What CAN'T you do with 4e?

[korjik]

My very biggest problem with 4e that I cant do with 3e is one of two parts.

Either:
1) I cant fix the problems of 3e

2) I cant use my preexisting world without major changes.

 

[Tsyr]

What does this actually mean?

Well I'm not Byron, but at a guess...

If I was wanting to run a high-fantasy game, my choices for system would be entirely different than if I wanted to run a low fantasy game. For high fantasy, I might pick some prior version of DnD, or perhaps Exalted, or something else. But by contrast, if I wanted to run a low fantasy game, I might still pick an older version of DnD, or I might pick Riddle of Steel, or maybe Ars Magica or Witch Hunter or something else.

I certainly wouldn't pick Exalted for a low fantasy game, although I concede that with enough rules manipulation you could maybe use it for one, because its system doesn't mesh well with my conception of low fantasy. By the same token, I could introduce enough spells and magic systems to make Riddle of Steel into high fantasy, but I wouldn't.

In both cases, older versions of DnD could fit, just by trimming away some excess fat. It doesn't, to me, feel this way in 4E. 4E feels like I would have a much harder time making it something beyond "Points of Light".

 

[Lizard]

Right.

I don't get why some people are so opposed to 'antagonist only' abilities. I see as a practical matter, protagonist and antagonist abilities serve different functions. PC abilities need to to balanced against frequent use and other the PC abilities. Antagonist abilities need to provide a challenge to the PC's for an encounter (or a few, at most, in the case of a recurring villain).
.

Because some people prefer a game which models a world which doesn't know who the protagonists are?

I "get" that 4e is narrativist. But that's a huge paradigm shift. Going from "this is a world, there's people in it, the rules give you a rough model of what they can do" to "There's a story to be told, you're the heroes, you'll fight the villains" is a major change from 3e to 4e.

YOU have no trouble with protagonist/antagonist abilities. A lot of people, however, DO have trouble with "Somehow, these people learned abilities which no one else knows and which PCs of equivalent training and power can't learn." Being told that the evil wizard's spell is pure plot device and that they can't pick it up can be very SOD-breaking. (And, in 4e, the evil rogue's cunning attack or the evil fighter's cool polearm trick.)

The more the unreality of the world is thrust into the face of the players, the harder it is for them to care about the world or their characters.

 

[Tsyr]

Right.

I don't get why some people are so opposed to 'antagonist only' abilities. I see as a practical matter, protagonist and antagonist abilities serve different functions. PC abilities need to to balanced against frequent use and other the PC abilities. Antagonist abilities need to provide a challenge to the PC's for an encounter (or a few, at most, in the case of a recurring villain).

They need to do different jobs, so I don't see why they should be interchangeable. It's a little like insisting you should be able to weld with a food processor and julienne carrots with an acetylene torch.

To my mind, if a power exists in the world that a "normal" badguy (As opposed to, say, a minor godling or something) can access, then I feel if a PC is willing to put enough work into finding the secrets of it out, that same power should be availible to a PC. Just telling them "Oh, sorry... That's not really something you can do. It's just something this guy did."... It's as nonsensical, to me, as if we assumed Fireball was for PCs only.

I run my games, with certain setting-specific exceptions (such as Exalted) as worlds where "Player Character" is not branded into the forehead and souls of player characters. They live and die by the same rules as everyone else.

 

[pawsplay]

It's an RPG. It "can do" anything. If I say my guy sunders the bad guy's sword, and the DM allows it, it happens.

We are talking about what "it" can do, not what YOU can do. You don't pay money to gain the benefit of your own creative talents.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I can't know under precisely what circumstances two abjuration spells in close proximity will become more noticeable. Nor how noticeable they will become. 3e tells me this, on page 81 of the PHB -

"Active abjuration spells within 10 feet of each other for 24 hours or more create barely visible energy fluctuations. These fluctuations give you a +4 bonus on Search checks to locate such abjuration spells."

Now I suppose you're going to tell me I could just 'handwave' it. Well I didn't pay for almost 1000 pages of rules to just handwave things. If I wanted to handwave everything I would be playing Amber.

 

[Scribble]

I can't know under precisely what circumstances two abjuration spells in close proximity will become more noticeable. Nor how noticeable they will become. 3e tells me this, on page 81 of the PHB -

"Active abjuration spells within 10 feet of each other for 24 hours or more create barely visible energy fluctuations. These fluctuations give you a +4 bonus on Search checks to locate such abjuration spells."

Now I suppose you're going to tell me I could just 'handwave' it. Well I didn't pay for almost 1000 pages of rules to just handwave things. If I wanted to handwave everything I would be playing Amber.

How hard do you want it to be to notice the abjuration spells?

 

[Zogmo]

Please note this is comedy. In before someone takes it badly anyways.

I can't make a half-orc lawful neutral monk

Comedy? COMEDY!? It's funny you said this.

I do love 4e so far and am gladly enjoying D&D more than I have in 5 years. So the overall game changes are very much welcome.

That was by far my most favorite character to play. I can't wait for the PBH II

 

[DandD]

As a specific example, my wizard collects any scrap of spell he can lay his hands on. To the point of if it is a choice of save the girl or get the bad guys spellbook, the girl better hope someone else is doing the saving. If I saw the wizard we were battling cast a spell, say Vile Obliteration, and my wizard hadnt seen it before, I would take great efforts to find the other guys books after we waked him. To be told 'oooh, sorry, that is a bad guy only power' would be a real problem.

Heck, the fact that I am limited to 3 dailies per level is really really REALLY annoying.

Yes, blast those utility spells which you can also memorize into your spellbook and chose from like the normal daily powers, and all those rituals. And damn all these encounter powers and your at-will powers.
Damn those fighters, rogues, rangers and everybody else. Now I don't suck at level 1-4, and I don't own everybody else at 8-12. That's not fair. Why do other players also have fun in combat and social encounters? Only spellcasters should be allowed to do that.

 

[Lizard]

How hard do you want it to be to notice the abjuration spells?

"Hey, this monster manual is just blank pages!"
"How hard do you want it to be to kill a dragon?"