The Official "4e Critique and Rebuttal" Thread

[Lago PARANOIA]

Ooo, the 'most likely' available part is what screws you. 95% is not 100%.

Now while I agree that it's a monstrous handicap to have to make this assumption and that any DM who actually does this is a ginormous cockface (because it just makes it one more way in which fighters are inferior to wizards) them declaring 'no, there aren't any fireball scrolls here' isn't technically them invoking Rule 0 or a houserule to screw your character.

It sucks, but when it comes to min-maxxing them's the breaks.

[Piell]

True, but wizards can and should be buying scrolls above their current level for future preparations (or to pull out in a bad situation). If one town doesn't have any fireball scrolls right now, fine. If no town ever has any fireball scrolls, it has clearly moved past the point of "most likely available" RAW and into DM-is-an-ass.

[Halloween Jack]

Holy crap a lot of stuff was shit in this thing for such a short amount of time. I expected a lot of defenses against me not being able to light my campfire the regular "Your MC is just stupid (shouldn't have to play Mother May I)" or "Light can't be used to make fire (Umm how not?)" but for someone to claim that I probably made that shit up?

No conceivable system will proof your roleplaying experience against a needlessly antagonistic DM. That being a given, devoting lots of pagecount to explicitly tell you that you can light campfires with your fire powers or chill cocktails with your cold powers are a waste, and no substitute for a DM who will just say "Hey if you're willing to use a power to do that, go ahead."

Trust me, I am sympathetic to your point of view and I hate Mother May I bullshit as much as you do!

I don't claim to know the rules as some others who spent more time with the game might. But my MC who had been playing for a while stated "There are no rules for that" and "That's not how it is meant to be used". Both are true which is why I gave up on the system.

The books do address it, though--"Okay, do it and roll with what seems reasonable." I can see how a DM might rule that a divine smiting power is for calling upon your god to smite a foe, not to light timber.

I don't roll that way, though. If I want to play a game where I have a Nuke spell but can't use it to blow open a wooden door, I'll play a NES console RPG.

BTW, how'd you get stuck in the woods without an Adventurer's Kit?

Nothing about the fighter class or any of the martial classes are supernatural. It's all low-grade 'realistic' action hero shit. Which is of course fine at low level; James Bond Jr. would be a huge help with Harry Potter and friends during years one and two. But at higher level when the supernatural characters like the monk and swordmage are (supposed to be) getting an upgrade in special effects and scope... the martial classes don't.

Sorry, the books say otherwise. It flat-out says that at high levels, what martial characters do has to be understood to be magic on some level.

And yes, Something Awful forums. Interesting that a forum with a name like that would choose to support 4.Fail. I mean, it is Something Awful. *dum dum pish* Jokes about the name aside though, I was previously under the impression they were a competent forum. However, seeing they support 4.Fail proves, without a doubt this is not the case.

Dude, you need a hug or something. You really hate 4e. You hate 4e worse than I hate AD&D, and that's some cold fucking hatred. You talk about 4e the way I talk about the guy who tried to set my head on fire, and 4e never did anything to you.

It's the same place, just one has a $10 registration fee or whatever and the other has photos of penises all over the place. Unless that's actually both of them.

Your signature makes this hilarious.

[tzor]

How about if I want to have a heroic fantasy character the likes of Fafhard, the Grey Mouser, Cu Chuchulain, Benjamin Franklin, or Elric?

Sorry for bringing up this old post, but I was extremely busy yesterday and am catching up now. Fafhrd and Gray Mouser are interesting examples because Leiber’s world is an interesting example. They exist in Nehwon; not in 4E and there are reasons for this. Leiber stacks the deck strongly against magic in his world, so much so that it is as much a liability as it is a source of power. White magic (the equivalent of clerical magic) is utterly pathetic; the Mouser dabbled in it in his younger days. Black magic, often comes with lots of negatives to it. In either case, both fail to be considered as “spells” in the 4E definition of the word; they are in fact rituals. When used in something like combat situations, they require the caster to be literally out of the combat situation entirely, perhaps in the adjoining room. In one famous example, the Mouser prevents a black wizard from completing a spell by throwing a dagger at him, hitting the black wizard in the eye. (Try that with 4E; I dare you; I double dare you!)

This brings up the first problem; the equality of point and counter point. You don’t need to counter point everything, but you need to have the same counter points. 1E (the original AD&D) had this problem in that fighters could literally swing a sword every minute of the day without penalty while the first level wizard only got one spell per day and that was it. Ideally if you start limiting one type of fantasy without limiting the other types you create an imbalance. Fighters get the ultimate problem because we silently demand more realism from fighting and we demand a lack of realism for magic.

Either you make the fighter more fantastic, or you remove the ability of magic to solve all problems without causing other problems. That is the only way fighters can stand toe to toe with wizards and not somehow look like they suck.

[Crawfish]

This shitty ancient "fail" catchphrase reminds me of why I quit WoW. That shit's obnoxious, 13 year olds on the internet are the worst.

[RobbyPants]

This shitty ancient "fail" catchphrase reminds me of why I quit WoW. That shit's obnoxious, 13 year olds on the internet are the worst.

I'm not saying I disagree with you, but I'm hoping that's not why you joined this forum.

[FatR]

In one famous example, the Mouser prevents a black wizard from completing a spell by throwing a dagger at him, hitting the black wizard in the eye. (Try that with 4E; I dare you; I double dare you!)

If that was the example I'm thinking about, he only managed to hit the wizard because he (unwittingly and through no ability of his own) had Dagger of Plot Device which negated the wizard's magic, that otherwise would have killed Fafhrd and Grey Mouser without save.

In fact, that's a recurring theme if we look at actual sword & sorcery stories, not their distorted image in grognards' minds or shitty ripoffs. Conan, or Solomon Kane, or Fafhrd & Grey Mouser wouldn't have lived past their first or second appearance in print without friendly neighborhood magic users appearing to help them, or plot dropping McGuffins in their lap. I'm not exaggerating. Career of fighter in fantasy has been built on deception and illusion of competency from the beginning. I mean, any of the listed characters didn't even outsmarted monsters and wizards, didn't even had knowledge or brains to hit them in the weak points. They only succeeded where others in the same setting failed, because they had plot on their side.

[Kaelik]

FYi, Wizard balance. Wizards can`t have every spell. Even by the most generous interpretation of the WBL cost, having every single first level spell requires buying six spell books and filling every page. If you are forced to go by scrolls, that`s even worse. It`s at least the entire WBL of a level 9 character can go into just first level spells. The balance "problem" of the Wizard is that having the best 10 spells of that level is sufficiently awesome to nake the 11th mostly not worth it, and you are already twice as good as a fighter anyway.

Solution is of course to make the fighter not a boring sack of crap as well, instead of making both characters sacks of crap like 4e does.

[Maxus]

Conan, or Solomon Kane, or Fafhrd & Grey Mouser wouldn't have lived past their first or second appearance in print without friendly neighborhood magic users appearing to help them, or plot dropping McGuffins in their lap. I'm not exaggerating.

Depressingly true for Conan. His first story has a dead sage put a magic mark on his sword to let him kill creatures of Set.

[Lago PARANOIA]

Sorry, the books say otherwise. It flat-out says that at high levels, what martial characters do has to be understood to be magic on some level.

There are some exceptions now and then, like the Yogi Hat Epic-Level Beastlord Ranger, but by and large martial powers are firmly on the footing of Vanilla Action Hero. Seriously, read the flavor text for those game effects. Most of these things you can easily imagine Conan or Ator doing.

And as for the martial power source description, we have this gem:
PHB Pg 54 Martial: Martial powers are not magic in the traditional sense, although some martial powers stand well beyond the capabilities of ordinary mortals. Martial characters use their own strength and willpower to vanquish their enemies. Training and dedication replace arcane formulas and prayers to grant fighters, rangers, rogues, and warlords, among others, their power.

Isn't that just wonderfully vague? Does 'well beyond the capabilities of ordinary mortals' mean Hercules or Batman? Well, considering how the actual feats, powers, PPs, and EDs are by and large low-grade sword and sandals bullshit, they almost certain mean Batman.

[Halloween Jack]

Conan is himself largely unbeatable when fighting mortal men unless he's surrounded on all four sides or is subdued while dead drunk (a mistake he makes many times). Dude's pretty clearly superhuman according to a "realistic" measurement. Batman's much the same, technically "normal" but only by the standards of comic books. His bones should be powder by now.

I like that the martial powers don't give detailed descriptions beyond telling me what it does practically. I like deciding (for my character or for the PCs if they wish) how the fighter inflicts a Bell Ringer or what happens when the Avenger drops Aspect of Might and how it's different from an ordinary weapon swing.

[Roxolan]

I'd argue that 4e went for both answers 4 and 5. We don't have the explicitly enormous earthquakes or whirlwinds, but they can do things that can't be explained by just physical might... the grappling fighter, for example, can just juggle monsters dozens of times larger than him, no problem.

No. He actually can't. He can immobilize and damage creatures dozens of times larger than himself. He cannot, however, juggle. More importantly, he cannot "lift a big rock" or "push open a castle gate" or do anything else vaguely interesting and plot developing that you might be able to do with having tremendous strength. Because, get this, he does not have tremendous strength!

18-20 to start with, +1 every four level, +1/2 level to Strength ability checks.

[Lago PARANOIA]

In the interests of balance, I think we need a '3E Critique and Rebuttal' thread.

I have a lot of stuff to say about that edition. Some good, most bad. This is especially true if we're going to 3.5E which started out bad and got steadily worse.

[Lago PARANOIA]

18-20 to start with, +1 every four level, +1/2 level to Strength ability checks.

Yeah and that tops out at 30 STR, which means that at level 28 a +2 STR bonus race that picked an ED that gave +2 to strength can deadlift 600 lbs..

Or without magical aid or some obscure racial ability/feat, they can get a maximum +25 bonus to strength checks at level 30. Then they have a 50/50 chance of breaking through a masonry stone wall (1 ft. thick).

Impressive, but nothing really special.

[Username17]

In the interests of balance, I think we need a '3E Critique and Rebuttal' thread.

I have a lot of stuff to say about that edition. Some good, most bad. This is especially true if we're going to 3.5E which started out bad and got steadily worse.

This is a waste of time. We genuinely don't have a bunch of 3tards ranting about how 3.5 shits roses. No one is making that argument, so there's nothing to rebut.

We do however get invaded by 4rries irregularly, and this thread has done fairly well at keeping the trolling contained. A 3e version of the thread would be addressing a problem we do not have by attacking people who do not exist. You might as well "rebut" Chartmaster or Cthulhutech.

We've been talking pretty openly about problems that 3e has for eight years, and all the Davanes have fled the community to go hugbox elsewhere.

-Username17

[Roy]

And yes, Something Awful forums. Interesting that a forum with a name like that would choose to support 4.Fail. I mean, it is Something Awful. *dum dum pish* Jokes about the name aside though, I was previously under the impression they were a competent forum. However, seeing they support 4.Fail proves, without a doubt this is not the case.

Dude, you need a hug or something. You really hate 4e. You hate 4e worse than I hate AD&D, and that's some cold fucking hatred. You talk about 4e the way I talk about the guy who tried to set my head on fire, and 4e never did anything to you.

I tend to regard the contemptible in contempt, yes. You should too. It's like someone trying to sell a Model T at new car prices. The Model T was nice. As a starting point. Many years ago.

As for a 3.5 bashing thread, it has plenty of problems too, and unlike 4rries, I am quite willing to go into those problems. The thing is, it's less flawed than 4.Fail, and less flawed than most everything else out there. Mostly because tabletop gaming is really fucked up.

[Psychic Robot]

This shitty ancient "fail" catchphrase reminds me of why I quit WoW. That shit's obnoxious, 13 year olds on the internet are the worst.

Really, it's just Roy being Roy. When you get past that, he's surprisingly tolerable.

[Darwinism]

I tend to regard the contemptible in contempt, yes. You should too. It's like someone trying to sell a Model T at new car prices. The Model T was nice. As a starting point. Many years ago.

As for a 3.5 bashing thread, it has plenty of problems too, and unlike 4rries, I am quite willing to go into those problems. The thing is, it's less flawed than 4.Fail, and less flawed than most everything else out there. Mostly because tabletop gaming is really fucked up.

Self hate is never pretty Roy. You should probably see a therapist about that and your irrational hatred to the point of making up pejoratives of a gaming system.

Oh and please point us to the parts where we're unwilling to discuss 4E's problems because I'm pretty sure that's just you making up a strawman so you can seem to be reasonable only in the same paragraph you prove that you're not willing to be reasonable by throwing out what you obviously consider to be an insult.

edit: ohhh I bet you mean the parts where people point out that the 'flaws' of 4E that are largely presented in this thread boil down to just opinions and blatantly false accusations, yeah we actually are unwilling to accept, "the system is broken because you can't break down doors," or, "there is no player agency even though that's literally impossible," or, "there are no meaningful choices because I say so." Because those are really dumb arguments.

[cthulhudarren]

In one famous example, the Mouser prevents a black wizard from completing a spell by throwing a dagger at him, hitting the black wizard in the eye. (Try that with 4E; I dare you; I double dare you!)

If that was the example I'm thinking about, he only managed to hit the wizard because he (unwittingly and through no ability of his own) had Dagger of Plot Device which negated the wizard's magic, that otherwise would have killed Fafhrd and Grey Mouser without save.

I don't know why you say this. The Mouser had GREAT skill with a dagger. It would have made more of a plot device to make him MISS.

[Wallacism]

Seriously, Roy? Breaking through doors? That door is scenery, nothing more. If the DM had wanted it to be more than a retextured wall, it would have been open to start with. Besides, if the players don't need to go find the blue key, what's going to force them to fight those orcs he statted up?

[Username17]

In one famous example, the Mouser prevents a black wizard from completing a spell by throwing a dagger at him, hitting the black wizard in the eye. (Try that with 4E; I dare you; I double dare you!)

If that was the example I'm thinking about, he only managed to hit the wizard because he (unwittingly and through no ability of his own) had Dagger of Plot Device which negated the wizard's magic, that otherwise would have killed Fafhrd and Grey Mouser without save.

I don't know why you say this. The Mouser had GREAT skill with a dagger. It would have made more of a plot device to make him MISS.

No. The point is that if he had thrown any other dagger in his possession - or indeed any other dagger in the world, it would have bounced off with no effect. The thrown dagger made him win, not because he was good with a dagger, but because the dagger itself was special.

-Username17

[Halloween Jack]

As for a 3.5 bashing thread, it has plenty of problems too, and unlike 4rries, I am quite willing to go into those problems. The thing is, it's less flawed than 4.Fail, and less flawed than most everything else out there. Mostly because tabletop gaming is really fucked up.

Have you considered berating it by using a catchphrase that isn't almost old enough to go to high school? This is like listening to my dad tell me that all my base belong to his Tom Clancy books. Actually, I think Dad's pace with pop culture is a lot more recent than Hamsterdance at this point.

[Crawfish]

Grogfix: replace all instances of the word "Fighter" with "Swordwizard". problem solved

[tzor]

In one famous example, the Mouser prevents a black wizard from completing a spell by throwing a dagger at him, hitting the black wizard in the eye. (Try that with 4E; I dare you; I double dare you!)

If that was the example I'm thinking about, he only managed to hit the wizard because he (unwittingly and through no ability of his own) had Dagger of Plot Device which negated the wizard's magic, that otherwise would have killed Fafhrd and Grey Mouser without save.

I don't know why you say this. The Mouser had GREAT skill with a dagger. It would have made more of a plot device to make him MISS.

I think FatR is correct, in that it was a special plot Macguffin that was used. (I was only thinking about the fact that in 3+ spells are instant and the only way you can disrupt them is with an AoO which you can't get with a thrown dagger.) Such devices are also common with Leiber. Most magic artifacts are given to the twain by either Sheilba or Nignauble and almost immediately taken away from them when the mission is accomplished. On the other hand, these artifacts tend to exist independently of the two wizards and can't really be called a product of wizardly magic. Indeed they often need the same plot Mcaguffins in order to make their own magic work.

[cthulhudarren]

If that was the example I'm thinking about, he only managed to hit the wizard because he (unwittingly and through no ability of his own) had Dagger of Plot Device which negated the wizard's magic, that otherwise would have killed Fafhrd and Grey Mouser without save.

I don't know why you say this. The Mouser had GREAT skill with a dagger. It would have made more of a plot device to make him MISS.

I think FatR is correct, in that it was a special plot Macguffin that was used. (I was only thinking about the fact that in 3+ spells are instant and the only way you can disrupt them is with an AoO which you can't get with a thrown dagger.) Such devices are also common with Leiber. Most magic artifacts are given to the twain by either Sheilba or Nignauble and almost immediately taken away from them when the mission is accomplished. On the other hand, these artifacts tend to exist independently of the two wizards and can't really be called a product of wizardly magic. Indeed they often need the same plot Mcaguffins in order to make their own magic work.

My bad, I must not be remembering this particular tale.