D&D 4E Positive Aspects of 4E

[kennew142]

So, you then believe that the wizard should take up more space in the core book than all the other classes combined, as was the case in 3e until they put the sorcerer in?

That's my problem. I don't mind wizards getting more, new stuff down the line, but favoring one class over all others in the core book is poor design.

I think you're missing my point as well. I am prepared to hand wave these things for BBEG guys in my game until the next PHB comes out. I am referring to the possibility that enchantments will be reserved for another class and that Polymorph will never make it into the rules. The fact that I will feel the loss of these spells in PHB1, does not in any way meant that I want to short change other classes. If you noticed the rest of my original post, I am extremely excited about the new powers/traits/maneuvers (whatever they are going to call them) for the martial characters. I just built a fencer using Bo9S for an upcoming Ravenloft game and am very psyched about playing him.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

So, you then believe that the wizard should take up more space in the core book than all the other classes combined, as was the case in 3e until they put the sorcerer in?

That's my problem. I don't mind wizards getting more, new stuff down the line, but favoring one class over all others in the core book is poor design.

The wizard's rules take more space to explain because they are more complicated. The cleric's rules are also fairly complicated and take a lot of space to explain. I'm not sure this is the same as "favoring" them.

I imagine that the 4E PHB will still include a lot of text on spell details, because of the need to define exactly what magic can and can't do. I don't see the fraction of space devoted to a class as necessarily meaning that a given class is more or less valued. Is a skill that includes more text necessarily a better skill than one that includes less text?

 

[Gort]

I hope they make wizards less fragile (better saves, base attack bonus, hitpoints and AC) but less powerful with their spells. When we got to higher levels, wizards tended to be "binary characters". They were either alive or dead, we hardly ever saw them get merely injured

 

[The Little Raven]

The wizard's rules take more space to explain because they are more complicated. The cleric's rules are also fairly complicated and take a lot of space to explain. I'm not sure this is the same as "favoring" them.

Take the description of the wizard class, and all of the wizard spells in the PHB. Then, take all the other class descriptions and all of their spells and abilities.

Wizard stuff alone comprises a larger section of the book than the other 9 classes combined (not counting the sorcerer). One class gets 1/3 of the book, while the other 9 classes get less than 1/3 of the book because of the need for normal rules and such. Thus, the wizard is favored above all others, because he has more options than every other class combined. This is the direct reason the sorcerer showed up in 3e, because they said it felt wrong for 1/3 of the book to be devoted to a single character type.

I don't see the fraction of space devoted to a class as necessarily meaning that a given class is more or less valued. Is a skill that includes more text necessarily a better skill than one that includes less text?

So, you don't see the problem with 9 classes getting less than 90 pages ALTOGETHER and one class getting more than 90 pages on it's own in a single book? You don't think that having more options for 1 class than the other 9 classes combined is a bad thing, nor showing favoritism towards that one class?

 

[Plane Sailing]

So pike off, you.

OK, you decide to post in a thread specifically about positive aspects of 4e with the purpose of raining on the parade and then you start to be rude to people.

After Morrus' ultimatum at the top of the forum too?

See you in a week, use the time to think about how to behave better please. If you have any questions do feel free to email me.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

So, you don't see the problem with 9 classes getting less than 90 pages ALTOGETHER and one class getting more than 90 pages on it's own in a single book?

No, I don't see that as a problem at all. The number of pages alotted is not some measure of the respect shown to a class. It's not the amount of text that matters, it's the content.

You don't think that having more options for 1 class than the other 9 classes combined is a bad thing, nor showing favoritism towards that one class?

More options in what sense? More options in any one given situation? More options for actions that can possibly be taken over the lifetime of the character? And no, I don't think it's a bad thing. Some character classes are meant to be simpler -- have you never seen a player paralyzed with indecision due to having too many options? For such a player, a simpler class may be better. But even the barbarian in my campaign had this issue -- he had SO MANY OPTIONS with his varying combinations of abilities and feats (shield or not, raging or not, charging or not, shock trooper or not, PA or not and for how much) that he was continually re-calculating his attack rolls and damage. He generated tons of options from just a few paragraphs of text.

 

[Traycor]

For PCs I would prefer some minor charms along the lines of "These aren't the droids you are looking for," or as simple as fascinating or distracting an opponent.

They said they aren't getting rid of all charms. They are just saving the best for the Psion. So charm person, suggestion, and other lower enchantment effects should still be in the game in some fashion, even if they are toned down.

To be fair, I also think that Kunadam was exaggerating a bit when he said that wizards are now just evokers. Our early development articles talked about spells like spectral steed being great choices and how they wanted these to not compete with things like fireball anymore for space. The wizard is going to have various utility spells and effects, but they are also going to have regular firepower in every combat.

I can see how description of the new combat sceme would make someone assume that wizards can only blast stuff, but that clearly isn't the case based on what we've been told.

 

[The Little Raven]

No, I don't see that as a problem at all. The number of pages alotted is not some measure of the respect shown to a class. It's not the amount of text that matters, it's the content.

And the wizard has more content available in the 3e PHB than every other class combined. One class having more abilities, spells, options, builds, whatever than the other 9 combined is simply poor design.

More options in what sense?

More options in the only sense that it can mean in this situation: more abilities for the class to use than every other class.

The fact that they admitted the sorcerer was added in part because of this focus on the wizard having more to do attests to this problem.

 

[Traycor]

So, you don't see the problem with 9 classes getting less than 90 pages ALTOGETHER and one class getting more than 90 pages on it's own in a single book? You don't think that having more options for 1 class than the other 9 classes combined is a bad thing, nor showing favoritism towards that one class?

I agree with you, but to be fair, those 90 pages aren't just for the wizard. There are spells in those pages for clerics, druids, bards, paladins, rangers, and assassins. Not to mention that magic items for all classes are based off many of those spells. Plus a large chunk of 3E monsters had abilities explained in those spells as well.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

And the wizard has more content available in the 3e PHB than every other class combined. One class having more abilities, spells, options, builds, whatever than the other 9 combined is simply poor design.

Let me rephrase. It's not how much content, it's the quality of that content. "More" content doesn't matter. You could, for example, add 200 0-level spells for the bard to the PHB. It wouldn't really be a significant improvement to the class, although it would give him far more options and far more text.

It's the nature of the D&D magic system that spells require lots of text to detail on what they can do and outline of various parameters. Fighter and thief abilities can be described in fewer lines of text, but in the high-level games I have played in, they have been exceptionally effective.

The fact that they admitted the sorcerer was added in part because of this focus on the wizard having more to do attests to this problem.

Do you think you could find me a cite on this? The wizard was one of the four "main" classes in 1E and 2E, so having 1/3 of the book go to them didn't seem unusually anomalous.