To all D&D fans - what are the top 3 specific changes 4e needs in your opinion

[subrosas]

1) More fluff. I don't care if it is in the core books, or separate books, but I want to send you $$$ for fluff. I'm serious! This includes fluff on monsters, fluff on society, fluff on magic, fluff on the gods. Throw it all in there. Make it contradict itself - I can pick the parts I like and ignore the parts I don't like. But I want some sugar with my medicine!

2) More ritual / alchemy style sub-systems. I like them a lot... Expand and deepen the skill challenge system. Its a good start, but I think it could be taken further. In short - more non-combat options.

3) More rules to make dwarven fighters distinct from human fighters, and orb wizards different from staff wizards. I liked the hints that were dropped early on, and was disappointed that this seemed scaled back in the released rulebooks.

 

[Dausuul]

- SKill choice. Why does every character of the same class have the exact same skills? I can see not bringing back skill points -- but why not just allow a choice of X trained skills from a subset Y for a given class?

Um, X trained skills from a subset Y for a given class is how 4E works already...

 

[Plane Sailing]

Um, X trained skills from a subset Y for a given class is how 4E works already...

olgar is probably thinking about the mandatory thievery skill for rogues or dungeoneering/nature for rangers.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

1) More time to play

2) More DMs, so I can play more

3) Fewer amazingly sucktastic edition threads on EnWorld

PS

Agreed, Agreed, and.. well, I ignore those so it doesn't matter.

I echo 1) above, but would change:

2) online {Dragon Mag, web enhancement, whatever} fluff and setting specific articles, leaving the generic crunch for the pay-to-access books and DDI.

3) would be a transparent overlay with a 1" hex grid so I can print off the module battlemaps and drop the overlay on... instant writable grid and gets rid of non-euclidian movement in one stroke!


I love the system and think many of the loudest complaints {long slug-fest combats, no out of combat rules} are really the symptom of DM's that don't adjust the campaign to the players expectations.

 

[doctorhook]

I'm a 4E fan, man.

1.) BETTER PROOFREADING, EDITING, AND PRINTING! The smudgy paper and ink is a bummer, but what really gets me is when products get released without having been proofread and edited immediately prior to printing. Mislabelling isn't cool. There shouldn't be sloppy, inconsistent formatting thoughout the entire book (AV). It's fine to issue rules updates, but copyediting ought to be done right the first time.

2.) More updates! Adherence to mathematical balance is one area I don't expect them to get right straight out of the gate. I expect them to try, but I'm fine with making changes to the rules based on player feedback. In short, I love updates, and I wish they'd release more of them!

3.) Dragon and Dungeon content that's balanced! Fluff has been top-notch in Dragon so far, but mechanically, things have been very shaky. A prestige class from Dragon ought to follow the same established format as printed ones before it, not strike out on its own like the Student of Caiphon. Ditto for other mechanical elements. Significantly, with the online magazines, there remains the option of hot-editing. Why isn't this done? Add a date to the .PDF and a note on the download page explaining what was changed. Dragon and Dungeon currently receive even less editing and proofreading than the printed materials, if the quality thereof is any indication. Worse still, as things stand today, neither magazine ever receives any significant updates.

 

[pukunui]

I've actually just given up DMing 4e because I've gone from loving it to not quite hating it ... but one of the other guys in the group wants to have a go DMing it, so I'm going to try playing it to see if I like it any better from the other side of the screen. So far it's not looking so great -- trying to build a PC is making me like this edition even less.

Although 4e is a definite improvement over 3.x, I prefer the SWSE system overall.

In order for me to reconsider 4e as the best game, I would need to:

1. Scrap the entire 4e class system and replace it with SWSE's talent tree-based classes/PrCs and its superior multiclassing system. SWSE's classes are so much more elegant and streamlined, not to mention more open-ended and customizable. 4e's classes really do feel incredibly restrictive after playing SWSE for a while ... and I hate the artificiality of encounter/daily limits (especially on the martial powers) and the restrictiveness of the powers-by-level system (why can my character only learn to do non-combat things at 2nd level, 6th level, and so on? In SWSE, you'd be able to learn comparable talents whenever you wanted to really ...). Bottom line: Talents are better than powers any day.

2. Reduce monster hit points across the board. As others have said, monsters have too many hit points and fights simply drag on too long. I know that not every monster is supposed to fight to the death, but still -- with some of the tougher monsters, it can take ages just to get them to bloodied.

3. Rethink healing. The healing surge mechanic really does absolutely nothing to address the "15 minute work day" issue. In fact, I think it only actually makes it worse because once you're out of healing surges, that's it. You simply cannot proceed because you can't even use healing potions to heal you any further. Yes, the ubiquitous wand of clw was an issue in 3.x, but at least it was an option for characters that had run out of healing magic and the like.

 

[Mottokrosh]

I'm quite a fan of 4E, but I have some issues too. Here's my top 3 changes wishlist.

1. Presentation. The is perhaps my biggest gripe. I love reading rulebooks and get inspired by them, and this includes the art and fluff, but also the general look and feel of the book. I think the graphic design of current books is very, very bland and uninspiring. The power lists are dreary to look at, let alone read through, for example. Get texture back in there. Worse, much worse, is that the graphic design seems to be fixed for ALL books, current and future. I understand that they want to make all books look more similar, to encourage cross-campaign sales. BUT imagine hating the look that was settled on, thus discouraging all sales. I don't quite hate it personally, but I might in a few months if it never changes! This will become a big issue down the line. Bring back 3.x's variety in graphic design!
2. Bland Spells. Focus is good, but how many more powers that do X damage and Y side-effect do we need? Now, some of these are very cool, but we need more diversity going forward, especially for casters.
3. Clunky Mechanics. While the overall design of 4E is pretty good, a few things don't quite gel. Daily item caps, fixed "utility" power slots, skill challenges, I'm looking at you. I agree with what a lot of other posters have said on these issues. Daily powers should not be called daily if they can't be used once per day.

 

[Zustiur]

Reactionary version:
1) rip it up
2) give me my money back
3) start again

Non-reactionary/fair version:
1) Remove at-will attack powers for nearly all classes
2) Put the magic items back in the DMG
3) Return to 'traditional' core classes and races.

4) Bring back non standard vision, even if only for non player races.
(Drow that can't see in the dark? What is this heresy?)

 

[Raven Crowking]

Top four changes needed, and why, IMHO:

(1) Return to an attrition-based model. The attrition-based model looks at an adventure setting as a whole, and each encounter as meaningful predominantly in terms of how it affects overall attrition. This means that a short, easy fight that costs you something tangible is still meaningful. It also means that every fight doesn't have to last 40+ minutes in order to seem worthwhile.

(2) Return to the OGL. No matter how wonderful the folks at WotC are, the system is going to be stretched, pulled, spindled, and mutilated only when 3pp have a crack at doing so. If you don't like the "feel" of WotC-4e, another company can provide things (like normal animals) that you might feel are missing. The best single monster book for 3e, IMHO, was Tome of Horrors (Necromancer Games). The second best was Predators (Betabunny). 4e is in drastic need of this sort of thing.

(3) Allow mundane powers to be mundane; allow magical powers to be magical. "Fixing" the spellcasting classes by making everyone, in effect, a sub-par Vancian caster simply doesn't do it for me. Nor do mundane powers that cause wounds to close and bones to knit seem all that believable. Which leads to

(4) Fluff and crunch must match. If you can damage someone on a "miss", I suggest that you stop calling it a miss. If a character isn't actually wounded when hit, stop calling it "damage". If there was never actually damage, don't call it "healing".


RC

 

[Drkfathr1]

I've noticed that several posters have mentioned the art/layout, and I've seen that comment in other threads too, which made me wonder...

What happened to all that cool art in the preview books? The ones that DID inspire everyone, that got everyone clamouring for wallpaper images? I look back at some of those, and then look at what's actually in the finished books, and I think WTH?