Newest 4E Update

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
Lago PARANOIA wrote: There is also no point to the Battlerager fighter now.
Honestly, I don't see how the battlerager is killed off now. The original one was ridiculously powerful and he got nerfed heavily (for good reason). But you still have to remember that you're getting that battlerager power instead of a +1 to attack.
Because invigorating powers suck and there aren't that many of them.

It's not that bad at lower levels, but once you gain enough levels (again, around level 11) to the point where you use four encounter powers and a daily per combat, you can either A) pick invigorating powers, which suck compared to other powers. or B) pick non-sucky powers and not use your class feature for three to five rounds, giving you bupkiss.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Lago PARANOIA wrote: It's not that bad at lower levels, but once you gain enough levels (again, around level 11) to the point where you use four encounter powers and a daily per combat, you can either A) pick invigorating powers, which suck compared to other powers. or B) pick non-sucky powers and not use your class feature for three to five rounds, giving you bupkiss.
Well no, you don't gain nothing. Whenever you hit, you get temp HP regardless. Invigorating only matters because it grants temp HP on a miss. I mean, even just picking up like 5-8 bonus HP every turn you hit something is pretty nice. It's not complete invulnerability like it was, but it's still better than a +1 to hit.
Last edited by RandomCasualty2 on Sat Jul 04, 2009 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SunTzuWarmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 948
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by SunTzuWarmaster »

Fuchs wrote:It really looks like an MMOG now. Patches after patches to rebalance the system.
The above echoes my sentiments.
User avatar
NineInchNall
Duke
Posts: 1222
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NineInchNall »

And this differs from 3.5 how exactly? How many times did we see "errata" for polymorph effects or spells and feats reprinted in nerfed form in multiple supplements until you either had to genetate a hierarchial tree sorted by release date or just say fuck it and move on with your life?
Current pet peeves:
Misuse of "per se". It means "[in] itself", not "precisely". Learn English.
Malformed singular possessives. It's almost always supposed to be 's.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

At least they're addressing some of the problems. Multihit fighter/strikers were too good before, so they nerfed them. Okay. There are other awesome things out there, some maybe too-awesome, but I wouldn't call things worse for this change.

Still, this is total MMO bullshittery. I'm amazed that all these niggling incremental changes are deemed necessary: I have a massive RPG collection and some are good, some are bad, and none are OMG SO AWESOME AND PERFECT. They're generally as good as the players and GM can manage to make them which is, in most cases, pretty damn good.

Supplements I can live with and like, but changing shit you published is underlining laziness or flagrant bullshittery. Design well, playtest and live with it and let people play. These things are just fucking annoying to track and deal with.
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by virgil »

I don't recall 3E, aside from polymorph, ever having incremental errata; which I think they mean, NIN.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

I'm not sure about 3.0E, but I know that 3.5E did.

That is, the basic books of 3.0E. I do know that 3E had some weird errata like for Dirty Fighting and Divine Power, but nothing strong enough to change the way entire classes worked.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

mean_liar wrote: Supplements I can live with and like, but changing shit you published is underlining laziness or flagrant bullshittery. Design well, playtest and live with it and let people play. These things are just fucking annoying to track and deal with.
Honestly I never understood why there was so much hate for errata. Sometimes there are going to be unforeseen balance problems. And seriously, I'd rather have them fix it than just shrug and say "oh well fuck it, we'll save those changes for 5th edition or 4.5"

Now they shouldn't change stuff unless its absolutely necessary, and I think a lot of their errata is filled with basically garbage wording changes that don't do much. But still, fixing shit like the battlerager is a good thing. Because I dont' want that broken garbage in my game.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

Allow me to backtrack a little.

Fixing it is okay, but the flurry of incremental changes is needlessly annoying. Pick a supplement, take a look at what you have, peruse the CharOp boards and make a list. When you issue an errata, you shouldn't have to revisit it.

Listening to your playtesters beforehand is even better.

Like, how could the Battlerager playtest have worked? Did no one notice he was invincible?

Did Guileful Switch really surprise them when it gave an extra action, considering that was what it was designed to do? Did they not realize how awesome that was right out of the box? "Free Action Point" didn't occur to them? Ditto with the Veteran's Armor?

I don't like seeing errata, but I consider it an acceptable evil: houserules usually take care of that stuff as it rears its ugly head in-game anyway, but its nice that they're paying attention. It's the iterations that piss me off, I suppose.
Last edited by mean_liar on Mon Jul 06, 2009 12:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

mean_liar wrote: Fixing it is okay, but the flurry of incremental changes is needlessly annoying. Pick a supplement, take a look at what you have, peruse the CharOp boards and make a list. When you issue an errata, you shouldn't have to revisit it.
Yeah that's for sure. It's not a lot of these problems have recently sprung up out of nowhere. Often like the first or second day a supplement is released, people are figuring out how to break it.

I really wish they'd produce just one errata after the books were out a month or two and they've figured out the relevant problems. So yeah,the incremental errata is annoying. But I'd rather have them do that then no errata at all. Of course, even their errata fucking sucks. I still can't believe they haven't errated the orbizard yet. Seriously.
Like, how could the Battlerager playtest have worked? Did no one notice he was invincible?
I don't even think there was a playtest on that.
Did Guileful Switch really surprise them when it gave an extra action, considering that was what it was designed to do?
Stuff like that i tend to blame on bad editing and bad english. Things like Rain of blows fall in this category. The designers mean to say one thing, but write it in a fucked up way so it reads as something overpowered. But honestly I'm not sure why it took them so long to get to Rain of Blows.

Really, I find myself more pissed off that there are so many things they havent' fixed yet, as opposed ot the fact that they haven't fixed things.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

Yeah, the Orbizard with the Cunning Swordmage Parrying Dagger (lulz) and Earthroot Staff is just a hoot. Whip out the orb AFTER you've used the power. Teehee etc. Phrenic Crown? Why not? Spider familiar? Sure! Spell Focus? Pile it on.

The Cunning weapon thing I can see how they missed. But the rest of that is a bunch of stackable incremental penalties. They made the same effect over and over and over and over again and just changed what shape it was taking. It's one thing to do that with damage items since the ceiling is much higher, but when you're dealing with Save effects, having ANY combination of powers and whatnot that totals to -12 or more is just stupid.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Errata should come fast and with a swiftness. I have no tolerance for errata that takes eight months to a friggin' year to come out, especially over things that have been complained about by a long time.

It's really unprofessional to come out with sweeping changes when people have already gotten used to it. Now for the battlerager fighter, sure, any change would've been better than leaving it as it is, but for that other crap if you're going to go that long without updating then just leave it like it is. Guileful Switch and Rain of Blows didn't really even hurt anything in the long run.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Psychic Robot
Prince
Posts: 4607
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm

Post by Psychic Robot »

I still can't believe they haven't errated the orbizard yet.
Somebody on the dev team must play one.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:
Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
You do not seem to do anything.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

I don't think Psychic Robot's snark is too far off.

Wizards are the only class in the Players' handbook that have their own epic destiny and own epic-level class feat--and both are ridonkulously good. They also get more powers than anyone else.

Now this extra attention is kind of moot, considering that the people who designed the class said that they weren't even sure what a wizard was supposed to do, but wizards did get extra attention.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Starmaker
Duke
Posts: 2402
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Redmonton
Contact:

Post by Starmaker »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:the people who designed the class said that they weren't even sure what a wizard was supposed to do
When the designers of a fantasy RPG have no idea what wizards should do, the end result is not surprising at all.
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Starmaker wrote:
Lago PARANOIA wrote:the people who designed the class said that they weren't even sure what a wizard was supposed to do
When the designers of a fantasy RPG have no idea what wizards should do, the end result is not surprising at all.
Plus Fucking One.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Regardless, nerfing top-tier options only works when there isn't any more top-tier options.

Now the only classes worth really giving a damn about anymore are the wizard, Battle Captains, and both flavors of rangers. And bow rangers become kind of superfluous after a certain level anyway, since around level 13 or so wizards can do more damage bow rangers and still do other stuff on top of that.

How in the world is that an improvement?
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Roy
Prince
Posts: 2772
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 9:53 pm

Post by Roy »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Regardless, nerfing top-tier options only works when there isn't any more top-tier options.

Now the only classes worth really giving a damn about anymore are the wizard, Battle Captains, and both flavors of rangers. And bow rangers become kind of superfluous after a certain level anyway, since around level 13 or so wizards can do more damage bow rangers and still do other stuff on top of that.

How in the world is that an improvement?
It's not. It's like core only 3.5 where you have clerics, druids, wizards, and the odd sorcerer and rogue and the others might as well not exist. Except that's a longer and broader list by far.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
User avatar
mean_liar
Duke
Posts: 2187
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Boston

Post by mean_liar »

Well, that's the bad part about it for sure.

I've only played one MMO and that was my experience with it: that the moderate classes felt underpowered and horrid once you tasted or saw the power of the truly awesome. Part of it is my own personal view on things (powergame ahoy!), but the other part is you have to buy into the idea that you're sucking comparatively and that's okay... when that's totally not okay.
Post Reply