D&D 4E The Best Thing from 4E

[D'karr]

I forgot to add characters that play as the desired concept from the beginning rather than waiting 3, 4, 7, 11 levels before becoming the character concept the player envisioned.

 

[Sethmaster]

I like how I can use refluff the classes and powers as anything and play in any setting with only a few additional rules like ammunition and sanity checks.
Also how every class is viable and play differently from others in their roles with their own uniqueness.

Also, I goddamn love warlords.

 

[cavalier973]

The "Four Defenses" model is an elegant one that I really like.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Haha, I'm the only one to vote for the edition wars? (I also voted for skill challenges and paragon paths.) What can I say? I think the conversations they sparked are actually really valuable when it comes to evaluating game mechanics (and why I might value certain mechanics over others). I'm not much into it anymore, but I think that's because those conversations really helped flesh out my views on gaming, and let me verbalize what I like in a way I hadn't been able to prior to many of those conversations.

Communication is useful, even if it's destructive.

 

[Manbearcat]

Haha, I'm the only one to vote for the edition wars? (I also voted for skill challenges and paragon paths.) What can I say? I think the conversations they sparked are actually really valuable when it comes to evaluating game mechanics (and why I might value certain mechanics over others). I'm not much into it anymore, but I think that's because those conversations really helped flesh out my views on gaming, and let me verbalize what I like in a way I hadn't been able to prior to many of those conversations.

Communication is useful, even if it's destructive.

Absolutely. Great post. The edition wars were extremely valuable for clarifying how very specific components of game design (especially the aesthetic/presentation component) negatively or positively affects folks of various mental frameworks. You got some xp for those last 7 words (bolded mine)!

Mechanically I'd say that the best thing from 4e was completely decoupling hit point recovery from spell-casting. Just that innovation was enough to really break open the wall. This introduced options for self recovery.

<snip>

The second one in my book is transparent mechanics, which ties directly to consistent maths.

<snip>

The third would be self-contained monsters. Easy to use, easy to wing, and easy to prepare. A delight to be used in combat and a delight for preparation time.

I'd also add a ditto to everything [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] put on his post.

I forgot to add characters that play as the desired concept from the beginning rather than waiting 3, 4, 7, 11 levels before becoming the character concept the player envisioned.

I'll ditto everything in this post as well. The transparency is a huge one!

My main love is the explicitness. The designers were explicit about the maths so that player groups can use it and morph it if they must to create the game they want. Power effects are explicit so that the game does not become an enforced "beauty contest" where, if the GM likes* your idea it will succeed (albeit you might need to make a roll), but if they dislike* your idea it will likely fail ("well, you need an athletics check to catch up to where the giant is, followed by acrobatics to jump on his back and a STR and a DEX check to stay on. Then roll your attack - but you get a -4 modifier because he's thrashing about").

Transparency again. I'm going to piggy-back on this. Transparency is kryptonite for my most disliked GMing technique; illusionism (by way of GM force). The abridgement or suspension of the formula of GM framed situation + player action declaration + the action resolution mechanics as the primary driver of play is never good. It is especially not good when it is done so that the primary driver of play then becomes GM inclination (either arbitrarily or even in the interest of their metaplot). When GMs are enabled to willfully keep that subordination a secret due to there being an opaque/fuzzy curtain between the players and the game's machinery (until the GM clumsily and inevitably goes a bridge too far and continuously does things clearly out of line, thus showing their hand), that is illusionism. It comes in multiple shapes and sizes, but illusionism's best friend is unclear/incoherent/hand-wavey rules, vague GMing principles/guidance, and a stout invocation that the GM is always right/can do what they want for the sake of story/"its the GM's game"; see White Wolf's "Golden Rule" and D&D's historical "Rule 0".

4e's transparency kicked that approach in its teeth and took its lunch money. Though it would never be readily admitted, I have absolutely no doubt that much gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands was had in the edition wars because many GMs had their precious illusionism taken from their toolbox.

 

[fjw70]

I picked 3 without reading the post.

Healing surges, the math framework, and easy monster/encounter design is what I liked most.

 

[mflayermonk]

Characters were good at early levels.
Monster Manual 3.
Wide variety of race choices.

 

[Schmoe]

I voted Other. Minions were the big innovation that I really liked from 4E. I think the idea was great and really lends itself to creating cinematic, dramatic combat scenarios. I'm not a 4E fan, but the Minions rules are inspiring.

 

[LostSoul]

I always felt that 4E made it easy to adjudicate non-standard actions.

 

[Balesir]

I voted Other. Minions were the big innovation that I really liked from 4E. I think the idea was great and really lends itself to creating cinematic, dramatic combat scenarios. I'm not a 4E fan, but the Minions rules are inspiring.

This is another "other" I agree with (but didn't think of when I originally posted). I would widen it, though - the whole minion - standard - elite - solo - swarm* spectrum allows combat encounters using monsters from the full range of "levels", but scaled and adjusted to suit the current PC level well. The only thing really missing was a stage between minion and standard - which is why several house-rule variants of such a thing exist.

*: By treating groups of low level creatures as swarms, you can not only use them at very high level, you also get to use them without the masses and masses of attack rolls required with just lots of puny combatants. Archer swarms with Area attacks and melee swarms with an Aura that does damage and that can act like a "mount" for a higher level creature (or PC) that joins with it combine to give all the tools you need for small-ish battles on your tabletop.