Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5580001" data-attributes="member: 51942">I don't think I'd consider subscribing (or really buying pretty much anything) until some variant of 4.5 comes out.  The problems are simply too large, and too fundamental.It seems that rather than look at what the ideal world for the customer would be and than asking how do we turn that into a business plan? they've decided they want a subscription model and asked themselves how do we pressure our customers into paying?What I'm waiting for:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Powers shared amonst classes; each power is distinctive.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Feats exist only as general feats, and no two feats have the same effect but different prereq's.  Each feat should be distinctive; non-combat feats and racial etc. feats belong in a different category.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Greater variety in characters by allowing freer combination of the above, rather than very limited predefined "builds" as now.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Less focus on perfect balance, and more on fantasy and fun.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Conversely, if you're going to make people choose from just 5 options when they level at least make sure those are actual real options, not traps.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Fewer solo's, fewer elites, more wacky monsters.  Less rigorous adherence to artificial numbers that make no sense for a particular monster.  The stats for a monster should reflect the monster more than it's level+role.  Basically, I want the fluff of the monster to accurately predict it's mechanical abilities.  When that doesn't work, omit the monster rather than printing nonsense.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rules cleanup: get rid of a bunch of rules & conditions.  With fewer powers, these can often be in the power itself, and be more elaborate and appropriate.  Get rid of marking as a general mechanic; it makes no sense (e.g. the knight's aura is much better).  Defender classes don't need some formulaic mechanic to perform their function.  Get rid of absurd restrictions on free action attacks (ugly hack), and don't make those kind of powers in the first place.  Get rid of limitations on OA's on your turn.  etc.  Keep it Simple!</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Dramatically reduce the number of Immediate reactions+interrupts: these slow down gameplay.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Power durations:  the current system was supposed to be simpler, but it makes no sense and interacts poorly with delay and ready.  This needs some kind of revamp; certainly for save-ends effects, and likely the whole thing.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Better support for third-party content.  Sorry guys, I just don't trust you (Wotc).  I didn't really trust you after you dumped the OGL, and you've proved those doubts justified.  Obviously you need the occasional refreshing breeze and constant competition, so if you cut that out, you'll make crap.  Don't do that.</li> </ul>Basically, I want a system with far fewer rules elements, but which can interact more freely.  That way each can be fully fleshed out, with actual fluff, and new releases need only contain very few new rules to remain interesting.I've got 4e, and I seriously doubt more of the same will ever convince me to fork out cash.  They need something new.  But who knows, maybe they'll make something brilliant...The OGL point is more of a meta-point.  I really don't think Wotc is exuding competence, and I'd feel much more safe buying into their next system if they didn't try to lock me in forever.  Their need to lock out competition doesn't speak of great confidence in the quality of their own product either.  They're just coasting on the brand.</blockquote>

Verification