D&D 4E Mike Mearls on how 4E could have looked

[Lanefan]

Alright, so here was the last session I GMed in 5e. Of note:

1) This was an Epic Tier Aliens Invasion scenario with actual Far Realm "Grays", War of the Worlds type bio-constructs (like pilotable golems, but made of organics), and their mother ship. However, instead of harvesting bio-material, they were harvesting time, slowly turning back the clock of this prime material plane.

Yoink! Not sure how I'd work it in, but that's an excellent plot idea!

As for how this played out, the only thing I can say is that there's no way in hell I'd allow that Diviner power or anything like it in any game I ever ran: I don't in general like any* effects that overturn or retcon die rolls after they've been made, and this one seems pretty blatant.

* - other than the rarest of exceptions e.g. someone who doesn't know they've picked up a wish from a luckblade says "I wish that didn't happen!" right after some disastrous roll...

 

[pemerton]

in all editions casters have - or can have, depending on spells known - the advantage; and I've never claimed otherwise.

Other posters (eg [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION], [MENTION=6780330]Parmandur[/MENTION], [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION]) seemed to be disagreeing with me when I said that in this respect 4e differs from 5e (because what you say is not generally the case in 4e, at least as I have experienced it).

If in fact they do agree with you that in 5e casters have the advantage in these non-combat, no-time-pressure situations, then most of the discussion is over. Because that's the whole difference I've been talking about with the discussion of DC-by-level, skill challenges and the like.

I can't see how this would be any different in 4e than in 5e or 1e or 3e.

Then reread some of my posts in this thread, some actual play reports, etc.
[MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] has already rehearsed the bulk of it in a post not far upthread. It's not rocket science - this is RPG design tech that was pioneered over 20 years ago.

 

[Manbearcat]

Reforging a magic hammer, certainly - when it comes to the enchantment part. Reforging an ordinary hammer, or the actual smithing of a hammer to be enchanted later? Unless you've got blacksmith in your background, good luck with that no matter what class you are.

Beyond the single reforging example, in all editions casters have - or can have, depending on spells known - the advantage; and I've never claimed otherwise. It breaks down by pillar a bit in terms of what they have and how possible it is to slow them down:

Social pillar: casters sometimes have big advantages here with charm-like spells* and some disguise and-or illusion options; but these can sometimes be reined in.
Exploration pillar: casters have massive advantages here - divinations, knowledge skills, transport spells, concealment spells, item knowledge, etc. etc. - that are hard to impossible to rein in.
Combat pillar: casters have some advantages here but using tactics and-or houserules noted above** this is the pillar where they can most effectively be reined in.

* - where I say 'spells' here, include 'rituals' too.
** - beyond the simple (and boring) GM/setting fiats of anti-magic fields and the like.

And I can't see how this would be any different in 4e than in 5e or 1e or 3e.

I can help with the bolded and underlined. This is how it comes together:

1) Combat Roles - Classes each have a suite of inherent features/abilities, the intersection of which creates extremely distinct, and extremely potent, combat roles. They also have secondary roles and can diversify to make them more potent, but fundamentally, each character is now a Magic the Gathering Deck Archetype that has inherent answers to problems.

2) Group Synergy - The combat mechanics (from enemy design, to enemy group synergy, to enemy group synergy or lackthereoff with terrain features, to unlocking Surges/swings in battle and the actual PC role mechanics themselves) create a scenario where force multiplication through heady play is more important than ever.

3) Symmetrical Resource Scheduling - Everyone being on the same resource schedule means that there is no inherent intra-combat or intra-adventuring day tension between classes (the Milestone mechanic augments this).

4) System maths + broad and potent skills + ease of access to them + genre logic + potent noncombat utility powers - All of this comes together to ensure that archetypes will be competent in their archetypal shtick and can easily push that further and diversify it though Feats/Utility Powers/Magic Item Augments (or Boons etc).

5) Noncombat Conflict Resolution and Fail Forward - Scene based play ensures relative parity in deployed resources as it terminates the "win condition" phenomenon inherent to powerful, gamestate-changing Wizard spells. Further, Fail Forward augments the competence factor as failure now means "story loss/setback and something interesting happens to change the situation dynamically and adversely on the ~ 33 % of your failed action declarations" rather than "compound probability maths say your an incompetent buffoon."

 

[Manbearcat]

Yoink! Not sure how I'd work it in, but that's an excellent plot idea!

As for how this played out, the only thing I can say is that there's no way in hell I'd allow that Diviner power or anything like it in any game I ever ran: I don't in general like any* effects that overturn or retcon die rolls after they've been made, and this one seems pretty blatant.

* - other than the rarest of exceptions e.g. someone who doesn't know they've picked up a wish from a luckblade says "I wish that didn't happen!" right after some disastrous roll...

Personally, I think the Diviners Portent ability is the coolest class design element in 5e. But, as you can see, its unbelievably powerful...especially at endgame with the way it synergizes.

Personally, if I was a Diviner PC in a game, I'd much rather give up some of my spells/features than give up Portent. It hooks right into the "see into the future and twist fate" aspect of the class beautifully and I'm sure its terrifically fun to deploy (to basically the effect of ensuring 3 crucial outcomes per adventuring day.

 

[pemerton]

Mythologically, magic is usually an act of a God, not a wizard. When it is a wizard, its usually not combat magic, but either complicated ritual, artifice, or slow.

<snip>

D&D wizards more resemble some strange superhero with a really oddly-specific set of powers than they do the typical wizards of myth and legend. (Although source material varies widely, some wizard-y culture heroes do some pretty wild stuff.)

<snip>

Generally speaking, the wizarding business doesn't seem to be about fighting. I'm not honestly sure about the timing, but I've seen others argue that this wizard-as-artillery thing is a modern (for a very broad use of modern) invention that coincides with the advent of gunpowder in warfare, particularly artillery.

In the context of D&D, Chainmail's lightning bolts, fireballs and cloudkills seem to be straightforward fantasy variants on artillery, ballistas and poison gas. I don't think it mattered, in that context, that they had no real mythological resonance.

Of literary wizard, the one I know who does the most blasting and shielding is Dr Strange. In MHRP, he's statted with Supreme Sorcery (naturally) and a Mystic Blast. (And some other stuff, but they're the workhorse abilities.)

 

[pemerton]

Personally, I think the Diviners Portent ability is the coolest class design element in 5e. But, as you can see, its unbelievably powerful...especially at endgame with the way it synergizes.

Personally, if I was a Diviner PC in a game, I'd much rather give up some of my spells/features than give up Portent. It hooks right into the "see into the future and twist fate" aspect of the class beautifully and I'm sure its terrifically fun to deploy (to basically the effect of ensuring 3 crucial outcomes per adventuring day.

The invoker/wizard in my 4e game has some similar abilities - the main one I'm thinking of at the moment is the reroll a failed attack roll if it's an action point-enabled attack. (From the Divine Philosopher paragon path.)

Interrupts are the most obvious mechanical devices for implementing prophecy/foresight into D&D.

In my Cortex+ Heroic game, the wizardly PC has an ability to take a die from the Doom Pool and add it to his pool - when it goes back to the Doom Pool it steps up unless he spends a PP, in which case it steps down. The flavour is that he can see the doom that's coming and either embrace it, or do things to hold it off!

 

[Manbearcat]

Is the idea to have a complication table perhaps .... I personally like how some 4e spells had repercussions when cast In particular those from the Malediction Invoker.

Malediction Invokers make for great thematic witches.

The invoker/wizard in my 4e game has some similar abilities - the main one I'm thinking of at the moment is the reroll a failed attack roll if it's an action point-enabled attack. (From the Divine Philosopher paragon path.)

Interrupts are the most obvious mechanical devices for implementing prophecy/foresight into D&D.

In my Cortex+ Heroic game, the wizardly PC has an ability to take a die from the Doom Pool and add it to his pool - when it goes back to the Doom Pool it steps up unless he spends a PP, in which case it steps down. The flavour is that he can see the doom that's coming and either embrace it, or do things to hold it off!

Yup. All awesome!

Through Death's Eyes is a similar one in Dungeon World...but its for a Fighter (winning)!

Through Death’s Eyes

When you go into battle, roll+WIS.

✴ On a 10+, name someone who will live and someone who will die.

✴ On a 7-9, name someone who will live or someone who will die. Name NPCs, not player characters. The GM will make your vision come true, if it’s even remotely possible.

✴ On a 6- you see your own death and consequently take -1 ongoing throughout the battle.

 

[Garthanos]

"compound probability maths say you're an incompetent buffoon."

I identify that problem as the Legolas "JUST SAY NO TO" downing the Behemoth problem.

 

[Parmandur]

OK, this is the first time in this thread that anyone has posted that the way 5e is "intended" to work is by having the GM block a high level wizard player's capabilities in various ways.

Personally I don't enjoy that sort of play, either as GM and player. So let me note another strength of 4e not yet commented on in this thread: it preserves an intraparty balance of mechanical effectiveness even when every player is doing his/her thing in accordance with his/her resources resulting from PC build.

EDIT: I saw this:

With likes from [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] and [MENTION=6780330]Parmandur[/MENTION]. So just to be clear - is it now uncontroversial that in fact, in a whole suite of non-combat situations (which would include something "no pressure" like reforging a hammer at one's leisure) 5e spellcasters are more effective than martial PCs?

Because that's certainly not true in 4e. But when I've been asserting that the two systems are different in this respect, I thought that was widely denied.

So I'm confused.

The game is intended to be played with a human adjudicator who crafts challenges to help his party members get their respective chances to shine. That human element is key to the who game.

 

[Lanefan]

Personally, I think the Diviners Portent ability is the coolest class design element in 5e. But, as you can see, its unbelievably powerful...especially at endgame with the way it synergizes.

Personally, if I was a Diviner PC in a game, I'd much rather give up some of my spells/features than give up Portent. It hooks right into the "see into the future and twist fate" aspect of the class beautifully and I'm sure its terrifically fun to deploy (to basically the effect of ensuring 3 crucial outcomes per adventuring day.

Question: do you ever run Diviners against the party?

Still don't like this sort of retcon-giving ability in any form.