Playtesting vs a .5 Edition

[KarinsDad]

Emphasis Mine...

I gotta disagree with this analogy. A sorcerer still runs out of all his spells and must rest at a certain point. In a per-encounter model this never happens.

Emphasis Mine...

Never? First off, not every ability is per-encounter in 4E. Some are daily. PCs will also run out of potions, scrolls, and similar charged items eventually as well.

Secondly, I said similar. I did not say identical. I also suspect that 4E PCs will eventually have to rest up as well, especially if they are about to face the main event BBEG later in the day and no longer have their daily abilities or want to prepare certain abilities or items that take time to prep. I doubt the game will have zero of these types of elements.

 

[MerricB]

We'll definitely have to agree to disagree. The changes to the 4E spell and magic system alone outweighs anything I saw for changes in the entire progression from 1E -> 2E -> 3E.

However, the changes have been in playtest for... quite a lot of the duration of 3.5e. We've been seeing more and more per-encounter abilities in supplements. It looks new if you only compare core 3.5e to core 4e. If you detour to the supplements, you see a lot of 4e in its initial stages.

Cheers!

 

[Nikosandros]

However, the changes have been in playtest for... quite a lot of the duration of 3.5e. We've been seeing more and more per-encounter abilities in supplements. It looks new if you only compare core 3.5e to core 4e. If you detour to the supplements, you see a lot of 4e in its initial stages.

This is true. If the issue is for how long 4e has been in development, I agree that it has been for quite some time.

On the other hand, if we are talking about playing experience and general feel, it is quite different to have some options in a supplement rather than have them being the core mechanics.

 

[JoeGKushner]

However, the changes have been in playtest for... quite a lot of the duration of 3.5e. We've been seeing more and more per-encounter abilities in supplements. It looks new if you only compare core 3.5e to core 4e. If you detour to the supplements, you see a lot of 4e in its initial stages.

Cheers!

The problem with that thinking is that if it was that easy to consider the pre-encounter abilities compatible, we'd be getting a conversion guide as opposed to the lines of "start a new campaign" and "wing it" at best.

 

[Cadfan]

It IS different. But it doesn't mean you can't get useful information.

Take the "usable every 5 rounds" mechanic for abilities in Tome of Magic. How do players react to that? Is the bookkeeping annoying, or fun?

In fact, you can focus on that detail a lot better if your players aren't dealing with an entirely new system at the same time. It lets you isolate details.

 

[JoeGKushner]

It IS different. But it doesn't mean you can't get useful information.

Take the "usable every 5 rounds" mechanic for abilities in Tome of Magic. How do players react to that? Is the bookkeeping annoying, or fun?

In fact, you can focus on that detail a lot better if your players aren't dealing with an entirely new system at the same time. It lets you isolate details.

And at the same time, if they ignore the standards because they're used to them, we get a .5 edition because they decide that the duration of standard stuff is hours too long and that buffing is a problem eh?

 

[Waylander the Slayer]

This is the analogy I think about. With a car, you might have tested a new clutch, a new chasis, a new transmission etc. and they might all be fantastic. But it is most important to see how all of the above work together- if you don't test that enough, possibility of a mechanical brakedown will be high.

 

[Dragon Snack]

http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13451537&postcount=98

Thank you.

 

[MerricB]

The problem with that thinking is that if it was that easy to consider the pre-encounter abilities compatible, we'd be getting a conversion guide as opposed to the lines of "start a new campaign" and "wing it" at best.

Joe, you're confusing two changes to D&D they're making in 4e.

Per-encounter abilities only have a limited effect on the maths of D&D. They primarily determine how long a group can continue adventuring. They were easily integrated into 3e, although they did cause a disconnect between the two types of adventurers - an Incarnate or Crusader could keep going a lot longer than a Wizard, although the Wizard did have more powerful attacks.

The bigger, and possibly more important, change they're making to D&D is to the power curve. Increasing the window of opportunity to use unmodified creatures is extremely significant and requires a major reworking of the maths behind the system.

Cheers!

 

[JoeGKushner]

Possibly.

But if the power levels themselves are undergoing "new math" then it would seem they'd need MORE playtesting, not less.