Roger
First Post
I think this thread runs perilously close to the ban on edition wars threads (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=230454), but I'm not a moderator.
Cheers,
Roger
Cheers,
Roger
-
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!
Where did my options go? - The New Paradigm
- Thread starter JDillard
- Start date
The Grackle
First Post
Actually "2(w) and slide target 3 squares" does give me a tingle up my spine, but great post. It's nice to hear from playtesters who've been at it for a few months. I've had similar observations:
3e= fun to tool around with character builds and template monsters
4e= fun w/tactics in-game
3e= fun to tool around with character builds and template monsters
4e= fun w/tactics in-game
melkoriii said:
There's two ways to define "Limited options". Firstly, there's the "Class concept X that I want isn't available." Secondly there's "The total number of options is less."
I was responding to the second argument, not the first. The first will almost assuredly be fixed in splatbooks, as you and others have mentioned. Does it suck to have to wait for your favorite thing to be available? Hell yes it does. However, given how much fun I'm having with my second or third favorite concepts (I've been playing Druids since 2e, can't wait for 4e version), I'm more than happy with the game as it is.
Great way to break out of lurking. Very insightful, and well communicated.
You couldn't make every concept in 3.5E with just the core three books, just as you can't with 4E. Your own impatience in having to wait for splat books is not a design flaw. Of course you can accomadate
more concepts in 3.5E when you have eight years more of releases to draw upon. Likewise, you really can't expect 8 years of material to appear in the core 3 of a new edition of the game unless you wanted to wait until 2017 for a 3000 page PHB. This really is the fatal flaw in the '4E has less character options!' argument: People tend to incorporate more than 3.5E's Core 3 into their view when they argue this. I'm glad the OP dodged this bullet and gave us something much more interesting to debate.
It would be a right shame to mistake a comparative discussion for an edition war, especially with as good as a point as the OP has made.
melkorii said:
You couldn't make every concept in 3.5E with just the core three books, just as you can't with 4E. Your own impatience in having to wait for splat books is not a design flaw. Of course you can accomadate
more concepts in 3.5E when you have eight years more of releases to draw upon. Likewise, you really can't expect 8 years of material to appear in the core 3 of a new edition of the game unless you wanted to wait until 2017 for a 3000 page PHB. This really is the fatal flaw in the '4E has less character options!' argument: People tend to incorporate more than 3.5E's Core 3 into their view when they argue this. I'm glad the OP dodged this bullet and gave us something much more interesting to debate.
Roger said:
It would be a right shame to mistake a comparative discussion for an edition war, especially with as good as a point as the OP has made.
Last edited:
I disagree with that. The added effects to attacks only balance out what was lost, for example trip, disarm, sunder and grapple. Also you forget that a lot of spells in 3E, which are missing in 4E, which had effects other than dealing damage to the enemy.
The play options are more spread out among all classes instead of focussed on spellcasters which is a good thing, but 4E does not offer more options than 3E neither at character creation nor in game, especially as a lot of options are duplicates.
The play options are more spread out among all classes instead of focussed on spellcasters which is a good thing, but 4E does not offer more options than 3E neither at character creation nor in game, especially as a lot of options are duplicates.
DreamChaser
Explorer
I honestly do not think that range of options = quality of options nor does it = enjoyability of game. 3e, which I still enjoy playing, created the illusion of options by offering a system with millions of possible permutations.
However, within those permutations, the number of viable options are substantially lower (perhaps dozens or hundreds) and most of that number was not available at the inception of the edition but arose as a result of the build-up (some say bloat but I disagree) of the game over 8+ years.
Also within those permutations, there is a massive disparity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. A fighter or rogue has far fewer viable permutations in 3e than clerics, druids, or wizards. Why? Because there are more spells than feats, those spells tended to grow in power over the life of the edition, and those three classes could learn every new spell of their class that appeared.
So, increased options really only applied on a practical level to spell casters. In the case of fighters, new feats were as often as not useless for an established character because the truly effective ones had to be planned for from the start.
Thus, I would suggest that the increased options of 3e was actually the "illusion" of increased options, many of which exacerbated other balance issues (spellcaster vs. not) in the game.
Now clearly there are fewer options TOTAL for 4e. Wizards have lost much of their granularity (not that I saw a huge range of 1st level spell options for wizards during the years I played). The classes as a whole have prospered in my opinion.
DC
However, within those permutations, the number of viable options are substantially lower (perhaps dozens or hundreds) and most of that number was not available at the inception of the edition but arose as a result of the build-up (some say bloat but I disagree) of the game over 8+ years.
Also within those permutations, there is a massive disparity between spellcasters and non-spellcasters. A fighter or rogue has far fewer viable permutations in 3e than clerics, druids, or wizards. Why? Because there are more spells than feats, those spells tended to grow in power over the life of the edition, and those three classes could learn every new spell of their class that appeared.
So, increased options really only applied on a practical level to spell casters. In the case of fighters, new feats were as often as not useless for an established character because the truly effective ones had to be planned for from the start.
Thus, I would suggest that the increased options of 3e was actually the "illusion" of increased options, many of which exacerbated other balance issues (spellcaster vs. not) in the game.
Now clearly there are fewer options TOTAL for 4e. Wizards have lost much of their granularity (not that I saw a huge range of 1st level spell options for wizards during the years I played). The classes as a whole have prospered in my opinion.
DC
One thing to consider when discussing options: sure, you Could create many, many concepts! Just that if you deviated past a certain point, your character was as useful as a quadriplegic in an ass kicking contest.
I have seen a 5th level party whose only healer was a Cleric2/Pal3. The party's only spellcaster was a Sor3/Rog2. All these choices were made for roleplaying purposes.
The DM threw CR 5 opponents at them, and the party routinely had their backsides handed to them on a silver platter.
In 4e, while there are fewer options, it's also harder to cripple yourself by making a wrong choice. And a wrong choice can be fixed with retraining. With 4e, I can make a social character who doesn't suck in a fight. That's bigger, to me, than being a full-plate fighter using longbow feats.
I have seen a 5th level party whose only healer was a Cleric2/Pal3. The party's only spellcaster was a Sor3/Rog2. All these choices were made for roleplaying purposes.
The DM threw CR 5 opponents at them, and the party routinely had their backsides handed to them on a silver platter.
In 4e, while there are fewer options, it's also harder to cripple yourself by making a wrong choice. And a wrong choice can be fixed with retraining. With 4e, I can make a social character who doesn't suck in a fight. That's bigger, to me, than being a full-plate fighter using longbow feats.
Similar Threads
