What's the first thing you guess you'll have to house-rule?

[Emirikol]

I've got the following things in mind (if we continue in lower-magic Hyboria or if we swap to Melnibone or Nehwon):
a) human subraces (25 in the current game) in place of warforged and demi's
b) spellcasting nerfs (probably have to see what these new multiclassing rules will do first)
c) drop or nerf a few anti-heroic heroic spells (mass sleep, entangle, evards, turn undead, etc.)
d) magic is magic: there is no divine/arcane distinction

I think my group already uses all the rest of the stuff from 4E so there probably won't be much changeover otherwise..just new books...

jh
[edit: ah yes...eliminating whatever remains of alignment-as-a-rule-or-related-to-spells-or-the-outer-planes]
[edit2: since all editions since the beginning of time: replacement for dead PC's rule: no x.p. loss, 50% starting loot]

 

[Zander]

Most likely Animate Object will still be a divine only spell. I'll houserule that it is both divine and arcane. As I've posted before in this forum, there are many well-known folkloric, literary and film references to arcane magic users being able to animate objects.

I'll also change the flavour of monks from oriental to occidental.

 

[Emirikol]

Are monks going to be in 4E?

jh

 

[I'm A Banana]

Interesting. I have never seen or heard of roles besides "tank", "healer/buffer", "dps" and " debuffer". Well, in no system that actually worked.
I suppose you could add "noncombat guy", who reads a book during the combat sections, or "specialist", who is very good in half of the encounters and spends the other half on the benches along with "noncombat guy".

Or further diversify the four roles into: "Tank", "AoE-Guy", "Melee DPS", "Ranged DPS", "Buffer", "Healer", "Debuffer". But then you need more than four players, and you need to divide the roles very strictly (i.e. no worthwhile damage dealing for the Tank), otherwise they overlap too much, because their focus is so narrow. You would need to redesign all classes.

It depends on what kind of game you're playing.

D&D, as it probably should be, is being designed primarily for the most action-packed fun moments of play: the combats. You have a Defender (who protects others), the Striker (who is mobile, who gets in, hits hard, and gets out), the Leader (who helps others do their job better) and the Controller (who dictates what others can do).

But let's say I'm playing a campaign wherein the PC's need to be less combatants, more (let's say) politicians. We'll want a, say, Negotiator (who gives things to get things), a Peacekeeper (who can influence people's emotional states), an Enforcer (who has the muscle to stop violations), and an Economist (who helps supply the party with all they need). I don't need to re-design the classes per se, I just need to add roles onto what they already do, roles more appropriate for the game I'm playing.

Or let's say I'm playing a horror-themed campaign where actual combat is very binary (either you kill it quickly, or it kills you quickly). We might need a Sage (who can discover things' weaknesses), a Doctor (who can prevent the creeping doom from grabbing ahold of you), a Survivalist (who can help you find resources under pressure), and a Brave (who has the cojones to actually confront the horror, and who helps others to do the same).

D&D is action-adventure and sparring party-based combat is a good place for the core game to focus, but it's hardly exhaustive of what the game can be (or the types of games I want to run).

My biggest fear in 4e is that they focus on that to the exclusion of D&D's vast potential, that they destroy some of the modability to get it to work right as an action-adventure party-based combat game, leaving DMs like me, who like to take the game in different directions, in a more difficult position.

 

[WyzardWhately]

Something like E6. Any normal joe, if he works hard and pushes himself, can probably make it to sixth level. It's rare, most people on the street are 1HD, but it can be done. 6th level is more or less the limit of (demi)human ability. However, if you want to push past the bounds of mortal destiny, and touch the promethean fire, you can gain levels normally (like a PC.) Exactly how this occurs is unique to the individual, but it usually involves passing through a gauntlet, making a sacrifice, and leaving some small scrap of humanity behind. This is why high level PCs can fall from heights and survive, leap unreasonable distances, and cast world-bending magics.

Also, Living Dungeons. In fact, delving into one is probably a good way to break that metaphysical barrier between normal people and Heroes.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Something like E6. Any normal joe, if he works hard and pushes himself, can probably make it to sixth level. It's rare, most people on the street are 1HD, but it can be done. 6th level is more or less the limit of (demi)human ability. However, if you want to push past the bounds of mortal destiny, and touch the promethean fire, you can gain levels normally (like a PC.) Exactly how this occurs is unique to the individual, but it usually involves passing through a gauntlet, making a sacrifice, and leaving some small scrap of humanity behind. This is why high level PCs can fall from heights and survive, leap unreasonable distances, and cast world-bending magics.

I kind of like this, and I'm a little nervous that in "putting NPC's in their place," 4e will loose the ability for me to say to the PC's: "You all start as commoners and you have to EARN your classes!"

I may add that in, if 4e doesn't include something like it.

 

[Anthtriel]

But let's say I'm playing a campaign wherein the PC's need to be less combatants, more (let's say) politicians. We'll want a, say, Negotiator (who gives things to get things), a Peacekeeper (who can influence people's emotional states), an Enforcer (who has the muscle to stop violations), and an Economist (who helps supply the party with all they need). I don't need to re-design the classes per se, I just need to add roles onto what they already do, roles more appropriate for the game I'm playing.

And those are completely unrelated to the functions they fulfill in combat. There is no reason why the striker cannot also be your economist or the controller cannot also be the peacekeaper.

That's what I tried to get at with the "noncombat guy". I have played systems before in which you have the characters mostly focused on combat and the characters mostly focused on other things, L5R for example. The danger is that during combat, the combat characters take care of things and the others sit on the sidelines, and the same thing in reverse outside of combat.

So in a game that has a fair amount of combat by defintion (D&D is not well suited for campaigns without combat), you are probably best off keeping combat and noncombat abilities entirely seperate, so that everyone is useful in both situations.

D&D is action-adventure and sparring party-based combat is a good place for the core game to focus, but it's hardly exhaustive of what the game can be (or the types of games I want to run).

My biggest fear in 4e is that they focus on that to the exclusion of D&D's vast potential, that they destroy some of the modability to get it to work right as an action-adventure party-based combat game, leaving DMs like me, who like to take the game in different directions, in a more difficult position.

Well, frankly, if you do something entirely different from D&D's focus, you are probably better off playing a different system altogether, probably even a home-brewed one. D&D's social mechanics are not something you would want to build a campaign around.

 

[Emirikol]

I kind of like this, and I'm a little nervous that in "putting NPC's in their place," 4e will loose the ability for me to say to the PC's: "You all start as commoners and you have to EARN your classes!"I may add that in, if 4e doesn't include something like it.

Well, if the reports are correct, a 1st level 4E is the equivalent of a 4th level 3E. That seems a bit aggressive to me. D&D gets too epic too fast as it is.

jh

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Well, if the reports are correct, a 1st level 4E is the equivalent of a 4th level 3E. That seems a bit aggressive to me. D&D gets too epic too fast as it is.

I don't know how much truth your statement holds, but as it is, didn't WotC say also, that the powercurve won't be that sky-rocketting again and henceforth you might start stronger but in the end (LVL30) you are as powerful as you would have been in 3E (LVL20).


Back to topic:

I'm goin' to try the game as it's written in the books first. Why start bothering over House Rules, when I haven't seen the complete game yet!

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

Are monks going to be in 4E?

jh

Not initially, but they're slated for entry later on.

Brad