Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4232843" data-attributes="member: 710">Previous experience at least does not support the notion that expansions won't break the game. I mean, we can all hope and dream, but there will be made errors. I agree with Steely Dan here - the clear structure of powers and feats and a limited set of class features makes it a lot easier to balance new powers and new feats. The power structure itself also ensures that you can probably never find a broken combo that dominates gameplay. Many more or less &quot;broken&quot; things in 3E were a result of being repeatable, or having lasting (possibly permanent) effects. 4E seems to cut down these. My only worry is that the structure might simply feel to rigid. Everyone has the same number of powers. If you want a class that has more &quot;innate&quot; abilities (strong class features), you can't compensate by reducing the number of powers. You can try to reduce the effectiveness of its powers, but beware a multiclasser!But maybe this is a good aspect. The constraints are obvious, and it forces a designer to work carefully. Incidentally, I also think that 4E shifts a lot of work from the DM and the players to the designer. YOu have to create your &quot;exception-based&quot; powers yourself. And if you want a new class, be prepared to create 80 powers for it! Creating a new 3E class is cheap and easy - you usually don't have to create more then 20 class features (one per level, and that's much already). A spellcaster can just reuse existing spells, or even an entire spell list.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mustrum_Ridcully, post: 4232843, member: 710"] Previous experience at least does not support the notion that expansions won't break the game. I mean, we can all hope and dream, but there will be made errors. I agree with Steely Dan here - the clear structure of powers and feats and a limited set of class features makes it a lot easier to balance new powers and new feats. The power structure itself also ensures that you can probably never find a broken combo that dominates gameplay. Many more or less "broken" things in 3E were a result of being repeatable, or having lasting (possibly permanent) effects. 4E seems to cut down these. My only worry is that the structure might simply feel to rigid. Everyone has the same number of powers. If you want a class that has more "innate" abilities (strong class features), you can't compensate by reducing the number of powers. You can try to reduce the effectiveness of its powers, but beware a multiclasser! But maybe this is a good aspect. The constraints are obvious, and it forces a designer to work carefully. Incidentally, I also think that 4E shifts a lot of work from the DM and the players to the designer. YOu have to create your "exception-based" powers yourself. And if you want a new class, be prepared to create 80 powers for it! Creating a new 3E class is cheap and easy - you usually don't have to create more then 20 class features (one per level, and that's much already). A spellcaster can just reuse existing spells, or even an entire spell list. [/QUOTE]

Verification