Useful Things Gleaned from 4e
Moderator: Moderators
Useful Things Gleaned from 4e
So I was seriously disappointed with D&D 4e (although not terribly surprised), but there were at least a few useful concepts there that I think are worth adapting to my 3.x games.
The "Bloodied" Condition: Simple yet elegant. I can easily see numerous effects triggering at "bloodied", or having grater/different effects when cast on a bloodied target. This might even be a good way to quasi-nerf SoD's: if they're only useable on bloodied foes, they're still useful but it cuts down on the rocket launcher tag syndrome.
Healing Surges: While I'm not sure I like the execution, I like the idea that healing is accessable to anyone, regardless of class, in the form of a "second wind" (this works well if you remember that some hp loss is supposed to be fatigue). I also don't mind the cap on infinite healing.
Half Your Level Bonus: Specifically on skills, but also on saves. It makes sense that a high-level [fill in the class] will be at least marginally competent at stealth, perception, and knowing what that particular monster is, even if they don't devote limited resources to being great at it. With saves, there's usually such a huge disparity between good saves and bad saves that I think a beter scenario might be having all saves = 1/2 your character level, with bonuses from feats, abilities and class (e.g., wizard grants +2 to Will saves).
Per Encounter Ppwers: It keeps the resource management issues of a per-day power, but cuts down on the five-minute adventuring day. Obviously some powers need to be per-day, but this would work great for many others.
Thoughts?
The "Bloodied" Condition: Simple yet elegant. I can easily see numerous effects triggering at "bloodied", or having grater/different effects when cast on a bloodied target. This might even be a good way to quasi-nerf SoD's: if they're only useable on bloodied foes, they're still useful but it cuts down on the rocket launcher tag syndrome.
Healing Surges: While I'm not sure I like the execution, I like the idea that healing is accessable to anyone, regardless of class, in the form of a "second wind" (this works well if you remember that some hp loss is supposed to be fatigue). I also don't mind the cap on infinite healing.
Half Your Level Bonus: Specifically on skills, but also on saves. It makes sense that a high-level [fill in the class] will be at least marginally competent at stealth, perception, and knowing what that particular monster is, even if they don't devote limited resources to being great at it. With saves, there's usually such a huge disparity between good saves and bad saves that I think a beter scenario might be having all saves = 1/2 your character level, with bonuses from feats, abilities and class (e.g., wizard grants +2 to Will saves).
Per Encounter Ppwers: It keeps the resource management issues of a per-day power, but cuts down on the five-minute adventuring day. Obviously some powers need to be per-day, but this would work great for many others.
Thoughts?
Last edited by Talisman on Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Re: Useful Things Gleaned from 4e
I like.Talisman wrote:So I was seriously disappointed with D&D 4e (although not terribly surprised), but there were at least a few useful concepts there that I think are worth adapting to my 3.x games.
The "Bloodied" Condition: Simple yet elegant. I can easily see numerous effects triggering at "bloodied", or having grater/different effects when cast on a bloodied target. This might even be a good way to quasi-nerf SoD's: if they're only useable on bloodied foesm, they're still useful but it cots down on the rocket launcher tag syndrome.
I don't like how the execution either, but the idea is cool.Healing Surges: While I'm not sure I like the execution, I like the idea that healing is accessable to anyone, regardless of class, in the form of a "second wind" (this works well if you remember that some hp loss is supposed to be fatigue). I also don't mind the cap on infinite healing.
I don't like. For saves and DCs I can see this. For skills it totally kills my idea of being good at some things and bad at other things. I just like ranks better.Half Your Level Bonus: Specifically on skills, but also on saves. It makes sense that a high-level [fill in the class] will be at least marginally competent at stealth, perception, and knowing what that particular monster is, even if they don't devote limited resources to being great at it. With saves, there's usually such a huge disparity between good saves and bad saves that I think a beter scenario might be having all saves = 1/2 your character level, with bonuses from feats, abilities and class (e.g., wizard grants +2 to Will saves).
I like, but IMO Tome of Battle did it better than 4E.Per Encounter Ppwers: It keeps the resource management issues of a per-day power, but cuts down on the five-minute adventuring day. Obviously some powers need to be per-day, but this would work great for many others.
I like them all Talisman.
I was an early proponent of 'linearizing' aptitudes. That is: making all attack and defense values increase linearly with level with respect to their target numbers for all classes (this is what the 1/2 level rule does). Defenses (AC, Will, Reflex, Fort, Perception, etc) should definitely be like this so that characters don't have glass jaws (3e suffered greatly from this). Attacks can be more rank-based, although it creates problems with multiclassing.
Per Encounter Powers are neat, but the obvious problem in 4e is that most of them don't do cool enough stuff. Also, it sucks monsters can recover them and players can't.
I was an early proponent of 'linearizing' aptitudes. That is: making all attack and defense values increase linearly with level with respect to their target numbers for all classes (this is what the 1/2 level rule does). Defenses (AC, Will, Reflex, Fort, Perception, etc) should definitely be like this so that characters don't have glass jaws (3e suffered greatly from this). Attacks can be more rank-based, although it creates problems with multiclassing.
Per Encounter Powers are neat, but the obvious problem in 4e is that most of them don't do cool enough stuff. Also, it sucks monsters can recover them and players can't.
To the scientist there is the joy in pursuing truth which nearly counteracts the depressing revelations of truth. ~HP Lovecraft
Bloodied is... odd. I can see some uses for it, but the way 4e uses it drives me a bit crazy, particularly when bound to solo monsters. I dislike the idea that the players will be timing their stunlocks to catch the monster's batshit crazy bloodied reaction. [Even if it gets a bit trivial at higher levels]
Surges- Eh. Its another counter for 'you should rest after X encounters'. It isn't quite as hard-coded as 3rd's 4 encounters per day, but still, it isn't much more than a limit to the adventuring day. I like the surge *value* however. Healing that actually scales as a meaningful number was long overdue. It fits the abstraction of HP much better than 'cure light = a longsword hit', which would either kill you or be completely insignificant, depending on your level.
1/2 level- Bleh. The lack of variety is overwhelming. Saves can be done with any reasonably thought out progression (which 3rd's probably isn't), but the lack of distinction is underwhelming. It also fosters the min-max problem that infests 4e. Everything else (1/2 level and item bonus) is set, so the only meaninful variable is your stats. If you don't set them up at the beginning of the game, you never, ever can, not withstanding the minor bumps from class and the save feats.
Skills are absurdly bad done this way (and made worse by the absurd DC scaling DC system). Everyone is innately average, and it doesn't even matter because the DCs are scaled for the specialist. There isn't room for weakness, training, background or anything else.
per encounter- I agree with ubernoob, ToB did it better. The lack of a recovery mechanic makes it absurdly stupid. And so many things don't lend themselves to this model. If I have a 17th level fighter power I can try to disarm one guy, once per battle? Fuck you. I could have accepted a pool of powers with a limit on the number of stunts someone could try. 4 encounter powers, ever, and you can use each once? Hack job.
There are concepts that are decent, but the implementation blows them to crap. I like the idea of rituals, even if I've seen it before, (and some spells are much better off as rituals), but the casting time, cost and sheer uselessness of many of them makes them ridiculous and sad.
Surges- Eh. Its another counter for 'you should rest after X encounters'. It isn't quite as hard-coded as 3rd's 4 encounters per day, but still, it isn't much more than a limit to the adventuring day. I like the surge *value* however. Healing that actually scales as a meaningful number was long overdue. It fits the abstraction of HP much better than 'cure light = a longsword hit', which would either kill you or be completely insignificant, depending on your level.
1/2 level- Bleh. The lack of variety is overwhelming. Saves can be done with any reasonably thought out progression (which 3rd's probably isn't), but the lack of distinction is underwhelming. It also fosters the min-max problem that infests 4e. Everything else (1/2 level and item bonus) is set, so the only meaninful variable is your stats. If you don't set them up at the beginning of the game, you never, ever can, not withstanding the minor bumps from class and the save feats.
Skills are absurdly bad done this way (and made worse by the absurd DC scaling DC system). Everyone is innately average, and it doesn't even matter because the DCs are scaled for the specialist. There isn't room for weakness, training, background or anything else.
per encounter- I agree with ubernoob, ToB did it better. The lack of a recovery mechanic makes it absurdly stupid. And so many things don't lend themselves to this model. If I have a 17th level fighter power I can try to disarm one guy, once per battle? Fuck you. I could have accepted a pool of powers with a limit on the number of stunts someone could try. 4 encounter powers, ever, and you can use each once? Hack job.
There are concepts that are decent, but the implementation blows them to crap. I like the idea of rituals, even if I've seen it before, (and some spells are much better off as rituals), but the casting time, cost and sheer uselessness of many of them makes them ridiculous and sad.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
The healing surges limit harms the game. People can heal themselves completely from less than zero to full in a single battle and still have enough to use as many as they are allowed in the next battle. It's only after that where the limits kick in. It's just an enforcement of the 5 minute workday. And it simultaneously prevents damage from mattering. It's quite an achievement of bad design.
Damage can't make you care, but the mechanic that keeps damage from mattering also encourages you to sleep after every major battle whether the princess is in danger or not.
-Username17
Damage can't make you care, but the mechanic that keeps damage from mattering also encourages you to sleep after every major battle whether the princess is in danger or not.
-Username17
- Count Arioch the 28th
- King
- Posts: 6172
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Why not just have all damage heal at the end of an encounter?
Look at most action movies, the hero takes a beating, but next fight he's back to fighting strength.
Or perhaps, I'm just projecting my opinions that D&D would be better if you were Batman.
Look at most action movies, the hero takes a beating, but next fight he's back to fighting strength.
Or perhaps, I'm just projecting my opinions that D&D would be better if you were Batman.
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Well, between combats all of your minor damage falls off in TNE. Even major damage drops to a fraction of the effect, but it's still there.
A big wound has a type I, a type II, and a type III. Next combat, all the type Is and type IIs are gone, but you keep your type IIIs. So your dramatic wounds still hurt some, but your non-dramatic bullshit vanishes next scene.
-Username17
A big wound has a type I, a type II, and a type III. Next combat, all the type Is and type IIs are gone, but you keep your type IIIs. So your dramatic wounds still hurt some, but your non-dramatic bullshit vanishes next scene.
-Username17
-
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm
That models cinematic combat the best I think. Where the hero can get beat up, and nothing bad really seems to happen to him next scene, but if he gets shot, then that wound keeps plaguing him for the movie.FrankTrollman wrote:Well, between combats all of your minor damage falls off in TNE. Even major damage drops to a fraction of the effect, but it's still there.
A big wound has a type I, a type II, and a type III. Next combat, all the type Is and type IIs are gone, but you keep your type IIIs. So your dramatic wounds still hurt some, but your non-dramatic bullshit vanishes next scene.
Mind you, I'm not defending the actual implementation of healing surges, just the basic concept. I like that anyone, regardless of class, can heal themselves a little bit in mid combat - less need for a healbot cleric to be chasing people around with a wand.
Frank, what you're talking about sounds somewhat like 7th Sea's damage system (flesh wounds go away at the end of the scene, but dramatic wounds remain until healed) or Spirit of the Century (stress goes away, consequences go away more slowly). I see your point, but I'm not sure there's really a way to implement that in 3.x.
I do find it somewhat bizarre that a PC can be literally bludgeoned to pulp repeatedly, and as long as there's a bard with a CLW wand nearby, he will never suffer any real effects because of it. That's what I meant by capping infinite healing.
Frank, what you're talking about sounds somewhat like 7th Sea's damage system (flesh wounds go away at the end of the scene, but dramatic wounds remain until healed) or Spirit of the Century (stress goes away, consequences go away more slowly). I see your point, but I'm not sure there's really a way to implement that in 3.x.
I do find it somewhat bizarre that a PC can be literally bludgeoned to pulp repeatedly, and as long as there's a bard with a CLW wand nearby, he will never suffer any real effects because of it. That's what I meant by capping infinite healing.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
-
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm
Yeah that's just stupid.Talisman wrote:
I do find it somewhat bizarre that a PC can be literally bludgeoned to pulp repeatedly, and as long as there's a bard with a CLW wand nearby, he will never suffer any real effects because of it. That's what I meant by capping infinite healing.
I like the idea that there are different levels of wounds, that way spells like "cuire serious wounds" and shit can actually mean something.
Sometimes you may actually have a serious wound and cure light is useless agaisnt it, you should need cure serious, not just a bunch of cure lights.
- JonSetanta
- King
- Posts: 5525
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Location: interbutts
Doublejump
No racial stat penalties for basic races
Weeaboo Fightan Magic as a warrior standard
Less mage power (although they did chop too much off)
INT and CON providing non-scaling benefits rather than "x per level"
NON VANCIAN SPELLCASTING
No racial stat penalties for basic races
Weeaboo Fightan Magic as a warrior standard
Less mage power (although they did chop too much off)
INT and CON providing non-scaling benefits rather than "x per level"
NON VANCIAN SPELLCASTING
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
Thanks for representing the average player's viewpoint for us. If others have a bonus and you don't, you're at a penalty.sigma999 wrote:No racial stat penalties for basic races
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
It changes the maximum variance from four points to two points, so the worst penalty for not min-maxing is smaller. I think that's a legit (if tiny) improvement.Bigode wrote:Thanks for representing the average player's viewpoint for us. If others have a bonus and you don't, you're at a penalty.
Also, addition is faster than subtraction, which is why TNE only gives bonuses based on your stats (last I checked, anyway).
In 3E if you took a racial stat penalty you expected to lose with that stat 100% of the time because you were "dumping" it. Fuck even if you didn't take a stat penalty just putting an 8 in made it clear you expected to lose opposed checks with that stat.MartinHarper wrote:It changes the maximum variance from four points to two points, so the worst penalty for not min-maxing is smaller. I think that's a legit (if tiny) improvement.Bigode wrote:Thanks for representing the average player's viewpoint for us. If others have a bonus and you don't, you're at a penalty.
Bullshit. Unless you are a third grader they are the exact same thing. Subtraction is just adding up. Try to give correct change some time and you'll see.Also, addition is faster than subtraction, which is why TNE only gives bonuses based on your stats (last I checked, anyway).
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:40 pm
Absolutely backwards.MartinHarper wrote:It changes the maximum variance from four points to two points, so the worst penalty for not min-maxing is smaller. I think that's a legit (if tiny) improvement.Bigode wrote:Thanks for representing the average player's viewpoint for us. If others have a bonus and you don't, you're at a penalty.
The penalties for not min-maxing in 4E are immensely larger than in 3E. A relative -2 to AC in 4E (very easy to get if you mess up) is huge. It's just harder to find those penalties b/c it's virtually impossible not to min-max in 4E.
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
No, he's right. While the penalties for failing to min/max are on the whole much larger in 4e (because everyone has one one thing they are good at, so generalists don't end up having saving graces in unusual circumstances), the penalty for picking the wrong race in 4e is indeed smaller.
Being an Orc when you should be a Sun Elf gives you +0 instead of +2 rather than -2 instead of +2. That's a legitimate step in the right direction. You don't notice because the Orc Wizard no longer has the option of falling back on no-save spells in order to mitigate the relative intelligence penalty. But the attribute reassignment itself is a real improvement taken by itself.
---
This is something that comes up over and over again in 4e because none of the subsystems work. It's tempting to say that the subsystems don't work because all of the changes are bad, but this is not true. All of the subsystems don't work because all of them are direct enough that if there is at least one thing that doesn't work in the flow chart of each subsystem then each subsystem fails. But that in no way implies that every part of the flowchart fails. Indeed, that isn't true.
-Username17
Being an Orc when you should be a Sun Elf gives you +0 instead of +2 rather than -2 instead of +2. That's a legitimate step in the right direction. You don't notice because the Orc Wizard no longer has the option of falling back on no-save spells in order to mitigate the relative intelligence penalty. But the attribute reassignment itself is a real improvement taken by itself.
---
This is something that comes up over and over again in 4e because none of the subsystems work. It's tempting to say that the subsystems don't work because all of the changes are bad, but this is not true. All of the subsystems don't work because all of them are direct enough that if there is at least one thing that doesn't work in the flow chart of each subsystem then each subsystem fails. But that in no way implies that every part of the flowchart fails. Indeed, that isn't true.
-Username17
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
The change to races, on its own, reduces the worst penalty for not min-maxing from four points in your primary stat, to two points in your primary stat.Tydanosaurus wrote:The penalties for not min-maxing in 4E are immensely larger than in 3E.
That there are other things in 4e that you believe make it important to min-max is a separate issue.
Last edited by MartinHarper on Fri Aug 01, 2008 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Aren't there? Didn't someone do a chart detailing how even if you max your attack stats at every opportunity, your odds of hitting still go down from about 60% at level 1 to about 40% at level 30? If you didn't min-max, how effective would you be then?MartinHarper wrote: That there are other things in 4e that you believe make it important to min-max is a separate issue.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Depends. Is it a party of strenth clerics?Maxus wrote:Aren't there? Didn't someone do a chart detailing how even if you max your attack stats at every opportunity, your odds of hitting still go down from about 60% at level 1 to about 40% at level 30? If you didn't min-max, how effective would you be then?MartinHarper wrote: That there are other things in 4e that you believe make it important to min-max is a separate issue.
-
- Journeyman
- Posts: 145
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:40 pm
I don't think you can look at it in isolation.FrankTrollman wrote:No, he's right. While the penalties for failing to min/max are on the whole much larger in 4e (because everyone has one one thing they are good at, so generalists don't end up having saving graces in unusual circumstances), the penalty for picking the wrong race in 4e is indeed smaller.
Take the 4E Wizard. If you pick a race that lacks Wis or Int mods, you Fail. You are either below the RNG on your To Hit or your Orb doesn't knock the BBEG off the RNG for saves as much (or both). That effect is gonig to be at least a 10% effect. Whether that Fail comes from a negative mod, or lacking a positive mod, doesn't really make much difference, does it?
Unless you're going to argue that any racial mods are bad b/c it penalizes racial choices, I don't think the form of the choice makes much difference. A net +4 in 3E isn't much different than a net +2 in 4E.