Where did my options go? - The New Paradigm

[The Highway Man]

The problem is, whenever D&D tried to do any of those things - allowing players to rule nations, forex - it failed miserably.

Do you consider Birthright a failure?

 

[d20Dwarf]

The warlock, as I found out, was made mostly obsolete by the introduction of Reserve Feats. Now wizards can do nearly everything a warlock can do, and do it better to boot.

Oops.

 

[Lizard]

You could wear it but you couldnt cast in it. Taking armor on and off was also a no no in combat even back then.

Nope, in 1e, you could. The only restriction was for thieves, who had to wear leather to use their thief abilities. Page 16.

"Although able to operate freely with the benefits of armor, weapons, and magical items available to the classes the character is operating in, any thieving is restricted to the armor and weapons usable by the thief class."

And on page 18, "A fighter/magic user can benefit from both armor, weaponry, and spells; a fighter/thief is limited by the constraints of the thief class".

F/MU cast in full plate from level 1, making all of the "reasons" why magic users couldn't wear plate pretty spurious.

So 4e is a bit of a throwback to 1e in that regard. While you can learn to wear heavy armor as a wizard, it costs a ton of feats; better to start as a fighter if that's what you're going for.

EDIT: Source is the 1st Edition PHB, 4th printing, 1979. The one I used in High School. Which I still keep by my desk, 'cause, you never know...

 

[ladydeath]

Or maybe it is you that lack roleplaying skills, since you obviously associate the mechanics of your character with roleplaying.

I guess you haven't played anything but 3.x, because let me tell you, in the good old days ....

Well, I've been roleplaying for 20+ years. In a multitude of game systems.

I was surprised to see a response such as yours. I only voiced some concerns and was glad from some actual feedback from others on the board.


What I was trying to get at is that there are alot of things that are locked into your character concept based on the smart thing to do once you have a character class and you cannot change your character's direction once you have picked a class.

Can you play a character who started out surviving on the streets of a city (2 levels of rogue) who suddenly finds out he's got a great aptitude for wizardry? (I know there is a multiclass feat which gets you Arcana, a wizard ability and the ability to use wizard implements)

 

[ladydeath]

T
Anyway, here's the thing: whether or not a game is "balanced" depends entirely upon the point of the game, the playspace. 4E's balance, or more accurately its focus on PC parity, is built around a combat centric model. N

Well said, Reynard.

 

[almagest]

I've read quite a few people stating that caster classes aren't overpowered at lower levels in 3e, and this constitutes some sort of "balance." I don't know how anyone could possibly think this is true. Just looking at the core 1st level Wizard/Sorcerer spells for 3e:

Shield, Mage Armor, True Strike, Enlarge Person, Magic Weapon, Summon Monster I - Prepare a couple of these, and/or potions/scrolls/wands, and you're quite a strong melee character.

Grease, Charm Person, Hypnotism, Sleep, Color Spray, Cause Fear, Ray of Enfeeblement, Reduce Person - Sleep and Color Spray are pretty potent save or dies for a first level character. The others inflict some strong battlefield control conditions.

Mount, Obscuring Mist, Comprehend Languages, Floating Disk, Disguise Self, Silent Image, Animate Rope - You've got a ton of utility covered here.

So what can other, non-caster classes do at first level that compares to the above?

 

[VannATLC]

Can you play a character who started out surviving on the streets of a city (2 levels of rogue) who suddenly finds out he's got a great aptitude for wizardry? (I know there is a multiclass feat which gets you Arcana, a wizard ability and the ability to use wizard implements)

What does surviving on the streets, even as a pickpocket and petty thief, have to do with being a Rogue?

He'd be a straight Wizard, who might, possibly, have the Rogue Multiclass, but most likely just has Thievery trained, possibly Streetwise.

This is weird, it feels like arguing with ex-wife, whose screen name is also ladydeath.)

 

[almagest]

What I was trying to get at is that there are alot of things that are locked into your character concept based on the smart thing to do once you have a character class and you cannot change your character's direction once you have picked a class.

I'd like to think I'm playing a smart character, yeah. You don't get to be a high-level character by playing an Elven fighter with a CON of 8 or a Wizard/Sorcerer multiclass.

Can you play a character who started out surviving on the streets of a city (2 levels of rogue) who suddenly finds out he's got a great aptitude for wizardry? (I know there is a multiclass feat which gets you Arcana, a wizard ability and the ability to use wizard implements)

Assuming this rogue/wizard character is a 3e character, I'd have to ask -- why in the world would you do that? Just play a Beguiler or Spellthief. You keep the flavor and lose the terrible character.

And yes, both classes I mentioned are *not* 3e core. Just like I'm sure 4e will have lots of neat classes/options to get the magic-y rogue you're talking about.

 

[Keltheos]

Do you consider Birthright a failure?

Now or when it was still in print?

 

[pawsplay]

Y'know, some time ago, I posted a thread on the General Forum talking about how, despite the mechanical changes in editions, D&D hadn't actually changed all that much. At least at the table. Strangely enough, despite some criticisms that I was trolling for another edition war (I wasn't), most people tended to agree. Sure, there are differences in play, but, stepping back a bit and taking a somewhat wider view, in all editions of D&D, when you sit down a play, everyone instantly knows that you are playing D&D and not some other system.

I truly, truly think, in a year or so, we'll be saying the same thing of 4e.

Let's contrast to what people are saying right now about 4e. I think from the very beginning, while some people were not happy to embrace the changes in 3e, I think people generally agreed it was still pretty much D&D.

I don't see the future, true. But I feel very differently about 4e than I did about 3e. For 3e, it was like, "Finally! They fixed that." With 4e, I'm like, "Wow, I would never have done it like that."