D&D 3E/3.5 Will 4E combat actually run slowly...slower than 3E?

[howandwhy99]

Additionally (at least in my experience), maneuvers speed up play: People who choose their maneuvers, usually get to know 'em pretty fast, because it's their goodie, while feats and general rules are less "sticky" and have to be looked up more often.

That's a good point. If a character is only capable of a handful of choices, knowing the best choice is fairly easy. That should speed up play. Feats and rules slow down play whenever they need to be referenced.

OTOH, I prefer not having talents or maneuvers even if they do speed up play. In the same vein as negative and positive laws, there are negative and positive options. Positive laws say you can do certain things, but everything else is off limits. Negative laws say you cannot do certain things, but everything else is open to you Negative laws and lists of cannots actually allow far greater liberty.

Maneuvers and cool powers play, common in Supers games, may be the fashion of the day, but I will always prefer choices limited by my own ability to dream than choices limited by a predetermined list... no matter how many options are published.

 

[Gargoyle]

I have two major concerns about 4E design. I realize this is all speculation but here goes

1. With the addition of all the new time segments....will the game actually run smoothly? We have quick, immediate, free, standard, etc. This seems to be a more complicating and reminds me of the old 1E segments. I thought this was an annoying expansion from the splatbooks which didn't need to be incorporated.

2. Now that the other classes have what I will refer to as "special maneuvers", will we have to sit around the table waiting for the fighter to pick his attack maneuver much like the wizard of old had to sit around and pick his spells?

1. Doesn't worry me so much. In fact, I'd guess that we'll have more clarity on how long it takes to do things and that will make things slightly faster, if anything.
2. I'm with you on this one. The problem isn't with the maneuvers in the core books, it's the plethora of splatbooks that will be published to expand the fighter "spell list". As long as your typical fighter doesn't know too many maneuvers, it won't get out of hand, but if it's a large list, then I could see this slowing things down with some players. After all, some players choose the fighter class for its simplicity and don't wish to have a big list of options every round. (or I daresay aren't good at making quick decisions...and perhaps know they aren't, thus they choose to play fighters..)

 

[Seule]

I play a Warblade (up to 3rd level now) and I played a Swordsage (at 4th level) briefly. One of the key things that I like is that while you have lots of potential maneuvers you could select, you only actually know a small number. It's like a sorcerer, where the list of Sorcerer spells is very long, but you only actually have to choose from a small number in combat. This also means that two Warblades may have a completely different list of abilities, and play completely differently.
This is a good thing. Options in chargen are good, particularly when they don't necessarily lead to a plethora of options in play.

I can see Wizards being modified to have a much smaller spell list, but also having a list of a few standard 'spells' they can always do. Wizards are one of the worst offenders for slowing down play, simply because at high level they have so many options.

--Seule

 

[Thurbane]

I have two major concerns about 4E design. I realize this is all speculation but here goes

1. With the addition of all the new time segments....will the game actually run smoothly? We have quick, immediate, free, standard, etc. This seems to be a more complicating and reminds me of the old 1E segments. I thought this was an annoying expansion from the splatbooks which didn't need to be incorporated.

2. Now that the other classes have what I will refer to as "special maneuvers", will we have to sit around the table waiting for the fighter to pick his attack maneuver much like the wizard of old had to sit around and pick his spells?

Unfortuantely I can't foresee any way this won't make combat rounds slower and more clunky than they currently are.

 

[broghammerj]

I play a Warblade (up to 3rd level now) and I played a Swordsage (at 4th level) briefly. One of the key things that I like is that while you have lots of potential maneuvers you could select, you only actually know a small number. It's like a sorcerer, where the list of Sorcerer spells is very long, but you only actually have to choose from a small number in combat. This also means that two Warblades may have a completely different list of abilities, and play completely differently.
This is a good thing. Options in chargen are good, particularly when they don't necessarily lead to a plethora of options in play.

The problem is that options in character gen are "good", but that means NPC gen is more complex, and there goes prep time out the window.

Why do I feel like 4E is being pushed as a "you can have your cake and eat it too."

 

[hong]

The problem is that options in character gen are "good", but that means NPC gen is more complex,

No.

 

[Campbell]

The problem is that options in character gen are "good", but that means NPC gen is more complex, and there goes prep time out the window.

Why do I feel like 4E is being pushed as a "you can have your cake and eat it too."

That is of course dependent on NPCs being created in the same manner as PCs. I'm not entirely sure this will be an issue.

 

[pemerton]

Agreeing with Hong and Campbell - it seems pretty likely that NPCs will not be built as PCs, but as monsters: assign a role, assign a challenge level, and then read off the relevant stats for that NPC.

 

[jonrog1]

Agreeing with Hong and Campbell - it seems pretty likely that NPCs will not be built as PCs, but as monsters: assign a role, assign a challenge level, and then read off the relevant stats for that NPC.

You're probably dead right. Similar to the SPYCRAFT 2.0 system of NPC's, not to mention how some computer game designers work in both MMO's and single player games. And I don't mean that in a "bad, dumbing down for computer gamers" way, I mean as in "these guys have designed a lot, and successfully, so let's gank their techniques" kind of way. It's smart and clean design.

 

[Desdichado]

Don't forget the sweet spot is extended to higher levels. What is the sweet spot you might ask? For me personally it is when my character is gaining some moderately cool powers but he's not so powerful that I need to start creating spreadsheets to manage him at higher level.

Hah! You were always one of the laptop brigade at our sessions even at lowish level, if I recall though. Only Bob and I refused to conform and say that if we can't run our characters with just our character sheets and our dice, then it ain't worth doing anymore.

I agree that the "sweet spot" in D&D currently is way too small and short of a span. We're up to 18th now, and even though I'm playing a relatively straightforward character (shifter barbarian) I find it more tedious to get into combat rather than fun. I'm with with Broghammer that all of these character options sounds at odds with the supposed goal of both streamlining play and extending the sweet spot. I have to admit that I'm a bit sceptical that they're going to pull that goal of to my satisfaction, to be honest with you.