The D&D 4th edition Rennaissaince: A look into the history of the edition, its flaws and its merits

[Kannik]

It's dangerous to go alone. Use this!

Ayup, that's the path to take to create or adjust a non-MM3/MV opponent. The "halve hitpoints, double damage" "fix" that is commonly bandied about was both a) not what MM3-math did and b) if memory serves came from a very specific instance someone was choosing to do for a very specific reason in their game and somehow it got turned into generic/blanket "need to do."

Making or tweaking opponents is one of my joys with the 4e system. Easy to craft the baseline (using those business card values), tweak to suit, and then design the abilities, auras, and powers to inject maximum flavour. Add in a sweet recharge and impactful power to really hammer home (pun intended) not only their combat role but their their fiction and theme. Serve to the party.

 

[Kannik]

I was also a multiclassing fanatic pre-4E, and initially tried multiclassing with some of my first characters, but found it unsatisfying.

For me, though, it turned out that the greater complexity and wealth of options available to single-classed martial characters made them exciting to me for the first time. I could play a single-classed Thief all the way to 30th, and a single-classed Fighter to 20th (two examples from two of the first campaigns I played in) and be happy as a clam with them, not needing spells to feel like I had cool abilities.

And then later in the edition they came out with Gestalt characters, who scratched that "true" multiclass itch, but I mostly was enjoying the novelty of satisfying single-classed characters.

Multiclassing in 4e, especially the power-swap feats, is interesting. I've oft toyed with getting rid of needing a feat to swap powers (ie once you take the entry level MC feat you can eventually mimic the swap feats w/o spending them) -- often, swapping the feat may give more flavour and sometimes more utility in certain circumstances, but not necessarily more 'power' (especially as you don't have all the class riders that would build upon the power itself). But there are some cases where you can get much more out of it than it might seem at first blush, so I understand having the feats help act as a gatekeeper rather than having the DM need to evaluate and pull back if something is breaking the campaign.

Hybrid multiclassing was indeed a a treat, though! So many neat, fun to play, and fiction/flavour-packed character concepts were available from that. I can especially remember the cleric/monk of Ilmater from my Bloodstone campaign, and my ranger/tempest-fighter that I was fortunate to play twice in two iterations of a campaign.

(Technically, I got to play her thrice, with the first iteration of the campaign happening years before under the 3.5e rules.)

 

[Joshua Randall]

On the topic of silly hybrids and MC, I present one of my proudest accomplishments in 4e nonsense "optimization": the
Psi-SwordLock Harlequin, an eladrin who can use Fey Step and thus Eladrin Swordmage Advance 4X per encounter.

D&D 4E Thread 'Eladrin Swordmage Advance shenanigans'

Nov 16, 2021

(Why I am posting a 4e character optimization thread here in 2021? Because I was going through some old files, came across this, and felt the desire to share. Enjoy!)

Eladrin Swordmage Advance (ESA) is a feat that allows you to make an MBA as a free action against an enemy you teleport adjacent to with Fey Step. Which is a fun and reasonably optimized ways to get some extra damage on the swordmage -- effectively this lets you make an attack as (part of) a Move Action in addition to your normal Standard Action attack.

ESA is particularly good on a Swordmage with Aegis of...

• Joshua Randall
• Replies: 2
• Forum: Character Builds & Optimization

• 
• 

 

[Micah Sweet]

Martial: Martial powers are not magic in the traditional sense, although some martial powers stand well beyond the capabilities of ordinary mortals. Martial characters use their own strength and willpower to vanquish their enemies. Training and dedication replace arcane formulas and prayers to grant fighters, rangers, rogues, and warlords, among others, their power. Martial powers are called exploits.

So while it doesn't quite mention anime territory, the 4e PHB is quite clear that martial heroes can perform deeds just as unrealistic as a wizard evoking fire from nothing.

Never said it wasn't, but it clearly still wasn't what enough folks wanted out of a game that tried to replace their current D&D.

 

[Staffan]

Never said it wasn't, but it clearly still wasn't what enough folks wanted out of a game that tried to replace their current D&D.

Clearly not. But you can't say it wasn't made clear.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Ehhhh, what’s that sonny? SPEAK UP!

I’m probably old enough that I could stat you out as a 5Ed critter called a “whippersnapper”.

…if I can find my glasses.

Its not impossible, but it seems--unlikely. If true, you're amazingly coherent and net-capable for your age.

(It might have been a while, but I've mentioned in the past I'm not too far off from my 68'th birthday and have been gaming for rapidly approaching a half century...)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Its not impossible, but it seems--unlikely. If true, you're amazingly coherent and net-capable for your age.

(It might have been a while, but I've mentioned in the past I'm not too far off from my 68'th birthday and have been gaming for rapidly approaching a half century...)

I forgot you’ve got a decade on me. Y’see! Maybe I’m not so coherent after all!
That said, before anyone else can take the shot…

Amusingly, I’ve got about 47 years in the hobby myself. We must have found it within a couple years of each other.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I forgot you’ve got a decade on me. Y’see! Maybe I’m not so coherent after all!
That said, before anyone else can take the shot…
View attachment 395220

Amusingly, I’ve got about 47 years in the hobby myself. We must have found it within a couple years of each other.

You actually started younger than I did from the sound of it, which wasn't as common that early as it was a few years later (but I'm not surprised we're not radically separated in age--we're both old Hero heads, and while that isn't an automatic marker for age, its a good indicator...)

(Amusingly, some years ago when I married my considerably younger wife and said "I know I know, I'm robbing the cradle", one of my best friends said "No, she's just robbing the grave..."

 

[EzekielRaiden]

You piqued my interest enough to make me dig through 30 pages of this thread in search of that post. I second the opinion that rules for "light combats" would alleviate 4e problems. Do you have any ideas how this would be accomplished or is that just an abstract wish?

Very, very loose ideas, so...not a lot more than an abstract wish, but still technically more?

That is, my notions are as follows.

1. You can convert at least most regular combats to skirmishes by "flattening" it--presumably, treating each entity as an obstacle that must be matched by an attack roll. I would suspect that minions could be clumped together as a single obstacle; conversely, a dangerous elite or solo might require multiple successes to defeat via skirmish.
2. Both enemy powers and player powers feed into these considerations. PCs can be assumed to benefit from Encounter powers, for example, so those would be treated as being already factored in.
3. Keep the number of rolls per player small. No more than 3, and preferably only 1. These need to be snappy--unless it would be a grave loss, always take the simpler option for figuring things out or resolving them. (Edit: Grave loss at a design level, to be clear. We don't want to be forcing players to choose between "fast, but failing" vs "successful, but plodding".)
4. Your role and/or power source may give you a leg up. Frex: a Skirmish against a single big nasty Solo might mean a Defender can take a penalty to her Skirmish roll (say, -2) in order to give everyone else a +2, because the Solo is Marked and thus can't focus as hard on them. Likewise, in a fight against Undead, Clerics in particular and maybe divine characters in general might get +2 to their rolls.
5. Daily powers or consumable items can be expended for some kind of benefit, probably invented by the DM but with Page 42-style guidance for examples of things that are generally worth doing. No more than one such benefit per person though; KISS is our watchword.
6. A single failed roll doesn't necessarily mean the skirmish has failed, just that it was very rough for that participant. It might cost you a Healing Surge; and if you failed badly (e.g. natural 1), you might have to roll again to avoid more long-lasting harm (e.g. a condition or the like.)
7. The skirmish DC depends (naturally!) on the level of the enemies present in it.
8. Some fights are not entirely appropriate for being implemented as skirmishes, so DMs should be forewarned that these rules are not meant to provide a rich tactical experience, but rather to ensure that even "two goblins in a hallway" encounters still have teeth but aren't agonizingly slow to deal with. You probably could play a game using only Skirmishes, but I think you'd be missing out.

Much of this was more gut feeling prior to actually writing it all out here, hence why I say it wasn't just a wish...but wasn't a lot more than one either.

 

[Joshua Randall]

There's some nods towards what @EzekielRaiden calls "Skirmish Rules" in some of the LFR adventures, when there is a desire to dispose of a bunch of routine enemies quickly, and/or as a way to do resource attrition without busting out a battlemap.

I'll address this as part of my another project that I'm working on.... (mysterious music)