The Latest Edition War

[Lago PARANOIA]

After a little bit of consideration, I think that, after 4e, what is needed is something to reassure people, rather than something that will scare people again;

I don't. It's not like we're going from Old Coke --> New Coke --> Coke Classic. It'd be more like going from Super Nintendo --> Nintendo 64 --> Super Nintendo + FX Chip Games. The gaming industry, both traditional and video games, have way moved on from the heyday of 3E D&D. Not just in mechanics but also in just plain feel. I have a really hard time believing that 'the old stuff but with some modest fixes' is what people actually want, especially since the old stuff is still in production and people more-or-less think that Pathfinder 'fixed' 3.5E.

a distillation of what people liked, built into something that works, rather than an attempt to make a completely new game.

I think that 3E and 4E D&D are so poorly built and the flaws are so well-known this is pretty much impossible. For example, take hit points. People might like the current double-to-triple digit system or at least don't complain about, but can you more-or-less preserve it and still make it into something that actually works?

I mean people like prestige classes but also have a lot of complaints about them. But fixing the complaints would require making the system look totally different--4E Paragon Paths are what we got when we actually fixed Prestige Classes. If you can't and have to leave it in the game, then why can't you make that argument for everything?

Preserving the feel also means preserving the flaws and then you're stuck with a nebulous and unanswerable question of 'do they actually want this warts and all or is it just the normal human initial aversion to change and they'd be better off totally redoing it?'

The upshot is that when someone tries to stigmatize a AAA video game, it doesn't work, because the demographic playing that game is already huge. TTRPGs are a totally different market appealing to a much smaller playerbase, and BADD-style boycotts totally can wreak havoc with sales.

The TTRPG market isn't that small. The number of people playing Pathfinder + 4th Edition D&D is still in the mid-millions.

[Seerow]

So aside from "humans come from another world", what are interesting twists that could potentially make the race unique within a fantasy setting?

You could go the route that humans actually aren't infinitely adaptable and great at everything. Simply picking a different race to be the dominant race and giving humans some niche, possibly cliched role, would be different at least. Like Orcs actually literally rule the world, and aren't really any more evil than anybody else. Humans on the other hand are pretty much nothing but scattered tribes, you can find a tribe just about anywhere, but they're generally looked down on by the other races, who have their niche habitats where they dominate, thus pushing the humans out to the fringes. Humans as a result tend towards the barbaric, with heavy leaning towards Barbarian/Druid.

[shadzar]

Not to mention the majority of the stuff you listed just makes me go "This doesn't sound like D&D at all".

Is that really a bad thing? D&D is dying under the weight of bloated grognard carcasses right now.

if you arent going to continue making something for the same purpose as the original, then why use the originals name?

you cant build a better mouse trap....nobody has done it. there was always two options, kill and catch and release.

none of the "new" humane traps are really new, just people using them more.

you dont need to use the name D&D if you arent going to stick with its concepts. jsut make and name it something else, and that means you dont need the rights to D&D to do so, nor do you need to wait for some new edition of it...

to the next sentence i say...suck a barrel of cocks...those grognard carcasses are what brought 3rd, 4th, and pathfinder to you.

if you have totally new people doing it, then agian, might as well not name it D&D just for namesake.

making a shoe for the head, doesnt make it a shoe because you want to call it that as a piece of body covering clothing...its a hat. dont live off the name, but off its own merits (see 4th edition)

[Lago PARANOIA]

Seriously, about half the things you want are things that are not just different, but antithetical to any current or previous incarnation of D&D. The D&D brand name comes with certain expectations, and if you try to subvert all of those expectations because you think being different is the way to turn shit around, then what you're going to end up with is a lot of disappointed customers.

So why was 3E D&D able to get away with killing off so many sacred cows? Why didn't more people pitch a fit when THAC0 was removed or the class system was totally change or wizards could equip swords or the saving throw chart was removed or the cleric moved away from 'healbot' or minimum stats were removed or racial class limitations were told to go fuck themselves or the stat chart became useless etc. etc.? All that stuff was integral to the feel of 2E to the extent you can see that crap reflected in D&D-wannabes

Seriously, even with all the shitty changes 4e went through, they at least tried to hold onto the core of what D&D was, the majority of its problems were mechanical ones.

And you don't see the problem here?

The core of D&D, or at least the vast majority of it, is mechanical and conceptual problems. Almost everything on my list is a direct response to a complaint or request or musing to something on this or another board.

'Argh, 4E D&D made miniatures mandatory.' / 'Wait, WTF do I do to resolve this Attack of Opportunity?' / 'characters are totally pwned by Mongol archers, we need to shrink the battlefield to give them a chance'
'4E put classes on the rails and locked them into boxes!' / '3E D&D multiclassing is totally insane'
'Man I totally hate that fucking 15-minute workday' / 'I hate 4E cartoon character healing'
'3E martial types don't have anything interesting to do' / 'Oh yeah, 4E characters just spam the save moves over and over'
'I'm so goddamn sick of having to sit in the back while the rogue diplomatizes everything' / 'Can't we come up with a better system than MTP'
'Man, ever since we got to level 11 the wizard and cleric have made my fighter useless' / '4E epic level characters can't do anything cool' / 'that kind of thing makes fighters feel too anime'
'4E magical items are lame and don't do anything interesting' / 'I don't want Dave to always hog the spotlight with his +12 Hackmaster' / 'getting magical items doesn't feel like a surprise or reward, just something that's expected'

Etc. etc. There just comes a point where spot-fixing just causes you to flip-flop between the two or three complaints and you either just need to put up with them or toss them out entirely.

I find it really hilarious that this board devotes pages and pages towards dissecting every single shit mechanic in D&D, why it's shit, and what should be done instead... but then wants to go with fixes that don't in fact fix the problem or doesn't want to go with a fix that will actually work.

[Yep]

So, I keep seeing people say that 4E is dying, but without any tangible evidence. Why?


What I want most from 5E is a better social/skill system than 3E/4E. Both suck really terribly between 3E's retarded static targets and 4E's broken RAW skill challenges. Combat's just fine, I like the way casters don't automatically dominate 4E like they do in 3E (unless the 3E caster has a gentleman's agreement to avoid the plethora of overpowered spells), and I like the standardized form of power presentation in 4E. That needs to continue; no more of this silly shit that happened in 3E where daily powers got presented in one text block among many; that's pointlessly obtuse and formatting fuckups have no reason to be continued.

Oh, and I am seriously laughing my ass off about you claiming that 3E got away with killing so many sacred cows, Lago. You really don't remember the immense number of exactly identical arguments AD&D->3E as 3E->4E? Or even AD&D 1E->2E? People married to a system are married to a system, that's it, they're always gonna fight tooth and nail to try and establish the supremacy of the system they use to make pretend. Because it's obviously better; why else would they prefer it?

Oh dear, you mean the Time of Troubles was panned by people wanting to ~*stay true to the REAL D&D*~ when it came out? Oh, and the same thing happened when AD&D transitioned to 3E?

And that's just the fluff, there were plenty of people being incredibly vocal about the mechanical aspects of 3E ruining D&D forever and WotC being a horrible corporation and so on, so forth. So much of it could be copy/pasted today with just a find/replace 3E/4E. I didn't get it then and I don't get it now; play the game you want, but don't pretend people playing the game you don't want are going to destroy tabletops forever because that's just hyperbolic idiocy.

[shadzar]

Seriously, about half the things you want are things that are not just different, but antithetical to any current or previous incarnation of D&D. The D&D brand name comes with certain expectations, and if you try to subvert all of those expectations because you think being different is the way to turn shit around, then what you're going to end up with is a lot of disappointed customers.

So why was 3E D&D able to get away with killing off so many sacred cows? Why didn't more people pitch a fit when THAC0 was removed or the class system was totally change or wizards could equip swords or the saving throw chart was removed or the cleric moved away from 'healbot' or minimum stats were removed or racial class limitations were told to go fuck themselves or the stat chart became useless etc. etc.? All that stuff was integral to the feel of 2E to the extent you can see that crap reflected in D&D-wannabes

because people were still playing 2nd, and not acknowledging WotC as a viable producer of D&D, until it became so widespread as to get in their face and try to crap all over what TSR had made, especially form those that never played D&D before, yet made claims of what it was or did, with no knowledge of it jsut to follow the bad wagon.

THEN people came out about it when forced to do so.

most boards were split such as dragonsfoot vs WotC forums so people didnt co-mingle with the opposing forces.

also TAHC0 form 2nd isnt a "sacred cow" as you claim, there was to-hit charts, THAC0 just replaced the printing of a chart to a simplified formula. THAC0 isnt the problem as it is seen, but the infinite range of AC.

So, I keep seeing people say that 4E is dying, but without any tangible evidence. Why?

4th edition is no longer being produced?

4th edition has been replaced with Essentials.

like 3.0, 4th edition lasted about 3 years before being replaced. they are observing and correlating events with past ones and seeing the pattern.

[Seerow]

'Argh, 4E D&D made miniatures mandatory.' / 'Wait, WTF do I do to resolve this Attack of Opportunity?' / 'characters are totally pwned by Mongol archers, we need to shrink the battlefield to give them a chance'
'4E put classes on the rails and locked them into boxes!' / '3E D&D multiclassing is totally insane'
'Man I totally hate that fucking 15-minute workday' / 'I hate 4E cartoon character healing'
'3E martial types don't have anything interesting to do' / 'Oh yeah, 4E characters just spam the save moves over and over'
'I'm so goddamn sick of having to sit in the back while the rogue diplomatizes everything' / 'Can't we come up with a better system than MTP'
'Man, ever since we got to level 11 the wizard and cleric have made my fighter useless' / '4E epic level characters can't do anything cool' / 'that kind of thing makes fighters feel too anime'
'4E magical items are lame and don't do anything interesting' / 'I don't want Dave to always hog the spotlight with his +12 Hackmaster' / 'getting magical items doesn't feel like a surprise or reward, just something that's expected'

The majority of the stuff you just listed? Yeah that's not the stuff I complained about you wanting to change. About half that stuff you listed? I gave a solution for earlier in the thread that doesn't involve trying to turn D&D into something totally alien. You should know as well as anyone I don't think either system is anywhere near perfect, but that doesn't mean you scrap the whole damn thing and try to change it from the ground up. If that's what you want, you can make a new goddamn game. Instead you build upon the strengths of previous editions and polish it.


Seriously when you want to put things like "Light to no sexuality" or "Humans" on your list of sacred cows that need to go, you need to seriously reexamine your priorities.

[A Man In Black]

So, I keep seeing people say that 4E is dying, but without any tangible evidence. Why?

If you're curious, because it's selling poorly and not putting out products and even the rabid fanboy enclaves are turning on WOTC.

If you're trolling, please fuck off and derail some other thread with this shit.

[Yep]

4th edition is no longer being produced?

4th edition has been replaced with Essentials.

like 3.0, 4th edition lasted about 3 years before being replaced. they are observing and correlating events with past ones and seeing the pattern.

I mean, just from lurking I know that you're functionally retarded or something but... what? Essentials is a sidepath that 4E is taking and does the, very admirable in my opinion, job of trying to make D&D easier for new people to get.

But non-Essentials is still fully supported; which makes your kind of sort of 3E->3.5E argument easily invalidated because 3E lost all official support once 3.5 came out. Then again you apparently think THAC0 is a good system sooooooooo

If you're curious, because it's selling poorly and not putting out products and even the rabid fanboy enclaves are turning on WOTC.

Is it? All I've seen to support this is ICv2 which is, by their own admission, just a poll where they call a few dudes and ask what they think is doing better, nevermind actual numbers or anything we just want soft opinions. That's... not exactly anything I'd put actual money onto, were this a bet.

[shadzar]

tell me what 4th edition products have come out in the last year since the switch to essentials?

i remember Mearls or someone else stating that ALL new products will be based on essentials moving forward. this makes the 4th edition PHB and classes outmoded, ergo 4th edition is no longer being supported, but instead 4.5 is.

I don't think either system is anywhere near perfect, but that doesn't mean you scrap the whole damn thing and try to change it from the ground up. If that's what you want, you can make a new goddamn game. Instead you build upon the strengths of previous editions and polish it.


Seriously when you want to put things like "Light to no sexuality" or "Humans" on your list of sacred cows that need to go, you need to seriously reexamine your priorities.

careful... your grognard is showing....

[Yep]

tell me what 4th edition products have come out in the last year since the switch to essentials?

i remember Mearls or someone else stating that ALL new products will be based on essentials moving forward. this makes the 4th edition PHB and classes outmoded, ergo 4th edition is no longer being supported, but instead 4.5 is.

Oh I don't know how about literally every Dragon issue in addition to Essentials not being a separate thing from 4E but instead an integrated system?

Goddamn it's like arguing with a toddler

[shadzar]

maybe you should go read some of the DDi articles where one of the designers said everything new would be based around essentials, and that essentials was the new core of D&D, Yep.

[/end derail]

[Lago PARANOIA]

Yes, Seerow, and ALL OF YOUR IDEAS RUN INTO OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT D&D.

1.) People complained bitterly that 3E multiclassing (and to a lesser extent 4E) is a waste of time because shit doesn't stack meaningfully. Moreover, Vancian casting and Psionics have their own special set of problems that need to be addressed that people were complaining about.

2) That's exactly the same system that 4E D&D uses. I can elaborate on why that system sucks if you want but there are also several threads on this board already complaining about the whole 'spam encounter powers in sequence, then just At-Wills until baby Jesus Cries'.

4) What the fucking fuck? Did you just propose a system for a TTRPG that divides by any number other than ten, five, or 2? Ha ha no. Throw it away and try again. Also the underlying idea behind that crap was done and done better by Shadowrun; when they tried to make hit points AND damage reduction scale upwards (like you proposed) it ends up fucking the math. Why the hell did you even propose this system anyway? The reason I proposed fixed hit points is to reduce the arithmetic as people find 20 Hit points - (10 Damage - 6 Soak) easier to calculate than 56 Hit points - 18 Damage. But you're already up in the mid double digits, so what is your system supposed to do?

5) Why change skills away from the d20? Are you going to use a different RNG like 2d10 or 3d6? Or were you talking about implementing another system entirely?

6) What the hell does 'mean something' mean or 'powers available change drastically'? I assume you mean vast increase in power level, but, uh, that's not precisely a change from how D&D did business. And you know what, people have complained about several of the subsystems you proposed to implement (transforming, fucking over even on a successful save, inflicting status effects that don't go away automatically) so unless you're proposing a change for those you're reintroducing old problems. It's easy to say things like 'transformation magic should be robust and flavorful yet balanced' but it's not exactly a solution, just a goal.


Thanks for perfectly showing why the entire underlying D&D system is rotten and needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. And why spot fixes tend to only make the problem worse or not fix anything, as we've learned from 4E D&D. A lot of the IDEAS behind it are good and a lot of the lessons we've learned from it are extremely valuable, but the system itself can go fuck itself and the grognards who say they want to keep this shitty shit can go fuck themselves too.

[shadzar]

Thanks for perfectly showing why the entire underlying D&D system is rotten and needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

or that those who want a game like Vampires, or Avataruto, should just find another game, rather than being hell bent on needing to be able to say they play D&D, so try to convert it to something for them, just so they can say they play D&D to fit in.

if one didnt like D&D, then why the need to change it to something they like rather than find or make something else?

what is the incessant need to say you play D&D all about, if you actually dont like D&D to begin with?

[Lago PARANOIA]

I mean, take hit points. Here are the generalized aspects to it across editions:

1.) Too much math. Triple-digit subtraction is too hard for a lot of players.
2.) Critical existence failure encourages focus-fire too much.
3.) Hit point totals can deviate too much between supposedly similar characters.
4.) People want to model a range of results from 'peasant kills orc with four attacks of spear' to 'paladin kills ancient wyrm dragon with four swings of Holy Avenger'.
5.) The scaling curves for attack and damage deviate even when they're tightly controlled; 3E and 4E D&D had/have rocket launcher tag and padded sumo.

4E D&D did a spot fix of 3 and while it's an improvement there are still some big problems with it. A hit point system that fixes all of these things is not going to look anything like D&D has ever had.

This is not the only subsystem with this calculus where it's either 'accept an unescapable degree of shittiness' or 'throw it away, go with something different'. If you fix enough problems you're going to end up with a game that doesn't look very much like the previous editions of D&D meaning that you're going to either have to intentionally release a game with a degree of brokenness in it or have a game that's 'not D&D'. I prefer the latter option, because fans are fickle and don't actually know why they like something.

[shadzar]

I mean, take hit points. Here are the generalized aspects to it across editions:

1.) Too much math. Triple-digit subtraction is too hard for a lot of players.
2.) Critical existence failure encourages focus-fire too much.
3.) Hit point totals can deviate too much between supposedly similar characters.
4.) People want to model a range of results from 'peasant kills orc with four attacks of spear' to 'paladin kills ancient wyrm dragon with four swings of Holy Avenger'.
5.) The scaling curves for attack and damage deviate even when they're tightly controlled; 3E and 4E D&D had/have rocket launcher tag and padded sumo.

4E D&D did a spot fix of 3 and while it's an improvement there are still some big problems with it. A hit point system that fixes all of these things is not going to look anything like D&D has ever had.

This is not the only subsystem with this calculus where it's either 'accept an unescapable degree of shittiness' or 'throw it away, go with something different'. If you fix enough problems you're going to end up with a game that doesn't look very much like the previous editions of D&D meaning that you're going to either have to intentionally release a game with a degree of brokenness in it or have a game that's 'not D&D'. I prefer the latter option, because fans are fickle and don't actually know why they like something.

1. buy a fucking calculator, this isnt the 1940's. the game always had an age range expecting the math equivalent ability of that age/grade range.
3. twins should get the same diseases and died at the same time because they are so similar?
4. they are stupid. who the fuck sits and thinks "kill in 4 hits"? and who said that would even work?

why are you even playing D&D if you never liked it and want DragonBall Z Budakai Tenkiichi? just go play that video game where you get your anime fix, and dont have to do math?

Lago: I went to McDonald's and they refused to give me a Whopper! ~throws tantrum~

[fbmf]

[TGFBS]
I tried to separate out the Latest Edition War into its own thread.
There was some overlap between a few posts. Sorry.
[/TGFBS]

[Username17]

When WotC said in court how many books they sold, it was a small number compared to previous editions.

The Pathfinder people now say in public that they sell more books than D&D, and WotC does not even challenge them on this point.

The head of D&D has been fired every fucking year since 4e came out. Heinsoo was fired in 2009, Collins was fired in 2010, and Slavicsek was fired in 2011.

Over the last two years, the release schedule has been radically cut back and diverted into a radically different direction twice a year. The "year of three" was never completed because they scrapped the DMG 3 and Arcane Power 2 before 2010 was even half over. The "PHB Races" series was never completed because the schedule was cleared for Essentials. Essentials wasn't completed because they started making more "Heroes of" books before the core products were even settled on.

So what does that add up to? You could say it isn't exactly "dying" because it keeps producing new ideas. But it seems like it is obviously dying.

[hogarth]

I think that 3E and 4E D&D are so poorly built and the flaws are so well-known this is pretty much impossible.

Outside of Internet echo chambers, the flaws in 3E and 4E are not "well-known". And even inside Internet echo chambers, there's no particular agreement over what's a flaw and what isn't.

[Swordslinger]

So why was 3E D&D able to get away with killing off so many sacred cows? Why didn't more people pitch a fit when THAC0 was removed or the class system was totally change or wizards could equip swords or the saving throw chart was removed or the cleric moved away from 'healbot' or minimum stats were removed or racial class limitations were told to go fuck themselves or the stat chart became useless etc. etc.? All that stuff was integral to the feel of 2E to the extent you can see that crap reflected in D&D-wannabes

3E really didn't kill off many sacred cows. Whether you use BAB or THAC0 or the 1E table system, it's basically all the same system, just written different ways. Saving throws got an overhaul, but it was still the basic same principle. Roll a d20 and if you fail, you're fucked. The spell list was copied almost completely from 2E.

The only area 3E really took chances was allowing people to purchase magic items.

[Seerow]

Yes, Seerow, and ALL OF YOUR IDEAS RUN INTO OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT D&D.

1.) People complained bitterly that 3E multiclassing (and to a lesser extent 4E) is a waste of time because shit doesn't stack meaningfully. Moreover, Vancian casting and Psionics have their own special set of problems that need to be addressed that people were complaining about.

Selective memory much? A few people complained about 3e multiclassing. Many more people complained about 3e multiclassing going away. The only real problem with 3e multiclassing was the way that it encouraged dips, so people would end up with conglomarations of like 6 classes to make certain concepts work.

Making multiclassing something that comes automatically, or via talents, or whatever other bullshit is stupid. It was a major area where 4e stepped wrong and made a lot of people cry about the lack of versatility.

2) That's exactly the same system that 4E D&D uses. I can elaborate on why that system sucks if you want but there are also several threads on this board already complaining about the whole 'spam encounter powers in sequence, then just At-Wills until baby Jesus Cries'.

No. The system 4e uses is "everyone has exactly 3 or 4 encounter powers and a few daily powers", so you burn through your powers very quickly, and there is nothing at all to encourage resource management. Having encounter based limitations is NOT the same as having a very small list of encounter powers you can only use once. The fact that you can't see the difference.....

4) What the fucking fuck? Did you just propose a system for a TTRPG that divides by any number other than ten, five, or 2? Ha ha no. Throw it away and try again. Also the underlying idea behind that crap was done and done better by Shadowrun; when they tried to make hit points AND damage reduction scale upwards (like you proposed) it ends up fucking the math. Why the hell did you even propose this system anyway? The reason I proposed fixed hit points is to reduce the arithmetic as people find 20 Hit points - (10 Damage - 6 Soak) easier to calculate than 56 Hit points - 18 Damage. But you're already up in the mid double digits, so what is your system supposed to do?

Primarily? Make armor an armor as DR equivalent that doesn't end in most enemies being completely incapable of dealing damage ever, or armor totally worthless.

Also, seriously, D&D's main demographic is nerds who are more than capable of simple math. We're not talking about calculus here, we're talking simple division.

5) Why change skills away from the d20? Are you going to use a different RNG like 2d10 or 3d6? Or were you talking about implementing another system entirely?

Like I said, not sure. 2d10 or 3d6 would probably be good. Maybe implementing an entirely different system. But regardless, d20 makes skill progression pretty retarded. In order to make something impossible for an untrained person to do, you basically have to make the DC so high it takes a level 6-10 person to do. A 3d6 system would probably would so that while you wouldn't make it impossible, it would be much more improbable earlier.

6) What the hell does 'mean something' mean or 'powers available change drastically'? I assume you mean vast increase in power level, but, uh, that's not precisely a change from how D&D did business. And you know what, people have complained about several of the subsystems you proposed to implement (transforming, fucking over even on a successful save, inflicting status effects that don't go away automatically) so unless you're proposing a change for those you're reintroducing old problems. It's easy to say things like 'transformation magic should be robust and flavorful yet balanced' but it's not exactly a solution, just a goal.

Congratulations, you're right. A post made within a span of about 20 minutes doesn't actually contain all the solutions for everything ever. Burn it with fire! Yes, certain things would need to be fixed to work a bit better. But the underlying goal is there. That goal being the tiers should be more meaningful than they are in 4e. In 4e even epic tier was basically equivalent to 7-9th level 3.5e in terms of what characters could accomplish. The point was to back up and make it so epic tier is more like what a 15th-20th level character can do. Does that mean reintroducing some things that were hella broken in 3.5? Yes. And yes, some of those were so broken they would need to be revised to be balanced even in a higher power environment. However losing a lot of those options is one of the things that turned people off from 4e, because despite it all they WANTED those options. So yes, reintroducing them has some problems. It doesn't mean doing so is doomed to fail.

[Swordslinger]

I think 5E can learn a lot from the latest edition of Mutants and Masterminds. As I played that game, I realized that all the codified rules and complex battlemaps have really been sucking up the fun as opposed to promoting it.

First, more freeform stuff, the power stunts you can do in that game are a great idea. Giving people a limited amount of special ways to do cool stuff is an awesome idea, and gets away from the "I attack, you attack" crap where you just sit there trading blows. The idea that we need to protect PCs from the tyrannical DM with rules straitjackets has to go. The game needs to allow more creativity and less rigidity.

Second, power level caps. Yes, these are your solution to min/maxing. It's a pretty elegant solution. You have two rolls an attack roll, and a soak/save roll (or an effect roll if you want attackers to roll all dice). The combined total of those bonuses for any check can't exceed twice your level. Very simple, and it gets things working the way you want them to. You don't have to worry about crazy buff stacking anymore.

Third, getting rid of hit points. M&M replaces hitpoints with a toughness saving throw, which I think is a good idea. I still can't figure out why they have fortitude and toughness plus dodge and reflex both as saves, but whatever. The concept is a good one, hit points need to go.

[Winnah]

From a marketing perspective, I think it would be a good idea to avoid contributing to the next edition war. I may be wrong, but planned obsolenscance tends to aggravate the fan base and if handled poorly, can also alienate people from the hobby.

You can't stop people from ranting on the internet, but you can at stop adding fuel to the flames.

Also, needs a new vanilla campaign setting. A gritty reboot of an established setting is just lazy.

[Psychic Robot]

4e isn't all bad but it shits on what made 3e good, and that was D&D tradition plus differentiation between classes. I don't want fighters and wizards on the same power schedule because that's retarded. wizard spells are daily because that's how they work in D&D. fighters having daily powers is full retard. give them encounter abilities and I'm fine with it.

[souran]

4e isn't all bad but it shits on what made 3e good, and that was D&D tradition plus differentiation between classes. I don't want fighters and wizards on the same power schedule because that's retarded. wizard spells are daily because that's how they work in D&D. fighters having daily powers is full retard. give them encounter abilities and I'm fine with it.

See, the issue was that 4E didn't do the things it did well hard enough.

NOBODY should have daily powers because daily powers suck.

When you are low level are are likely to have 3-5 such daily powers and are likely to face 15-20 rounds of combat then it sucks hard core. Its frustrating that even though you have I win buttons you still have only a little more magic than david blaine.

On the other hand, once you have have say 10 to 12 rounds worth of spells you are uber and everybody else is pointless because you can pretty much make sure that only the 10 to 12 rounds of spells you have are relevant each day.

Daily powers suck. They have always sucked. They will continue to suck and make games frustrating.