Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="triqui" data-source="post: 5512647" data-attributes="member: 57948">Fun part is that *I* am in the process of remodelling 4e/3.5 to better suit my own playstyle, and SEVERAL of the things he has proposed are actually in the alpha status of the system. Probably we both got inspiration from same sources:1) 3 paths come from guild wars/rifts (the videogame), and to a lesser degree to Dragon Age 2. There you can have several &quot;paths&quot; and combine them to build &quot;unique&quot; classes. It helps to counter one major flaw of 4e: the uniqueness of each powers (due to exception based design) make the players to need to learn several mechanically different powers for nearly the same result (ie: the fighter &quot;footwork lure&quot; and the swordmage equivalent power, which are *close* to be the same thing). Thus, a warrior &quot;cleave&quot;, a barbarian &quot;cleave&quot; and a paladin &quot;cleave&quot; would be mechanically the same, all under a &quot;path&quot; (let's say... &quot;vanguard&quot;). This saves up pages in the book (you dont need a space for your wizard &quot;frost nova&quot; and your sorceror &quot;frost aura&quot; and your warlock &quot;frost ring&quot; which bassically do the same thing: a close burst ice damage spell that add some hindering to movement, be it &quot;slow&quot;, &quot;inmobilize&quot; or &quot;daze&quot;). Mike Mearls himself has tolk about this. 2) &quot;boosts&quot; come from 4e psionic powers. It helps to counter some of the 4e grips: fighters not being able to repeat same attack twice in an encounter. Essentials go this route, actually: you can use X effects as much as you want, and your &quot;encounter&quot; power is just &quot;boosting&quot; those effects damage, or adding a condition to them (in case of the hunter, for example). I also went with the &quot;points of effort&quot; solution (in my case, &quot;Adrenaline, Focus, Mana, Conviction&quot;) becouse it can be used for other things (such as activating some &quot;feats&quot;)3) races as &quot;class&quot; come from Legends of Anglerre, where your race just open you for race-related aspects. So an elf *might* learn &quot;elven sight&quot;, but not necesarelly needs to do so. This, coupled with no stat-boosting for them, make any race viable as companion of any other &quot;path&quot;However, we differ in some points. I dont use the 1000 page aproach (I dont like 30 variants of fireball. I just have one, which can be boosted). My paths have much less spells/powers on them, and there are &quot;skill stunts&quot; attached to skills, and Action Triggers seem to make the combat much more complex, I'll go the other way (reducing the number of things players can do in their turns -no minor action-, and the number of *interrupts* or *oportunity actions* they have, specially the offensive ones, plus getting rid of multiattacks -except for areas, solved with 1 single roll-). I want the combat to run faster, and everyone turn last as much as everyone else. I dont like when a player with action points, minor action/move action attacks, plus regular standard action, all of them multiattack/multitarget, needs 15 minutes to resolve their turn)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="triqui, post: 5512647, member: 57948"] Fun part is that *I* am in the process of remodelling 4e/3.5 to better suit my own playstyle, and SEVERAL of the things he has proposed are actually in the alpha status of the system. Probably we both got inspiration from same sources: 1) 3 paths come from guild wars/rifts (the videogame), and to a lesser degree to Dragon Age 2. There you can have several "paths" and combine them to build "unique" classes. It helps to counter one major flaw of 4e: the uniqueness of each powers (due to exception based design) make the players to need to learn several mechanically different powers for nearly the same result (ie: the fighter "footwork lure" and the swordmage equivalent power, which are *close* to be the same thing). Thus, a warrior "cleave", a barbarian "cleave" and a paladin "cleave" would be mechanically the same, all under a "path" (let's say... "vanguard"). This saves up pages in the book (you dont need a space for your wizard "frost nova" and your sorceror "frost aura" and your warlock "frost ring" which bassically do the same thing: a close burst ice damage spell that add some hindering to movement, be it "slow", "inmobilize" or "daze"). Mike Mearls himself has tolk about this. 2) "boosts" come from 4e psionic powers. It helps to counter some of the 4e grips: fighters not being able to repeat same attack twice in an encounter. Essentials go this route, actually: you can use X effects as much as you want, and your "encounter" power is just "boosting" those effects damage, or adding a condition to them (in case of the hunter, for example). I also went with the "points of effort" solution (in my case, "Adrenaline, Focus, Mana, Conviction") becouse it can be used for other things (such as activating some "feats") 3) races as "class" come from Legends of Anglerre, where your race just open you for race-related aspects. So an elf *might* learn "elven sight", but not necesarelly needs to do so. This, coupled with no stat-boosting for them, make any race viable as companion of any other "path" However, we differ in some points. I dont use the 1000 page aproach (I dont like 30 variants of fireball. I just have one, which can be boosted). My paths have much less spells/powers on them, and there are "skill stunts" attached to skills, and Action Triggers seem to make the combat much more complex, I'll go the other way (reducing the number of things players can do in their turns -no minor action-, and the number of *interrupts* or *oportunity actions* they have, specially the offensive ones, plus getting rid of multiattacks -except for areas, solved with 1 single roll-). I want the combat to run faster, and everyone turn last as much as everyone else. I dont like when a player with action points, minor action/move action attacks, plus regular standard action, all of them multiattack/multitarget, needs 15 minutes to resolve their turn) [/QUOTE]

Verification