they feel luckY

A medusa assassin ambushed the PCs in retaliation for their operations against Daask. There was no warning whatsoever, just a hard spot check to see through the disguise. Three (out of four) had to save. The one who failed didn't get to take a single action. Stone to Flesh is a level 6 spell and hence unavailable in Eberron, though Stone Salve can be purchased. The group paid the 4000gp for it, but the PC failed his system shock and died. The player, understandably a bit hacked off, elected to make up a new PC at that point.

Old school. Awesome.

A (deceased) wizard's library, guarded by a logic puzzle. The wizard's programmed image warned of severe consequences for any mistakes. A floating black skull with a black gem in its forehead cast Finger of Death if the wrong answer was given. It fired once for a single error, and twice at the PC trying to prise the gem out (old skool!). All saves passed.

As long as there was an option to bypass or ignore it without stopping the whole adventure, I don't see a problem with this. Players making informed choices is always better than not.

 

[ptolemy18]

Um, hello, I never said those things in any of my quotes. You are taking peoples quotes from the anti SoD crowd and putting my name on them.

That is not cool.

I'm sorry, man. I didn't mean to imply that you were anti-SoD. I was being grouchy about the content of the Wizards quotes, not about your post... sorry I didn't make it clear.

 

[ptolemy18]

Oh, it's not hard to add some numbers. Even I somehow got the basics after 7 years of D&D 3rd edition.

What's hard is accounting for all the special modifiers that apply to your AC.

""Hm, do you have Magic Circle vs Evil? Am I still in range? Oh, I have a Ring of Protection +1, so that grants me only +1. Okay, your Magic Vestment gives me +3 enhancement bonus, but my Armor is already a +2. I Combat expertise for 3. Than there is the Bards Insprire Heroics, did it give me a bonus to AC or did I dream this up? Okay, Barskins up, with my Amulet of Natural Armor +2 this is only a net +1 improvement, and then there is the Ioun Stone whcih gives me +1 insight to AC. Oh, and I have Uncanny Dodge (Dex Bonus to AC). Ah, the last monster drained 3 points of my Dex. Okay, no, a 17 barely misses my flat-footed AC.)
Well, it was part of the fun (and there were a few good strategies to minimize the overhead, too), at least for a while. But I don't really think I miss it - if it's really gone.

Well, true, it does get pretty confusing. :/ I'm not married to the many zillions of different kinds of AC bonuses. I still think that the diagonal-movement rules are more awkward in play, however, because diagonal movement is something that comes up all the time, whereas touch and flat-footed ACs are something that, comparatively, doesn't come up very much. Comparatively.

The diagonal thing, although it's not the subject of the thread I guess, is one of my pet peeves because it changes diagonal movement from a very quick "step, step, step, step" to "step, step... wait... was this the first diagonal or the second diagonal?... um... step."

 

[Raven Crowking]

I thought it was a great analogy.

Of course, nobody has yet to address my thoughts about how SoD spells can really shaft a player posted a few pages back. (Here specifically.) But, hey... I guess "real players" don't mind sitting around doing nothing for a whole evening because of failing one save...

Didn't you read Mallus's post?

Since you always get to keep playing, what does it matter if you use the same avatar? Why are you a tough guy if you re-enter the game with the dog instead of the shoe? Why are you a wuss if you prefer to keep the shoe?

So, either SoD can "really shaft a player" (and the Monopoly analogy is dead wrong) or you "always get to keep playing", so what does it matter if you use the same character?

Personally, I think that the Monopoly analogy is dead wrong, but that there is no difference between dying due to a SoD effect or any other effect so far as your point goes.

RC

 

[gothmaugCC]

The diagonal thing, although it's not the subject of the thread I guess, is one of my pet peeves because it changes diagonal movement from a very quick "step, step, step, step" to "step, step... wait... was this the first diagonal or the second diagonal?... um... step."

Thats why My players and I switched to a hexagonal grid map. Makes things alot easier, especially "magic circles" and other round spell effects.

Then again, we don't let counting squares slow us down. Half the time its a real quick "I move to here, ok?" with the DM saying "Fine". WE don't let quibbling over +/- 5ft slow down the action

 

[Aaron L]

What I am very much afraid of is that 4E is going in a direction where "even Fighters have magic powers now!", overawesomeified WoW/anime approach, such as the "Dragon Tail Cut" thing, th oversized Cloud-like glowing magic swords, goat-horned Teiflings as a core race in the PHB (may as well include catgirls as far as I'm concerned.)


I had been very much liking everything I saw about 4E until just recently. Elves are now ALL primitive wood-elves, with all of the Tolkien "beings of great power" elements cut out?

Oh my God, YUCK!

Fighters get Book of Nine Swords style "Super Moves" that equal Fireballs and Lightning Bolts?

Gag me with a longsword.

I'm really afraid 4E is even MORE of a move away from a simulation of sword and sorcery fantasy stories into a self-referencing modern D&D fantasy power trip. While I'm all for anime and WoW style videogame influence in my D&D, making the basic core of D&D pretty much a clone of Inuyasha, WoW, and Final Fantasy is NOT the style I want my D&D to be.

I'm still being cautiously optimistic about 4E, but I'm afraid my optimism is beginning to slip drastically witch each passing tidbit I hear. And that makes me very sad, because while the early things I had heard had made me very excited, the latest things I have heard have made me very sad.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

What I am very much afraid of is that 4E is going in a direction where "even Fighters have magic powers now!", overawesomeified WoW/anime approach, such as the "Dragon Tail Cut" thing, th oversized Cloud-like glowing magic swords, goat-horned Teiflings as a core race in the PHB (may as well include catgirls as far as I'm concerned.)


I had been very much liking everything I saw about 4E until just recently. Elves are now ALL primitive wood-elves, with all of the Tolkien "beings of great power" elements cut out?

Oh my God, YUCK!

Fighters get Book of Nine Swords style "Super Moves" that equal Fireballs and Lightning Bolts?

Gag me with a longsword.

I'm really afraid 4E is even MORE of a move away from a simulation of sword and sorcery fantasy stories into a self-referencing modern D&D fantasy power trip. While I'm all for anime and WoW style videogame influence in my D&D, making the basic core of D&D pretty much a clone of Inuyasha, WoW, and Final Fantasy is NOT the style I want my D&D to be.

I'm still being cautiously optimistic about 4E, but I'm afraid my optimism is beginning to slip drastically witch each passing tidbit I hear. And that makes me very sad, because while the early things I had heard had made me very excited, the latest things I have heard have made me very sad.

Where is the relation to this topic.? I can understand if some people need to vent and voice their concerns, but it's better to find a thread that is related to their actual critics. Because even if Fighters would get a "Sword Fireball" power, this has no indication that the game would become "soft".

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Didn't you read Mallus's post?



So, either SoD can "really shaft a player" (and the Monopoly analogy is dead wrong) or you "always get to keep playing", so what does it matter if you use the same character?

Personally, I think that the Monopoly analogy is dead wrong, but that there is no difference between dying due to a SoD effect or any other effect so far as your point goes.

RC

I think the point is that there's two things going on. First is that in any game, if you die, your character gets replaced by another character of approximately equal power level. If you like, you could just erase the name and pencil in another, but keep the character more or less identical. After level 9, you don't even have to change the name. So save-or-die is irrelevant. The interesting thing isn't whether you die, it's what you do on the adventure. Second, lots of people put a lot of investment into their characters, develop them, and become attached to playing them. So having that all be wiped out by a save-or-die on round 1 is ridiculously arbitrary considering what their play goals are. For that style of play, save-or-die is unwanted.

The point is, Mallus and Jhulae both get to the same conclusion--save-or-die is teh suck--from very different starting points. That probably indicates that save-or-die effects are not suitable for a wide variety of playing styles. In fact, I'd argue that they're only suitable for the corner case of "I want the chance that my character will randomly drop dead due to circumstances beyond my control." But that's not a majority position. Not even a plurality, I think. And even that position breaks down at level 9 when save-or-die changes from a threat to an inconvenience.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

The point is, Mallus and Jhulae both get to the same conclusion--save-or-die is teh suck--from very different starting points. That probably indicates that save-or-die effects are not suitable for a wide variety of playing styles. In fact, I'd argue that they're only suitable for the corner case of "I want the chance that my character will randomly drop dead due to circumstances beyond my control." But that's not a majority position. Not even a plurality, I think. And even that position breaks down at level 9 when save-or-die changes from a threat to an inconvenience.

Yeah, as much as two people coming to the conclusion that save-or-die works fine for them from very different points of view indicates that the mechanic is perfectly suitable for a wide variety of playing styles, and that only corner cases of "I want my character to be unkillable" will find it unsuitable.

 

[Remathilis]

Deleted