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

OK on this "I would’ve much preferred the ability to adopt any role within the core 4 by giving players a big choice at level 1, an option that placed an overlay on every power you used or that gave you a new way to use them."
Basically have Source Specific Powers and less class powers. But I think combining that with having BIG differing stances to dynamically switch role might be a better idea so that your hero can adjust role to circumstance. I have to defend this NPC right now vs I have to take down the big bad right now vs I have to do minion cleaning right now, I am inspiring allies in my interesting way, who need it right now.

and the obligatory
Argghhhh on this. " I wanted classes to have different power acquisition schedules"

And thematic differences seemed to have been carried fine.

 

[Lanefan]

From the get go in 4e in the PHB you were exposed to a Paragon path and Epic Destiny and players may think of their characters in terms of that. Quite honestly the most basic Epic Destiny is the Demi-god (and arguably a very sound choice in the game too - recommended by the handbooks). The game at that point help establish some shared fiction. In some sense even ignoring the mechanics became narratively part of how you defeat the Demogorgon in high level and the like.

The problem with things like Paragon path and Epic Destiny IMO is that they force players to think way too far ahead at or around the char-gen phase...and that they also put players in the mindset that their PCs are of course going to survive long enough to reach these fine ends.

It's an extension of the same issue I had with 3e where players would plan out their PC's whole 1-20 progression and development before the end of session 0, and then expect it to happen.

I'd far rather have these sort of things arise naturally out of the ongoing run of play, if they are to arise at all, and maybe get worked into the fiction as the game goes along. Or maybe not - not everyone's dreams come true. In the current game I play in, one of my PCs has a long-term goal of getting a Senate seat or maybe even becoming Empress (it's a quasi-Roman culture) but there's no guarantee whatsoever that any of this will ever happen...and nor should there be, and nor should there be any in-built expectations that it will.

Unfortunately, Paths and Destinies come with - or certainly imply - expectations of success that really shouldn't be there.

 

[Parmandur]

I keep saying that this is a problem with 3e/4e/PF and you keep focusing on 4e, trying to turn this into a “vs 4e Edition war”. But this isn’t 2008 and I have zero interest in that kind of discussion...

Honestly, it is still somewhat of a problem in 5E, as they didn't kill Feats dead as they ought to have done.

 

[Shasarak]

And, here again, THIS is the problem. The cleric spends some money and a spell slot and poof, problem solved. The fighter wants to do the same thing, and now he has to spend an entire adventure faffing about.

THIS is the problem? You have a chance to do something truly epic by wrassling Death into returning your dead friend to life and the problem is that you actually have to play it out rather then making an Athletics check and spending 1000gp so you dont have to "faff about"?

What I am hearing is that you want your character to "do" epic things with the proviso that you do not have to actually do epic things, just say that you have done them. Is that more or less correct?

presumably one where the dead PC's player is warming the pines.

My fake answer to this is, that he should have played a better game so his loser character did not die then.

My actual answer to this is, that it is a complicated topic that probably should at least be mentioned in session 0 so that Players and DM can at least recognise that character death could happen and what does everyone want to do about it if it does happen.

 

[Hussar]

THIS is the problem? You have a chance to do something truly epic by wrassling Death into returning your dead friend to life and the problem is that you actually have to play it out rather then making an Athletics check and spending 1000gp so you dont have to "faff about"?

What I am hearing is that you want your character to "do" epic things with the proviso that you do not have to actually do epic things, just say that you have done them. Is that more or less correct?



My fake answer to this is, that he should have played a better game so his loser character did not die then.

My actual answer to this is, that it is a complicated topic that probably should at least be mentioned in session 0 so that Players and DM can at least recognise that character death could happen and what does everyone want to do about it if it does happen.

Your assumption here is that every DM would go ahead and create an adventure where you go and wrestle death instead of just looking at the player and saying, "No." Which, IME, is FAR more likely. Very, very few DM's IME are going to just drop whatever adventure they've got prepared, and create an entire new adventure which means traveling into some sort of Hell, fighting Cerberus and then wrestling Death. It's just not going to happen. What will actually happen is that the player will say, "I want to wrestle Death" and the DM will say, "You got a magic item for that? No? Sorry, you can't."

 

[Shasarak]

Your assumption here is that every DM would go ahead and create an adventure where you go and wrestle death instead of just looking at the player and saying, "No." Which, IME, is FAR more likely.

No, my assumption is that sounds like a cool idea how can we narratively tie that into the story.

Then the immediate push back from you that I get is that "you dont want to faff about" actually doing it. In contrast the feedback from Garthanos is that it would be perfect.

The acquistion of rituals and practices both in 4e are in story like magic items and the first time you do it I think yes that binding it up in a quest is perfect The knights travel into the other world and recover the Grail is one version of this.

So what is it? Do you want to do Epic stuff or do you just want to say that you do Epic stuff.

Very, very few DM's IME are going to just drop whatever adventure they've got prepared, and create an entire new adventure which means traveling into some sort of Hell, fighting Cerberus and then wrestling Death. It's just not going to happen. What will actually happen is that the player will say, "I want to wrestle Death" and the DM will say, "You got a magic item for that? No? Sorry, you can't."

If the DM did not want to change their adventure then they should have thought through the consequences of killing off a PC. It sounds like it would have to be a real railroad for the DM to keep trying to push through after a character death.

 

[Garthanos]

THIS is the problem? You have a chance to do something truly epic by wrassling Death into returning your dead friend to life and the problem is that you actually have to play it out rather then making an Athletics check and spending 1000gp so you dont have to "faff about"?

It's because its brought up in context where everyone has been accepting the Priest doing it trivially FOREVER (ok not all of us)

Once its acknowledge that the Cleric doing it that way isn't acceptable either as a trivial expenditure so both the Priest and Shaman and the Warrior pulling off their stylized raise dead trick get pulled into the story driven implementation (at least the first time I am cool with it). For instance the way I wrote it up I even called it Grail Quest - if the Karma points were not available for the resurrection even after the first time there would also be "earning it".

Arthur had much smaller group doing the search it was him and an irishman (a Llewc / Lugh fellow which is probably an earlier Lancelot) and a few others and it was the Irish magical cauldron of life not a Christian cup of christs blood.

The Cauldron of the Goddess requires you learn how to please her and after that you may be using it more casually like the Tuathans raising dead on the field of battle or the Norse Aesir with their armies which just reminds me in effect another practice/ritual through which one can renew minion class troops in quantity ie another Marshal Troops, blink blink OK that is a connection I didnt have before. And another possible function of the Cauldron meme for troops instead of heros.

OK now that feels awesome the thought of Aesir as a race or Theme for MPIII may have just made the list. (Since Tuathans are a decent theme).

 

[Shasarak]

Its because its brought up in context where everyone has been accepting the Priest doing it trivially FOREVER (ok not all of us)

You are not wrong.

I would guess the problem is with the players that dont want to "faff about", they just want Joe back on his feet asap. If you look at the original Raise Dead in ADnD you needed at least a 9th level Cleric to cast it, they could not bring back anyone dead for longer then 1 day per level, the character needed to pass a Resurrection Survival Check and the person brought back needed complete bed rest for as many days as they had been dead. So really it is the type of spell you wanted to cast during your down time anyway.

If you want to talk about how bad it got, I remember some of the Epic destiny powers from 4e that started with the line: After the first time today that you die....
I mean not only do you not even need someone else to bring you back, the designers assumed that you were going to be doing it multiple times. Now that was really metal.

 

[Garthanos]

You are not wrong.

I would guess the problem is with the players that dont want to "faff about", they just want Joe back on his feet asap. If you look at the original Raise Dead in ADnD you needed at least a 9th level Cleric to cast it, they could not bring back anyone dead for longer then 1 day per level, the character needed to pass a Resurrection Survival Check and the person brought back needed complete bed rest for as many days as they had been dead. So really it is the type of spell you wanted to cast during your down time anyway.

I think they would have been better translating that ritual to level 11 in 4e but they just pulled it straight across (Paragon is really name level)

I mean not only do you not even need someone else to bring you back, the designers assumed that you were going to be doing it multiple times. Now that was really metal.

That is happening so long after the priest was raising the dead for 12 levels already if the DM is pushing the group hard enough for this to be happening the Demi-god has probably made the trip so many times he knows the way

Rather like Osiris who was resurrected again and again and again so much so that it became part of his story. (symbollically we have this happening with many gods as they represent cyclic forces/occurances from the river Nile to the sun and moon etc)

DO NOT WATCH THE GODS OF EGYPT WITHOUT WEARING YOUR SILLY HAT and completely not taking it seriously.

 

[Garthanos]

What will actually happen is that the player will say, "I want to wrestle Death" and the DM will say, "You got a magic item for that? No? Sorry, you can't."

Sadly true.

I mentioned the PC having a personal theme about seeing death? and presenting the combat medic as him fending off a shadowy figure nobody else sees. The idea being if this is part of the story directional for that character. In other words it provides the set up.

Something I think about wrt a downed hero is the problem of Party Death Spiral... the party action economy takes a hit essentially a way for the Dead hero to take part by using a inspiration almost like they are currently a disembodied lazylord beconning from the other heroes parties memories as flashbacks, some he gives extra attacks to and its like they are raging over his death and other lazylord effects.

It might give a player something to do at least for a bit when his character is dead maybe even till the end of this immediate sub arc.

 

[darkbard]

Something I think about wrt a downed hero is the problem of Party Death Spiral... the party action economy takes a it essentially a way for the Dead hero to take part by using a inspiration almost like they are currently a disembodied lazylord beconning from the other heroes parties memories as flashbacks, some he gives extra attacks to and its like they are raging over his death and other lazylord effects.

It might give a player something to do at least for a bit when his character is dead maybe even till the end of this immediate sub arc.

That's some pretty creative thinking there, Garth!