Why do they hold back the cool toys until level 25-30?

[RiotGearEpsilon]

Seconding mikal.

[Kaelik]

Perhaps the design thoughts for this game wasn't the thought of backloading, frontloading, or powers in general, but rather just to create a balanced system among the classes itself? After all, the game doesn't have to be as narrow minded as this whole 'real ultimate power' I've been seeing crop up more and more on these forums...

You can't see something crop up "more and more" when you've only been here for two days.

[mikal768]

Perhaps the design thoughts for this game wasn't the thought of backloading, frontloading, or powers in general, but rather just to create a balanced system among the classes itself? After all, the game doesn't have to be as narrow minded as this whole 'real ultimate power' I've been seeing crop up more and more on these forums...

You can't see something crop up "more and more" when you've only been here for two days.

Unless of course, I was a lurker and poster on the forums that were around before the move and decided not to actually register until now. Also, I've been around the WotC forums since 2000, was a former WizO there, and kept in touch with a couple of people who were regulars to these forums. So... yeah. I easily can see something crop up "more and more". I just decided not to register and post until now.

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

Perhaps the design thoughts for this game wasn't the thought of backloading, frontloading, or powers in general, but rather just to create a balanced system among the classes itself? After all, the game doesn't have to be as narrow minded as this whole 'real ultimate power' I've been seeing crop up more and more on these forums...

I have no idea what you mean by 'real ultimate power', as the power system of this game has been skewered and criticized from multiple angles.

[mikal768]

Perhaps the design thoughts for this game wasn't the thought of backloading, frontloading, or powers in general, but rather just to create a balanced system among the classes itself? After all, the game doesn't have to be as narrow minded as this whole 'real ultimate power' I've been seeing crop up more and more on these forums...

I have no idea what you mean by 'real ultimate power', as the power system of this game has been skewered and criticized from multiple angles.

As I said, from what I've been seeing, the main issues with the new edition on here seem to be

1) The game plays like a bad MMO (disagree. As I think it was Frank who pointed out, that's just a badly thought out meme.)

2) The game does not feel like D&D, due to the reason above and reasons below (again, disagree. You have the iconic classes, you have the iconic monsters, you have the setting(s) coming up. For me, that's really all you need in character wise. Out of character, you have most of the spells, skills, and abilities from the previous editions streamlined in such a way that no class gets shafted? Does that mean that one class doesn't get to do everything or that there are only (parapharsing) 6 unique things to do shown 200 different ways? Perhaps. Is that bad? Not necessarily.)

3 (and perhaps most glaring/important)) You can't change the world with the powers of the PCs (i.e. REAL ULTIMATE POWER). Yes, the ability to do crazy things like Fabricate/Wall of Iron and the wish economy is gone. As is a lot of the abilities that basically turned the game into Caster's Paradise. And I say Good Riddance! I'd rather play a game which allows all classes to be able to equally shine without getting into insanely stupid levels of power (Exalted notwithstanding, which was designed to do so thematically from the ground up).

So what if the powers (outside of rituals) are now short ranged? So what if you can't fly all day, or it takes 10 minutes to teleport? So? Fucking? What? The system works pretty well for what it is, and from the time I've spent playing it, is a lot more enjoyable then 3.x was, despite the loss in power. (And this is coming from the resident "min/maxer" of my gaming group(s)).

To me, 4e helps mesh the best parts of previous editions: It allows more flexibility/RP, while using a (mostly) balanced combat system. Yes, it sacrifices the more 'World-Shaping' abilities, but that doesn't mean a PC can't shape the world! It only means that the world will be shaped the way it should be: by teamwork and collaboration. And I don't mean between just the players.

Edited to Add: It seems to me that the big issue with the new system is that simply, you don't get super insane powers anymore. And frankly, if you're willing to ignore what has become a generally balanced more system that actually seems to streamline and quicken combat, allow each class to have their own niche, and even emphasize roleplay (via the skill system) because it doesn't 'give me my rocket tag powahs', then I think you're missing the forest for the trees. In my Humble Opinion.

[virgil]

There remains significant problems outside the MMO meme angle.

It's already been shown that the skill challenge doesn't work. Even post-errata, it's an exercise in extreme failure & success, and the fact that cooperation is actually detrimental to success a large portion of the time. I don't see how the skill system is worth anything.

Having 200 ways to do 6 unique things shows a level of complication that is completely unwanted and a near useless time-sink. I've said it before that I can purchase a giant tub of Mage Knight minis and find a free form RP system and get more bang for my buck, with a better learning curve to boot.

Speaking of time-sinks, combat against solo monsters is a major one. You can blow your entire non-at-will power supply, each, and still likely have another minute of in-game wailing.

And I'm sure you've seen the verisimilitude arguments with the fact that monsters both have and use gear, yet we can't truly loot them except in a discrete and planned-out manner seperate from what we actually fight?

[Manxome]

Far be it from me to intrude into the edition wars, but I've heard a number of complaints repeatedly expressed here that didn't make that list:

4) Key game mechanics that are unbalanced or fail to do their jobs (skill challenges, price and casting time of rituals)

5) Lack of tactical depth significant character customization options (if all available abilities are basically the same and multi-classing is not viable, those are legitimate complaints entirely separate from #2 and #3)

6) Poor scaling mechanics (battles reportedly take much, much longer at high levels, even though nothing particularly new happens)

7) Disconnect between stated design intent and actual mechanics (class roles ambiguous and poorly executed, failed to accomplish goal of reducing dependence on items, etc.)

EDIT: 8 ) Verisimilitude objections (looting, abilities that affect PCs differently than NPCs, etc.) (thanks virgileso)

I can't speak to the accuracy of any of these complaints, but they're definitely different from the ones you listed, and I see nothing wrong with them in principle.

I don't think I've heard anyone (other than you, just now) claim (or admit) that combat is faster, that the skill system emphasizes roleplay, or that they miss rocket tag. In fact, I've been hearing the opposite.

[The 13 Wise Buttlords]

1) The game plays like a bad MMO (disagree. As I think it was Frank who pointed out, that's just a badly thought out meme.)

4E gets the 'bad MMORPG label' because they cut out a lot of the stuff in 4E that's not relevant to hitting people with swords and just plainly didn't give a fuck about the stuff they kept in.

In an MMORPG, you don't really give a shit about the insurmountable 3-foot deep river or the invincible door or the plague that's going on in the forest city of Bumfuck, Elfland, because the game is designed to just be an excuse for crunching numbers.

Three glaringly obvious examples: Diseases, Skill Challenges, and Damaging Objects.

So, yes, the MMORPG label is richly deserved.

3 (and perhaps most glaring/important)) You can't change the world with the powers of the PCs (i.e. REAL ULTIMATE POWER). Yes, the ability to do crazy things like Fabricate/Wall of Iron and the wish economy is gone. As is a lot of the abilities that basically turned the game into Caster's Paradise. And I say Good Riddance! I'd rather play a game which allows all classes to be able to equally shine without getting into insanely stupid levels of power (Exalted notwithstanding, which was designed to do so thematically from the ground up).

What the hell are you talking about?

'Good riddance to the PCs not being able to do crazy things with the setting, because the classes are now balanced!'

Wizards and clerics being able to change the face of the game world while fighters not being able to was a definite and recurring problem with D&D. But that wasn't because wizards and clerics were broken, that's because:

A) The entire idea of a magicless melee fighter is a dumb one to revolve a high fantasy setting around. It works out just fine if you're keeping levels low. It works out fine if you're going for a Bleach-like setting where there isn't anything really magical or impressive about your fantasy world that doesn't involve things people with swords. It can work out fine if you're just going for combat balance.

But this is fucking Dungeons and Dragons. If you get to a high enough level, you should be able to make castles appear out of nothing, you should be able to permanently change the weather pattern in your area, you should be able to terraform large portions of the country. You did that in 2nd and 3rd edition, I don't know fucking know why they took that out for 4th edition, other than it made fighters feel small in the pants. But doing that kind of crazy crap is part of the fucking setting. Someone has to be able to do it; why not the PCs?

I mean, I expect shitty DMs to get butthurt over the fact that the players can have an input and say into a setting beyond 'I hit it with my axe DURRR', but the other people at the table? WTF?

B) When given the chance to fix things, the DMF Cocksuckers preferred a MMORPG system where gaining maximum level doesn't really change anything except for the fact that you fight a different palette swap of monsters? WHY DID WE LISTEN TO THESE BLITHERING RETARDS?

So what if the powers (outside of rituals) are now short ranged? So what if you can't fly all day, or it takes 10 minutes to teleport? So? Fucking? What? The system works pretty well for what it is, and from the time I've spent playing it, is a lot more enjoyable then 3.x was, despite the loss in power. (And this is coming from the resident "min/maxer" of my gaming group(s)).

1) The game plays like a bad MMO

I just thought that it would be funny to juxtapose these quotes.

I think it's ingenious to deny the fact that D&D is resembling a game more than a world while handwaving away the holes in the system because combat is sooooooooo much more important.

To me, 4e helps mesh the best parts of previous editions: It allows more flexibility/RP,

No, it doesn't.

4E puts players on the rails, punishes them from expanding outside of narrowly defined archetypes, and then doesn't give them RP-related abilities.

Did you actually read the book? Everything not related to hitting things in combat like the game designers think you should got fucking gutted. Rogues can't even use morningstars or axes anymore. HOW IS THAT MORE FLEXIBILITY AND ROLEPLAY?

while using a (mostly) balanced combat system.

We've gone over the 'balance' in the combat system of 4E a lot of times before.

The problem is that while it does an admirable job of keeping people in RNG, the fact is that the combat system still sucks balls by making players bigger pussies as they go up in level. And to keep players in RNG they had to cut out a LOT of abilities and scrap the multiclassing system altogether, I don't even see why it was fucking worth it.

Yes, it sacrifices the more 'World-Shaping' abilities, but that doesn't mean a PC can't shape the world! It only means that the world will be shaped the way it should be: by teamwork and collaboration. And I don't mean between just the players.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO SHAPE THE WORLD WITH YOUR MEAGER SET OF ABILITIES?

This is the Bleach problem, where you literally can't fucking do much aside from hitting people with swords.

I mean, what advantage does a level 30 character have over a level 5 character in:

A) Helping the peasantry rebuild after the dragon burns their home down.
B) Calling together an army from scratch to fight off an ogre horde.
C) Convincing the orc tribes that they should have permanent peace with the elves and lifting them from their Native American-like situation of slowly but surely losing wars and relevance?
D) Coming together with a way to give Kefin, the City of Sand a water supply after Vampire Ninjas blow up the aqueduct.
E) Building a stronghold in the middle of the wastelands in preparation for prophecied the demon hordes 100 years from now?

This is standard fantasy bullshit and being higher level in 4th doesn't help you with any of it.

That shit is fine for an MMORPG, but not for D&D. That's why 4th edition gets the MMORPG label, because gaining levels doesn't allow you to affect the setting unless the DM puts in deus ex machinas.

[mikal768]

Having 200 ways to do 6 unique things shows a level of complication that is completely unwanted and a near useless time-sink. I've said it before that I can purchase a giant tub of Mage Knight minis and find a free form RP system and get more bang for my buck, with a better learning curve to boot.

I disagree to this. If anything, this moves away from complication to simplicity. The more ways there are to do something, the more redundancy there is to a system, allowing more options. How does having multiple redundancy make things more complicated?

Speaking of time-sinks, combat against solo monsters is a major one. You can blow your entire non-at-will power supply, each, and still likely have another minute of in-game wailing.

So... basically during combat against what could be termed Mini-Bosses/BBEG's... you use all of your most powerful attacks. How is that bad exactly? You can easily get back everything that isn't a daily fairly quickly. You're SUPPOSED to use all your daily/encounters in situations such as this, and still work on defeating the solo. That's not a time sink. That's supposed to be a milestone.

Again, this once again goes back to the 'rocket tag' mentality I spoke of earlier, where the mindset seems to be 'enemies are meant to be nuked and passed by, in 2 rounds or less. Anything longer is bad. Same for traveling/encounter situations'.

And I'm sure you've seen the verisimilitude arguments with the fact that monsters both have and use gear, yet we can't truly loot them except in a discrete and planned-out manner seperate from what we actually fight?

That can easily be handwaved if one considers that some of those items might not actually be inherently magical in and of themselves, but are powered by the monster itself. With the introduction of magical energy materials such as Resiidum, one could easily say that some items are powered by the inherent power of the monster, and thus are useless when the enemy falls.

For an example of such links, one can look at the Death Knight template, with their "Soul Weapon".

Any actual items which fall from the enemy are seperate, actual magic weapons, which may or may not be stronger then the weapons which such enemies normally use, for whatever reason.

There are many ways to help fix that issue from a verisimilitude/suspension of disbelief PoV. That is just one way thought of off the cuff. I am sure there are many more ways to work through that as well.

Far be it from me to intrude into the edition wars, but I've heard a number of complaints repeatedly expressed here that didn't make your list:

Feel free!

4) Key game mechanics that are unbalanced or fail to do their jobs (skill challenges, price and casting time of rituals)

Skill challenges do need more work, I agree, but the skill system itself can still be used in different circumstances (granted, a more 3.5 way, but as I stated before, I don't feel the 4e system is perfect as is by any means). As for rituals, I actually feel they fit very well. As I stated above, magic just doesn't have the oomph it used to, in order to balance things among the classes.

That means you don't have to worry about Batman the wizard, capable of doing anything the other classes can, but better! A wizard shouldn't be able to open doors better then the rogue while flying around and teleporting everywhere in 6 seconds, while causing more deaths round per round then the poor fighter.

5) Lack of tactical depth significant character customization options (if all available abilities are basically the same and multi-classing is not viable, those are legitimate complaints entirely separate from #2 and #3)

I disagree with this. There is significant tactical depth and customization for characters. Especially as new classes and paragon paths and racial feats come into play. Remember, this game isn't meant to allow a person to be able to do it all and be the end-all-be-all. This edition emphasized TEAMWORK. That means that you won't be perfect, you'll always need to have backup from your friends if you're going to succeed. That's not a weakness. That's a design point. And one sorely needed. It frankly gets old when one person can do everything, or worse, everyone can do everything.

6) Poor scaling mechanics (battles reportedly take much, much longer at high levels, even though nothing particularly new happens)

Weird. I've played at heroic, paragon, and epic for both playtesting and personal gaming, and I've found the game actually goes much faster. The only time I've experienced slowdown was when players didn't write down their powers/combos with other players, and they had to continually reference everything. This was especially true for online play. Online play can go very slow, with a combat of 3 rounds at low levels taking almost an hour depending on how the players are. In general, I would say that combat can goes twice or even three times as fast, once everyone knows the rules well enough and writes down their own abilities on their sheets/power cards.

7) Disconnect between stated design intent and actual mechanics (class roles ambiguous and poorly executed, failed to accomplish goal of reducing dependence on items, etc.)

I don't see this disconnect, personally. The class roles are pretty well defined, with the defenders capable of helping slow down the momentum of the enemies, the controller capable of making sure said enemies don't move around the defenders too quickly, and the strikers are the most mobile of the PCs, flitting around the entire place taking down leaders and non minions in general. Leaders all in all help everyone out. So yeah, again, haven't seen any actual examples of such breakdown in ACTUAL gameplay. This even includes a so-called 'Fort of Death' adventure where the DM decided to throw everything AND the Kitchen sink at the PCs to see what it would take to down the groups who run through it.

I don't think I've heard anyone (other than you, just now) claim (or admit) that combat is faster, that the skill system emphasizes roleplay, or that they miss rocket tag. In fact, I've been hearing the opposite.

Well, to be honest, it seems that most people on these forums were obvious fans of the rocket tag. Personally, I got tired of the whole nuke/rocket tag situation before 3.5 even came out. Much of the feedback I've heard actually seems to slide with my own experiences (most notably rpg.net. I can't say anything about wotc forums since the only thing I do on there anymore is argue with community management futilely).

And the skills are capable of enhancing RP in my opinion, due to the simple fact that you can use skills that aren't "normally" allowed to be used, with the correct IC reasoning, helping come up with with ways to roleplay out why Arcane knowledge of say... ancient Fey rituals may point to clues as to why children are being kidnapped at midnight from the local village, or the like. The way that skills aren't as pigeonholed in this edition helps expand RP opportunities, will stopping such things as the 3rd level bard capable of making a sworn enemy into a fanatical ally with 1 minute of talking.

1) The game plays like a bad MMO (disagree. As I think it was Frank who pointed out, that's just a badly thought out meme.)

4E gets the 'bad MMORPG label' because they cut out a lot of the stuff in 4E that's not relevant to hitting people with swords and just plainly didn't give a fuck about the stuff they kept in.

I disagree. They cut out things that frankly don't need to be micromanaged with rules and concentrated the mechanics on things that need to be micromanaged with rules the most, i.e. combat.

In an MMORPG, you don't really give a shit about the insurmountable 3-foot deep river or the invincible door or the plague that's going on in the forest city of Bumfuck, Elfland, because the game is designed to just be an excuse for crunching numbers.

And what in 4e causes you to not be able to cross said river? There is a swim check via athletics. The invincible door can be surmounted by rituals (most easily knock, if possible. If not, then perhaps the ritual summon sages or mystic oracle, to learn how to get past). As for the plague, there are many ways to stop a plague in 4e. It seems to me the main issue you have is that the new system requires you to WORK to do these things (except for the river of course). You seem to think a system that hands you the ability to be king shit of turd mountain while still having enough spells per day to go kick asmodeous' ass is a good thing. I disagree.

Three glaringly obvious examples: Diseases, Skill Challenges, and Damaging Objects.

Diseases have been errated. I've already said Skill Challenges still need work, and I see no problem with damaging objects.

So, yes, the MMORPG label is richly deserved.

No. No it's not. Unless of course you care to point me to the next Elite Guild Instance so I can get my elite tweaked uber implement. But make sure it's a few days away. I'm still grinding the plains for ore.

What the hell are you talking about?

'Good riddance to the PCs not being able to do crazy things with the setting, because the classes are now balanced!'

Strawman. I never said they can't do 'crazy' things. I said they can't do things that make the other players feel completely useless. The power level of 4e is much different from 3e. Which again, to me, is a good thing.

Wizards and clerics being able to change the face of the game world while fighters not being able to was a definite and recurring problem with D&D. But that wasn't because wizards and clerics were broken, that's because:

A) The entire idea of a magicless melee fighter is a dumb one to revolve a high fantasy setting around. It works out just fine if you're keeping levels low. It works out fine if you're going for a Bleach-like setting where there isn't anything really magical or impressive about your fantasy world that doesn't involve things people with swords. It can work out fine if you're just going for combat balance.

But this is fucking Dungeons and Dragons. If you get to a high enough level, you should be able to make castles appear out of nothing, you should be able to permanently change the weather pattern in your area, you should be able to terraform large portions of the country. You did that in 2nd and 3rd edition, I don't know fucking know why they took that out for 4th edition, other than it made fighters feel small in the pants. But doing that kind of crazy crap is part of the fucking setting. Someone has to be able to do it; why not the PCs?

Actually, no, someone doesn't have to be able to do all that. That's an assumption that may have been inherent in your opinion. But no, it's not a player right to be able to magically rearrange the world at whim just because they've hit 15th level as a caster. In fact, since it's frankly easy to hit said level, that actually takes away from the FLAVOR of DnD, where you're supposed to become an epic hero.

What's more epic? The ability to change the face of the world thanks to the actions and deeds you've done from 1st level until the time you leave the world of mortal men, or terraforming the world with your regular spells per day just because you hit 15th level?

It seems to me that the issue isn't that the fighters pants felt small, but rather those who feel that a power reduction somehow equates into a bad system might feel wrong that their own personal penis substitutes no longer apply in DnD.

I mean, I expect shitty DMs to get butthurt over the fact that the players can have an input and say into a setting beyond 'I hit it with my axe DURRR', but the other people at the table? WTF?

The players ability to have an input in the world has not been affected. Unless of course you mean the players ability to arbitrarily say "No. The world doesn't work that way, because I'm now epic level." In fact, with the additions of Epic Destinies, I would argue that the players abilities to have an input have only INCREASED, by pushing for COLLABORATION between players and DMs, rather then one attempting to enforce their will over the other, either due to the DM being arbitrary or the players reaching a threshold of (casting) power. But again, that goes back to the whole penis substitute thing I mentioned earlier.

B) When given the chance to fix things, the DMF Cocksuckers preferred a MMORPG system where gaining maximum level doesn't really change anything except for the fact that you fight a different palette swap of monsters? WHY DID WE LISTEN TO THESE BLITHERING RETARDS?

Because perhaps you've had these assumptions from the beginning, assumptions which aren't as bad as you're making them out to be? Perhaps because you like to YELL AND BE BOLD IN ALL CAPS AT THE DROP OF A HAT AND EXPLODE INTO HISTRONICS FOR NO REASON!!!?!1ONE1!? Yeah. I'm going to go with that.

I just thought that it would be funny to juxtapose these quotes.

I think it's ingenious to deny the fact that D&D is resembling a game more than a world while handwaving away the holes in the system because combat is sooooooooo much more important.

D&D has always been a game. D&D itself is only a framework of rules, a skeleton which is to be used to help a group create the world itself, via the background made by the DM and the actions of the group. If anything, it's disingenuous to attempt to claim that because I said the rules should try to focus on combat, that somehow makes the campaign or world aspect suffer for some reason. It doesn't.

No, it doesn't.

Yes. It does.

4E puts players on the rails, punishes them from expanding outside of narrowly defined archetypes, and then doesn't give them RP-related abilities.

4E allows for the players to work as a group to succeed, rather then letting one person take over the game because they happen to play a Druid or Cleric and you wanted to be the Fighter, and makes sure that RP happens without mechanical crutches, but rather (except for a few social skills), dependent on the actual In Character interactions, not dice rolls.

Did you actually read the book? Everything not related to hitting things in combat like the game designers think you should got fucking gutted. Rogues can't even use morningstars or axes anymore. HOW IS THAT MORE FLEXIBILITY AND ROLEPLAY?

The ability to wield axes and morningstars does nothing to actually enhance or weaken roleplay.

We've gone over the 'balance' in the combat system of 4E a lot of times before.

The problem is that while it does an admirable job of keeping people in RNG, the fact is that the combat system still sucks balls by making players bigger pussies as they go up in level. And to keep players in RNG they had to cut out a LOT of abilities and scrap the multiclassing system altogether, I don't even see why it was fucking worth it.

So... in other words, because you don't gain REAL ULTIMATE POWER as you level up, the system sucks. See the penis substitute comment above for my thoughts on that again.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO SHAPE THE WORLD WITH YOUR MEAGER SET OF ABILITIES?

How did Ceaser shape Earth without the ability to teleport, fly, or cast wish? How did Hitler? How does anyone?

If you need REAL ULTIMATE POWER to shape the world, then you're a pretty piss poor "hero" (or "villain").

I mean, what advantage does a level 30 character have over a level 5 character in:

A) Helping the peasantry rebuild after the dragon burns their home down.

Funds to rebuild the town. Favors from beings across the multiverse, including but not limited to:

Dragons, Devils, Demons, Elementals, Gods.
But I forgot. The only real power is SPELL POWER(tm)!

B) Calling together an army from scratch to fight off an ogre horde.

I dunno. All the kingdoms you helped save (or even create), during your adventures as you became a demigod (or archmage, or whatever?) No. I forgot. That's all useless.

C) Convincing the orc tribes that they should have permanent peace with the elves and lifting them from their Native American-like situation of slowly but surely losing wars and relevance?

Skill Challenges and actual roleplay? The Diplomacy, Bluff, and Intimidate skills? I mean, last time I checked, roleplaying can accomplish a lot.

Of course, some may find it more fun to just have a +45 to diplomacy and thus convince the orcs to become your fanatical followers in one minute.

D) Coming together with a way to give Kefin, the City of Sand a water supply after Vampire Ninjas blow up the aqueduct.

Ritual: Summon Oracle or Call Oracle (don't have the book handy). High level ritual, allows you to find out the answer to your question, which you then go on a quest to do.

Because you know, actual adventures can be a lot more fun then "ho hum. I'm level 30. I'll just whip up this decanter of endless water for you. Or 200 of them. Anything else before I go conquer a nation before lunch?"

E) Building a stronghold in the middle of the wastelands in preparation for prophecied the demon hordes 100 years from now?

...You can do that in 4e as well. It's called pack mules. Or teleportation circles. And building it your-fucking-self.

This is standard fantasy bullshit and being higher level in 4th doesn't help you with any of it.

Weird, I just found like, ways to do ALL of that, in less time then it took for me to type it all out. Given actual time to PLAN something, I'm sure I could EASILY come up with more efficient ways. But hey, hyperbole seems to work for you. Or not.

That shit is fine for an MMORPG, but not for D&D. That's why 4th edition gets the MMORPG label, because gaining levels doesn't allow you to affect the setting unless the DM puts in deus ex machinas.

No, 4th edition requires you to actually work and plan again, rather then whipping it all up with 25% of your spells/powers/abilities/items per day. That's a difference that seems to have been forgotten by many on this forum.

[virgil]

How does having multiple redundancy make things more complicated?

Because it's got the effect of a "build-your-own" power template system, except instead of building my own, I am given a list of every permutation; each with varying choices and limitations. As I go up in level, I go through more of the same choices.

There's no real sense of progression or change, yet I'm given a laundry list of choices as if there was.

Again, this once again goes back to the 'rocket tag' mentality I spoke of earlier, where the mindset seems to be 'enemies are meant to be nuked and passed by, in 2 rounds or less. Anything longer is bad. Same for traveling/encounter situations'.

Your hyperbole needs work. I never say I wanted 'rocket tag', and the current BBEG model is truly in the 'padded sumo' range that's just as bad as rocket launcher tag.

That can easily be handwaved if one considers that some of those items might not actually be inherently magical in and of themselves, but are powered by the monster itself.

So it can be handwaved if we ignore their own explanations? There's an inherent power in a stinkin' goblin that doesn't exist in players? That's an even worse explanation, because that further divides the NPC/PC interactivity; because now players are incapable of forming their own gear.

As I stated above, magic just doesn't have the oomph it used to, in order to balance things among the classes.

That means you don't have to worry about Batman the wizard, capable of doing anything the other classes can, but better! A wizard shouldn't be able to open doors better then the rogue while flying around and teleporting everywhere in 6 seconds, while causing more deaths round per round then the poor fighter.

The knock example is a bad one to bring up; because the current system is such that everyone can just punch it down in less time than using the spell.

It feels like you're putting words in our mouth when you speak of us wanting wizards to be all-powerful. What about the concept of non-casters doing the same level of stuff, like we've advocated many a time before in 3E? Cutting down on the breadth is a fine thing, especially since you take those remaining aspects and put them on others, rather than removing it from everyone.

I'm not asking for everyone to do everything, but the current set-up is closer to everyone doing virtually nothing. It's more mob tactics than teamwork, the way it's currently set-up, because of the limited nature in what people do.

Probably the biggest concern I have over the system: when the breadth of your abilities are soo limited, I don't see the point in stretching it out over 30 levels. That's a needless complication and time sink. I can basically play the same game by using E6. This saves immense amounts of time and money for the same effect.

[mikal768]

Because it's got the effect of a "build-your-own" power template system, except instead of building my own, I am given a list of every permutation; each with varying choices and limitations. As I go up in level, I go through more of the same choices.

Except that you don't have a list of every permutation. You have a list of the abilities capable by your race/class/feat choices. Much like 3e, except, if anything more narrowly defined as you don't have the ability to multiclass heavily. Hell, the thing which allows most customization, paragon paths, are limited by your stat choices (to qualify for non class PPs)

There's no real sense of progression or change, yet I'm given a laundry list of choices as if there was.

to which I have to disagree. You do have a sense of progression and change. At lower levels, you basically have minor buffs/status effects/damage dealers.

As the levels increase, these abilities increase in power and complexity, and, most importantly, the ability to synergize/combo with your teammates. You're not MEANT to be the most effective when you're on your own. You gain the real change/progression when you learn how best to work with your teammates.

Your hyperbole needs work. I never say I wanted 'rocket tag', and the current BBEG model is truly in the 'padded sumo' range that's just as bad as rocket launcher tag.

I disagree with this. Inflated enemies while decreasing rocket tag/nuking actually forces the teammates to work together more. You aren't meant to be able to one shot important things, nor, in my opinion, should you be able to be. It's woefully anticlimatic when, after several adventures, the BBEG you're facing drops thanks to a single lucky save or die.

So it can be handwaved if we ignore their own explanations? There's an inherent power in a stinkin' goblin that doesn't exist in players? That's an even worse explanation, because that further divides the NPC/PC interactivity; because now players are incapable of forming their own gear.

Actually, no, it doesn't divide NPC/PC interactivity I would posit that in actuality there are now three classes: monsters (the 'mobs' that compromise 99% of the enemies a PC group will face), NPCs (those that are specifically made by the DM for story purposes), and PCs (self explainatory).

NPCs will generally have custom gear, and templates, either class or otherwise, and such won't need to worry about it. Monsters of course will have the 'special power' or whatever that gives them the ability to have said weapons.

Is it perfect? No. Can it work? If you aren't a tightass. NONE of this, of course, actually impedes the PCs abilities to 'form their own gear' in any way shape or form. If, however, you still feel it does, please, feel free to provide examples of how it would.

The knock example is a bad one to bring up; because the current system is such that everyone can just punch it down in less time than using the spell.

Except that said door will then be useless, and you may need to have said door not be useless. Remember, it's not as if there's a fabricate spell at hand or wall of iron, ready to seal up a portal you can break down.

To be honest, I love the fact that good old fashioned brawn can actually be more 'effective' then magic in circumstances like these.. provided, again, you don't need the door.

This all goes back to the point I originally made that you responded to: that it's not a flaw that a wizard can't be Batman anymore. It's a feature to allow everyone a chance to shine.

It feels like you're putting words in our mouth when you speak of us wanting wizards to be all-powerful. What about the concept of non-casters doing the same level of stuff, like we've advocated many a time before in 3E? Cutting down on the breadth is a fine thing, especially since you take those remaining aspects and put them on others, rather than removing it from everyone.

Yes, you could also raise the level up to make everyone equal in power to 3.x casters, but if you do so, you quickly come up with a situation where the PCs might as well call themselves Exalts. As I stated before, such a power level can easily be done (see Exalted). However, in my opinion, DnD works better when the PCs are (generally) NOT a group of godlings capable of rearranging the face of the planet, because (especially in dnd), the game breaks down from actual game play to "insert power A into city B, have tea, come back and win the game".

So, to summerize, yes, a game can be run using Mr. Trollmans methods of making the economy run around Wish, and everyone having super power. But, in my opinion, that just doesn't work for 3e, and, as stated before, reeks of penis envy and rocket tag syndrome, which, as I stated before, I, me, personally speaking, do not like.

I'm not asking for everyone to do everything, but the current set-up is closer to everyone doing virtually nothing. It's more mob tactics than teamwork, the way it's currently set-up, because of the limited nature in what people do.

And that is patently untrue. Using mob tactics will get your defenders run around, your controllers and strikers killed, and a TPK in short order. Teamwork really is needed if you're going to be successful against anything except a group of one hit minion kobolds led by a Dragonshield.

[Koumei]

Three things, mikal:

1. It looks like you fucked the quote tags up. Please fix this.

2. Judging by your opinions, I am going to suggest you try the methadone program for your own good. No, I'm not implying that you're on drugs, I'm explicitly stating it.

3. One of your aliases, Mengde. That would be Cao Cao Mengde (Moutoku Sousou). I can only think of a few reasons why you would bear this title:
a) You don't think things through
b) Your biggest skill is pissing people off
c) You consistently get outsmarted by people going by the name Zhuge Liang Kongming (Shokatsuryo Koumei).

I'll assume it's the last. This is going to add completely irrelevant support to my statement that you're putting words in our mouths and making strawmen as quickly as you can in an attempt to not focus on the seriously bad issues 4E has.

But as Koumei, I will destroy your strawmen with fire

We are not saying we want one-round combats. We just don't want fifty year combats. As it stands, boss fights, even if you halve their HP, take too long. A single battle should not take all of your resources for the day, leaving you chipping away with at-will abilities.

Combat seriously needs to be shorter. Not "Finger of Death... I win!" shorter, but much shorter than what it is. Daily abilities, the "these are your best!" also need to be better. Not "You die!" better, but there needs to be a clear, noteworthy difference between "This is so special I can only do it once per day" and "I can do this whenever I feel like it."

We don't want the wizard to do everyone else's job. We want everyone to be impressive and heroic at their own job, and reasonably competent at a few other jobs, to cover bases and provide options, and to be able to do things that tell hem apart from peasantry and make them seem special, as well as leaving their mark on the world so that they are remembered as the people who did something.

Previous editions didn't pay much attention to non-combat too, we get that, but this one seriously curb-stomps it. It goes out of its way to ban anything which could be used as a way around combat or another way of doing things, anything other than what their plot demands you do.

There. Your strawmen are now burning merrily, because Mengde can never outsmart Koumei. And seeing as you decided to bring your argument right into the middle of where everyone disagrees with you, you might seriously have to argue against everyone, with each of us pointing out different things to counter your points. It'll be just like Red Cliff all over again, and I feel I'm dragging the (made up) relevance of our names about as far as they will go.

[Nihlin]

If I want to play a game where I undertake long and arduous journeys to achieve a destiny and change the shape of the world through mechanically-supported negotiation and pursuit of personal goals, I've found better systems for that. Systems that focus on that as job #1 and drive straight for making it interesting. In A Wicked Age comes to mind as the newest strong implementation of the trope, though not my favorite.

If I want to play a game about heroes making their mark on the world through force of arms and intense competition, with a flexible skill system that allows for infinite improvisation in a scant number of elegant rules, I've got Agon shining at me to handle it.

DnD is neither of those games. Its rules base does not support either of those things as job #1, and it does not cut away anything that obscures those narrative arcs.

For my wife and I, DnD has been our supers game, with power curves only matched by Nobilis. 4E is something else entirely - but, for our part, there's nowhere for it to go. We already have a perfectly good miniatures combat game (and WotC also sold me one already), we already have games that do cinematic combat elegantly and with ease, and we have too many games to play as it is that execute the hero's journey with power and grace. We don't need another game that tries to do those things.

DnD was our gonzo fantasy game. We're not hiring for any other positions, so there's really nowhere else for it to go in our gaming world. And that's why my wife and I are personally sad to see the change-the-world-with-a-wave stuff go - because that was about the only thing we saw DnD accomplishing for us. Delaying that or pushing it out entirely means that we just look at it, shrug, and go back to all those other great games we have on the shelf.

Obviously, if DnD was your gritty low-magic fantasy game (a very popular drift) or your hero's journey game, then you might see a lot of this new direction as a feature.

[virgil]

You can still change and progress without becoming a solo-master, and it's getting frustating that you can't seem to seperate the two options.

Why do you keep assuming that I want a one-round battle? I'm fine with using my full suite of powers on the BBEG, I'm not fine with using my full suite and then continuing for 10 more rounds.

The whole divide that monsters get with their 'special power' is a bad thing. At the same time they're showing a durability and in-combat flexibility that rivals that of the player, they also get to do so in a manner that is both dependent and independent of their gear. They very obviously wear armor and wield weapons, yet they don't exist after we defeat them unless the loot tables & DM look favorably upon us?

The only reason rocket tag syndrome was maintained by F&K was because 3E's monsters and underlying foundation used it. Not because people necessarily wanted it over padded sumo; we largely wanted neither extreme to exist, but worked with what we had.

Probably the biggest concern I have over the system: when the breadth of your abilities are soo limited, I don't see the point in stretching it out over 30 levels. That's a needless complication and time sink. I can basically play the same game by using E6. This saves immense amounts of time and money for the same effect.

Let me throw in an extra bit here that I feel is important. 4E doesn't allow anything but a limited range of fantasy behavior. 3E allows the low-fantasy along with the high-fantasy and even the epic fantasy.

EDIT: Let me also say that I agree with pretty much everything Koumei says.

[mikal768]

Three things, mikal:

1. It looks like you fucked the quote tags up. Please fix this.

Noticed that earlier, and was in the process of doing so before being beseiged with 500 server errors. Should be fixed now.

2. Judging by your opinions, I am going to suggest you try the methadone program for your own good. No, I'm not implying that you're on drugs, I'm explicitly stating it.

So in other words, you have nothing of actual consequence to add to this discussion, beyond 1. Got it. I'll make sure to ignore your future posts, if this is what I'm to expect from you.

3. One of your aliases, Mengde. That would be Cao Cao Mengde (Moutoku Sousou). I can only think of a few reasons why you would bear this title:
a) You don't think things through
b) Your biggest skill is pissing people off
c) You consistently get outsmarted by people going by the name Zhuge Liang Kongming (Shokatsuryo Koumei).

I've been guilty of A and sometimes proud of B. Never been able to have C happen yet. I'll have to find a person with the right name first!

Of course, for those that knew me on the wotc forums when I was a WizO, they know the real reason was the sexy duck hat.

I'll assume it's the last. This is going to add completely irrelevant support to my statement that you're putting words in our mouths and making strawmen as quickly as you can in an attempt to not focus on the seriously bad issues 4E has.

Then feel free to point out these actual supposed strawman. Unless you have more poison to throw down the well first! Otherwise, please, feel free to continue with the personal insults.

We are not saying we want one-round combats.

No, you want every PC to have the same powers as Casters did in 3.x. Which results in one-round combats. Completely different. I guess that means that my saying I don't want a million dollars, yet I want a job that pays me a million dollars for 1 hours work, means I really don't want a million dollars.

We just don't want fifty year combats. As it stands, boss fights, even if you halve their HP, take too long. A single battle should not take all of your resources for the day, leaving you chipping away with at-will abilities.

I've actually been through several boss fights, and, again, when the group actually works together, said combats end very quickly, even if the actual combat takes several rounds (or a few turns) to end. And you're thinking with 3e stereotypes again. Even if a single fight takes all your 'assets' per day, you regain a good 75% of them with a 5 minute rest, the rest with an extended rest. So yes. You actually are supposed to take all your resources for the day. Because you get most of those resources right back.

Combat seriously needs to be shorter. Not "Finger of Death... I win!" shorter, but much shorter than what it is. Daily abilities, the "these are your best!" also need to be better. Not "You die!" better, but there needs to be a clear, noteworthy difference between "This is so special I can only do it once per day" and "I can do this whenever I feel like it."

And they generally are, since dailies generally do more damage, inflict more ongoing statuses, allow for more radical battlefield/control rearrangement, etc. Please show specific examples of how these abilities are somehow not different, if you feel they are not. And make sure to make them level equitable. Comparing a Level 2 daily utility verses say... a level 20+ encounter just isn't fair.

We don't want the wizard to do everyone else's job. We want everyone to be impressive and heroic at their own job, and reasonably competent at a few other jobs, to cover bases and provide options, and to be able to do things that tell hem apart from peasantry and make them seem special, as well as leaving their mark on the world so that they are remembered as the people who did something.

And... they do that just fine in 4e. They just don't do it at the penis substitute level that casters had in 3e. In 4e terms, PCs do exactly as you just want them to do. The only difference is that they require more help from each other then you wish. You want every hero to be be the hike the ball, block the defense, run the pattern, throw the ball, catch the ball, do the end zone dance, and then lead the cheerleading squad. 4e doesn't do that, but it does allow people to be impressive and heroic in their own specialty. Just without a rocket tagging mentality.

Previous editions didn't pay much attention to non-combat too, we get that, but this one seriously curb-stomps it. It goes out of its way to ban anything which could be used as a way around combat or another way of doing things, anything other than what their plot demands you do.

No, it only bans things which circumvent actual non-combat, forcing people to interact and use their skills rather then power/spell 432a: the shoe tying cantrip maneuver e3

There. Your strawmen are now burning merrily, because Mengde can never outsmart Koumei.

Hmmm. nope. I still see the same self congratulatory backslapping that made me decide to hold my tounge until now. The blind spot you share, she is still there, sadly.

And seeing as you decided to bring your argument right into the middle of where everyone disagrees with you, you might seriously have to argue against everyone, with each of us pointing out different things to counter your points.

Yes. And that makes the fact I have valid points wrong... how? Unless of course, you subscribe to the Fallacy where the group is automatically correct because said group is the majority, the group in this case being this community.

It'll be just like Red Cliff all over again, and I feel I'm dragging the (made up) relevance of our names about as far as they will go.

One can never overuse RotK symbology. never

If I want to play a game where I undertake long and arduous journeys to achieve a destiny and change the shape of the world through mechanically-supported negotiation and pursuit of personal goals, I've found better systems for that. Systems that focus on that as job #1 and drive straight for making it interesting. In A Wicked Age comes to mind as the newest strong implementation of the trope, though not my favorite.

If I want to play a game about heroes making their mark on the world through force of arms and intense competition, with a flexible skill system that allows for infinite improvisation in a scant number of elegant rules, I've got Agon shining at me to handle it

DnD is neither of those games. Its rules base does not support either of those things as job #1, and it does not cut away anything that obscures those narrative arcs.

Fair enough. I never said 4e was the best system for such things. I just said that 4e is moving in that direction rather then the directions 3e went in. And I don't consider that to be a flaw. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course, I don't feel DnD has EVER tried to make one simple aspect as job 1, but in fact allowed several such jobs to be able to take center stage at need. That's been the draw of DnD over the years (minus legacy), the abilty to do a little bit of everything, to varying degrees of success (and of course, failure)

For my wife and I, DnD has been our supers game, with power curves only matched by Nobilis. 4E is something else entirely - but, for our part, there's nowhere for it to go. We already have a perfectly good miniatures combat game (and WotC also sold me one already), we already have games that do cinematic combat elegantly and with ease, and we have too many games to play as it is that execute the hero's journey with power and grace. We don't need another game that tries to do those things.

DnD was our gonzo fantasy game. We're not hiring for any other positions, so there's really nowhere else for it to go in our gaming world. And that's why my wife and I are personally sad to see the change-the-world-with-a-wave stuff go - because that was about the only thing we saw DnD accomplishing for us. Delaying that or pushing it out entirely means that we just look at it, shrug, and go back to all those other great games we have on the shelf.

If you wish to play a supers gonzo fantasy game, I would suggest Exalted. As it seems you wish to play only games which have one actual inherent 'Job 1', as you put it, Exalted would fit your needs much more then DnD, in any edition, ever could.

You can still change and progress without becoming a solo-master, and it's getting frustating that you can't seem to seperate the two options.

No. I can separate it. I just don't feel that the actual separation occurs from what I've seen on these boards.

Why do you keep assuming that I want a one-round battle? I'm fine with using my full suite of powers on the BBEG, I'm not fine with using my full suite and then continuing for 10 more rounds.

Then work with your group better? As I said before, the real strength of 4e combat isn't solo power. It's teamwork.

The whole divide that monsters get with their 'special power' is a bad thing. At the same time they're showing a durability and in-combat flexibility that rivals that of the player, they also get to do so in a manner that is both dependent and independent of their gear. They very obviously wear armor and wield weapons, yet they don't exist after we defeat them unless the loot tables & DM look favorably upon us?

As stated before, they do have the loot. It's just non magical, or not as effective, for whatever reason. Does that truly, really, somehow inherently break a game, or even SoD/versimilitude if you can work around it? I don't believe so. If you do, please show me how.

The only reason rocket tag syndrome was maintained by F&K was because 3E's monsters and underlying foundation used it. Not because people necessarily wanted it over padded sumo; we largely wanted neither extreme to exist, but worked with what we had.

Except that when one has a choice between rocket tag or padded sumo, the group here seems to prefer rocket tag instead. Which again, I have commented on at length

Let me throw in an extra bit here that I feel is important. 4E doesn't allow anything but a limited range of fantasy behavior. 3E allows the low-fantasy along with the high-fantasy and even the epic fantasy.

Example of limits (beyond exalted level world shaping) that are not capable of being emulated via 4e, please?

[mikal768]

Dont mean to double post, but I do wish to clarify:

I obviously don't feel my gaming style is the end-all be-all one true way of gaming. Hell, it may not even be right for the majority of people.

However, as I have been trying to say, it seems that a lot of people here, people whose viewpoints I've read and generally respect, are sliding towards the thought that THEIR way of gaming seems to be the only correct one, and that 4e, which is, objectively speaking, perfectly viable and does its job (balancing classes and pushing teamwork), while not destroying the spirit of what one could objectively call Dungeons and Dragons, to whit, the ability to help make the campaign world a better (or worse) place then you left it.

Yes, you may not like that the power level has been severely nerfed. But that doesn't mean that this game is a travesty, or Mearls should be burned in effigy. It only means it's DIFFERENT then what you personally would have done. It's obviously viable, and obviously workable within its context.

/soapbox

[Nihlin]

If you wish to play a supers gonzo fantasy game, I would suggest Exalted. As it seems you wish to play only games which have one actual inherent 'Job 1', as you put it, Exalted would fit your needs much more then DnD, in any edition, ever could.

We've tried it, actually. DnD delivered the experience better for us, given our particular tastes and desires. I admit that I have nowhere near the experience with Exalted as with DnD, but reading the core book and playing through an adventure arc with an experienced Exalted player at the helm didn't illustrate any compelling advantages to us at the system level.

There is certainly greater support in the fiction, color, tone, and setting than in DnD for that sort of over-the-top play, which are valid points in its favor, but that set of factors ultimately wasn't able to carry the day for us. It was enjoyable, however, and I wouldn't personally be adverse to playing again.

Of course, given that I also know about half a dozen people who moved to Exalted for precisely the reasons you describe, this may well all be quite idiosyncratic on our part.

On a separate note, I actually do like rocket-launcher tag in a wide variety of situations. Whether in film or first-person shooters, I always personally feel the greatest drama and impact when violence, once begun, ends as fast and as brutally as possible.

Two fine examples are the last shootout in "Unforgiven," the meat of which lasts exactly as long as it takes Clint Eastwood's character to snap off 4 or so rounds from his revolver, and the final showdown in "Sanjuro," which is over in an eyeblink as Toshiro Mifune's character draws his blade in reverse grip and cuts down his opponent while the unfortunate man is still bringing his own blade to ready.

Likewise, my favorite climatic BBEG boss fights in all of my DnD experiences have been precisely those that were over the fastest, probably because they had this sense of great violence unleashed with shocking speed. Not every fight goes by so quickly, but it happens often enough in our games to retain the sense of barely-constrained possibility.

Which is all to say that a thing which to many is a bug in 3.X DnD is, to me personally, a very fine feature.

[Ice9]

I've seen "just play Exalted" coming up a lot as advice recently, and it misses a critical point - one of D&D's big features is the fact that it is D&D.

Roleplaying games can't be judged on their individual merits alone, because the finest RPG in existance is worthless if you can't find anyone to play it with. A significant part of their value is how easily you can find other players - and D&D, simply by virtue of being D&D, has a huge advantage in this area. So while Exalted may have it's points, it's not going to be a viable replacement unless it becomes a hell of a lot more popular fast.

Which is the reason why there's actually a point to complaining about 4E; simply by existing, it makes 3E less good as a game by sapping the player base. And while WotC isn't at all likely to change direction, at least having concrete complaints can be useful when debating which system one's group should use.

[Neeeek]

Yes, you may not like that the power level has been severely nerfed. But that doesn't mean that this game is a travesty, or Mearls should be burned in effigy. It only means it's DIFFERENT then what you personally would have done. It's obviously viable, and obviously workable within its context.

Wrong. Not only wrong, but a total, absolute failure.

The problem with the power level in 4e is the lack of scale.

You want to play a low-power game? Knock yourself out. That should cover the first 25-40% of levels. You want a plane-hopping, world-altering game? Great. That should cover the top 10% or so of levels.

4e never gets to the high power stuff. At all. The failure is that a 1st level character isn't that much different than a 30th level character in terms of ability to affect the world. You don't want to use world-altering spells? Fine. Don't play high levels. Denying the same to everyone else? Utterly moronic design.

[Draco_Argentum]

mikal, I suggest you go read the TNE threads next time you decide the consensus here is for rocket launcher tag. You are patently wrong and making yourself look foolish by spouting what must either be ignorance or hyperbole.

Exalted is a very good game. Note especially that it devotes far more to non-combat mechanics than any edition of D&D ever has. Another important point is that you start awesome. 3e had you start weak and grow fast. 4e has you start weak and pretty much stay that way, at least by comparison to Exalted/3.x power levels. The problem is that 4e has 30 levels devoted to not having world shaking power. That is fine in a video game where the computer can level up my numbers. In PnP it results in about three times too many level ups.

[mikal768]

On a separate note, I actually do like rocket-launcher tag in a wide variety of situations. Whether in film or first-person shooters, I always personally feel the greatest drama and impact when violence, once begun, ends as fast and as brutally as possible.

And I disagree with that. Sometimes the best types of fights, especially in fantasy, are set pieces that last awhile, bringing pathos, drama, or just plain action into it.

Would Luke vs Vader in Return of the Jedi have been as compelling if Luke had fast forwarded to chopping Vader's hand off? I think not.

Would the three way battle on the wheel in Pirate of the Carribean 2 have been as dramatic of impactful if Jack Sparrow had caused the wheel to crush his enemies and walked away? Hell no!

Sometimes a shocking attack can be dramatic, if played properly. Most of the time however, it's only a shock, with no actual drama behind it. A truly dramatic scene is needs build up to it, and build up during it. If, in the two scenes above, the fight ended before it began, people wouldn't have felt it as dramatic. They would have seen it as a cop out. And rightly so.

I've seen "just play Exalted" coming up a lot as advice recently, and it misses a critical point - one of D&D's big features is the fact that it is D&D.

Then, if that's the defense as to why one likes 3e, then the rules to a degree don't matter, since you're playing the game for the background setting. In that case, port exalted type rules into a D&D background. There you go. A setting designed for such play with a D&D background, where you can go be king of the hill to your hearts content.

Roleplaying games can't be judged on their individual merits alone, because the finest RPG in existance is worthless if you can't find anyone to play it with. A significant part of their value is how easily you can find other players - and D&D, simply by virtue of being D&D, has a huge advantage in this area. So while Exalted may have it's points, it's not going to be a viable replacement unless it becomes a hell of a lot more popular fast.

Or, you know, you actually try to get people to try it. But I guess it's easier to just bitch and moan then actually attempt to get people to try something new. Or bitch and moan that the new system doesn't cater to the weaknesses of the old.

Which is the reason why there's actually a point to complaining about 4E; simply by existing, it makes 3E less good as a game by sapping the player base. And while WotC isn't at all likely to change direction, at least having concrete complaints can be useful when debating which system one's group should use.

The inherent good or badness of a systems ruleset is not based on competition from other rulesets. If the system was a better game, then it would stand alone despite the new edition which is out.

Wrong. Not only wrong, but a total, absolute failure.

The problem with the power level in 4e is the lack of scale.

You want to play a low-power game? Knock yourself out. That should cover the first 25-40% of levels. You want a plane-hopping, world-altering game? Great. That should cover the top 10% or so of levels.

Unmmm... incorrect. You can easily plane hope at those levels, and change the world. The rituals Planar Portal and True Portal can easily give you personal teleportation from world to world, and are available for an entire THIRD of the game! (Level 18+) If not, gates work well. And you do change the face of the world with your adventures if you so choose to.

The only difference is that you do it in 4e by actually doing shit. Not by sitting there and throwing around 200 powers per day. It's the difference between beating a game by skill, and beating a game because you put "no clip" cheats in. One requires work. The other requires the equivalent of pressing a button.

Now, if you want to play a game where you don't have to actually put thought into the character, and just choose the same old powers for world domination, that's your choice. But that doesn't mean your choice is inherently better. Or even a good one.

4e never gets to the high power stuff. At all. The failure is that a 1st level character isn't that much different than a 30th level character in terms of ability to affect the world. You don't want to use world-altering spells? Fine. Don't play high levels. Denying the same to everyone else? Utterly moronic design

Except that, again, you do get to the high power stuff. The difference is that 4e high power is just plain different from 3e. Just as 3e is compared to 2e. So... yeah. Nothing is being 'denied', beyond the ability to use unbalanced cheese.

[RandomCasualty2]

But you're missing the point. Its not that you need to spend every day of your life slaughtering people. Its the mathematical fact that you can do all the killing you need to do in 3 months. At 18, an adventurer could seriously expect to set out, become a demigod, and seriously father/bear a child before they're 19, retired and set up a semi-divine dynasty.
And the pregnancy will take up 75% of that time!

You're missing the point. That's a fuckload of killing and there's a lot of downtime going to be mixed in between that, unless the world is just so completely in jeopardy that it experiences a crisis every day within a days journey of the last one.

Adventurers may have months or weeks in between adventures, maybe even years.

And that's as easy as the DM saying, "And so you guys spend the next 2 months looking for another adventure."

I'm not sure why people think there shouldn't be any downtime. If there isn't that's clearly a DM style choice. The DM can pace the adventure however he wants. if he wants a crazy video game reality where the adventurers do nothing but rest at the inn and then move onto their next fighting area, then sure... but that's not the fault of the rules. Seriously would you rather have the rules such that it's basically impossible to ever get to level 30 through normal playing? Fighting 300 battles against stuff close to your level is actually pretty reasonable to get to demigod status. I mean seriously, that's about 30 adventures. That's a lot.

Getting to high levels is still damn hard. Most people who try to do so die.

[Username17]

Mikal, I think Joseph Stalin said it best: Quantity has a Quality all its own.

Using Windows has certain obvious disadvantages versus using Linux, but the fact that it is ubiquitous is a special advantage where you using a Windows box at home makes you better able to handle any random computer you find in an office or library, because chances are those are Windows machines as well.

People don't have limitless time to learn games. Chances are they will only play one or two on any regular basis. Therefore even bothering to learn role playing game systems which are not in common use is a marginal activity at best. There are advantages to Shadowrun or Champions, but I am not so blind as to condemn people who refuse to learn them on the grounds that they are seriously unlikely to be able to get a game of them together whether they learn them or not.

D&D is the biggest game. More people will know how to play D&D than any other game. In many places of the Earth a game of D&D is literally the only game in town. So when they come out with a new edition of D&D it actually hurts people if that edition is not good. I for example, live in the Czech Republic for 10 months out of the year. Playing role playing games requires technical and arcane language which I frankly do not possess in any Slavic language. My list of potential gaming partners in Czech Republic therefore is limited to expatriots and people with very good English. The number of potential games I have open to me in Czech Republic is therefore very small, and I don't have the ability to pick and choose gaming systems.

So when one of the major gaming systems, indeed the major gaming system comes out with a new edition that is made of cardboard and feces, that seriously hurts my ability to do face to face gaming at all for ten months out of the year. That's a really big deal. It's not something that one can just handwave away by learning GURPS, because there isn't a fucking GURPS game for me to play in anywhere in Prague.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty2]

double post

[RandomCasualty2]

Sometimes a shocking attack can be dramatic, if played properly. Most of the time however, it's only a shock, with no actual drama behind it. A truly dramatic scene is needs build up to it, and build up during it. If, in the two scenes above, the fight ended before it began, people wouldn't have felt it as dramatic. They would have seen it as a cop out. And rightly so.

Yeah, also we're talking about a game, and while sure, one shotting your enemy can be fun from time to time, getting killed in one shot is most certainly not fun, especially when you don't even get to act. It feels very cheap and most players are rather upset when it happens to them.

And further, this is a game where you want an ongoing campaign. Rocket launcher tag just isn't very useful for producing that atmosphere, because when combats are over fast, it means you're going to have big swings. The fewer instances of random chance, the less likely you're going to get stable outcomes. Play five hands of blackjack and your odds are actually pretty decent that you'll come out ahead. Play 1000 hands and you're almost certain to be a loser.

Now, in an RPG the PCs are supposed to have the numerical edge because they're the ones you want to last. But rocketlauncher tag is like playing 5 hands of blackjack in a close fight. Really anything can happen. And so your entire group may get TPKed over a small bit of bad luck. If a fighter is at all dramatically close, then it is going to be somewhere where the PCs could die and quickly. Just a little bit of bad luck and game over.

If you want an RPG to encourage talking and not combat, then rocket launcher tag can help with that. If you on the other hand want heroic combat and a lot of fighting. Rocket launcher tag is a bad choice for running a stable game.