Pretty sure there's always going to be demand. I've modified 5e on FG to run a bit like 4e, but it's not really the same (nor should it be).Curious about people’s thoughts on this. I always liked the tactical aspects of D&D 4e, though didn’t play much of it myself. I think in a lot of ways, 4e suffered due to marketing and the fact that it was so different from D&D 3.5e, yet had the same name.
I’m sure there were many other issues that 4e had which turned away gamers, but I am curious now if there is demand for another game, which takes the best of 4e, and is designed and marketed as a “tactical” RPG. That is to say, an RPG with emphasis on grid-based combat, with depth for character creation, “powers” chosen at different levels (unique to the classes), and of course, a functional “social”/RP mechanics, with related skills, etc.
Hadn't heard of Gubat Banwa so thanks for the link! I have LANCER (hard and electronic copy); have a group willing to play over the holidays. I also joined the KS for Role so looking forward to playing that online. I also downloaded ICON but haven't played it.I already mentioned LANCER and Gubat Banwa, both heavily inspired by 4e, but Tom Parkinson-Morgan (LANCER) has also released a playtest version of the ICON RPG, which uses some of the tactical mechanics of LANCER, together with narrative framework borrowed from Blades in the Dark. The feel of the setting is very much a techno-magical one, with angel-summoning gunslingers, shadow-teleporting assassins and lighting-throwing spellblades. The grid-based combat design has a strong Final Fantasy Tactics influence, but with the same kind of pushes, marks and in-combat healing you'd see in 4e.
Im assuming folks are thinking of the marks, and push, and blast elements of 4E that are unique to that edition. I'd love to hear more from folks on this tho.
I've played in multiple campaigns for 13th Age, 4E and 3.5, PF1, PF2, Savage Worlds, Fate and AD&D. I've also got 100+ hours of Gloomhaven under my belt, so I've feeling pretty much the target person for this question!When I specifically want to spend hours on fantasy themed tactical combat, I usually turn to Gloomhaven, rather than an RPG.
I'd agree with your rankings.I've played in multiple campaigns for 13th Age, 4E and 3.5, PF1, PF2, Savage Worlds, Fate and AD&D. I've also got 100+ hours of Gloomhaven under my belt, so I've feeling pretty much the target person for this question!
I strongly enjoy tactical group play -- and by that I don't mean just "pieces on a board", I mean the need for a group to consider each other's strengths, and to significantly require team coordination to be highly effective. Of the games in this list, I'd rank the order as:
Gloomhaven has specific rules on NOT sharing plans, because the entire game is about tactical teamwork. I played the main campaign at level +2, and at that level if you tried to do your own thing, you would fail, almost certainly.
- Everything else (SW might head the list)
A very typical round might have conversation: "I'm not going as fast as I can, but I'm going pretty fast and I can be the target for most of their attacks if you can move slowly" "Ahh, not sure I can move slow enough, I'll plan to go invisible then if I am faster than you"
For 4E, you don't need that level of coordination for most encounters, but it makes things very smooth if you do, but for big encounters, it's not uncommon for our group to plan 10 minutes on what we expect to do the first round, and powers that help your team move around, give them extra abilities and so on.
A very typical round might have conversation: "Keep that 3x3 square open, I'm going to daze those two bodyguards in it, but it's not ally friendly" "Hey, delay for me then; I'll move Janet out of that space and have a good chance of sliding the boss into the zone for you"
PF2 has a number of classes who do operate pretty independently; but it does benefit significantly from a bit of planning. I think mostly because the game is harder than other current D&D versions by quite a bit, so even small tactical considerations make a big difference.
Yes, totally. 13th Age has easily the best monsters that are ready to go, but 4E made customization and creation of unique, fun, tactically interesting monsters so smooth.(the monster builder for 4e was the greatest tool ever. So easy to make new monsters).
Absolutely. Tell me this example of play doesn't evoke the FFT battle grid...But I will also point out that a lot of these designers aren't necessarily pointing to WoW as their computer game inspiration - as was something of a rallying accusation against 4e - but, rather, to JRPGs, particularly games like Final Fantasy Tactics.
One of my best memories of 4e was the comraderie of D&D Encounters. That group at the local store became my house group for many years.This is the easiest edition I have ever run as a GM. Session preps were cake.
You know what? I am sick and tired of waiting for someone else to come out with a version of the game that I want. 4e works great! It's not perfect, but no edition ever is.
So what if there is no new material to support it? This is the easiest edition I have ever run as a GM. Session preps were cake. I still have all my books, plus the magazines I downloaded while my DDI subscription was active. And anything I am miss is probably in pdf on one of the DriveThru stores.
No, I already have the tactical game like 4e. It's 4e. And I am going to make it my own, for me. Finally, I can have all the rules and components I want to use, consolidated and updated in one place. Probably gonna make some changes, too. Why? Because that is what we do since 1974! We homebrew!
View attachment 146347
But now we have nicer tools.
I never really considered the gimmick-loaded 4e a tactical game; but every version of D&D has been a combat-focused game with few real options.
Zweihander, my current go-to system, is a lovely tactical game which also handles social situations well. It is incredibly lethal, fast, and grim.
I think there's a huge difference between detailed combat and tactical combat. I wouldn't rate Savage Worlds at all for "tactical" combat. It's not inherently particularly tactical, despite being mini-friendly. Twilight 2000 I haven't played the new version of, but I'd be shocked if the combat was in any way actually tactical.Newest edition of Twilight 2k has incredibly detailed combat. Savage World has miniature rules baked into it's DNA and is basically a RPG/skirmish miniatures game. Fragged Empire was created to feel like a FPS.
The only grid-based combat game with "powers" chosen at different levels is 4e. So if you're asking if people want more 4e, I think the real answer is "do you want to bring a new game to the market that's a retro-clone of 4e?"
And I will add that LANCER, ICON and Gubat Banwa all play on a grid (LANCER also works well on hexes) and all have different "powers" chosen at each level (and more mix-and-match modularity than 4e did). They're true successors to 4e and it always annoys me that people talk about them like they don't exist.Whereas 4E, and, notably, Lancer, are extremely tactical in a genuine sense. I think Lancer shows people would still like something like that, to be honest.