You don't like the new edition? Tell me about it!

[ExploderWizard]

PLEASE!!! That was my key gripe about 3.X Edition. In 2E I had all of the Wizards and Priests spell compendiums. The number of spells that 2E had totally blew away 3.X. I loved that the compendiums has spells that were helpful in the campaign sense but not necessarily in combat. Example: Bigby's Construction Crew. I had a wizard that supported himself during downtime by casting Bigby's Construction Crew for various building projects in the town he resided in.

I think what DaveMage was trying to point out is that 3.X and earlier editions offered far more caster options than 4E and he is correct. In any of those editions adding available spells was really easy. With 4E adding a "spell" is quite a chore to make sure that its a proper part of this balanced tasteless breakfast.

 

[Gallo22]

If the rule doesn't work for you that's one thing. But please don't insult those of us who like the idea by mockingly calling it Regeneration. A well-reasoned statement that you believe characters are given too many healing surges per day for your tastes is much preferred over mockery.

He's not insulting you in any way. Please stop trolling this thread! These are out opinions, no where in this thread does it say 4th Edition players are wrong with liking 4th ed.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I left my rant in another thread: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=4271023&postcount=81

Largely covers my thoughts about 4e.

RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think what DaveMage was trying to point out is that 3.X and earlier editions offered far more caster options than 4E and he is correct. In any of those editions adding available spells was really easy. With 4E adding a "spell" is quite a chore to make sure that its a proper part of this balanced tasteless breakfast.

Well, except for 3.x Sorcers and Bards, off course.

Edit: Or did I misunderstand you, and you're talking about creating new spells? In that case, well... If you wanted to add something balanced in 3E, it was not easier or harder then it was in 4E. If you don't care about balance, well.. it's easy in both editions, too...

 

[ExploderWizard]

Well, except for 3.x Sorcers and Bards, off course.

Edit: Or did I misunderstand you, and you're talking about creating new spells? In that case, well... If you wanted to add something balanced in 3E, it was not easier or harder then it was in 4E. If you don't care about balance, well.. it's easy in both editions, too...

I was talking about simply expanding the available spells list. I do think its harder to add balanced spells in 4E. Its also harder to add balanced spells in 3.X compared to any earlier edition, it just a matter of degree. The more tightly knit the rules are, the easier it is to introduce "game breaking" elements.

 

[Xorn]

What I hate about 4E:

Having people walk up to me and explain to me why 4E sucks without having even heard anything about it.

(I'm not slamming those in this thread, I spend a lot of time at the game shop, and I've had people walk up and explain to me why 4E sucks, and it's apparent they have NO IDEA what they are talking about. And it drives me nuts.)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I was talking about simply expanding the available spells list. I do think its harder to add balanced spells in 4E. Its also harder to add balanced spells in 3.X compared to any earlier edition, it just a matter of degree. The more tightly knit the rules are, the easier it is to introduce "game breaking" elements.

I don't think it's really that hard to create a balanced power in 4E. There are enough samples and enough guidelines to lead you through the right mix. But that is mostly because 2/3rd of the powers (in contrast to the rituals) are related to dealing damage or special effects on targets.

What's a lot more difficult in all editions is to figure out when it's balanced to give the PCs something like Scry, Fly or Teleport, Speak with Dead or any other spell or power that is not focused on dispatching enemies.

Think about it - Speak with Dead? It could be level 1 spell, or a level 5 spell, or an epic level spell. They don't affect the combats you fight, but the "feel" of your campaign...

 

[Turanil]

I ran the 4e Quick-Start rules in Keep On The Shadowfell , and I didn't like it. I was painfully aware of the mechanics every minute of the game. An account of my experience is written here:

http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10663

The more I read, the more I am stunned. Well, at least as I want to compare it to previous editions of D&D. Maybe if it was a new game, I would just ignore it. However, 90 minutes to resolve a fight between four 1st level PCs and eight kobolds?!? Three kobolds have dozens of hp and five of them have 1 hp each? Fighters inflicting damage even though they don't hit, yet not on minions? More book-keeping and battlemat use than ever? Well, the more I read about it, the more it seems 4e is like an enormous hoax or April's fool...

 

[ExploderWizard]

Think about it - Speak with Dead? It could be level 1 spell, or a level 5 spell, or an epic level spell. They don't affect the combats you fight, but the "feel" of your campaign...

Yeah its hard to see the value of taking prisoners with this around
We ruled that it only worked provided the soul wanted to communicate.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

Just for fun, since I saw your post, I decided to check out the math. Allowing for the following (not including any racial powers, class features or powers gained from feats)

8 Races
1 Class (specifically showing who many options for each class)
12 possible combos for At Will powers
4 for Encounters
4 for Dailies

gives you 1536 possible character designs for a 1st level character. Yes not all of these are very synergistic, but you DO have options

Mathematical nitpick: 4 choose 2 is 6, not 12. In other words, taking Cleave and Reaping Strike is the same as taking Reaping Strike and Cleave. So for any given class, you have 768 possible choices of races and first-level powers.

But the number of possible "character designs" for a given class is probably larger, since you may also choose feats (and, of course, ability scores).

Of course, in practice, the more relevant but harder to quantify property is the degree to which these designs play differently.