On homogeneity, or how I finally got past the people talking past each other part

[SSquirrel]

... While the negative blasts flow both ways, the agreement that 3E has its redeeming points seems to be much fewer are farther between from the pro-4E side than the other way around. Noise to signal may drown out the difference, but I virtually never see 4E fans saying anything good about 3E.

I'll admit I have very little good to say about 3E, but then, I'm pretty happy with 4E. The things that annoyed me most about 3E were things that were minimized (Alignment) or removed (Vancian magic). Is 4E a toolbox for doing everything? No, but they also didn't try for it to be. I do think that the flexibility and openness of the OGL paired w/the 3.x ruleset allowed for a lot of games that would have never seen the light of day, but it was also part of why we had a horrible glut of terrible, terrible gaming books.

I'm a big fan of the things that I felt were well done (pretty much everything from Malhavoc Press, M&M, etc) and enjoy them, but I think that the 4E system fits my desires for gaming more directly.

I do have negative things to say about 3E, but I try and keep them in a constructive fashion and not just trash 3E to trash it. 3E was a huge step toward making the underlying mechanics of the game more clear and it came at a time when we needed something better. 3E was definitely better than 2E and it saved the game we love when it was looking like it might go away forever, but at the same time, I think it was a step and a transitional edition.

 

[Hussar]

How to make criticals fun:

Exploding dice. EVERYTHING is more fun with exploding dice.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

The thing about criticals is they always hit PCs harder than monsters. Monsters have a life expectancy of one encounter. PCs are ideally going to survive a campaign. Any increased chance of random death is going to hit PCs harder. Randomness favors the short term over the long term.

Its interesting that 4E made PC criticals so much more powerful than monster crits.

 

[gbonehead]

As someone who's been playing since I got my blue box set in 1979, I think I've given all editions of D&D a fair shake, including 3e, 3.5e and 4e.

However, I'll be up front here, and say that I prefer 3.5e over 4e, just to get that out of the way right off. I'm not a 4e hater, it's just not my thing.

I've played many enjoyable games of 4e, but for me it's just missing something. I'm not going to bother trying to figure out what, as it's irrelevant - the living campaign we run at local cons is 4e, and it's clearly here to stay, so my preference for 3.5e is trumped by popular demand, though my epic home campaign is 3.5e for the long haul.

There are some things, however, that I having trouble dealing with, and that's the reason I'm posting here. These are not criticisms per se, they're things I really truly need to deal with in order to effectively run games.

1. How the heck do you make a character? As the number of splat books for 4e grows at an amazing pace (and note that the 4e splat books are *mandatory* due to the incredible volume of feats and powers), I'm finding myself completely unable to keep up in any effective way with the hundreds and hundreds of new feats and powers added to the system.

2. How do I differentiate skills? I've always run games where non-combat stuff is as important as combat stuff, and in 4e once you reach moderate levels, the differences between characters as far as skills go are overshadowed by the + 1/2 level skill modifier and the lack of per-level skill advancement (other than the + 1/2 level).

3. How do I introduce new players to the game? Time was, I'd say "okay, here, play this human fighter, it's dirt simple." Now, near as I can tell there's *no* dirt simple class for newbies - every class is equivalently complex, with a bevy of at-will/encounter/daily powers, racial abilities, and class features. I really do miss that plain 'ol fighter for new players

These are the kind of things that give me trouble running a 4e game, and given that I'll be doing it for the forseeable future, any assistance would be grand

P.S. If the only answer to #1 is "Subscribe to D&D Insider and use the online tools" then that will make me sad. Building characters shouldn't require (cash to WoTC) + (Online tools).

 

[MerricB]

2. How do I differentiate skills? I've always run games where non-combat stuff is as important as combat stuff, and in 4e once you reach moderate levels, the differences between characters as far as skills go are overshadowed by the + 1/2 level skill modifier and the lack of per-level skill advancement (other than the + 1/2 level).

At moderate levels, you should be looking at differences of between 5 and 10 for key skills; that seems quite enough to really differentiate them. (Note that the points of differentiation are "trained or not trained", "focused or not focused" and "ability scores".

3. How do I introduce new players to the game? Time was, I'd say "okay, here, play this human fighter, it's dirt simple." Now, near as I can tell there's *no* dirt simple class for newbies - every class is equivalently complex, with a bevy of at-will/encounter/daily powers, racial abilities, and class features. I really do miss that plain 'ol fighter for new players

Give them the ranger. It now fulfills that role.

Cheers!

 

[drothgery]

1. How the heck do you make a character? As the number of splat books for 4e grows at an amazing pace (and note that the 4e splat books are *mandatory* due to the incredible volume of feats and powers), I'm finding myself completely unable to keep up in any effective way with the hundreds and hundreds of new feats and powers added to the system.

Eh. Any individual player can make a character with 95% of the character options available for it with PH1 + [book the class he wants to play is in, if it's not PH1] + [book the race he wants to play is in, if it's not PH1] + [approriate splatbook] + [book for the setting, if you're playing in a WotC setting with a 4e Player's Guide]. Five books, max, and there's almost certainly some overlap there; I mean, your player could be playing a gnome swordmage in Eberron, but he's probably not.

The vast majority of powers and feats are class and/or race specific; you can easily ignore the ones of no relevance to your character.

 

[Betote]

Eh. Any individual player can make a character with 95% of the character options available for it with PH1 + [book the class he wants to play is in, if it's not PH1] + [book the race he wants to play is in, if it's not PH1] + [approriate splatbook] + [book for the setting, if you're playing in a WotC setting with a 4e Player's Guide]. Five books, max, and there's almost certainly some overlap there; I mean, your player could be playing a gnome swordmage in Eberron, but he's probably not.

I really, really hope you were trying to be sarcastic there

 

[drothgery]

I really, really hope you were trying to be sarcastic there

It wasn't intended to be. It's the exact same way things were in 3.5, except that the non-PH1 classes largely showed up in the splatbooks (which were oddly set up, in that CWar and CAdv were by what became 4e roles, while CArc and CDiv were set up by what became 4e power sources).

 

[Betote]

It wasn't intended to be. It's the exact same way things were in 3.5, except that the non-PH1 classes largely showed up in the splatbooks (which were oddly set up, in that CWar and CAdv were by what became 4e roles, while CArc and CDiv were set up by what became 4e power sources).

So you really think 5 books for making a PC is not overkill. Wow.

And when I played 3.x, the only book I used part from the PHB was PHB2, just for the Fighter feats. That's a big difference. In 3.x, splatbooks were largely optional, whereas in 4e they're pretty much needed for very basic concepts (as familiars or animal companions).

In 4e I feel as if I had to choose a class first, then a concept, whereas in most other RPGs and D&D incarnations it's always been for me more a first concept, then game details approach. And paying 10$ a month for something that should be in the first core book is not acceptable for me.

 

[AllisterH]

There are some things, however, that I having trouble dealing with, and that's the reason I'm posting here. These are not criticisms per se, they're things I really truly need to deal with in order to effectively run games.

1. How the heck do you make a character? As the number of splat books for 4e grows at an amazing pace (and note that the 4e splat books are *mandatory* due to the incredible volume of feats and powers), I'm finding myself completely unable to keep up in any effective way with the hundreds and hundreds of new feats and powers added to the system.

Not sure I understand the point. Why do you believe it is mandatory to use all the books? You _CAN_ build a PHB-only fighter that is as effective as a fighter that uses all the sourcebooks. There hasn't been that noticeable power creep (certain items in AV1 are a problem) but generally speaking the options in PHB I are as good as those in the latest splatbook.

The only classes I think that benefit immensely by their splatbook are the wizard and warlock via Arcane Power AND the paladin via Divine Power. Mainly because they get more options and they were slightly hurting for some using just the PHB1.

2. How do I differentiate skills? I've always run games where non-combat stuff is as important as combat stuff, and in 4e once you reach moderate levels, the differences between characters as far as skills go are overshadowed by the + 1/2 level skill modifier and the lack of per-level skill advancement (other than the + 1/2 level).

Assuming characters have the same ability score, there are actually 4 breakpoints in terms of effectiveness of skills.

Untrained (+0)
Jack of all Trades (+2)
Skill Trained (+5)
Skill Focused (+8)

Keep in mind though that 4e intentionally doesn't want the skill range between characters to be unbounded. Kind of makes it difficult to make skill challenges for the entire party if one guy has a skill of 20 and another has a skill of 0 and they're only at level 11.

3. How do I introduce new players to the game? Time was, I'd say "okay, here, play this human fighter, it's dirt simple." Now, near as I can tell there's *no* dirt simple class for newbies - every class is equivalently complex, with a bevy of at-will/encounter/daily powers, racial abilities, and class features. I really do miss that plain 'ol fighter for new players

.

Assuming you start at level 1, it's actually pretty simple for new players I found. You are starting at level 1 right? If not, a suggestion would be to make the new player a companion character instead of a pc and thus they won't be as intimidated. The DMG2 rules are pretty good for this IMO.

I mean, giving a newbie player a level 9 fighter to make in either 3e or 4e is going to be a serious anti-newbie friendly move.

Seriously, the 3.x fighter is NOT an easy beginning class. Definitely rather the cleric or druid for newbie players IMO.

Ironicaly, I sayt he best newbie class would be the ranger, specifically the archer ranger build. Twin Strike all the time