D&D General New Interview with Rob Heinsoo About 4E

[mamba]

That's to me isn't bombing
That's burning out.
The 4e schedule burned through 15 years of content in 5 years.

I guess that depends how soon after the introduction the sales fell off a cliff. I have no good data on that however

 

[payn]

I firmly believe that if 4e

1. Gave every class 2 role and let you choose between them at level 1
2. Have all powers shared between power source

There'd be more acceptance on 4e.

Like you choose fighter and choose Slayer (Striker) or Guardian (defender).
Paladin chooses Defender or Leader.
Wizard choose Controller or Blaster.
Etc etc.

I think the less people had to accept to fix what was broken in the past, the more they'd accept change

A good start.

 

[Clint_L]

Obviously not all Wizard Players are like that... let's call them 'Die hard Wizard Fans' then? People who's favorite class is the Wizard BECAUSE of the dramatic alteration you can do. I find these types of people very vocal and opinionated. They want that specific fantasy and they want MORE of it and get mad when it happens less frequently and they don't want other classes to get those opportunity as often either.

I don't find anyone I game with to be like that. Ever, really. To me, that's more of an internet thing where people get on forums and start stanning for their "team." On this forum, it seems like Team Wizard and, especially, Team Fighter are pretty vocal.

But I suspect if I actually played with any of those folks, none of them would be that impassioned about these issues IRL. Maybe I'm wrong, though. I dunno. Is there anyone here who only plays one class, be it wizard or something else?

I guess in my whole history of D&D I've played rangers and paladins the most, but I've played most every class at some point. Well, except psi classes.

 

[Clint_L]

And I don't really see an actual play streaming show like Critical Role breaking out with the complexities of 4e's combat had the edition survived to 2015. I think that and its level of success would have had to wait for a 4e-successor anyway, or maybe something a bit more old school or another iteration of Essentials that drew more from D&D's history than 4e did (and 5e successfully did).

As I recently learned, the Critical Role cast played their first game together using a heavily modified version of 4e. Then they switched to Pathfinder. And then back to 5e.

So...like quite a lot of D&D players, actually.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

As I recently learned, the Critical Role cast played their first game together using a heavily modified version of 4e. Then they switched to Pathfinder. And then back to 5e.

So...like quite a lot of D&D players, actually.

Fun fact I noticed recently: Keyleth, which is the name of one of the PCs from the start of Critical Role, is given as one of the sample female elf names in the 4E PHB.

 

[Undrave]

But never in a consistent way, which damages immersion and people bailed from the game for this reason.

So... game designers are not allowed to be experimental? You're using a single power from the tail end of the edition and claiming it's why people bailed on the game. There's plenty of other momentwhere doing an Arcana check dictates the power of whatever effect you're using, there's nothing inconsisten about Suggeston just because you can't wrap your head around the narrative.

Were illusions and polymorphs rituals? what about summons? Were the summonable creature as varied as in 3e?

Illusions were mostly added in Arcane Power. There were Illusion powers (that interacted with the Orb of Deception feature that let you redirect a failed power to another target once an encounter) and illusion rituals. Divination rituals too, BTW and there's even a ritual to let you talk to a ROOM! In 4e you can talk with animals, the dead, plants, oracles, mystic sages from other dimensions and even whatever room you happen to be in.

Disguise Self was in PHB1 though.

Because here something surreal is happening: you guys are talking to me as if 4e just came out and I should try this awesome game. It's been a while guys, it bombed, and I and others are desperately trying to let you understand why.
The very thread started because the very designer didn't get it yet, which is telling.

Nah, we're annoyed because you're misrepresenting the edition to excuse it not being to your taste.

Have all powers shared between power source

No thanks, that's lame.

So keep combat roles out of the PHB and put them in the DMG instead? The DM does resemble a director in some ways.

You mean obscure the combat role and pretend they're not build into the class?

 

[Undrave]

It's actually very elegant. Likewise Scare as Arcana for Intimidate (I can't recall if that's canonical if I made it up).

It puts the use of these non-combat spells into the general non-combat resolution framework (ie skill challenges).

'Arcane Utterance', the level 2 Arcana Skill Power lets you 'cite an obscure fact to confuse, impress or scare a foe' letting you replace a Bluff, Diplomacy or Intimidate roll with Aracana! It's actually a better version of Suggestion, but I think Suggestion is like a level 1 class feature of like... a Beguiler in Essentials?? And a Wizard is automatically trained in Arcana.

And speaking of skills, the Wizard could take all three skills related to Rituals in the PHB: Arcana, Nature and Religion.

 

[Undrave]

I don't find anyone I game with to be like that. Ever, really. To me, that's more of an internet thing where people get on forums and start stanning for their "team." On this forum, it seems like Team Wizard and, especially, Team Fighter are pretty vocal.

Heh, you're probably right. It's a type of Internet Guy I guess.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Terrible example. I know exactly how far a swim check in 3.5 will get me, it's 1/2 my land speed, assuming a full round action spent swimming, checks are made 1/round. A character specializing it and not wearing armor can easily take 10 to hit the calm water DC indefinitely, and after a few levels or with specialty equipment probably can't fail to hit the rough water DC.

I know that, because it's written in the skill description and when the DM describes a river, I can ask "how wide is it?" and then determine precisely how I'd interact with swimming it, down to my chance of success on each individual action. The swim check is something I, the player, use against the obstacle, and can weigh the costs of deploying vs. other approaches.

So, basically the probability that you can swim 100 meters, in total, is effectively zilch. Yeah, that's a great skill system! I want that! ROFLMAO! Seriously, nobody, outside of combats that happen at very small scales, uses it that way, it's unworkable.

 

[I'm A Banana]

So keep combat roles out of the PHB and put them in the DMG instead? The DM does resemble a director in some ways.

If I cook on that, I get to a place where the DM maybe has different kinds of inspiration they can award? Maybe like, the brave knight character is taking a heroic last stand, so they get to mark all the mons in the fight for a round. Which is an interesting idea with some legs!

I'm generally content with how 5e provides nudges that suggest a role, and then gives everyone kind of a minimum ability to do any job regardless of their class. Could be better or more explicit, really, but also fine as it is for me personally. When the primary gameplay purpose of a class is character expression, as 5e seems to understand, it follows that things like niche protection and strict "class = role" definitions can work against that purpose. A lighter touch is better for that design.

Suggestion - it was completely transformed into "make an arcana check for diplomacy" which is horrible to say the least.

What's kind of odd to me about this one is that 4e was very explicit in encouraging people to sub in different skills when appropriate. 5e's a lot like this, too. Making an Arcana check for Diplomacy is not something you need a power to do, it's just something you can do if you can justify it to your DM. "I discuss with the king how magic could help him solve his problems" is making an Arcana check instead of a Diplomacy check. Heck, one of the examples of improvising with an Arcana check from the Rules Compendium is literally contributing to a negotiation (though they limit it by the creature types related to a knowledge check).

This power was made after 4e was fairly mature, too, so it's not like they didn't know about the context. Guess with 400 or so powers per class, you're gonna get some weird ones.