Will there be a 4.75 a la Pathfinder?

[pemerton]

I'm curious what 4e fans would consider an improvement of 4e.

I think there is a lot of scope to tighten up PC building - eg fewer (or less fiddly) feats, reducing the dependence of combat stats on ability scores, a less clunky de-integration of magic items than inherent bonuses.

The trick would be keeping the resulting mathematical output more-or-less consistent with the current maths base of the game.

And one aspect of the game which can't be fixed while holding the basic maths constant is fixing the discrepancy between scaling of combat bonuses/DCs and scaling of skill bonuses/DCs. (Which is one of the contributors to the sometimes irritatingly clunky interface between combat and non-combat resolution.)

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I think there is a lot of scope to tighten up PC building - eg fewer (or less fiddly) feats, reducing the dependence of combat stats on ability scores, a less clunky de-integration of magic items than inherent bonuses.

The trick would be keeping the resulting mathematical output more-or-less consistent with the current maths base of the game.

And one aspect of the game which can't be fixed while holding the basic maths constant is fixing the discrepancy between scaling of combat bonuses/DCs and scaling of skill bonuses/DCs. (Which is one of the contributors to the sometimes irritatingly clunky interface between combat and non-combat resolution.)

I agree.

If was going for a 4E rebuild I would actually start with the monster creation system and use that as the basic platform with some tinkering to the basic numbers and then go from there. In the same way that you can knock up a standard 4E monster that is a level-appropriate enemy AND mechanically interesting in a few minutes, a similar process for PCs could do the same thing without a lot of quibbling over feats and whatnot... and PCs of any level could, in theory, be built in minutes.

13A is a lot more a 3.75 than a 4.75

That's your opinion, but as someone coming right out of 4e it directly scratches my itch.

I must admit, I do not see the 3.xE influence. For me, like [MENTION=91777]Dungeoneer[/MENTION], 13th Age feels very much like a variant 4E.

 

[Nikosandros]

I agree with [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] about possible improvements to 4e. I would also add (IMHO) a system of handling non-combat challenges in which a player could leverage his mechanical choices. For example, I've always been disappointed that picking Pathfinder or Master Spy as paragon paths does not confer any mechanical advantages at all outside of combat.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I agree with @pemerton about possible improvements to 4e. I would also add (IMHO) a system of handling non-combat challenges in which a player could leverage his mechanical choices. For example, I've always been disappointed that picking Pathfinder or Master Spy as paragon paths does not confer any mechanical advantages at all outside of combat.

When we began to use character themes with our Neverwinter campaign, I immediately started giving non-combat bonuses for anything that the PCs could relate to their theme. In many ways, it was very similar to what I saw two or so years later with 13th Age's backgrounds. And while we have never gone beyond Heroic Tier, I would be doing something very similar with Paragon Paths.

 

[Raith5]

I hope someone does a modest clean up of 4e. I think it is a great game that not only played so much better than it read but also ushered in new mechanical ways to express the essence of D&D across editions: teamwork (in and out of combat). While I do want to see what 5e does, I am doubting that it will be able to offer same of experience - but I will wait and see.

Aside from a serious clean up of feats and powers, I like to see action points as an encounter resource (maybe with more monsters getting them to so as to counterbalance) because they are cool and tend to speed up the resolution of combats. I think the hp monsters could be reduced a bit: some general buff to PC damage or decrease in monster hp would be a good thing.

I also like something like 5e backgrounds - I like the way backgrounds in 5e makes some links between the character and gameworld.

 

[pemerton]

I also like something like 5e backgrounds - I like the way backgrounds in 5e makes some links between the character and gameworld.

Agreed. I also like 13th Age's freestyle backgrounds.

I would also add (IMHO) a system of handling non-combat challenges in which a player could leverage his mechanical choices. For example, I've always been disappointed that picking Pathfinder or Master Spy as paragon paths does not confer any mechanical advantages at all outside of combat.

When we began to use character themes with our Neverwinter campaign, I immediately started giving non-combat bonuses for anything that the PCs could relate to their theme.

In my game we handle this a bit differently. As GM, I use a PC's theme/paragon path/epic destiny to inform the viable framing of non-combat actions. In some circumstances there can also be a circumstance bonus, but I think the first is more important.

So eg a Primordial Adept can make an Arcana check to tap chaotic energy, whereas that is not open to other PCs. Or the Questing Knight of the Raven Queen, when confronting a knight of Orcus, has options open to him for both Diplomacy and Intimidate that are different from those open to other PCs.

In a way (and relating to something that [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] raised in another recent thread) it's trying to use 4e in as something of a free-descriptor system like Fate, Marvel Heroic RP, HeroWars/Quest, etc.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Agreed. I also like 13th Age's freestyle backgrounds.


In my game we handle this a bit differently. As GM, I use a PC's theme/paragon path/epic destiny to inform the viable framing of non-combat actions. In some circumstances there can also be a circumstance bonus, but I think the first is more important.

So eg a Primordial Adept can make an Arcana check to tap chaotic energy, whereas that is not open to other PCs. Or the Questing Knight of the Raven Queen, when confronting a knight of Orcus, has options open to him for both Diplomacy and Intimidate that are different from those open to other PCs.

In a way (and relating to something that @Umbran raised in another recent thread) it's trying to use 4e in as something of a free-descriptor system like Fate, Marvel Heroic RP, HeroWars/Quest, etc.

Yeah, that's a more detailed explanation of what I do. The bonuses I referred to go beyond a simple +x to include extra options, some of which are informed by things I have read in your posts. Amd. as a I also discovered later, it is quite Fate-like.

 

[Nikosandros]

I wish [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] had been hired to contribute to the first DMG of 4e...

 

[pemerton]

Yeah, that's a more detailed explanation of what I do. The bonuses I referred to go beyond a simple +x to include extra options, some of which are informed by things I have read in your posts.

Cool. And thanks. Also to [MENTION=7993]Nikosandros[/MENTION], who is too kind.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I wish @pemerton had been hired to contribute to the first DMG of 4e...

In all seriousness, [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]'s posts - and those of several other posters whose names I will remember once the caffeine kicks in - really show what a great game there is within 4E, a point which sadly very few at WotC ever grasped. To say any more would be to cry over great rivers of spilt milk.

Back to the topic at hand, I also think the DDi tools have also contributed to the lack of demand for a 4E clone. Unless the tools are also cloned, for some of us it would make a cloned 4E too much like hard work, much like the attitude some of us have for 3.xE and Pathfinder.

(NB: Please do not read that last comment as any sort of express or implied edition-warring. I remain a huge fan of 3.xE and Pathfinder even if I refuse to run them.)