class ballence / 5e will have the WoW approach, I dont like it.

yes, its another I gota gripe posting...

I just watched the PAX "future of D&D" pannel Q&A, one thing they mentioned was they didnt like how more complex characters, like spell casters, were more powerful than meele characters, and through the combat mechanics are planning on making everyone equal like they did in 4e. (or in other words like the way the desiners of wow did a few years back)

ok thats one of the things I didnt like about 4e. I dont want fighters who use feats or martial abilities like spells or powers.

in AD&D I think classes were ballenced in that a mage at low levels was one ork axe swing away from death, getting a mage to a level where he was more powerful than a fighter was a great success, but even then, they were glass cannons.

low HP, casting time, and spell disruption all meant that while you had infinately more power and situational adaptability, you were still dependant on having the fighters keep the orks off you so you could get your spells off.  That added a great tatical element to the game.

I never played 3.0 but am playing PF now, and now spell casters have more HP, there really isnt a casting time, and the only way your spell can get disrupted is if the monster with the axe waits for you to try and cast a spell and hits you then, and if you dont cast a spell but instead do something else, the ork with an axe just waits around.

I hate this,  it seems to me the game is bass akwards. it makes sense to me that calling on otherworldly power to summon a castle destroying earthquake should take some time waving your arms and shaking magic sticks. it shouldent just be snap your finger and it happens.

there should be a way even a pesant with a thrown rock can disrupt a mage carefully casting a spell. And I dont want fighters doing manuvers that are every bit as effective as a fireball, but for some bizzare reason can only do this a few times a day.

please, if there is a gaming god, give me back casting time, physically weak mages, and spell disruption that actually works regardless of what feats the mage takes.  

"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax

yes, its another I gota gripe posting...

I just watched the PAX "future of D&D" pannel Q&A, one thing they mentioned was they didnt like how more complex characters, like spell casters, were more powerful than meele characters, and through the combat mechanics are planning on making everyone equal like they did in 4e. (or in other words like the way the desiners of wow did a few years back)

ok thats one of the things I didnt like about 4e. I dont want fighters who use feats or martial abilities like spells or powers.

in AD&D I think classes were ballenced in that a mage at low levels was one ork axe swing away from death, getting a mage to a level where he was more powerful than a fighter was a great success, but even then, they were glass cannons.

low HP, casting time, and spell disruption all meant that while you had infinately more power and situational adaptability, you were still dependant on having the fighters keep the orks off you so you could get your spells off.  That added a great tatical element to the game.

I never played 3.0 but am playing PF now, and now spell casters have more HP, there really isnt a casting time, and the only way your spell can get disrupted is if the monster with the axe waits for you to try and cast a spell and hits you then, and if you dont cast a spell but instead do something else, the ork with an axe just waits around.

I hate this,  it seems to me the game is bass akwards. it makes sense to me that calling on otherworldly power to summon a castle destroying earthquake should take some time waving your arms and shaking magic sticks. it shouldent just be snap your finger and it happens.

there should be a way even a pesant with a thrown rock can disrupt a mage carefully casting a spell. And I dont want fighters doing manuvers that are every bit as effective as a fireball, but for some bizzare reason can only do this a few times a day.

please, if there is a gaming god, give me back casting time, physically weak mages, and spell disruption that actually works regardless of what feats the mage takes.  




So then you haven't even looked at the play test then?

Fighters have down to earth maneuvers that they can do in exchanged for extra damage dice they get each round. Wizards still have vancian as default and some of the spells are downright overpowered. They can be interrupted by taking damage each round. Also mages in 5E so far are so fragile that a house cat can kill them in one round...

I think you are jumping the gun. They aren't going to give fighters daily powers like they did in 4E, they are going to balance them like in 4E, which means they are going to make them have interesting things to do that no other class can do and get an equal time in the spotlight.

My suggestion is to sign up for the free play test download the packet and quit letting your imagination get the best of you... or better yet, let your imagination get the better of you... in a game of D&D and not outside it...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.

I'm not sure this is a serious concern here at this time. It could happen and I haven't played Pathfinder (I really ought to) but mages have always had a certain danger attached to casting in combat in games I play.


My 5e playtest sessions have presented many risks for the lowbie mage and the trend looks like that will hold. Until we get more information I think it's safe to say that mages are pretty fragile. If anything, they could use a couple more defensive options.

@loki- nope, got no party to play it, so I'm just listening to the devs. but what your saying is... no there is no casting time?

PS I always felt fighters get plenty of time in the spotlight, were all just watin for that crit. 90% of the time I play melee characters, why? I think their cool, blades meat and steel=badass, I really dont need abilities in fact, that just kind of corrupts it for me. fighters are and should be simple....

you stick it with the pointy end...
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax
@loki- nope, got no party to play it, so I'm just listening to the devs. but what your saying is... no there is no casting time?

PS I always felt fighters get plenty of time in the spotlight, were all just watin for that crit. 90% of the time I play melee characters, why? I think their cool, blades meat and steel=badass, I really dont need abilities in fact, that just kind of corrupts it for me. fighters are and should be simple....

you stick it with the pointy end...



You have to make a dex check if you cast in melee unless your spell targets an area within 5' or a target within 5' of you. the DM can call for a con check for 'environmental' distractions. If you fail either of those you lose your action, but not the spell slot. So disruption is in.

As a Fighter you don't have to use the abilities at all, you can just dump the dice into straight damage so you have all the things you wanted while still allowing others to have theirs.

Even if you can't play you can still download the play test and give feedback on it. That way you aren't throwing around baseless accusations that are clearly factually incorrect...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.

yes, its another I gota gripe posting...

I just watched the PAX "future of D&D" pannel Q&A, one thing they mentioned was they didnt like how more complex characters, like spell casters, were more powerful than meele characters, and through the combat mechanics are planning on making everyone equal like they did in 4e. (or in other words like the way the desiners of wow did a few years back)

ok thats one of the things I didnt like about 4e. I dont want fighters who use feats or martial abilities like spells or powers.

in AD&D I think classes were ballenced in that a mage at low levels was one ork axe swing away from death, getting a mage to a level where he was more powerful than a fighter was a great success, but even then, they were glass cannons.

low HP, casting time, and spell disruption all meant that while you had infinately more power and situational adaptability, you were still dependant on having the fighters keep the orks off you so you could get your spells off.  That added a great tatical element to the game.

I never played 3.0 but am playing PF now, and now spell casters have more HP, there really isnt a casting time, and the only way your spell can get disrupted is if the monster with the axe waits for you to try and cast a spell and hits you then, and if you dont cast a spell but instead do something else, the ork with an axe just waits around.

I hate this,  it seems to me the game is bass akwards. it makes sense to me that calling on otherworldly power to summon a castle destroying earthquake should take some time waving your arms and shaking magic sticks. it shouldent just be snap your finger and it happens.

there should be a way even a pesant with a thrown rock can disrupt a mage carefully casting a spell. And I dont want fighters doing manuvers that are every bit as effective as a fireball, but for some bizzare reason can only do this a few times a day.

please, if there is a gaming god, give me back casting time, physically weak mages, and spell disruption that actually works regardless of what feats the mage takes.  



I, for one, will only be happy with a balanced 5E that gives Fighters 'kewl powers'. 
...whatever


I just watched the PAX "future of D&D" pannel Q&A, one thing they mentioned was they didnt like how more complex characters, like spell casters, were more powerful than meele characters, and through the combat mechanics are planning on making everyone equal like they did in 4e. (or in other words like the way the desiners of wow did a few years back)

ok thats one of the things I didnt like about 4e. I dont want fighters who use feats or martial abilities like spells or powers.


The way D&D:Next is crafted so far, you can create a system that doesn't use Specialties (ie. feat trees), Feats, etc. Or, if you don't care about balanace, just make your Fighter character without those aspects. As for the Fighter class features, lokiare's suggestion of just plugging the "Expertise Die" into damage per attack is a solid one. None of their abilities seem "supernatural" or have any sort of recharge time like it was in 4E. Personally, I never had a problem with that either.


in AD&D I think classes were ballenced in that a mage at low levels was one ork axe swing away from death, getting a mage to a level where he was more powerful than a fighter was a great success, but even then, they were glass cannons.

low HP, casting time, and spell disruption all meant that while you had infinately more power and situational adaptability, you were still dependant on having the fighters keep the orks off you so you could get your spells off.  That added a great tatical element to the game.



Ah, good ol' Linear Fighters, Quadratic Wizards theory. I've never seen this actually done well in previous editions. Probably because I think we game for a few character levels then go to another campaign. So the whole concept is lost when you don't play a character from 1st to 20th level.  Additionally, when a Wizard has the ability to immobilize/kill/stop or otherwise "win" an encounter with a spell or two, then I have serious issues with that. Low HP and AC doesn't "balance" out these types of powerful spells.


I never played 3.0 but am playing PF now, and now spell casters have more HP, there really isnt a casting time, and the only way your spell can get disrupted is if the monster with the axe waits for you to try and cast a spell and hits you then, and if you dont cast a spell but instead do something else, the ork with an axe just waits around.

I hate this,  it seems to me the game is bass akwards. it makes sense to me that calling on otherworldly power to summon a castle destroying earthquake should take some time waving your arms and shaking magic sticks. it shouldent just be snap your finger and it happens.



Multiple casting rounds, frankly, sucks. I don't see ANY fun in "casting" for multiple rounds to get off an effect. For one, it completely removes any sort of tactical play from the spellcaster. As an example, a group of 5 Orcs are clustered as the round begins. The wizard casts fireball. 2 rounds later, the fireball goes off but now that cluster is broken up and what was a great spell choice 2 rounds ago is completely wasted on 1 or 2 monsters if your lucky. Secondly, it's less dynamic as a round-per-round game goes. Sitting there, as people around you get to interact with the world and encounters, your there.....casting. And if in that time, your hit or engaged, you have little recourse besides hoping they miss. And if they do hit, well those rounds where you were doing nothing are wasted. Those are just two (of many) elements of why I'll never ever go back to AD&D or previous editons. And I can't see how those mechanics are good for the game now.  


there should be a way even a pesant with a thrown rock can disrupt a mage carefully casting a spell. And I dont want fighters doing manuvers that are every bit as effective as a fireball, but for some bizzare reason can only do this a few times a day.

please, if there is a gaming god, give me back casting time, physically weak mages, and spell disruption that actually works regardless of what feats the mage takes.  



Spell disruption is there in D&D:next as it was also in v3.5 and Pathfinder (but, thankfully not in 4E). As stated, Fighters don't get quasi-magical maneuvers (they didn't in 4E save for one, but that's for another discussion) in D&D:Next, they get simple but elegant maneuvers that exhibit a form of martial prowess not common amongst other classes. And they only get a few and have to build up more as they gain levels. They automatically get Deadly Strike (adding their expertise die to damage when the hit) and Parry (subtracting their expertise die to damage when their hit) plus one additional maneuver based of their Combat Style. Shield users might take Protect (an ability like parry for an adjacent ally) or Cleave (spending the expertise die to make an extra attack if they drop the 1st bad guy). Also, there is a casting time, it requires 1 action. If you want multiple-round casting times, then we're at an impasse because I'd drop D&D:next in a heartbeat if they implemented them again. I will advocate for a sub-system that provides an old-school feel that adds additional casting time to spells for perhaps an increase of effect as a module to be bought later down the road. 
The "fighters rock the lower levels, mages rock the higher ones" philosophy doesn't work due to too simple reasons:


  • many games break up before getting to higher levels, thus denying the mages their chance to shine.

  • many games start at higher levels or some players join them at higher levels, thus denying the fighters their chance to shine.


 Wouldn't a "everyone rocks at every level" philosophy assure that all games go of without a hitch regardless of  at which level they start or finish?


I have often seen disruption rules, multiple rounds castings etc offered up as balancing  mechanism for overpowered spells, this is called treating the symptoms.



One can easily see how a system where spellcasters don't pay for being more powerful because they are not is in fact treating the cause. 


Also to the non-WoW crowd please:



  • elect some ambassadors get them to go to Blizzcon

  • get them to explain your stance that Wow is just such a inferior game to tabletop role playing

  • and you don't want their wretched rules to infect your sacred game

  • they the WoW fans will obviously be moved by your plight and start a campaign at Blizzard

  • for Blizzard to sue Wotc if they put out WoW-like rules


 Auxiliary note keep repeating steps 1-3 till some ambassadors get back alive.


 

One of the things WoW itself learned over time is that characters need to feel like their class at level 1. For years, level 1 characters started out with almost nothing and didn't reflect their playstyle at the level cap(which is the meat of WoW play). They did a major shakeup of are game and rebuilt the game so even at the lowest levels the play of the game resembled the experience of playing the class as it was meant to be played. 

I found this a problem in pre-4E D&D, where you didn't really feel like you were playing your character until a certain level was reached. I'd really rather 5E doesn't go back to that.
...whatever
D&D isn't a simulation, it's a roleplaying game that's designed with fun first - for all character classes.

Spell casting is only one small bit of it that people get hung up over for some reason.

And to the OP: Most of your concerns have been addressed in 5e. Fighter's don't have daily powers or abilities (but they do have a variety of melee attacks)
Baalbamoth,

Your argument seems a little at odds with itself -- you say you don't like that WotC is planning on balancing martials with casters, but then you mention that you believe that in AD&D, the wizards were balanced with the Fighters?   If you were making Next, would you make fighters weaker than in AD&D, and wizards more powerful?  Or, would you agree with WotC, that fighters and Wizards should be balanced?    In other words, I believe you and WotC have a common goal -- different, but equally powerful characters.

And, if that's the case, maybe we can all work together to make the game we all want?  You say you "dont want fighters who use feats" - can you clarify if you never want any fighter subsystem that isn't entirely based on at-wills?    After all, you could imagine a stamina subsystem, well implemented, that models that a fighter will be more tired at the end of a battle than the beginning.    Would you accept such a hypothetical subsystem, or would you gripe about any system that allows fighters to use any power other than "I swing my sword"?

As well, many people point out that heroic efforts can't be done repeatedly per day - see marathon, olympic press, etc.   While the daily power didn't truely capture that, would you be okay with a fatigue system that did?       I.E. -- are your gripes JUST limited to not liking change, or are they focused a specific complaint about a subsystem implementation?  Because if it's the first, there's no way to create a new system that pleases you, since it will, by definition be different.  IF it's the 2nd, then some of the interesting subsystems (Like combat superiority) should appeal to you.
@loki- nope, got no party to play it, so I'm just listening to the devs. but what your saying is... no there is no casting time?

PS I always felt fighters get plenty of time in the spotlight, were all just watin for that crit. 90% of the time I play melee characters, why? I think their cool, blades meat and steel=badass, I really dont need abilities in fact, that just kind of corrupts it for me. fighters are and should be simple....

you stick it with the pointy end...



You have to make a dex check if you cast in melee unless your spell targets an area within 5' or a target within 5' of you. the DM can call for a con check for 'environmental' distractions. If you fail either of those you lose your action, but not the spell slot. So disruption is in.

As a Fighter you don't have to use the abilities at all, you can just dump the dice into straight damage so you have all the things you wanted while still allowing others to have theirs.

Even if you can't play you can still download the play test and give feedback on it. That way you aren't throwing around baseless accusations that are clearly factually incorrect...



I don't often agree with Lokiare, but he's dead on here. Download the playtest, actually read what they've given each class, and then post. Completely baseless griping is ridiculous.

I love fighters, I really didn't like how they came out in 4e, and 5e has the best system for fighters in any rpg I've seen. It's awesome, and not Crouching Tiger, Hidden Gladiator style awesome so much as Gladiator type kick-assery. They've got a really solid foundation for a system with a bunch of different, awesome abilities where no one class feels like it's better than another.

'That's just, like, your opinion, man.'
Another reason that "awesome now, terrible later" vs. "vice versa" is a terrible balancing mechanic is that campaigns are -long-. It may not be obvious to those with no real D&D experience, but D&D isn't DotA, where you rum through the span of the game's levels in a half hour or so. A level span of imbalance can represent -months- of play. "But you were pretty sweet last April" is an an incredibly weaksauce setup compared to putting the game together properly.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
I dont want fighters who use feats or martial abilities like spells or powers. 


in AD&D I think classes were ballenced in that a mage at low levels was one ork axe swing away from death, getting a mage to a level where he was more powerful than a fighter was a great success, but even then, they were glass cannons. 


I think what they mean is that they aren't going to give the fighter steroids as much as simply tone down the wizard's firepower, giving them a little more utilitarian focus instead of a being a mobile tactical nuking machine. They stated that they want to make all classes feel useful in and out of combat. Also, they already stated that they will not be going back to the 4e style powers to achieve this balancing act.
D&D Next - Basic and Expert Editions

I firmly believe that there should be two editions of the game; the core rules released as a "Basic" set and a more complicated expanded rules edition released as an "Expert" set. These two editions would provide separate entry points to the game; one for new players or players that want a more classic D&D game and another entry point for experienced gamers that want more options and all the other things they have come to expect from previous editions.

Also, they must release several rules modules covering the main elements of the game (i.e., classes, races, combat, magic, monsters, etc.) upon launch to further expand the game for those that still need more complexity in a particular element of the game.


Here's a mockup of the Basic Set I created.



(CLICK HERE TO VIEW LARGER IMAGE)
  

Basic Set

This boxed set contains a simple, "bare bones" edition of the game; the core rules. It's for those that want a rules-light edition of the game that is extremely modifiable or for new players that get intimidated easily by too many rules and/or options. The Basic Set contains everything needed to play with all the "classic" D&D races (i.e., Human, Dwarf, Elf, and Halfling) and classes (i.e., Cleric, Fighter, Rogue, Wizard) all the way up to maximum level (i.e., 20th Level).

The Basic boxed set contains:

Quick Start Rules
A "choose your own way" adventure intended as an intro to RPGs and basic D&D terms.

Player's Handbook
(Softcover, 125 pages)
Features rules for playing the classic D&D races and classes all the way up to 20th level.

Dungeon Master's Guide

(Softcover, 125 pages)
Includes the basic rules for dungeon masters.

Monster Manual
(Softcover, 100 pages)
Includes all the classic iconic monsters from D&D. 

Introductory Adventure
(Keep on the Borderlands)
An introductory adventure for beginning players and DMs.

Also includes: 

Character Sheets
Reference Sheets
Set of Dice


Expert Set

A set of hardbound rules that contains the core rules plus expanded races and classes, more spells and a large selection of optional rules modules — that is, pretty much everything that experienced players have come to expect. Each expert edition manual may be purchased separately, or in a boxed set. The Expert set includes:

Expert PHB (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus 10 playable races, 10 character classes, expanded selection of spells and rules modules for players.)
Expert DMG (Hardcover, 250 pages. $35 Includes core rules plus expanded rules modules for DMs.)
Expert MM (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes an expanded list of monsters and creatures to challenge characters)


Expansions

These expansion rules modules can be used with both the Basic and Expert sets. Each expansion covers one specific aspect of the game, such as character creation, combat, spells, monsters, etc.) 

Hall of Heroes (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes a vast selection of playable character races and classes, new and old all in one book)
Combat and Tactics (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes dozens of new and old optional rules for combat all in one book)
Creature Compendium (Hardcover, 350 pages.$35 Includes hundreds of monsters, new and old all in one book)
The Grimoire (Hardcover, 225 pages. $35 Includes hundreds of new and old spells all in one book)





A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage

A Million Hit Points of Light: Shedding Light on Damage and Hit Points

In my personal campaigns, I use the following system for damage and dying. It's a slight modification of the long-standing principles etsablished by the D&D game, only with a new definition of what 0 or less hit points means. I've been using it for years because it works really well. However, I've made some adjustments to take advantage of the D&D Next rules. I've decided to present the first part in a Q&A format for better clarity. So let's begin...

What are hit points?
The premise is very simple, but often misunderstood; hit points are an abstraction that represent the character's ability to avoid serious damage, not necessarily their ability to take serious damage. This is a very important distinction. They represent a combination of skillful maneuvering, toughness, stamina and luck. Some targets have more hit points because they are physically tougher and are harder to injure...others have more because they are experienced combatants and have learned how to turn near fatal blows into mere scratches by skillful maneuvering...and then others are just plain lucky. Once a character runs out of hit points they become vulnerable to serious life-threatening injuries.

So what exactly does it mean to "hit" with a successful attack roll, then?
It means that through your own skill and ability you may have wounded your target if the target lacks the hit points to avoid the full brunt of the attack. That's an important thing to keep in mind; a successful "hit" does not necessarily mean you physically damaged your target. It just means that your attack was well placed and forced the target to exert themselves in such a way as to leave them vulnerable to further attacks. For example, instead of severing the target's arm, the attack merely grazes them leaving a minor cut.

But the attack did 25 points of damage! Why did it only "graze" the target?
Because the target has more than 25 hit points. Your attack forced them to exert a lot of energy to avoid the attack, but because of their combat skill, toughness, stamina and luck, they managed to avoid being seriously injured. However, because of this attack, they may not have the reserves to avoid your next attack. Perhaps you knocked them off balance or the attack left them so fatigued they lack the stamina to evade another attack. It's the DM's call on how they want to narrate the exact reason the blow didn't kill or wound the target.

Yeah, but what about "touch" attacks that rely on physical contact?
Making physical contact with a target is a lot different than striking them, so these types of attacks are the exception. If a touch attack succeeds, the attacker manages to make contact with their target.

If hit points and weapon damage don't always represent actual damage to the target, then what does it represent?
Think of the damage from an attack as more like a "threat level" rather than actual physical damage that transfers directly to the target's body. That is, the more damage an attack does, the harder it is to avoid serious injury. For example, an attack that causes 14 points of damage is more likely to wound the target than 3 points of damage (depending on how many hit points the target has left). The higher the damage, the greater the chance is that the target will become seriously injured. So, an attack that does 34 points of damage could be thought of as a "threat level of 34." If the target doesn't have the hit points to negate that threat, they become seriously injured.

Ok, but shouldn't armor reduce the amount of damage delivered from an attack?
It does reduce damage; by making it harder for an attack to cause serious injury. A successful hit against an armored target suggests that the attack may have circumvented the target's armor by striking in a vulnerable area.

What about poison and other types of non-combat damage?
Hit point loss from non-physical forms of damage represents the character spitting the poison out just in time before it takes full strength or perhaps the poison just wasn't strong enough to affect them drastically, but still weakens them. Again, it's the DMs call on how to narrate the reasons why the character avoids serious harm from the damage.

If hit points don't don't represent actual damage then how does that make sense with spells like Cure Serious Wounds and other forms of healing like healer kits with bandages?
Hit points do represent some physical damage, just not serious physical damage. Healing magic and other forms of healing still affect these minor wounds just as well as more serious wounds. For example, bandaging up minor cuts and abrasions helps the character rejuvenate and relieve the pain and/or fatigue of hit point loss. The key thing to remember is that it's an abstraction that allows the DM freedom to interpret and narrate it as they see fit.

What if my attack reduces the target to 0 or less hit points?
If a player is reduced to 0 or less hit points they are wounded. If a monster or NPC is reduce to 0 or less hit points they are killed.

Why are monsters killed immediately and not players?
Because unless the monsters are crucial to the story, it makes combat resolution much faster. It is assumed that players immediately execute a coup de grace on wounded monsters as a finishing move.

What if a character is wounded by poison or other types of non-physical damage?
If a character becomes wounded from non-combat damage they still receive the effects of being wounded, regardless if they show any physical signs of injury (i.e., internal injuries are still considered injuries).

Ok. I get it...but what happens once a character is wounded?
See below.
 

Damage and Dying

Once a character is reduced to 0 or less hit points, they start taking real damage. In other words, their reserves have run out and they can no longer avoid taking serious damage.

  1. Characters are fully operational as long as they have 1 hit point or more. They may have minor cuts, bruises, and superficial wounds, but they are are not impaired significantly. 
  2. Once they reach 0 or less hit points, they become Wounded (see below).That is, they have sustained a wound that impairs their ability to perform actions.
  3. If they reach a negative amount of hit points equal or greater than their Constitution score, they are Incapacitated. This means they are in critical condition and could possibly die.
  4. Characters will die if their hit points reach a negative amount greater than their Constitution score, plus their current level.

Unharmed: 1 hp or more
Wounded: 0 hp or less
Incapacitated: -(Constitution) to -(Constitution+Level)
Dead: Less than -(Constitution +Level)

Wounded
When the character reaches 0 or less hit points they become wounded. Wounded characters receive disadvantage on all attacks and saving throws until they heal back up to 1 hit point or more. This allows for a transitory stage between healthy and dying, without having to mess around with impairment rules while the character still has hit points left.

Incapacitated
Characters begin dying when they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution score. At which point, they must make a DC 10 Constitution saving throw on each of their following turns (the disadvantage from being wounded does not apply for these saving throws).

If successful, the character remains dying, but their condition does not worsen.

If the saving throw fails, another DC 10 Constitution saving throw must be made. If that one fails, the character succumbs to their wounds and dies. If successful, the character stabilizes and is no longer dying.

Finally, if a dying character receives first aid or healing at any point, they immediately stabilize.

Dead
Characters will die if they reach a negative amount of hit points equal to their Constitution, plus their current level. Thus, if an 8th level character with a Constitution score of 12 is down to 4 hit points then takes 24 points of damage (reducing their hit points to -20) the attack kills them outright.

I don't have a problem with fighting characters having powers similar to 4E, the only thing I really prefer is they stick to the idea that you don't need a battlemap to play. I don't want a bunch of minor positional powers where you're pushing stuff 1 square and similar stuff.
I just watched the PAX "future of D&D" pannel Q&A, one thing they mentioned was they didnt like how more complex characters, like spell casters, were more powerful than meele characters, and through the combat mechanics are planning on making everyone equal like they did in 4e. (or in other words like the way the desiners of wow did a few years back)


3e tried this as well, four years prior to World of Warcraft. PF also made moves to even out the power levels of wizards and spellcasters versus non-spellcasters. 

This is not a "WoW" thing, it is a fundamental shift in how classes are designed dating back more than a decade and reflected in most modern RPGs, be it video games or tabletop. You see it more in video games because the edition turn around is faster. In the time it took D&D to have three editions (four if you count Basic as a side edition) Final Fantasy had eight different incarnations. 

The idea of balance being acceptable over the lifespan of a character was always an awkward one. It ignored people starting at higher levels and people who only played low levels. It pushed people to play ineffective or less important characters for months with the promise of potential later glory or because their time had passed. It's just gone out of vogue.

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

The thing is, Dungeons & Dragons is a Role Playing GAME , balance in games is a mandatory aspect of a game that involve more than 1 player, just because WoW development put alot of emphansys on balance (and for a good reason, because of the aspect of the MMO on it, goes really strongly toward Min/Maxing just to beat the endgame content and to remain competitive on PVP, those 2 being the main aspect of the game),  but balance was still an aspect on alot of games before WoW
"Wizards are week now but strong later" was never a balancing factor in a campaign because players would play throwaway characters for the first few levels before bringing in their "real" wizards at the point they were worth playing.

It was a good theory on paper, but failed to predict the actual behaviour of players well.
Classes should still be balanced across all levels.  That said, there's alot of room to manuver with "balance".

I like casting time.  It actually allows for extra powerful effects while keeping things balanced, and not really contributing to the 5-minute work-a-day.

Of course, i can imagine barbarians and other class getting a similar schtick.  The more they fight, the stronger they get.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

"I like casting time.  It actually allows for extra powerful effects while keeping things balanced, and not really contributing to the 5-minute work-a-day."

True. However that has to be weighed against the "I sit here at the table doing nothing for half an hour while my friends play D&D until my Rain of Doomy Doom Spell goes off" effect.
The "wait three rounds" for an awesome ability can be done magically, or not.    A 3rd edition player friend of mine had an assassin whose ability would be study a monster for 2 rounds, and then attack, and if it hit, it was an automatic kill.   The player found it awesome, so maybe this kind of play is interesting for some people?
"I like casting time.  It actually allows for extra powerful effects while keeping things balanced, and not really contributing to the 5-minute work-a-day."

True. However that has to be weighed against the "I sit here at the table doing nothing for half an hour while my friends play D&D until my Rain of Doomy Doom Spell goes off" effect.

That's fine.  It's not like your forced to play that class.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

I'm not sure deliberately making something unfun to a significant fraction of the target audience is a good way to approach balancing a game mechanic.

I mean, I'm not at all opposed to putting in some "multi-round cast for greater effect" options. It passes the rule of cool. But I think it's misplaced to make it the way a class works in general, in order to balance it against other classes.

I personally know too many people who want to play spellcasters but who would loathe to have dead rounds at the table.
I mean, I'm not at all opposed to putting in some "multi-round cast for greater effect" options. It passes the rule of cool. But I think it's misplaced to make it the way a class works in general, in order to balance it against other classes.


This sounds great.

And it's not too hard to imagine similar (sort of) mechanics for non-magical characters: from really simple things like "Lining up a Shot" using a few actions to improve an attack, to more complex things like a "Combo" that requires specific actions on multiple rounds that culminates in a far more potent effect.
Feedback Disclaimer
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us. No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC). (And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft) A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)
That's a pretty good idea. Tricky to execute but worth examining.

Heh. The possibility of the whole party freezing in place as they power up occurs to me.


Orc 1: They aren't moving. What are they doing?

Orc 2: I don't know! The one in the hat is mumbling, the one with the bow is staring at me and the little guy is...hey, where did the little guy go?

Orc 3: Urrk! *thud*
If you could explain what "the WoW approach" is, and how any edition of D&D at all is even remotely modeled after it, then I wouldn't dismiss you for mindless edition warring.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
"I like casting time.  It actually allows for extra powerful effects while keeping things balanced, and not really contributing to the 5-minute work-a-day."

True. However that has to be weighed against the "I sit here at the table doing nothing for half an hour while my friends play D&D until my Rain of Doomy Doom Spell goes off" effect.

That's fine.  It's not like your forced to play that class.


Or choose that spell.

Options good.  Varied spells good.  But not just casters should get varied cool things to do.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Multiround maneuvers good but only 2 rounds thanks
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

Yeah I miss caster disruption rules from earlier editions.  Even 3e made it a joke.  I would definitely like a module along those lines.

My Blog which includes my Hobby Award Winning articles.

Yeah I miss caster disruption rules from earlier editions.  Even 3e made it a joke.  I would definitely like a module along those lines.



Caster disruption is still in play for D&D:next so far as I know. Except you lose the action instead of the spell (thank God). As for electing to cast spells for longer durations for a greater effect, I'm perfectly fine with that. It's an OPTION I choose at the casting time and gives me a better bang for my buck. Automatically throwing that rule in there as a balance point or to emulate an "old-school" feel is not a good idea. Heck, I remember a few 3X spells that had casting times that could be extended for better use like Light of Lunia.
I'm all for some "balance", but not homogenisation.
I'm going to try and answer the questions asked generally rather than specifically...

first, your right, fighters and mages were ballenced by early/strong late/weak mechanics.

Those mechanics make rational sense to me because.. 

fighters are mastering sticking a sword in people, mages, clerics, etc. are mastering their ability to tap into magical wells of power.

If there really isnt anything magic in what a fighter is doing, it does not make sense to me that they would be able to change from say, a professional athlete some where around 5-6th level, and turn into some kind of wolverine or captian america super hero when they hit 20th level. 

bottom line is, no matter how awesome conan is with a sword, theres still a practical limit to what a strong guy who's great with a sword can do and there really is not a limit to what "magic" can do (thats why its called magic) 

so weak/strong makes sense to me. 

the class ballence is becoming WoW like in that... when I first started playing wow, the warriors were deadly up close but if you got away there wasnt much they could do, likewise the rogues were deadly as hell if they snuck up on you, but weaksauce if they got caught out in the open, but the favorite was the mage as he could do tremendous damage all the time and had shut down spells that could lock you in place etc. but each class had a difference in play, a place they were strong in and a place they were weak in. Generally if a warrior took on a mage in a 1v1 PVP battle, the mage was winning. in later builds they evened that out, now no matter where the fight happened, a mage and fighter getting in a PVP were mostly even, the outcome 50/50 of who would win. they achieved class ballence IE no class being better than any other regardless of circumstance.

I dont want classes that dont really have a specialty, where everyone has around the same hp, (or if not your build could focus more on defense and make a mage more fighter like.) where everyone can do about the same amount of damage to the same number of creatures in the same situations. That is what I was seeing in 4.0 with the fighters powers. if you took your build one way you could be more effective at AOE control than a mage, etc. 

I like classes to have strengths and weaknesses, I dont like having builds or powers that let you overcome those weaknessses and maybe take over an area normally controlled by another class. If a class virtue is that they are variable (IE a fighter/theif/mage) and can cover more than one area of expertise, I think there should be a pretty severe cost to being alowed to do that.

 

"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax
I'm going to try and answer the questions asked generally rather than specifically...

first, your right, fighters and mages were ballenced by early/strong late/weak mechanics.

Those mechanics make rational sense to me because.. 

fighters are mastering sticking a sword in people, mages, clerics, etc. are mastering their ability to tap into magical wells of power.

If there really isnt anything magic in what a fighter is doing, it does not make sense to me that they would be able to change from say, a professional athlete some where around 5-6th level, and turn into some kind of wolverine or captian america super hero when they hit 20th level. 

bottom line is, no matter how awesome conan is with a sword, theres still a practical limit to what a strong guy who's great with a sword can do and there really is not a limit to what "magic" can do (thats why its called magic) 

so weak/strong makes sense to me. 

the class ballence is becoming WoW like in that... when I first started playing wow, the warriors were deadly up close but if you got away there wasnt much they could do, likewise the rogues were deadly as hell if they snuck up on you, but weaksauce if they got caught out in the open, but the favorite was the mage as he could do tremendous damage all the time and had shut down spells that could lock you in place etc. but each class had a difference in play, a place they were strong in and a place they were weak in. Generally if a warrior took on a mage in a 1v1 PVP battle, the mage was winning. in later builds they evened that out, now no matter where the fight happened, a mage and fighter getting in a PVP were mostly even, the outcome 50/50 of who would win. they achieved class ballence IE no class being better than any other regardless of circumstance.

I dont want classes that dont really have a specialty, where everyone has around the same hp, (or if not your build could focus more on defense and make a mage more fighter like.) where everyone can do about the same amount of damage to the same number of creatures in the same situations. That is what I was seeing in 4.0 with the fighters powers. if you took your build one way you could be more effective at AOE control than a mage, etc. 

I like classes to have strengths and weaknesses, I dont like having builds or powers that let you overcome those weaknessses and maybe take over an area normally controlled by another class. If a class virtue is that they are variable (IE a fighter/theif/mage) and can cover more than one area of expertise, I think there should be a pretty severe cost to being alowed to do that.

 




The problem isn't that magic can do anything 'because its magic'. The problem comes in when the Wizard can do anything because they have unlimited magic and suffer no consequences except memory loss to pay for it. In other words why is it a mortal Wizard with a little practice can channel and control the magical energy required to move mountains? They just shouldn't be able to do that. Now I have no problem with a demi-deity having that kind of phenomenal cosmic power, but a regular person that reads books for a living? Yeah right.

So I have no problem capping the casters power down to a reasonable level, because its just as realistic that a Wizard would not be able to move a mountain by channeling magic as it is for a Fighter to not be able to cleave a mountain in half.

Aside from that the problems of one character outshining the rest at the table because 'magic can do anything' is not fun for the rest of the group and least of all the DM who has to be more clever than their players and line every dungeon with 6' of lead and have anti-scry spells active on every BBEG because 'magic can do anything'.

In other words I'm fine with 'magic can do anything' as long as it also has ', but casters are only mortals and are therefore limited' tacked on...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
well I think "realistic" and "magic" dont mix well.  I see the limits on what mages can cast comes more from the fantasy genre itself, not so much trying to guestimate how much magic power a mortal human can channel.  but eiter way, one is using basically miracles which dont have a realistic limit on what it can do (regardless of if you think moses is fictional or not, in that story he parted an ocean), and the other guy has a big knife. Think its a little more easy to gage what somebody can do with a knife rather than a miracle.
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Gygax
well I think "realistic" and "magic" dont mix well.  I see the limits on what mages can cast comes more from the fantasy genre itself, not so much trying to guestimate how much magic power a mortal human can channel.  but eiter way, one is using basically miracles which dont have a realistic limit on what it can do (regardless of if you think moses is fictional or not, in that story he parted an ocean), and the other guy has a big knife. Think its a little more easy to gage what somebody can do with a knife rather than a miracle.



If you delve into the Moses story a bit you'll realize he was using quest spells (from 2E) and that he wielded a staff blessed by God (artifact). He was also very high level on top of that. He was also a Cleric who gained his power from his deity. The clerical spells he cast took minutes not seconds to cast too so they were more akin to rituals...

The equivalent would be a level 10 Wizard with a Staff of the Magi using high level ritual scrolls...Smile

Edit: Also in the fantasy genre the Wizards and other casters can't cast 36 spells a day and usually get very tired after casting just a few spells. So even going by that metric they are still over powered...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
well I think "realistic" and "magic" dont mix well.  I see the limits on what mages can cast comes more from the fantasy genre itself, not so much trying to guestimate how much magic power a mortal human can channel.  but eiter way, one is using basically miracles which dont have a realistic limit on what it can do (regardless of if you think moses is fictional or not, in that story he parted an ocean), and the other guy has a big knife. Think its a little more easy to gage what somebody can do with a knife rather than a miracle.


IIRC, ROland(I think it was him) cut a mountian in half by throwing his sword at it. He would be a pretty high level character.

It's more easy to gauge what somebody can do by throwing a sword 5 miles rather than just carrying a stick.(See, I can make casters look silly too)
well I think "realistic" and "magic" dont mix well.  I see the limits on what mages can cast comes more from the fantasy genre itself, not so much trying to guestimate how much magic power a mortal human can channel.  but eiter way, one is using basically miracles which dont have a realistic limit on what it can do (regardless of if you think moses is fictional or not, in that story he parted an ocean), and the other guy has a big knife. Think its a little more easy to gage what somebody can do with a knife rather than a miracle.


Assuming normal gravity and anything resembling Newtonian or Complex physics. In some settings, those asumptions are absolutely false. In fact, any setting with an Underdark, Giants that don't shatter under their own weight in an anti-magic zone, Dragons that can fly and breath fire without magic, and insects larger than house cats, or Hollow Worlds.
Simply put, either internal consitency, or what we consider reasonable and mundane in our own world, is right out the window.
I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
well I think "realistic" and "magic" dont mix well.  I see the limits on what mages can cast comes more from the fantasy genre itself, not so much trying to guestimate how much magic power a mortal human can channel.  but eiter way, one is using basically miracles which dont have a realistic limit on what it can do (regardless of if you think moses is fictional or not, in that story he parted an ocean), and the other guy has a big knife. Think its a little more easy to gage what somebody can do with a knife rather than a miracle.


Assuming normal gravity and anything resembling Newtonian or Complex physics. In some settings, those assumptions are absolutely false. In fact, any setting with an Underdark, Giants that don't shatter under their own weight in an anti-magic zone, Dragons that can fly and breath fire without magic, and insects larger than house cats, or Hollow Worlds.
Simply put, either internal consistency, or what we consider reasonable and mundane in our own world, is right out the window.



Not to mention that spell casters in the real world use rituals only and take minutes, hours, and days to cast their spells for little to no effect...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Not to mention that spell casters charlatans in the real world use rituals only and take minutes, hours, and days to cast their spells for little to no effect...


Personal quip there.
I've seen just a bit too much to discard possibility.
If we want to expand "spell casting" to "monk" abilities, I have witnessed Iron Jacket.
It was... inspiring to see someone's bare chest unmarked by a spear point I had just cut my finger on. Watching the haft bend and then start splintering was particularly impressive.
Prep time was a few minutes, to be sure. ;)
But then again, if our world is truely absent any real magic, then all of that should be Fighter stuff, right? 

I have an answer for you, it may even be the truth.
Casting time differing per spell seems good. (Rogues already do this)

And i agree, 2 rounds top. Anything longer would be a ritual.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

Not to mention that spell casters charlatans in the real world use rituals only and take minutes, hours, and days to cast their spells for little to no effect...


Personal quip there.
I've seen just a bit too much to discard possibility.
If we want to expand "spell casting" to "monk" abilities, I have witnessed Iron Jacket.
It was... inspiring to see someone's bare chest unmarked by a spear point I had just cut my finger on. Watching the haft bend and then start splintering was particularly impressive.
Prep time was a few minutes, to be sure. ;)
But then again, if our world is truly absent any real magic, then all of that should be Fighter stuff, right? 




Yeah, that's what I don't get the things Monks and Fighters in the real world have been documented doing are considered 'unrealistic' to these people.

What was the martial art style you said you witnessed, I need to bookmark some examples from it for when these arguments come up...Smile

While there are 'charlatans' who know their stuff is fake, there are people who believe in magic for real and actually 'cast' spells thinking they will have an effect. Those people take minutes, hours, and days to run through their spell casting for a minimal effort. Like a tiny increase in luck, or giving someone else bad luck...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Sign In to post comments