4Edition. Do you like it?

[JinnTolser]

Igor's Law: As an online Ravenloft discussion grows longer, the probability of demonstrative arguments involving Azalin Rex approaches 1.

I hereby call it argumentum ad Azalinum.

There, its copyrighted. From here on, you use Azalin to prove a point, you owe me money.

Some form of that ought to go into your signature.

And it's so true too!

[alhoon]

Seconded. It's true. Igor's law stands. Still, that you copy righted it doesn't mean we should give you royalties. Else every time we used the name Azalin we should give money to WoTC.

[HuManBing]

You can't copyright ideas or statements of fact. Because what you introduced is a philosophical concept, it's outside the scope of copyright law protection. You're welcome to name it after yourself, but you wouldn't get any more royalties from it than Drs. Parkinson or Alzheimer got from discovering their respective mental diseases.

[Igor the Henchman]

I've also copyrighted sarcasm, you know. It's true - I totally have.

[brilliantlight]

I guess my biggest pet peeves of fourth edition is the lack of flexibility for casters and the fact that yyou can't easily convert 3.5 edition games to it.

[Jester of the FoS]

I guess my biggest pet peeves of fourth edition is the lack of flexibility for casters and the fact that yyou can't easily convert 3.5 edition games to it.

This also grated on me, but the more I thought about it, it was the identical play mechanics for the first 16 classes that irked me.
Removing role and class abilities a fighter plays much like a cleric who plays much like a wizard.
There's some small variation but for the most part they're identical.

Compare it to online games that were much of the inspiration.
I'll randomly pick one. How about... Warcraft.

The fighters have a rage mechanic that builds unlocking new powers.
Rogues have energy that goes down as they use powers but rapidly returns during combat and rely on combos of attacks.
Death knights have six runes that can be used and recharge.
Other casters have the standard mana that only recharges between combat.

Compare that to 4e where every class can use the same number of powers each day, which recharge at the same rate.
It took until PHB3 with monks and psions for them to add any variation.

It's the bland, uniform hegemony for the sake of "balance".

How could it have been changed?
Well, martial characters could have been given fewer powers that they could use more often. Daily powers are silly for a martial character. More powerful powers would have to be unlocked by situations like immediate powers.
It thematically fits the power source and is a tad more realistic and reactive.

There's also the limited use and inflexibility of powers. A wizard in earlier editions used fireball even at high levels and it's power increased. There's no reason powers couldn't increase in damage and be useable at higher levels or in place of a higher level power.

At this point, 4e really has some big flaws. They're trying to fix them with the splatbooks adding options and corrections but not changing the old books. Inferior classes and builds, powers that are just unequal.
I'm almost hoping for 4.5 just so they can make everything work like it should. 4e really, really needed another 6-12 months in playtesting.

[brilliantlight]

True, and there is also the fact that there isn't much difference from one cleric to another. With so few prayers it is easy to pick out the best ones but that is going to be almost the same ones that any other cleric will take. They left off gnomes and 1/2 orcs off PHI as well as bards and druids and IIRC all four of them have a histroy all the way back to AD&D 1st edition.

[HuManBing]

I've also copyrighted sarcasm, you know. It's true - I totally have.

I checked the registries and sarcasm wasn't in them. I also checked the patent registries, and it turns out Microsoft has patented it and owns all rights until 2115. You may want to take note of this if you wish to bring suit to defend your invention.

I've heard that Microsoft's lawyers have no sense of humor, and moreover they take everything way too seriously, even jokes.

The swine.

[HuManBing]

Oh, and they're also hypocrites. Who always think of something to add moments after the conversation's over.

[Igor the Henchman]

[jaer]

I disagree that all classes in 4e play the same. With just the PHB1, there would be a lack of variety amongst classes, however, I play in one group and DM another.

In the player group: Cleric, Paladin, Rogue, Wizard, Warlord

In my DM group: Celric, Paladin, Rogue, Wizard, Warlord, Warlock

While some had some power-overlap, none were identical in race or powers. They all play very different (which the other DM and I use compare).

I also see a difference in the roles. I have switched from a Cleric to and Invoker (PHB2), and in looking at the different methods of control, Invokers Slow, Daze, and Immobolize. Having read Druids, they create zones of rough terrain and push more, I believe.

I disagree that they waited until Monks and Psions to make the mechanics for classes different.

Fighters have a lot of dailies that are stances--some start with an attack and they you enter the stance, providing a bonus that lasts all fight or until you change stance.

Warden's have polymorphs, which are similar to stances, but the bonuses they get are very different and the Warden gets a special one-time use attack while polymorphed, at any time during the encounter. The playstyle between these two classes feels very different in reading them to me.

Barbarians have the Rage powers which they can "cash in" to add damage to other attacks. Sorcs have powers that are changed by if the die roll is even and odd. Divine Power added to Invokers a bunch of powers that put a negative effect on the invoker when used (the invoker is immobilized until the end of their next round or take on-going damage as long as the effect on the enemy lasts). As far as I know, this is unique to this class.

I like that the resource management isn't soley on the spell casters anymore--nor can a character fully deplete themselves to uselessness--and that every source book isn't improving wizards and clerics because they have new and better spells while fighters and other melee classes were left in the dust (until 3.5 PHB2), only getting cooler through magic gear. They've balanced out the power additions and, with PrCs gone, less power gaming.

But I do think they needed more playtesting and perhaps some better clarfications/fact checking; overall, I do like 4e. I have been pleasently surprised by how different every character is, despite the set number of powers to pick from.

[brilliantlight]

The problem is virtually all clerics are alike, all wizards are alike and all rouges are alike. There isn't much to differentiate them.

[alhoon]

I agree that the classes are somewhat similar. Unfortunately it was a real turnoff for me.

As for martial classes, most of my friends told me: "What? daily maneuvers? How on earth they explain that? Just once per day you have the chance to strike really hard? Shouldn't it be tied with triggers?"

IMO Martial classes should depend on immediate actions, passive powers and at will powers. Even the idea of the encounter powers (remember Book of nine swords in 3rd edition) seemed to turn off my players.
As for 4th being a pen&paper MMORPG I believe they were influenced, but the Miniatures game was what really, really influenced 4th.

Let me tell you another thing I noticed:

Recently I played "Decent" a couple of times. It's a game like Hero Quest with dungeons etc that has an expansion that allows you to play it as a campaign, where the character evolves etc.
It was nice and it felt like 4th edition! Well, actually 4th edition seemed much better than this game to tell the truth.

Except from playing 4th edition, I also play 3rd edition and World of Darkness.

Comparing all these games I could say:
4th edition beats Decent in being a nice RPG board game. The game was made mostly to be "A few hours of interesting encounters with balanced and easy rules spiced up with some RPG".
Sure you can RP with 4th edition. You can have whole sessions without rolling a single dice. Or without combat. Skill challenges are good if you fix them in a way to suit your party.
As a note, we tend to RP even in Monopoly. It can be done.

3rd edition and WoDarkness are nice RPG pen&paper games. You take a lot of time to customize your character.
Yes, at 3rd level you may have crafts(weaponsmithing) from 0 all the way to 6 ranks + ability modifier + feats.
That's customizing.
Most of the time, I make a rough sketch for a map and it works.
In 4E, with all the shifting and encounter powers that let you move around etc you need a better map. You need a board. It's a board game.

Finding the spells for a 5th level wizard that has an extra 2000 gp worth of spells in his spellbook and which of them to memorize takes as much time as making a 10th level char from scratch for 4E.

As a note, sometimes you don't want to go all the extra mile. You just want to play a nice game where you're either trained to follow tracks or not and that doesn't take into account how much trained you are (i.e ranks).
Sometimes you want a game where you don't sit in front of the spell list thinking "Hmmm... I need to memorize dispel, but I also need to memorize circle of protection from evil or the vampire wizard will dominate us. Should I memorize prayer or greater magic weapon?"
Sometimes you want a game where you say to the DM "hmmm, the Evil cultist is over this 15' tall watchtower, and there are rough, sharp stones around the wooden base. I want to kick out one of the watchtower's braces so he loses his balance and falls on the rocks. What I roll, and how much damage he gets?" And the DM simply answers "Hmm, roll me a strength attack with a -4 penalty against his fortitude. You're level 8 so you do 3d10+5 damage if you make it."

That's when you play 4th. (or Decent)

****************

Sometimes you want a more realistic system, that a character doesn't just say "I'm a weaponsmith!" but it's there in his character sheet and he may be a bit more or less trained than the next weaponsmith (i.e have different amount of ranks).
Sometimes you also want a system that the evil wizard can kill you with a pointed finger. That the mind flayer can take control of you and make you use all your actions and abilities and for longer than 5 mins.
A system where the wizard in your party can teleport you out of a bad combat situation and that the enemy mage can also teleport with his buddies in your home.
A system where the monsters are following the same rules like your characters do, the world is the same for everyone PCs and NPCs alike.
A system where you can play the mind flayer or the ogre or the minotaur.
A system where the orc is dump. Like a -2 in intelligence. That the ogre is tough and strong. Like +10 strength and 4HD.

That's when you play 3rd (or WoD)

All in all, 4E isn't a new form of 3rd edition. It's a whole new game. Some like it, some not. Personally, I find that they fill different preferences for me.

[brilliantlight]

I agree that the classes are somewhat similar. Unfortunately it was a real turnoff for me.

As for martial classes, most of my friends told me: "What? daily maneuvers? How on earth they explain that? Just once per day you have the chance to strike really hard? Shouldn't it be tied with triggers?"

IMO Martial classes should depend on immediate actions, passive powers and at will powers. Even the idea of the encounter powers (remember Book of nine swords in 3rd edition) seemed to turn off my players.
As for 4th being a pen&paper MMORPG I believe they were influenced, but the Miniatures game was what really, really influenced 4th.

Let me tell you another thing I noticed:

Recently I played "Decent" a couple of times. It's a game like Hero Quest with dungeons etc that has an expansion that allows you to play it as a campaign, where the character evolves etc.
It was nice and it felt like 4th edition! Well, actually 4th edition seemed much better than this game to tell the truth.

Except from playing 4th edition, I also play 3rd edition and World of Darkness.

Comparing all these games I could say:
4th edition beats Decent in being a nice RPG board game. The game was made mostly to be "A few hours of interesting encounters with balanced and easy rules spiced up with some RPG".
Sure you can RP with 4th edition. You can have whole sessions without rolling a single dice. Or without combat. Skill challenges are good if you fix them in a way to suit your party.
As a note, we tend to RP even in Monopoly. It can be done.

3rd edition and WoDarkness are nice RPG pen&paper games. You take a lot of time to customize your character.
Yes, at 3rd level you may have crafts(weaponsmithing) from 0 all the way to 6 ranks + ability modifier + feats.
That's customizing.
Most of the time, I make a rough sketch for a map and it works.
In 4E, with all the shifting and encounter powers that let you move around etc you need a better map. You need a board. It's a board game.

Finding the spells for a 5th level wizard that has an extra 2000 gp worth of spells in his spellbook and which of them to memorize takes as much time as making a 10th level char from scratch for 4E.

As a note, sometimes you don't want to go all the extra mile. You just want to play a nice game where you're either trained to follow tracks or not and that doesn't take into account how much trained you are (i.e ranks).
Sometimes you want a game where you don't sit in front of the spell list thinking "Hmmm... I need to memorize dispel, but I also need to memorize circle of protection from evil or the vampire wizard will dominate us. Should I memorize prayer or greater magic weapon?"
Sometimes you want a game where you say to the DM "hmmm, the Evil cultist is over this 15' tall watchtower, and there are rough, sharp stones around the wooden base. I want to kick out one of the watchtower's braces so he loses his balance and falls on the rocks. What I roll, and how much damage he gets?" And the DM simply answers "Hmm, roll me a strength attack with a -4 penalty against his fortitude. You're level 8 so you do 3d10+5 damage if you make it."

That's when you play 4th. (or Decent)

****************

Sometimes you want a more realistic system, that a character doesn't just say "I'm a weaponsmith!" but it's there in his character sheet and he may be a bit more or less trained than the next weaponsmith (i.e have different amount of ranks).
Sometimes you also want a system that the evil wizard can kill you with a pointed finger. That the mind flayer can take control of you and make you use all your actions and abilities and for longer than 5 mins.
A system where the wizard in your party can teleport you out of a bad combat situation and that the enemy mage can also teleport with his buddies in your home.
A system where the monsters are following the same rules like your characters do, the world is the same for everyone PCs and NPCs alike.
A system where you can play the mind flayer or the ogre or the minotaur.
A system where the orc is dump. Like a -2 in intelligence. That the ogre is tough and strong. Like +10 strength and 4HD.

That's when you play 3rd (or WoD)

All in all, 4E isn't a new form of 3rd edition. It's a whole new game. Some like it, some not. Personally, I find that they fill different preferences for me.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. The way I read you is that you think 3.5 is better for roleplaying while 4th edition is better for wargaming.

[Jester of the FoS]

While some had some power-overlap, none were identical in race or powers. They all play very different (which the other DM and I use compare).

Class features tend to determine all of the difference in how a class plays. The resource management tends to be identical however, as everyone has identical at-wills/encounters/dailies.

They play different yes, but so would a fighter with a reach weapon and one without, even if they had similar powers. And two players will often have different tactics.

Likewise, many classes have options and status effects other classes do not. Warlock powers tend to be single target ranged powers while sorcerers use bursts and blasts which make them feel very different.

But they're not really.

Fighters have a lot of dailies that are stances--some start with an attack and they you enter the stance, providing a bonus that lasts all fight or until you change stance.

Warden's have polymorphs, which are similar to stances, but the bonuses they get are very different and the Warden gets a special one-time use attack while polymorphed, at any time during the encounter. The playstyle between these two classes feels very different in reading them to me.

Which isn't very interesting or unique if both of them have it. Rangers also have stances.
Stances are also a fairly unspectacular mechanic, as it's a constant bonus that won't stack with your other constant bonuses.

Barbarians have the Rage powers which they can "cash in" to add damage to other attacks. Sorcs have powers that are changed by if the die roll is even and odd. Divine Power added to Invokers a bunch of powers that put a negative effect on the invoker when used (the invoker is immobilized until the end of their next round or take on-going damage as long as the effect on the enemy lasts). As far as I know, this is unique to this class.

Interesting sub-mechanics all, but hardly something that makes the class radically different.

I disagree that they waited until Monks and Psions to make the mechanics for classes different.

That's nice.
Too bad the designers admitted it. In design articles for the psion they admitted the first 2 PHBs played it safe and they now felt comfortable to play with the system.

Look how radically different the resource management is on the psion. They have to weight the pros and cons of power points and dailies. They have this flexibility beyond the other classes.

Now think about how a barbarian might work if it gained rage the longer the fight went on, slowly increasing or altering their power. Or if they gained rage in response to attacks so their basic attacks became teh equivalent of dailies.

I like that the resource management isn't soley on the spell casters anymore--nor can a character fully deplete themselves to uselessness--and that every source book isn't improving wizards and clerics because they have new and better spells while fighters and other melee classes were left in the dust (until 3.5 PHB2), only getting cooler through magic gear.

But you still NEED the magic gear, which is even more essential to your character. Heck, at first level 4/5ths of the party get a magic weapon or armour and as early as level 2 someone gets a +2 item.

And instead of wizards and clerics getting something every book it will be one book every 2-3 years. There was nothing for human fighters in PHB2 at all.

They've balanced out the power additions and, with PrCs gone, less power gaming.

It's alive and well. Visit the WotC character optimization boards to see some disgusting combinations of gear/paragon paths/ and feats.