Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
What's so bad about 4th edition? What's so good about other systems?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="catastrophic" data-source="post: 5614579" data-attributes="member: 81381"><p>. . .still not seeing it.</p><p> </p><p>I don't think any 4e fas has a problem wiht this idea, and in truth, there are mechanics like that in 4e- they don't always work though, and the psionic classes are a clear example of this. </p><p> </p><p>The problem people have is when people act as if the kind of design we saw in previous editions was not only positive, but lucid. There was nothing lucid about how fighters, rogues, and full progression spellcasters related to each other in previous editions. It was just garbage design. </p><p> </p><p>Adding balance was a very good thing 4e did. The classes are not perfectly balanced, in fac tmore balance is needed for some neglected class builds like whirling slayers and some of the v shaped classes, but the status quo is still vastly superior to the rtap-laden, caster-dominated design of other editions.</p><p> </p><p>Contrary to what the haters may claim, the powers systme is a good thing, and rejecting it is not good design. It allows both players and desginers to better compare and understand classes, and that means people get better pick and build the class they want, instead of being trickedby bad design, or forced to adopt some wierd spiked chain build to make their class as fun to play as the other classes at the table.</p><p> </p><p>Wotc has tried to mod the class system several times, with varying success. Essentials does this, as does psionics- the verdict is stil out on both of these, but i think the problem wiht the classes is less their balance, which is ok, and more their inability to be juged by the same standards another classes, by a potential player. </p><p> </p><p>I certainly think that strong, unique mechanics would be a good thing for classes and power sources to have. But they have to exist within the context or a strong, reliable, and legible class system, in order for them to be well balanced, and easy for a player to understand and compare to other classes.</p><p> </p><p>If anything, a 'strong core mechanic' mandate would enhance the strengths of 4e design. It kinda exists at present, but it needs to be more dominant, so that you can look at say, a defender, look at their challenge power, and understand how they operate in their role, without having to look over all their powers to see how thngs actually pan out in play. OTOH, this frees up powers to be more fun at being powers, rather than doing double duty backing up the core class mechanic.</p><p> </p><p>I can also imagine similar mechanics by power source would be a great and characterful way to give each class a 'seconday role'. If each divine character has the same 'use this to heal a dude or turn undead' power, and each primal character has a 'get some temp hp' power, and so on, then players can easily what their pcs does, b comparing those effects, and each poer source has the kind of clear thementic qualities that 4e was flirting with, but needs to implement more clearly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="catastrophic, post: 5614579, member: 81381"] . . .still not seeing it. I don't think any 4e fas has a problem wiht this idea, and in truth, there are mechanics like that in 4e- they don't always work though, and the psionic classes are a clear example of this. The problem people have is when people act as if the kind of design we saw in previous editions was not only positive, but lucid. There was nothing lucid about how fighters, rogues, and full progression spellcasters related to each other in previous editions. It was just garbage design. Adding balance was a very good thing 4e did. The classes are not perfectly balanced, in fac tmore balance is needed for some neglected class builds like whirling slayers and some of the v shaped classes, but the status quo is still vastly superior to the rtap-laden, caster-dominated design of other editions. Contrary to what the haters may claim, the powers systme is a good thing, and rejecting it is not good design. It allows both players and desginers to better compare and understand classes, and that means people get better pick and build the class they want, instead of being trickedby bad design, or forced to adopt some wierd spiked chain build to make their class as fun to play as the other classes at the table. Wotc has tried to mod the class system several times, with varying success. Essentials does this, as does psionics- the verdict is stil out on both of these, but i think the problem wiht the classes is less their balance, which is ok, and more their inability to be juged by the same standards another classes, by a potential player. I certainly think that strong, unique mechanics would be a good thing for classes and power sources to have. But they have to exist within the context or a strong, reliable, and legible class system, in order for them to be well balanced, and easy for a player to understand and compare to other classes. If anything, a 'strong core mechanic' mandate would enhance the strengths of 4e design. It kinda exists at present, but it needs to be more dominant, so that you can look at say, a defender, look at their challenge power, and understand how they operate in their role, without having to look over all their powers to see how thngs actually pan out in play. OTOH, this frees up powers to be more fun at being powers, rather than doing double duty backing up the core class mechanic. I can also imagine similar mechanics by power source would be a great and characterful way to give each class a 'seconday role'. If each divine character has the same 'use this to heal a dude or turn undead' power, and each primal character has a 'get some temp hp' power, and so on, then players can easily what their pcs does, b comparing those effects, and each poer source has the kind of clear thementic qualities that 4e was flirting with, but needs to implement more clearly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions
What's so bad about 4th edition? What's so good about other systems?
Top