D&D 4E Stealing 5e movement for 4e : how hard?

[Garthanos]

Well, another element would be a greater separation of role function. If, say, controllers did a good bit less damage, then using your controller to debuff/tactically disadvantage some of the baddies while the fighter blenderizes the rest would be more of a thing...

Any allow non-damage to compete a bit better with kill it ... regardless of role separation

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Any allow non-damage to compete a bit better with kill it ... regardless of role separation

I think 4e takes that to something of an extreme. Anyway, I think you could cut damage output by, let us say for the sake of argument, a 'wizard' vs a 'fighter' and give the wizard a bit more in the way of 'status effect' kind of stuff without wrecking the game.
Here's a thought. Instead of saying Wizbang can daze and Swordbang can do loads of damage, how about if Wizbang has to pay a resource cost to play the damage game at Swordbang's level, and vice versa? This is actually CLOSE to how 4e seems to have wanted things to work, but it tends to get more and more mushy with added layers of supplements and whatnot.

 

[Garthanos]

I think 4e takes that to something of an extreme. Anyway, I think you could cut damage output by, let us say for the sake of argument, a 'wizard' vs a 'fighter' and give the wizard a bit more in the way of 'status effect' kind of stuff without wrecking the game.
Here's a thought. Instead of saying Wizbang can daze and Swordbang can do loads of damage, how about if Wizbang has to pay a resource cost to play the damage game at Swordbang's level, and vice versa? This is actually CLOSE to how 4e seems to have wanted things to work, but it tends to get more and more mushy with added layers of supplements and whatnot.

its intriguing I grant you...

 

[Garthanos]

But kill it is ever the best conditions which is what I was talking about.

 

[Garthanos]

4e tends to have non-debilitating conditions (IE slow, weakness, marked, minor attack/defense penalty, dazed). So its rare that one can really put certain monsters on the 'back burner' to a really significant degree.

I am thinking sustained weakness means offense has been taken down a significant notch. (its actually similar in some ways to a major attack penalty)

 

[Tony Vargas]

What do people think about transporting 5e movement back to 4e? what challenges might there be?
Any issues you see?
It feels natural ... i see powers that allow delivery of multiple attacks some have intrinsic movement between and others do not those seem like they would be a challenge factore

In the sense of the non-convertible move action? It'd screw with the action economy, a bit. The ability to intersperse movement & attack might make some powers seem less significant, though they usually involve additional movement over and above that of the move action, so maybe not.

In the sense of counting diagonals, nah, not worth the added complexity. ;P