I think I get it now

[Jerry]

This quote was what some goon at WotC said in a 4th Edition thread:

(I've always wondered about the need to force the system to become what you want, when there is a system in existence that does the job better. Why contort a system into what it isn't, when in the end, you are not playing 4.0 anyway? You are playing 4.0 homebrew style.)

Then, I thought this was what made me partially unsatisfied with the Tome series; all the changes to it was not the original D&D that I knew and loved. It changed so much to 3rd Edition (my first experience of D&D) that it didn't feel like the D&D that I originally played. I still enjoyed the original game, despite all its flaws.

[CatharzGodfoot]

To each her own. I like the Tome rules because they still feel like D&D.

[Jerry]

To each her own. I like the Tome rules because they still feel like D&D.

To me, it's not so much that it feels like D&D (it does), but that it feels like a different version of D&D. I'm afraid of change.

[RandomCasualty2]

Yeah I kind of have trouble with the Tome series because it takes D&D purely in the rocket launcher tag direction, which honestly doesn't feel much like D&D to me. This was probably because I started playing 2nd edition, where you almost always spent several rounds trading blows in combat, and at high levels, the save or dies mostly failed. 3E totally turned that around, making high level into a lethal frag fest never felt right to me.

4E feels a bit more like 2nd in that regard, and honestly I have to say that for the most part, 4E does feel like D&D, more so than the 3.5 rocket launcher tag matches ever did.

Playing a wizard is probably about the only class that just doesn't feel right, though that could be because the ritual system sucks, and there's a few capabilities missing, like creating illusions (and I mean real illusions, not the illusion flavored direct damage shit that Dragon magazine or whatever produced). Also, it's a new concept that a wizard is playing the same game as a fighter. I figure in time we will get used to this, and it may in the long run, be better for the game.

It's not really that 4E doesn't feel like D&D to me, so much as it feels unfinished and rushed. There are a lot of things, like rituals, solo HP and skill challenges that all seem like they could have been looked into a bit more.

[Jerry]

You know, before I stumbled onto this site, I just didn't care as much about the negative aspects of D&D. When I did stumble onto such problems, I didn't realize it.

You guys just seem too pessimistic for my tastes.

[CatharzGodfoot]

You guys just seem too pessimistic for my tastes.

The teapot and the kettle, my friend.

[K]

Yeah I kind of have trouble with the Tome series because it takes D&D purely in the rocket launcher tag direction, which honestly doesn't feel much like D&D to me. This was probably because I started playing 2nd edition, where you almost always spent several rounds trading blows in combat, and at high levels, the save or dies mostly failed. 3E totally turned that around, making high level into a lethal frag fest never felt right to me.

Agreed, but there were two essential problems:

1. No part of your character should work poorly. So making save or dies not work is just bad design.

2. Save or dies are an essential part of 3.X. The only way to fix them would be to rewrite the whole system and cut them out. The Tome series was designed as a spot fix because writing a new system is a lot of work.


So, that being said, making the flavor of the game match older versions of DnD requires a lot work. Considering that 4e spectacularly failed at that and they have paid staff, I don't feel too bad if my own efforts fail on only a few points.

[RandomCasualty2]

Agreed, but there were two essential problems:

1. No part of your character should work poorly. So making save or dies not work is just bad design.

2. Save or dies are an essential part of 3.X. The only way to fix them would be to rewrite the whole system and cut them out. The Tome series was designed as a spot fix because writing a new system is a lot of work.

Oh yeah, I mean I understand the predicament that you're put under to write anything balanced for 3.5. Basically, you've got to either rewrite the entire spell section, or you've got to rewrite the martial classes.

3.5 at its core is almost entirely about rocket launcher tag, and when you're working in that framework you really can't do much to fix it. You and Frank did the best you could within the 3.5 framework. You guys tried to make fighter types as good as casters and for the most part, you succeeded in that goal.

But basically, once you have a game based on save or dies, it's just not the perfect D&D as I envision it. It may make for a good modern game, where lethal combat is a good thing, but for a fantasy badass, I'd like him to take more than one spell or attack to bring down.

So, that being said, making the flavor of the game match older versions of DnD requires a lot work. Considering that 4e spectacularly failed at that and they have paid staff, I don't feel too bad if my own efforts fail on only a few points.

Well I wouldn't call 4E a spectacular failure. It does a few things well and at the very least, the starting point for balance seems relatively sound. And as far as a building block, I'd much rather have a bland but balanced game, rather than a totally broken semi-interesting one (I say semi-interesting simply because 3.5 was only actually interesting if you were playing a caster, if you were anything else, you were basically playing 4E, only without any powers at all).

And I'm curious: If you were going to make a Tome series for 4E, what kind of things would you put in there and what changes would you make?

[K]

And I'm curious: If you were going to make a Tome series for 4E, what kind of things would you put in there and what changes would you make?

Well, here's my list of the hot issues:

1. Remap the abilities so that they do interesting things on a power level on par with 3e, as well as increasing damage so that padded sumo goes away. When monsters do more interesting things than you, you are in trouble. Things like planar binding don't need to go in, but I've never heard complaints about planar ally.

2. Ditch the whole treasure/magic item section. It's straight unworkable.

3. Replace the encounter/daily system with something that doesn't have to be handwaved every time.

3. Rebalance flavor abilities against other flavor abilities, rather than against real abilities.


Considering that this would involve rewriting about 80% of the material, I don't think anyone should expect me to do it.

The only thing 4e does well is that they set the whole game at a balance point of around 4th level. Seriously, with a little creative gameplay I could beat Orcus with a 4th level character. He's just a pile of saves and HPs, so doing something like collapsing a mineshaft on him actually is the best way to beat him.

[RandomCasualty2]

1. Remap the abilities so that they do interesting things on a power level on par with 3e, as well as increasing damage so that padded sumo goes away. When monsters do more interesting things than you, you are in trouble. Things like planar binding don't need to go in, but I've never heard complaints about planar ally.

Well couldn't you just cut monster HP by a percentage and add in new abilities that let you do stuff? I mean, you could leave in the abilities that are already there, and just add a few new ones.

2. Ditch the whole treasure/magic item section. It's straight unworkable.

Yeah, the magic item system was pretty horrible. Especially given that by the book, you get more treasure being a newly generated character than you do by being an organic character, which is just stupid.

3. Replace the encounter/daily system with something that doesn't have to be handwaved every time.

3. Rebalance flavor abilities against other flavor abilities, rather than against real abilities.

What do you mean by these two?

The only thing 4e does well is that they set the whole game at a balance point of around 4th level. Seriously, with a little creative gameplay I could beat Orcus with a 4th level character. He's just a pile of saves and HPs, so doing something like collapsing a mineshaft on him actually is the best way to beat him.

well I don't know about that. With all his HP orcus would probably survive the mineshaft collapse (is there even any rule for falling object damage in 4E?), and then with his huge STR check he'd probably dig himself out eventually.

And that's kinda cool, so I'm okay with it, since a lot of times you see some creature or monster getting buried and it slowing him down but not killing him.

[JonSetanta]

You know, before I stumbled onto this site, I just didn't care as much about the negative aspects of D&D. When I did stumble onto such problems, I didn't realize it.

You guys just seem too pessimistic for my tastes.

Hahaha..

I wouldn't say too pessimistic, though. Perhaps just enough to admit there are problems.

[K]

1. Remap the abilities so that they do interesting things on a power level on par with 3e, as well as increasing damage so that padded sumo goes away. When monsters do more interesting things than you, you are in trouble. Things like planar binding don't need to go in, but I've never heard complaints about planar ally.

Well couldn't you just cut monster HP by a percentage and add in new abilities that let you do stuff? I mean, you could leave in the abilities that are already there, and just add a few new ones.

you can't have a system where some abilities are crap for their level and some are great. Better to scrap teh whole lot and start over.

And cutting monster HPs would work. The point is that padded sumo must go.

2. Ditch the whole treasure/magic item section. It's straight unworkable.

Yeah, the magic item system was pretty horrible. Especially given that by the book, you get more treasure being a newly generated character than you do by being an organic character, which is just stupid.

3. Replace the encounter/daily system with something that doesn't have to be handwaved every time.

3. Rebalance flavor abilities against other flavor abilities, rather than against real abilities.

What do you mean by these two?

When does an encounter start? End? If a monsters keep attacking you one at a time does that mean your encounter never ends? If you run through three rooms and three monsters start chasing, is that one encounter or three? If you close a door in the middle of combat and it takes a monster a minute to break through, is that a new encounter?

After listening to the Penny Arcade playtest, it's pretty clear that it's just handwaved.

As for point 3, check my post on Aging.

The only thing 4e does well is that they set the whole game at a balance point of around 4th level. Seriously, with a little creative gameplay I could beat Orcus with a 4th level character. He's just a pile of saves and HPs, so doing something like collapsing a mineshaft on him actually is the best way to beat him.

well I don't know about that. With all his HP orcus would probably survive the mineshaft collapse (is there even any rule for falling object damage in 4E?), and then with his huge STR check he'd probably dig himself out eventually.

Well, a cave in is a 13th level challenge and creates difficult terrain, so that's not a tunnel collapse. I expect that a true tunnel collapse is Epic by the rules and the weigh of tons of stone would kill him long before he dug himself out (But we don't even know what a Str check does, so it doesn't matter).

[RandomCasualty2]

you can't have a system where some abilities are crap for their level and some are great. Better to scrap teh whole lot and start over.

And cutting monster HPs would work. The point is that padded sumo must go.

As far as the first thing, that basically sums up 3.5 more so than 4E. I mean for fucks sake, you've got acid arrow in the same spell level as scorching ray and web.

Isn't padded sumo just that monsters take more and more attacks to kill as you get higher in level? Therefore, wouldn't cutting their hp gain account for this?

When does an encounter start? End? If a monsters keep attacking you one at a time does that mean your encounter never ends? If you run through three rooms and three monsters start chasing, is that one encounter or three? If you close a door in the middle of combat and it takes a monster a minute to break through, is that a new encounter?

Well actually they resolved that one in the rules, by saying that you have to take a short rest (5 minutes) to get back an encounter power. An encounter that doesn't let you get a short rest is considered to not be a new encounter.

Well, a cave in is a 13th level challenge and creates difficult terrain, so that's not a tunnel collapse. I expect that a true tunnel collapse is Epic by the rules and the weigh of tons of stone would kill him long before he dug himself out (But we don't even know what a Str check does, so it doesn't matter).

Well, it's entirely based on how much arbitrary damage the tunnel collapsing would do and what the DM rules his chances for digging himself out would be.

[MartinHarper]

When does an encounter start? End?

90% of the time, it starts when you roll initiative, and ends when you take a five minute rest.

If a monsters keep attacking you one at a time does that mean your encounter never ends?

Kinda. Powers that cause effects that last "till the end of the encounter" last five minutes, so if you're still slaying monsters one at a time 60 rounds later, the effects of some earlier powers may wear off.

If you run through three rooms and three monsters start chasing, is that one encounter or three?

One.

If you close a door in the middle of combat and it takes a monster a minute to break through, is that a new encounter?

No. If it takes five minutes, and the players chill while they're waiting, it's a new encounter.

[Harlune]

Also, it's a new concept that a wizard is playing the same game as a fighter.

See, that's every major problem I have with 4E condensed into a single sentence.

A system that has the fighter playing the same game as everyone else is good.

A system that has everyone playing the same as the fighter is bad.

It's a subtle, but important difference between the two. The fighter's game in 3E freaking sucked, and (this is important) it sucked for more reasons than just class imbalance. So making every class the same as the fighter doesn't fix things it just spreads the suck around.

[JonSetanta]

A system that has the fighter playing the same game as everyone else is good.

A system that has everyone playing the same as the fighter is bad.

It's a subtle, but important difference between the two. The fighter's game in 3E freaking sucked, and (this is important) it sucked for more reasons than just class imbalance. So making every class the same as the fighter doesn't fix things it just spreads the suck around.

Then it looks like we need to find a class somewhere in between for the standard.

Bard or Psychic Warrior for instance.

[K]

When does an encounter start? End? If a monsters keep attacking you one at a time does that mean your encounter never ends? If you run through three rooms and three monsters start chasing, is that one encounter or three? If you close a door in the middle of combat and it takes a monster a minute to break through, is that a new encounter?

Well actually they resolved that one in the rules, by saying that you have to take a short rest (5 minutes) to get back an encounter power. An encounter that doesn't let you get a short rest is considered to not be a new encounter.

That's funny, because the Penny Arcade podcast played differently, and they were playing with one of the signature DMs. I expect it'll be one of the most houseruled things.

Well, a cave in is a 13th level challenge and creates difficult terrain, so that's not a tunnel collapse. I expect that a true tunnel collapse is Epic by the rules and the weigh of tons of stone would kill him long before he dug himself out (But we don't even know what a Str check does, so it doesn't matter).

Well, it's entirely based on how much arbitrary damage the tunnel collapsing would do and what the DM rules his chances for digging himself out would be.

Right. And thirty tons of stone means he's dead any way you try to rule it. Win for a 4th level character.

Sure, there are no rules for it, but there are rules for other things in the game that the essential point remains the same. You've seen the ten 1st level Wizards example, right?

[RandomCasualty2]

It's a subtle, but important difference between the two. The fighter's game in 3E freaking sucked, and (this is important) it sucked for more reasons than just class imbalance. So making every class the same as the fighter doesn't fix things it just spreads the suck around.

Well the 4E system is somewhat of a middle point. Everyone gets a few gimmicks they can do. It's not the old "All you can do is full attack" system of prior editions. Everyone gets some powers and for once, the fighter is actually getting a fair share.

And thirty tons of stone means he's dead any way you try to rule it.

Hardly. It's quite possible he found a niche that didn't totally collapse or what not, or even that the stones fell on him and he survived the impact. Cave-ins and such are rarely entirely uniform. There are places where one might be able to survive them.

And besides this is D&D, the game where you can fall 200 ft and survive. I don't find that surviving a cave in is all that less plausible.

[K]

And thirty tons of stone means he's dead any way you try to rule it.

Hardly. It's quite possible he found a niche that didn't totally collapse or what not, or even that the stones fell on him and he survived the impact. Cave-ins and such are rarely entirely uniform. There are places where one might be able to survive them.

And besides this is D&D, the game where you can fall 200 ft and survive. I don't find that surviving a cave in is all that less plausible.

Well, if you can keep Orcus in a level 13 cave-in for a few hundred rounds, he'll die. I expect a full cave in uses deadlier rules, but it's not even necessary. Using the object rules, Orcus needs around a hundred rounds to smash through a huge boulder, so if you keep pushing them in the way and he'll die. Teleport is line of sight so he can't even escape, and he can't drag rocks with more than 1750 lbs.

I'm not saying that this is a common or easy situation. I'm saying it's the kind of thing I pull at 4th level, so the fact that it works on 4e Orcus is really sad.

3e Orcus would Teleport out and rip your heart out. 4e Orcus is just a puzzle monster until 30th level when you fight him straight out.

[MartinHarper]

3e Orcus would Teleport out and rip your heart out. 4e Orcus is just a puzzle monster until 30th level when you fight him straight out.

I think part of the weirdness here is that 3e stat blocks have everything a creature can do, and 4e stat blocks have everything a creature is likely to do in combat. For example, the rules for liches say that Orcus can "reform a destroyed lich, turning it into a lich vestige", but there's no "reform destroyed lich" power in Orcus's stat block, or rules for how it happens or how long it takes.

Which brings us back to there being more emphasis on DM fiat and DM houserule than in the 3e books.

[Jerry]

You guys just seem too pessimistic for my tastes.

The teapot and the kettle, my friend.

That's probably why I post so much here.

[K]

3e Orcus would Teleport out and rip your heart out. 4e Orcus is just a puzzle monster until 30th level when you fight him straight out.

I think part of the weirdness here is that 3e stat blocks have everything a creature can do, and 4e stat blocks have everything a creature is likely to do in combat. For example, the rules for liches say that Orcus can "reform a destroyed lich, turning it into a lich vestige", but there's no "reform destroyed lich" power in Orcus's stat block, or rules for how it happens or how long it takes.

Which brings us back to there being more emphasis on DM fiat and DM houserule than in the 3e books.

Monsters are just less powerful and tactically interesting.

Out of combat was always handwaved. Evil rituals and the like were always just part of a story and everyone moved on.

My beef is that Orcus is now a 4th level Puzzle monster and a 30th level combat monster.

[Jerry]

I wouldn't say too pessimistic, though. Perhaps just enough to admit there are problems.

But when good ideas/rules come out, you don't see as many threads here discussin them, compared to the threads about broken rules, fixing broken rules, or how much WotC sucks.

[Surgo]

Oh my God, is the OP still making threads about this? Shut the fuck up already.

[Jerry]

Oh my God, is the OP still making threads about this? Shut the fuck up already.

What other threads?