Pathfinder and 4e's love child, what I want in 5e

[Dausuul]

Those and the "powers" and saves as defenses are my biggest gripes against 4e. I agree that 5e shouldn't have the "dead" level issue but if healing surges and the "powers" systems are included then I won't purchase the products. The "automatic" healing smacks of an computer game to me. I can't think of another game system where the characters can "heal" automatically during combat without say cyber-wear or assistance of another character. Certainly not say in GURPS Fantasy/Horror or Call of Cthulhu.

So, suppose 5E used a framework similar to 3E, but with fighter feats designed to provide new combat options instead of numeric bonuses (more Whirlwind Attack, less Weapon Focus), and a wound/vitality point system to reduce cleric-dependency. How would you feel about that approach?

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Therefore Class becomes: Class Feature + Combat Role + Non-Combat Role. You have a lot of potential combinations. People complained that for instance, all Strikers or Controllers felt alike. Well now you're picking a non-combat role, and a class feature of your choice, and various powers that emphasize what you want. It would need to be finagled so that you can't get the best of all options, but it's a step in a more "I can build any character" direction. Themes are a great example of this. It's a layer you can plug and play on any character.

Agree 100%. Then add to that a similar broadening of "race" into "culture" Culture becomes: Race + Society + Environment. This doesn't need near the mechanical support as the class features or roles, but it easily breaks out "racial" things that don't belong on races into other categories that can then have that same mix and match. If you were a stereotypical dwarf raised in a slightly xenophobic dwarven society in a cavern environment--this gives you certain bonuses and penalties, and perhaps a few key niche abilities. OTOH, if you were a dwarf raised as a merchant in a clan of mix-race nomads, you get something different. That lets race listings be simple (as will the society and environment listings), and we can just forget about half races altogether.

 

[BryonD]

I'm not sure I agree with this. Here are the big design elements that set 4E apart from 3E/Pathfinder in my mind:

• Healing surges and full hit point recovery with extended rest.
• All classes use a modified Vancian power system.
• Extremely position-dependent combat effects requiring a battlemat to adjudicate.

There's lots of little stuff, but those are the biggies, the things that make a player of earlier editions go "Whoa. What happened there?" And these are major points of contention for 3E/Pathfinder fans.

Those are certainly issues. But I think you've significantly missed the boat when you say those are the major points of contention.

You could fix all three of those things completely and still not convert 75% of people who dislike 4E.

I think you are speaking as a 4E fan and solving the problems with 4E as a 4E fan. And you might very well be able to achieve an overwhelming consensus amongst 4E fans that your changes would make a good game great or a great game awesome.

But you are not coming close to addressing the non-4E fan issues.

If the list posted in the OP were a basis for 5E, the market split would remain. Reinvigorating the supporters wouldn't do anything to reduce the issues amongst the non-supporters.

But consider the design goals underlying them:

• Reduce the need for somebody to play a cleric.
• Provide a baseline of per-encounter resources, so a party that has exhausted its daily resources isn't totally drained.
• Make sure everyone has interesting mechanical options other than "roll to hit."
• Balance the classes across the level range.

While not everyone agrees that these are good things, I don't think you'd find nearly as much objection to them. As a 4E fan, I want a game that solves these problems. As a 4E critic (yes, I'm both), I don't like 4E's particular solutions. Both halves of me could be satisfied by a game that used 4E's design insights and experience to tackle the problems in a different way. Essentials made a good start by moving away from the single universal Vancian mechanic.

I agree that making progress on these issues would be a good thing and would tend to improve the popularity of any given game.

AND, if you solved those problems but kept the list as described in the OP, the change in the market split would be negligible.

 

[qstor]

So, suppose 5E used a framework similar to 3E, but with fighter feats designed to provide new combat options instead of numeric bonuses (more Whirlwind Attack, less Weapon Focus), and a wound/vitality point system to reduce cleric-dependency. How would you feel about that approach?

That works for me. Also like of like the feat "Step up" in Pathfinder.

I like the wound/vitality approach for "modern" games like d20 Modern and Star Wars. I think it would work in D&D. But the standard hit point system to me along with the Vancian magic system has been one for the hallmarks of D&D. I think the wound/vitality approach doesn't have the "auto" healing of a healing surge which was the turn off for me. The wound/vitality approach is also like stun vs body damage in Hero System.

Mike

 

[qstor]

If the list posted in the OP were a basis for 5E, the market split would remain. Reinvigorating the supporters wouldn't do anything to reduce the issues amongst the non-supporters.


I agree that making progress on these issues would be a good thing and would tend to improve the popularity of any given game.

I agree that a lot of the issues with 4e that "smack" of a computer game, ie the need for a battlemat, the automatic healing, the need to use minis. (at least these are the issues for me) need to be changed to handle the market split.

Most of us apart from maybe Morrus or WOTC employees aren't privy to the decisions about any new edition so we don't know if market split is driving the "push" towards a new edition. But I think there's a lot of "bad blood" among gamers I know that I know. So the new edition ought to have a lot of new "bells and whistles" that *look* and *feel* like old bells and whistles to get them to come around. But superficial changes like from 4e to the Essentials aren't going to do it.

Mike

 

[Dragonblade]

Those and the "powers" and saves as defenses are my biggest gripes against 4e. I agree that 5e shouldn't have the "dead" level issue but if healing surges and the "powers" systems are included then I won't purchase the products. The "automatic" healing smacks of an computer game to me. I can't think of another game system where the characters can "heal" automatically during combat without say cyber-wear or assistance of another character. Certainly not say in GURPS Fantasy/Horror or Call of Cthulhu.

Aside from the fact that HP don't represent physical injury, even in Pathfinder, it actually provides the exact same game mechanic.

Its just instead of having surges as an intrinsic part of the character, you carry them external to you in the form of a wand of cure spells. Mechanically the same effect is achieved, everyone "heals" after every encounter. Personally, I find the need to carry a wand around just as clunky as you find the semantics of surges.

Both games need to solve the same problem, though. How do you have multiple encounters per day, but maintain verisimilitude in terms of healing and injury?

I think surges just need to be finessed and redefined but the potential is there.

 

[gamerprinter]

Its just instead of having surges as an intrinsic part of the character, you carry them external to you in the form of a wand of cure spells. Mechanically the same effect is achieved, everyone "heals" after every encounter. Personally, I find the need to carry a wand around just as clunky as you find the semantics of surges.

What about those of us who don't use wands of any kind, or at least never as cure light wounds. We use what are called 'clerics' for our healing. There is almost never a wand with healing spells in it in our games. If our cleric runs out of spells, we are just extra careful about getting wounded or killed.

The point is I recognize the similarity between healing surges and wands of healing, but since we don't use wands of healing, ever, the concept is still alien to our basic game and something we don't want.

 

[BryonD]

Most of us apart from maybe Morrus or WOTC employees aren't privy to the decisions about any new edition so we don't know if market split is driving the "push" towards a new edition. But I think there's a lot of "bad blood" among gamers I know that I know. So the new edition ought to have a lot of new "bells and whistles" that *look* and *feel* like old bells and whistles to get them to come around. But superficial changes like from 4e to the Essentials aren't going to do it.

Mike

Fair enough.
When the thread title says "love child" I read an implication of reconciliation into that.

I'm not saying WotC is eager to fix the split. (Well, I will say that, but I'm not saying it in this thread.... )
I'm not saying the milk can be unspilled.

I am saying that posts in this thread don't seem to relate to the issues that a lot of people who don't like in 4E REALLY have with the game and therefore the solutions being proposed won't work for those people. Which isn't to say it wouldn't make 4E fans games that much more awesome for them and hurray for that.

But its like fans of red saying that crimson is even better than red and the reason blue fans don't like red is because it isn't crimson.

 

[Pentius]

What about those of us who don't use wands of any kind, or at least never as cure light wounds. We use what are called 'clerics' for our healing. There is almost never a wand with healing spells in it in our games. If our cleric runs out of spells, we are just extra careful about getting wounded or killed.

The point is I recognize the similarity between healing surges and wands of healing, but since we don't use wands of healing, ever, the concept is still alien to our basic game and something we don't want.

Same basic idea still. You can fight, lose hp, then regain HP swiftly, but there is a limit on how often this may happen.

 

[Pentius]

Fair enough.
When the thread title says "love child" I read an implication of reconciliation into that.

I'm not saying WotC is eager to fix the split. (Well, I will say that, but I'm not saying it in this thread.... )
I'm not saying the milk can be unspilled.

I am saying that posts in this thread don't seem to relate to the issues that a lot of people who don't like in 4E REALLY have with the game and therefore the solutions being proposed won't work for those people. Which isn't to say it wouldn't make 4E fans games that much more awesome for them and hurray for that.

But its like fans of red saying that crimson is even better than red and the reason blue fans don't like red is because it isn't crimson.

I thought it was more like saying fans of blue don't like red, and fans of red don't like blue, therefore everyone will love purple. But other than that, yeah, I pretty much agree.