What CAN'T you do with 4e?

[Doug McCrae]

Pun-Pun rests on PCs getting the use of a power intended only for NPCs. If you allow equality then every single monster ability has to be policed for balance.

 

[timbannock]

I, at least, limited myself to the 3 Core Books.

I always wished I had.

 

[Steely Dan]

Everyone playing bears some of the responsibility for maintaining game balance/playability. It's not all on the DM.

I wish there were more players like that.

 

[Mallus]

I wish there were more players like that.

Hi. You can't have mine .

BTW, nice screen name. Are you fan of the band, Burroughs, or both?

 

[BryonD]

No, it will.

You won't let yourself do it, for whatever reason.

Heh, ironic comment since the complaints against 3E over and over are about how people couldn't do so many things that I easily did all the time.

As far as new 4E classes, I'm certain that I could make quite a few easily. But that the constrainsts of the system would make it far less satisfactory than 3E. The core classes aren't clones of each other, but they are way to close for my preference. You start expanding the numbers and you are going to more and more get into nothing more than bolting different flavor to the same mechanics.

 

[Steely Dan]

-BTW, nice screen name.


-Are you fan of the band, Burroughs, or both?

-Thanks, glad someone appreciates it.


-Both, but Donald and Walter with more of a passion, it's kind of hard to call them a band, when their players (session) are constantly changing (Larry Carlton and Steve Gadd were the peak for me).

Oh, and it's always a pleasant surprise when someone knows the origin of their title.

 

[Andor]

Why?

Do you accept the idea that some abilities that would be appropriate for an entire-party-challenging short-term villain could be game-breaking in the hands of PC's? If so, why would you deliberately want to break the game? Everyone playing bears some of the responsibility for maintaining game balance/playability. It's not all on the DM.

No, I don't really accept that basic premise. First because a single villain challanging the entire party is presumably at a higher level so that by the time my character has learned enough to pull off that stunt it's not that big a deal. Secondly 'game-breaking' in my experience almost never means that one player is monopolizing the table which would be bad, usually it's GM code for "Wah! They now have the power to change my world in ways I didn't think of and I want sole control over everything!" Did the ability to make magic items in 3e wreck your game? Because that was the number one thing most previous editions outlawed.

My problem with PC/NPC power splits is it breaks my immersion to have visible red and blue circles around everyones feet telling the difference between PC and NPCs. Do you accept that ruining my suspension of disbelief lessens the game for me? If so, why would you deliberately want to break my suspension of disbelief? Everyone playing bears some of the responsibility for maintaining game immersion. It's not all on the Player.

 

[Scribble]

Secondly 'game-breaking' in my experience almost never means that one player is monopolizing the table which would be bad, usually it's GM code for "Wah! They now have the power to change my world in ways I didn't think of and I want sole control over everything!"

I've seen the reverse... the wah that NPC can do something I can't even though I never knew about it before, but since it does a lot of damage I could possibly use it to up my game and WIN D&D!!!! OOOOHHHH GIMMIE GIMMIE GIMMIE!!!! ALL THE XOP AND TREASURE IS MIIIINE!!!!

Did the ability to make magic items in 3e wreck your game? Because that was the number one thing most previous editions outlawed.

Outlawed? Don't remember it being outlawed... There just wasn't a system for it as far as I remember. (aside from vague descriptions of kitten tears and baby's whispers or something...)

My problem with PC/NPC power splits is it breaks my immersion to have visible red and blue circles around everyones feet telling the difference between PC and NPCs.

Visible red and blue circles? Huh?

 

[Gallo22]

What can't 4th Edition do...

...be back wards compatable to my $2,000 worth of 3.x books.

 

[Mallus]

I don't really accept that basic premise

That's a shame. It's a perfectly serviceable premise.

Secondly 'game-breaking' in my experience almost never means that one player is monopolizing the table which would be bad, usually it's GM code for "Wah! They now have the power to change my world in ways I didn't think of and I want sole control over everything!"

Then you've played under some bad DM's.

And in my experience, trying to 'bad DM-proof' the game means reducing the number of player options to a small, controlled set (I've never seen it increase them). Also, it's impossible...

Did the ability to make magic items in 3e wreck your game?

No. But I wasn't talking about magic item creation. That should have been obvious from what I wrote.

My problem with PC/NPC power splits is it breaks my immersion to have visible red and blue circles around everyones feet telling the difference between PC and NPCs.

Again, it breaks your immersion that different characters (one PC, one NPC) should have different abilities that represent different (fake) life experiences? Or that they have different abilities that represent their different roles in the game (it's still a game, right?).

Do you accept that ruining my suspension of disbelief lessens the game for me?

Let's say that I'm questioning how you're constructing that suspension of disbelief.

If so, why would you deliberately want to break my suspension of disbelief?

Because you're constructing it badly. Specifically, in a way that results in removing interesting elements from play (you're requiring all abilities/items/wahoo be acquirable by PC's, so good luck running an LotR knockoff).

Everyone playing bears some of the responsibility for maintaining game immersion.

Note that this doesn't absolve you of your responsibility as a player...

It's not all on the Player.

Never said it was. But you're the one demanding that all in-game abilities be player-accessible.