| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
 Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 08:51:20
|
quote:
The Warlord - Why? How can you be a 1st level “warlord”?
Probably because all the other class name alternatives sounded really bad. Does the class name really matter, though? After all, how many people refer to themselves by their class name? If you called a Barbarian a barbarian he'd probably consider it an insult. And Fighters and Rogues certainly don't refer to themselves as such. Just add Warlord to that list. Just as most Fighters ingame wouldn't refer to themselves as a Fighter, likewise most Warlords ingame won't refer to themselves as Warlords (they're both more likely to simply call themselves sellswords and the like).
quote:
Warlock - Why? Why isn't this just included as an alternate path for a wizard? But I "get" this class in comparison to warlord.
It's different enough that it justified its own class. It has its own take on magic which I rather like. Besides, Warlock is a perfect class for Venger. 
quote:
Wizards and Clerics – Why? Where are my spells? OK my powers can do some cool damage but why do i just feel like any other character with their own powers?
Play through it. Trust me, they don't feel the same. As for their spells, simply not enough room. If you give them additional options, then you have to cut options from something else. And personally, I prefer every class having a roughly equal amount of options, rather then a small number of classes having a massive amount of options, and the rest of the classes having a miniscule amount of options.
quote:
Elves & Eladrin - Why? I'm not held up on the Eladrin name but why did we need to split elves into 2 separate races in the Core books? I really like the idea of the different elven subraces in the Realms – a unique feature of FR, but it isn’t necessary for core.
Core's always had elf subraces (you'll find them all in the Monster Manual). This is a positive step as the number of elf races has been cut to three, as opposed to half-a-dozen.
quote:
Missing Classes and Races – Why?
No room. 320 pages for eight classes and races. How much more could've been packed in? What should've been cut in order to make room for them?
quote:
Where are the gnome?
Monster Manual for now, and it's very nice. I'm considering playing one. Perhaps a balding Gnome Wizard? I'll wear red robes and refer to myself as "Dungeon Master"...
quote:
Deities – Why? Why are they in a core rule book?
Why not?
quote:
Why do the deities and the planes need to be part of any core book?
They're useful for new players. Not every D&D player is a grizzled veteran of 20 years of gameplay, after all. Some are just starting out, and when you're starting out, it's nice to have something to hang your hat on. Besides, I rather like the core setting described in the books. I've got half a mind to actually play a campaign there.
quote:
Hit Points - Why did they stop rolling them?
To more easily balance classes at every level.
quote:
Why doesn't con bonus apply at each level any longer?
To make Con a less vital stat. In 3.5 the difference between Con 10 and Con 14 at 20th-level is 40 hit points. In 4E it's four hit points. Con was far to important a stat for every class.
quote:
Healing Surges - Why? What was wrong with needing party healing via character classes such as cleric and paladin or acquiring potions of healing and other items?
Because it sucks to have a player forced into playing a character they don't want to play. I can't tell you how often I've seen campaigns which're short of a Cleric, and the requirement for my participation was to play a Cleric. In those instances I prefer to bow out of the game rather then get stuck with a class I'm not interested in playing (although I enjoyed playing a Cleric for the first time in 18 years of gaming, recently, when I played one in a 4E game).
quote:
Where is the fear of life ending for your character in 4th edition?
It's still there. The lethality of the game is, as always, still firmly in the hands of the DM. And from appearances, 4E looks to do a better job at making it easier for the DM to gauge what kind of a threat an encounter for a PC party will be.
quote:
What is the context of a character being able to spontaneously heal damage? Gritting it out through damage is one thing but repeated healing is another.
HP doesn't represent only raw physical damage taken. It represents other factors, as well, like fighting spirit. So a Healing Surge, then, can mean a lot of things. Regrouping, a surge of adrenaline, morale boost, etc.
quote:
Base Attack Bonus: Why??? How is it that, aside from a couple modifiers here and there, A wizard and fighter have the same base attack bonus? This doesn’t make sense to me.
I suspect it's about making encounter design easier. Not a big deal, though, IMO. Even if their attack bonuses are comparable, that doesn't mean anything, as a Fighter will still be far better at swinging a sword then a Wizard, and a Wizard will be a far better shot with a spell then with a longbow.
quote:
Defences and Saves: Why?? Ok i can accept the idea of defences after some thought. But what did they do to saves? Everyone now has a base 50/50 save attempt regardless of level with the odd modifier here and there. Why?
It replaces spell durations. Instead of a spell lasting 1d4 rounds, for example, you roll a Saving Throw at the end of a round. It keeps the players invested, as their character could come back into the game at any moment. Making it a Saving Throw also allows for modifiers. In prior editions, the spell would last however long it lasted. But now, it can end more quickly or last longer depending on the specifics of the situation.
quote:
Skills - Why? Why are they so simplified? Why are they too generic?
To each their own. But I rather prefer a condensed skill list, as characters now get more bang for their buck from their skills. And with the number of trained skills available to each class, as well as the ability to take the Skill Training Feat in any skill, characters are now more skillful.
quote:
Why so little difference between unskilled and skilled?
A +5 bonus is hardly a little difference.
quote:
It started with 3rd edition when they dropped the cha requirement among other things and created all the martyr spells but why did they turn the paladin into a living punching bag?
Why is this a bad thing? It's certainly great for any Paladins of Ilmater out there.
quote:
Where is the fun of playing a noble knight with special gifts from their deity?
It's still there, and the Paladin has far more deific gifts then he's ever had, before.
quote:
Great I get to do radiant attacks... awesome.. my powers need me to martyr my character to work..cool...
Only some of them. And you don't have to take those if you don't want to. There're plenty of options, after all.
quote:
i’ll just absorb all this damage so the other characters in the party can inflict all the damage.
Read through it again. You can do both at once if you so choose. There's no 'either or' proposition, here. You do both.
quote:
I’ll do some middling damage here and there while the fighters and everyone else kick butt and i’ll give away my healing surges to the other party members.
Once again, you can do both. The Paladin certainly doesn't do "middling damage". The 4E Paladin's tougher then ever.
quote:
Magic Items – Why?? Why are they in the PH????????????
Because they're used by the players, not the DM. And things which're used by the players belong in the Players Handbook. I can't tell you the sheer number of players which I've run across, who aren't DM's, and yet they own a copy of the Dungeon Master's Guide. Why? For the magic items. After three editions it's pretty obvious that if players are buying the DMG solely for that info, then it's pretty clearly player info and belongs in the PHB. And it's nice to no longer have a DMG which is a must-have for players, too. Although personally, I could've lived without magic items altogether. I would've been fine if they'd held off on them altogether for Adventurer's Vault or whatever the book is going to be called. Those 32 pages could've possibly given us enough space for two more classes. No biggie, though.
quote:
Energy/Level drain – Why? Well I actually know Why? It was too scary an attack. Considered unfair by many players.
It was scary in that it dragged down gameplay to a crawl and turned the game into a boring math exercise. Level drain was a miserable rule system that I'm glad to see the backside of. Especially since in some cases it made no sense at all (Vampire slam attack? Really? So if Dracula backhands me really hard, he can make me forget how to cast Fireball?).
Personally, for pretty much all the reasons you listed, I'm very happy with 4E. As soon as the current adventure is over, my current homegame will be switching over to 4E. And I'm looking to add one or two more 4E games to that. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
 |
|
|
Darius Talynth
Acolyte
Canada
21 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 16:09:39
|
Hi Venger. Thanks replying to my post. I think you gave some very good responses to the "Why"s that I threw out there. Your reasoning is sound and helps to make sense of many of them. I will still have to wrap my mind around many of them - not to understand from a mechanics point of view but from the context viewpoint. Of course, there is still a great deal of "to each, his own" and there is nothing wrong with that.
I am not anti 4e per se. I can be open to it and if invited to play in a game I would give it an honest try but I won't go actively seeking a 4e game or start one of my own. I am happy to continue playing my mish-mash 1e/2e/3.xe game. Of note, the 4E DMG can be used in any edition game. It seems very well done in terms of content much of which applies to Role playing issues, campaign and adventure design, and so on which is good, general RPG game mastering help. Of course, much of this content could be found in previous DMGs and role playing help articles.
As for a few certain specifics...
when I referred to the warlord, you're right, I am nitpicking on the name. It is my right to do so  but the concept of the character seems flawed to me. And the name is part of that. In 3e terms it makes sense to me as a prestige class but not as a base class. Maybe it could have been a paragon path for fighter.
Regarding hit points - the different classes are still too close together. the Defenders (fighters, and paladins) should have been based on a d12 hit die which would give average 7 hp per level (ok really it's 6.5 hp). As for the concept of hit points representing skill, luck, adrenaline in addition to hardiness, I am aware of this ideal and subcribe to it myself. However, healing surges seem very video gamey to me... but in and of itself they aren't necessarily wrong. just... very different to me.
As for level draining... I understand your point regarding the mathematical problems it can bring. However, I was harkening back to 1e (and revealing my grizzled vet status) where the game was much simpler (no skills, feats, etc.) and level draining monsters were feared. There are very few monsters that can actually strike fear into the hearts of players and level draining undead (for example) could do that. You would even see some parties flee from them. As for your example of the wizard being level drained and "forgetting" how to cast fireball, I see it differently... i see your wizard being so weakened by the attack that he is unable to cast the spell until he can receive proper healing. So I will say "to each his own" for energy drain.
My venting post was good for my "acceptance" of 4e. I'd like to thank Venger for his thoughts. His comments and answers to my "why's" have helped me to get a better grasp of the reasoning and context to some of the 4e game design. Also, I was able to get some things off my mind by typing them out.
I will say this: 4e is not a bad game. It is D&D. BUT it is a different way of playing D&D. I'm not ready for these differences and...for now... I choose to rebel against them  Reality is I don't think i need them with all of my 1/2/3e materials and a happy gaming group that likes our game. But I might be inclined to steal some of the new 4e concepts that I do like. House rules may indicate that something in the game needs to be fixed.. but, whatever, we like our house rules and we would be house ruling in 4e too.
|
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 20:14:23
|
I'll give some of my thoughts as to the "why" of some of the things you mentioned.
quote:
Originally posted by Darius Talynth
The Warlord - Why? How can you be a 1st level “warlord”? To me a warlord is an earned honorific (or at least description). You become a warlord through your deeds not because you picked the class at 1st level. I don't get the context for this class.
As Venger said, the actual name of the class doesn't have to mean that much. Also, it's a class that's meant for the "inspiring leader" type of warrior, and it's possible to be such a character at level one.
quote:
Warlock - Why? Why isn't this just included as an alternate path for a wizard? But I "get" this class in comparison to warlord.
Warlocks get their powers thanks to a pact rather than through study--that already makes them pretty different from wizards.
quote:
Elves & Eladrin - Why? I'm not held up on the Eladrin name but why did we need to split elves into 2 separate races in the Core books? I really like the idea of the different elven subraces in the Realms – a unique feature of FR, but it isn’t necessary for core.
I think for 4E the designers wanted to play up the different aspects of elven lore (ie. ethereal and magical vs. close to the earth and woodsy). As I see it, eladrin and elves were made different enough from each other so as not to feel repetitive. I wouldn't say elven subraces were unique to the Realms, per se.
quote:
Missing Classes and Races – Why? Where are the gnome? Half orc? Bard? Monk? Barbarian? Druid? Sorceror (well sorcerer is redundant now, too bad... i liked it in 3e).. that’s right.. they’ll be in PHB2... and that was expected. Oh ya.. they are also still in my 3e books.
There's only so much room in the books, and the designers said (in the preview material) that they hadn't figured out exactly how they wanted to do certain races and classes yet.
quote:
Alignments? Why did they go from Nine to Five? Why did they change Neutral to Unaligned? Actually I don’t mind these changes and I’m happy to see alignment continue to be part of D&D. I never could tell the difference between NG and CG but I could tell the difference between NG/CG and LG. I think unaligned is a sensible change. True Neutral, if you use “the balance” mantra, was actually a “lawful” minded pursuit IMO... I could understand LN. CN didn’t matter on its own and fits into unaligned well. LE and CE were easy to grasp. But i think they should have kept LE as a separate alignment and lumped CE and NE together into the generic Evil.
I'm sorta with you here (I think). I think they should have ditched the Law/Chaos axis all together, as even now the half-hearted inclusion of LG and CE is confusing people. Some people think LG and CE are just extreme versions of good and evil, but even the rulebooks say otherwise.
quote:
Deities – Why? Why are they in a core rule book? Why do the deities and the planes need to be part of any core book? They are setting and campaign specific. They shouldn’t have been in 3e core either. Redesigning the planes and deities to fit the 4e core was unnecessary – a big red herring. Ok the idea of the alignment wheel doesn’t quite fit anymore but it’s no big deal. The Realms cosmology was g a good idea. Why do they need to change that to fit a core ideology? And id I may say, Planescape was a great resource to the D&D universe.
The core deities and cosmology are there for those who don't want to use an established setting and would like these elements to be already developed for their own setting. Not everyone has the time or inclination to make up their own pantheon and cosmology, and for these people, the rulebooks provide an out-of-the-box system right there, ready to use. Also, for my part I think they are both pretty nicely done.
quote:
Skills - Why? Why are they so simplified? Why are they too generic?
I don't think the streamlined skills are a bad thing. For example, I always thought it was a bit silly to have seperate skills for hiding and moving silently, even though most of the time you needed both those skills for any use thereof to be effective. No reason for them not to be rolled together--it's assumed that if you are good at one, you are probably good at the other. The same principle is behind the other skill rollups.
quote:
Feats – Why? I liked the feat system as introduced in 3e and I guess it is more or less the same in 4e.
I have a question. You say you liked the feat system of 3E, and then say that it's probably not so much different in 4E. So, isn't that a good thing? Why are you asking why about it?
quote:
The Paladin – Why? What did they do to you??
...
At least my paladin is still immune to disease and fear... what’s that? No.. not anymore...
I think one of the goals of 4E was to take characters with tons of immunities down a peg. For example, I've heard that 4E warforged no longer have the laundry list of immunities that they used to.
quote:
Paladin was one of the few classes that had role playing restrictions (LG alignment, code of conduct)
I'm pretty sure they are trying to get rid of alignment restrictions (on base classes, at least) as well. That being said, the rulebooks still encourage players to refrain from playing evil alignments, just like in 3E.
quote:
Energy/Level drain – Why? Well I actually know Why? It was too scary an attack. Considered unfair by many players. But I love level draining monsters.
You answered your own question here. You may have liked level draining, and there are probably plenty of people out there who would agree with you. However, it looks like WotC had reason to believe that most people didn't find level drain attacks to be fun.
quote:
OK I’ll stop things here for now. I can keep asking “why” over and over. I made a very negative post and I apologize.
No reason to apologize--you expressed your opinion and were polite about it. 4E isn't going to be for everyone, and that's fine. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 15 Jun 2008 20:28:50 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 23:24:39
|
quote:
Hi Venger. Thanks replying to my post. I think you gave some very good responses to the "Why"s that I threw out there. Your reasoning is sound and helps to make sense of many of them.
You're welcome. :)
quote:
As Venger said, the actual name of the class doesn't have to mean that much. Also, it's a class that's meant for the "inspiring leader" type of warrior, and it's possible to be such a character at level one.
I've heard people talking about how Warlord would be a more appropriate class for Tanis Half-Elven.
quote:
I don't think the streamlined skills are a bad thing. For example, I always thought it was a bit silly to have seperate skills for hiding and moving silently, even though most of the time you needed both those skills for any use thereof to be effective. No reason for them not to be rolled together--it's assumed that if you are good at one, you are probably good at the other. The same principle is behind the other skill rollups.
Agreed. Nearly every time you had to use Hide, you also had to use Move Silently, as well, making you roll twice for one action. Likewise, Search and Spot are two other skills which shouldn't have been separate. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Darius Talynth
Acolyte
Canada
21 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2008 : 23:53:44
|
Hi Rin. Thanks for your thoughts on my post.
Both you and Venger have given good comments and are helping me to come to grips with the differences in 4e. As for my confusing line about "Feats" that was me backtracking as I typed 
I am starting to come around on 4e as I recover from my initial reaction. I think I actually prefer some of the complexity of character building in 3e. As for 4e, I do like that some class specific features (such as rogue's evasion) have been broken out into feats. I think that skills are a bit too simplified but there is a happy medium somewhere between 3e and 4e - no not 3.5 - that could satisfy my interests.
Alignment has always had a big role to play in D&D and I think it is important to keep it in the 4e. I'm happy to see it there. I think I have always had a slightly different take on alignments than some players and it has lead me into a share of debates but I think the new 4e alignment system is closer to reflecting my thoughts. I could go along with just the good, evil and neutrality as you have suggested but I think that lawful type behaviour is enough of a concrete concept (discplined, respect for and/or use/abuse of authority, honorable behaviour, ethics, and so on). Chaos and Neutrality really don't mean much other than that they are not lawful. Good and Evil are easy to distinguish and the new unaligned viewpoint is a sensible take on the old true neutral and shades of neutality. Alignment debates can be very frustrating so it is important to clarify or simplify the topic. Just three alignments Good, Evil, Unaligned, could achieve this as well. Afterall, in the case of a classic paladin: you could say they are champions of Good who have to follow a code and this would enforce playing a lawful type of good without calling it that directly. Not sure if I'm explaining myself very well here so I'll leave it with this last comment - I am trying to recall where and from whom I heard this statement, which I now badly paraphrase here:
"regardless of our upbringing or culture, we are not always sure what is right, but we are all sure about what is wrong."
If anyone knows where that is from please let me know! it is eating me up
sorry if I just started an alignment debate 
|
|
|
|
Rhone Ethenkhar
Acolyte
Canada
31 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jun 2008 : 23:29:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
It was scary in that it dragged down gameplay to a crawl and turned the game into a boring math exercise. Level drain was a miserable rule system that I'm glad to see the backside of. Especially since in some cases it made no sense at all (Vampire slam attack? Really? So if Dracula backhands me really hard, he can make me forget how to cast Fireball?).
Because Lord knows, math is really hard to do.  Well given that the way most of 4e is presented, that kind of thing sure seems like it would fit in rather well, being unbelievable and all. It (level draining) was what made undead scary and to not be underestimated. And it required one to be careful with what your character did. They have built in too many "safety" features (or nerfing I guess) into 4e imho. Player's should learn from their mistakes & not to be coddled and have their hands held through quests.
|
" Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages...I intend to discover who are the prisoners and who are the warders." -the Prisoner |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 00:44:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Darius Talynth
As for your example of the wizard being level drained and "forgetting" how to cast fireball, I see it differently... i see your wizard being so weakened by the attack that he is unable to cast the spell until he can receive proper healing. So I will say "to each his own" for energy drain.
Character levels in traditional D&D are life energy levels -- they don't just represent experience and expertise. When a magic-user is level-drained, her soul, thus ability to command magic, is reduced. (Much as casting a Vanceian spell doesn't make you forget how, rather the energy structure in your mind is expended.) |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 06:29:44
|
quote:
Because Lord knows, math is really hard to do.
Yus, cuz oll us 4E fans err jus' plum stooopid.
It isn't a matter of being hard, but a matter of slowing the game down. And it gets worse the larger the number of level draining creatures they are. I want to play, not spend time constantly recalculating scores.
quote:
It (level draining) was what made undead scary and to not be underestimated.
Undead should be scary, yes. But not because they turn what should be an enjoyable game into a monotonous and tedious experience. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 06:45:58
|
quote:
Character levels in traditional D&D are life energy levels -- they don't just represent experience and expertise. When a magic-user is level-drained, her soul, thus ability to command magic, is reduced. (Much as casting a Vanceian spell doesn't make you forget how, rather the energy structure in your mind is expended.)
As another poster elsewhere said...
quote:
Levels are not life-force. They're a measure of how much a character knows.
And while I'm quoting other posters...
quote:
I find the whole tendency to equate "I want to remove level drain" with "I want D&D to have no danger" to be not only a straw man argument, but bordering on offensive. I like danger in D&D. I think resurrection is too easy. I think the whole "death at -10 hp" rule is more than generous enough, and I argue against any effort at making death harder (such as "death at - 10 + Con" "10 + level," both of which I've seen). I've had to argue with several DMs, who wanted to fudge rolls to keep my characters alive, because I want the danger in the game to be real.
And I still want level drain out of the game. Not for purposes of making the game "safer," but because I have conceptual problems with level drain (as mentioned above), and because I think it impacts the fun of the game in a way that other forms of character harm do not.
If you like level drain, cool. But don't assume that because others do not, they're espousing a D&D game without risk.
|
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Rhone Ethenkhar
Acolyte
Canada
31 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 16:34:01
|
Originally posted by Vengerquote:
Yus, cuz oll us 4E fans err jus' plum stooopid.
You said it, not me.
Originally posted by Vengerquote:
Undead should be scary, yes. But not because they turn what should be an enjoyable game into a monotonous and tedious experience.
Well, that is how you get fear in a game mechanics way in a game; affect the stats of a PC. But really, the mathematics involved are so simple, imho nothing gets slowed down.
Incidentally, I do think the rules by and large of 4e are fine. I think it will be a fun game and look forward to checking it out. But things like this (level draining being removed) just seem unnecessary imho. |
" Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages...I intend to discover who are the prisoners and who are the warders." -the Prisoner |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 18:43:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Darius Talynth
Hi Rin. Thanks for your thoughts on my post.
You're welcome.
quote:
Alignment has always had a big role to play in D&D and I think it is important to keep it in the 4e. I'm happy to see it there. I think I have always had a slightly different take on alignments than some players and it has lead me into a share of debates but I think the new 4e alignment system is closer to reflecting my thoughts. I could go along with just the good, evil and neutrality as you have suggested but I think that lawful type behaviour is enough of a concrete concept (discplined, respect for and/or use/abuse of authority, honorable behaviour, ethics, and so on).
I just think that if they were going to consolidate the alignments as they did (which might well have been a good idea), it would have been simpler to just ditch the law/chaos axis altogether. That way, you could still have traditionally "lawful" or "chaotic" characters, they just wouldn't be labeled as such within the game. Or, they should have used some new labels. As it is, LG and CE feel like relics without CG and LE. That's my opinion, anyway. I do think "unaligned" was probably a good idea. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 18:45:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rhone Ethenkhar
Because Lord knows, math is really hard to do.
Well, some people aren't too fond of doing math work, especially when they are playing a game. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Rhone Ethenkhar
Acolyte
Canada
31 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 18:54:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Rhone Ethenkhar
Because Lord knows, math is really hard to do.
Well, some people aren't too fond of doing math work, especially when they are playing a game.
People use math when playing plenty of games: poker, cribbage, Axis & Allies, to name but a few. No one complains there. Granted, they are not RPG's. However, I guess if you are playing Ravenloft all the time, it could get to you :)
I hear you though; I don't like math much. But in this situation, mho is that the math involved in D&D is very simple and I disagree that it drags down play and makes it monotonous. |
" Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages...I intend to discover who are the prisoners and who are the warders." -the Prisoner |
|
|
|
Tiziano
Acolyte
Italy
36 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 19:05:39
|
My usual way of DMing encounters with level-draining NPCs was to have the math ready in advance, a little table with the effect of level draining for each character, not that hard to set up.
From what I heard from those of you who have read the manuals, I'm more and more convinced that 4th ed. isn't for me, if anything I'm sorely tempted to go back to AD&D, I still miss the kits...(and that math wasn't so bad either) |
http://www.portraitadoption.com/ |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 20:59:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
As another poster elsewhere said...
quote:
Levels are not life-force. They're a measure of how much a character knows.
Monster Manual p. 99: 'If a vampire scores a hit upon an opponent . . . its powerful negative force drains 2 life energy levels from the victim'. Little point criticizing the logic of set-ups you aren't even familiar with. |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 21:45:31
|
quote:
You said it, not me.
After you implied it pretty heavily.
quote:
Monster Manual p. 99: 'If a vampire scores a hit upon an opponent . . . its powerful negative force drains 2 life energy levels from the victim'. Little point criticizing the logic of set-ups you aren't even familiar with.
And I think that's wrong. Experience points and levels should be purely an indicator of how much you know, now your "soul" or "life energy" or whatever. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Rhone Ethenkhar
Acolyte
Canada
31 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jun 2008 : 22:02:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
quote:
You said it, not me.
After you implied it pretty heavily.
Actually, no I did not. After you said:
"It was scary in that it dragged down gameplay to a crawl and turned the game into a boring math exercise."
I merely said in round about(albeit sarcastic) way that I could not believe that it could be considered a "boring math exercise" since it would only account for maybe 5 to 10 seconds to figure that level draining out. I apolgise for any misunderstanding on my part & any intentional or unintentional implying of implications, implied or otherwise. But notwithstanding, you were the one to say it not I.
quote:
Originally posted by VengerAnd I think that's wrong. Experience points and levels should be purely an indicator of how much you know, now your "soul" or "life energy" or whatever.
Ah well. I guess if you are going to quote things one should check ones sources a bit more thoroughly, eh? |
" Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages...I intend to discover who are the prisoners and who are the warders." -the Prisoner |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36909 Posts |
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 05:04:55
|
| Doesn't mean that's what they should be, just as hit points shouldn't strictly be a measure of how much punishment you can take. Those're two 4E changes which I like, because neither of those definitions made much sense. Levels and experience should be a measure of how much you know, pure and simple. Just as hit points should be more then just the amount of physical damage you can endure, because otherwise, hit points are cartoonish. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Zanan
Senior Scribe
Germany
942 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 13:55:01
|
| Was just made aware of the fact that the Drow as well as the Drider joined the elusive club of "monsters" no longer part of the SRDs. As it looks, no-one outside WotC will thus be able to make money out of them utilizing 4E rules. |
Cave quid dicis, quando et cui!
Gæð a wyrd swa hio scel!
In memory of Alura Durshavin.
Visit my "Homepage" to find A Guide to the Drow NPCs of Faerûn, Drow and non-Drow PrC and much more. |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 14:58:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Energy/Level drain – Why? Well I actually know Why? It was too scary an attack. Considered unfair by many players. But I love level draining monsters.
You answered your own question here. You may have liked level draining, and there are probably plenty of people out there who would agree with you. However, it looks like WotC had reason to believe that most people didn't find level drain attacks to be fun.
How does Energy/Level Drain work in 4th Ed.? Or has it simply been removed alltogether?
If it has been removed, what other powers do 'level-draining' undead recieve instead? |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
|
|
|
Bakra
Senior Scribe
628 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 15:02:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zanan
Was just made aware of the fact that the Drow as well as the Drider joined the elusive club of "monsters" no longer part of the SRDs. As it looks, no-one outside WotC will thus be able to make money out of them utilizing 4E rules.
And how does this hurt anyone’s current or future games? What is wrong with an ‘exclusive monster club’? What is wrong with a company protecting their Intelligential Property? Also the monsters in the D&D setting are very numerous and I’m sure they have to contend with space limitations. Plus I’m sure they learned a lot from their last SRD and they decided to put this knowledge to use to protect them. And maybe in the near future they will add more monsters to this document based on demand from the public. To give some people a glimmer of hope, they do have drow poison listed in the document. |
I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . .
So saith Ed. <snip>
love to all,
THO
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36909 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 16:43:53
|
It was just a statement, with no commentary or opinion given.
Play nice, people. One more warning and I'll lock this scroll for a few days.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 18 Jun 2008 16:53:40 |
|
|
|
Odysseus
Seeker
USA
51 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 17:18:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ergdusch
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Energy/Level drain – Why? Well I actually know Why? It was too scary an attack. Considered unfair by many players. But I love level draining monsters.
You answered your own question here. You may have liked level draining, and there are probably plenty of people out there who would agree with you. However, it looks like WotC had reason to believe that most people didn't find level drain attacks to be fun.
How does Energy/Level Drain work in 4th Ed.? Or has it simply been removed alltogether?
If it has been removed, what other powers do 'level-draining' undead recieve instead?
As far as I can see its gone.
Things like Wraiths, Wights and Lichs , have various powers that do alot of necrotic damage. |
“Anybody can become angry, that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way, that is not within everybody’s power, that is not easy.” —Aristotle |
|
|
|
Rhone Ethenkhar
Acolyte
Canada
31 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2008 : 18:40:15
|
I can understand why WotC got rid of it though (level draining stuff). I mean, I think aside from people disliking it, it was yet another mechanic in the game that was in it's own category, and did not feel as though it clearly related (or perhaps codified would be a better word) to the rest of the system.
From what I have seen, they are streamlining the game, yes? Everything seems to have neat categories for things to fit into so as to avoid confusion as to what damage comes from what source; that helps narrow down the kind of damage is done, I guess. Maybe WotC felt that "damage" was broken up into too many sub categories and just wanted it to be in the singular form of hit point damage. I dunno. |
" Unlike me, many of you have accepted the situation of your imprisonment, and will die here like rotten cabbages...I intend to discover who are the prisoners and who are the warders." -the Prisoner |
|
|
|
dwarvenranger
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2008 : 04:08:42
|
Okay, now that I've played 4th ed I can officially give my opinion, and that is that the game will very much appeal to those who want their D&D to be WoW or Magic, or (especially in my mind) Diablo II.
Now, I was only playing a pregenerated character (a dwarf fighter). He seemed pretty average, for this edition anyway, which is to say horribly overpowered against any other edition, and yes I've played through all of them in the past 25 years I've been gaming. I mean an attack which does 6d6+3 dam? Even if it's only once per day it seems a bit much at first level anyway
Combat was not any simpler IMO, as the toughness level of monsters seems to have gone up across the board as well as everyone having all these special abilities now. Our final battle took the better part of an hour and a half to finish (five chars against 6 kobolds). However we would have died, (as it was both the other fighter and the wizard ended up unconcious and everyone else ended up close) much quicker if the DM had realized that the super cleric ability, Godsmack or what ever it was called, only allows enemies to do half damage for one round instead of the whole combat. We did prevail though.
Comments from the other players were varied, with those who were already invested in the game (having purchased the core books) being optimistic and those who were not being guarded. However, I will say that the other players (I do not play Magic or WoW, but I do play Diablo II) made the comments on how certain things were similar to Magic or WoW. The DM felt the system was much easier for figuring CR and xp.
After leafing through the PHB and noticing the names of the armor I made the comparison to Diablo II.
Even though we have an experienced group and were able to get in some good role-playing, my impression of the game is that it doesn't really feel like D&D. IMO it feels like a pen and paper video game, which, if that appeals to you is fine, but I will leave my video games on the computer. |
If I waited till I knew what I was doing, I'd never get anything done.
|
|
|
|
Nemea of Nowhere
Acolyte
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2008 : 07:25:46
|
... As much fun as it would be soundly bashing whichever party is wrong about their thoughts on 4th edition...
Perhaps it would be better to use a more objective approach? Why not, whenever you next post in THIS discussion, describe more the issues and facts new to fourth edition. For instance, I think it's rather INTERESTING, don't you all, that "variant classes" could be designed simply by adding a new tree or two of abilities and feats? For my first subject, check out our new ILLUSIONIST class at WotC! *bonks head 'cause can't remember source, don't want link, YOU FIND IT!!!"
p.s. Oh, and everyone? Venger is right about EVERYTHING. ... well... not everything. I don't think he should kill Dungeon Master. But yeah, that's one smart demilich befouling utterevil. |
Games are fun.
Arguing only leads to fun if I get to flambe the doubters. :P
The arcane is just that: arcane. I enjoy magusphysics and ESP studies and espousals about reality and holographic hypothetical realities, but just remember: I have studied for years and now know the way to make the universe drop a squirell on your head. |
|
|
|
Zanan
Senior Scribe
Germany
942 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2008 : 16:22:22
|
You know, I have a gut feeling that with each new book you will find "new trees", "abilities", feats and racial or class options and even sooner than in 3E/RE people will loose sight of all this. It looks perfectly made for somesuch and could well flood the minds of DMs and players alike.
Regarding XP, though I need to deep-consult the DMG on that, taking monsters / opponents out of the MM is fine*, but group strengths vary and if I want to create a drow cleric like the lass in the MM as a real mean character with normal abilities, her XP and "CR" will surely be different than the take-em-and-use-em versions.
*I could do that with any 3E book and a NPC that suits my purpose. |
Cave quid dicis, quando et cui!
Gæð a wyrd swa hio scel!
In memory of Alura Durshavin.
Visit my "Homepage" to find A Guide to the Drow NPCs of Faerûn, Drow and non-Drow PrC and much more. |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jun 2008 : 00:43:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nemea of Nowhere
... As much fun as it would be soundly bashing whichever party is wrong about their thoughts on 4th edition...
Perhaps it would be better to use a more objective approach? Why not, whenever you next post in THIS discussion, describe more the issues and facts new to fourth edition.
That's what I generally try to do, both here and on the WotC boards.
quote:
For instance, I think it's rather INTERESTING, don't you all, that "variant classes" could be designed simply by adding a new tree or two of abilities and feats?
I am indeed impressed by the wide array of options that PCs have, even within one class. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jun 2008 : 03:11:19
|
| After I saw the 4e SRD, I decided to write off 4e all together. I am fed up with WotC. Well, actually, I will check out the 4e FRCG when it comes out still, but I am not expecting it too blow my socks off. And that is out of my respect for the FR brand and Ed, not D&D or WotC. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
D&D 4e Discussion Scroll
