|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 7:39PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2009
|
I'm curious--what do those of you who are passionate and invested in 4E wish that the edition had done differently? Try to think in terms of bigger-picture design choices, i.e., less "I wish Rune Priests had more stuff" and more "skill challenges were wonky." I frankly ask out of simple curiousity, but here's some full disclosure: while I've played (and enjoyed) 4E for several years, my heart lies with the older forms of the game. They just speak to me more aesthetically, in every sense of the word. I suspect that might make me a backwards primitivist in these parts, but there you have it  In any case, thanks for indulging my curiousity.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 8:01PM
#2
|
|
|
Rituals never worked right.
Skill Challenges felt unimpressive, but still better than previous editions.
The "Points of Light" concept was ignored too often.
My thoughts on what works and what doesn't in D&D and how D&D Next may benefit are detailed on my blog, Vorpal Thoughts.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 8:03PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Nov 13, 2011
|
-more depth to skills.
this is something i've had issues with all D&D versions. basically, what makes one character with a skill total of Y different from another character with a skill total of Y? i love the condensed skill list and i hope to [deity] that we never return to the 3rd ed laundry list, but i would like to see more depth within individual skills.
one houserule i'm currently in the process of cobbling together is adding a further level of specialization to the skills, where upon gainng X levels (currently working with X=2) you chose one specialization. the specializations are, at the moment, rippred directly out of various RPGs. think something along the lines of the skill powers in martial power 2 and 3rd ed's skill tricks.
-it kept alignment
i dislike alignment. i won't go into too many details as i've said so in other threads. my preference is a more personalized code for the character, something akin to White Wolf's virtues/vices, fate's aspects or mouseguard's personal motto thingy. i'm currently working on/brainstorming a way to have it refresh action points, second wind, dailies and trying to find time to test it.
-cash
this is another thing i generally dislike about D&D, is how you get big piles of money. in 2nd ed, i disliked the fact it expected you to play SimCity in the last half of the game, which i care not for, so i ended up with enought GP to make a dragon jealous. in 3rd and 4th the expected monetary values of items are simply insane.
the inherent bonuses is helping alot in my work to make a decent weath system that's decoupled from character power that won't unbalance the game but it's hard times ahead for paco.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 8:11PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2006
|
Critters could die faster, in general,
PC's could die faster too
Feat taxes
I do wish for a faster combat
A lot of great ideas that didn't quite make it off of paper or didn't start to work until later on (early solo's early controlers, skills OoC utility)
Feat taxes
Balance of skills (why does thte fighter get so few skills?)
I wish there were some interesting mechanical options Outside of Combat, and I wish they were taken from different pools of resources.
And finally- Feat taxes.
The essential theme song-
Get a little bit a fluff da' fluff, get a little bit a fluff da' fluff! (ooh yeah) Repeat
Unless noted otherwise every thing I post is my opinion, and probably should be taken as tongue in cheek any way.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 8:34PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jan 26, 2011
|
Things that could be further improved or done differently:
- Weaker / wishy-washy in OoC situations - seems at odds with the rigid tactical combat system
- Feat taxes
- Borrowed too much from MMORPGs Tank/Healbot/DPS model
- PC progression system that pits combat enhancements versus OoC enhancements
- 'Always on' feats in the same feat pool as situational (and nearly always more flavourful and/or PC customization oriented) feats
- Lack of support for some races and classes (in a system this bloated up?!? crazy, right?!)
- Item rarity system
"Do androids dream?" Rick asked himself.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 8:38PM
#6
|
|
|
I actually thought 4e did skill challenges well, once the 2nd DMG came out to help you design them. However, I do wish characters had more out-of-combat options other than aid-another.
I wish 4e had divorced +X items from the inherent math of the game. Throwing in boons and inherent bonuses was a nice patch, but they came so darn late. I hope DDN corrects that mistake by taking them out of the math as a default assumption (it's easier to add than to subtract).
I wish 4e had a better multiclass system. The one that came with the 1st PHB was horrible (not that feat-based multiclassing has to be, but they way it was executed in the 1st PHB was bad). It was basically just a stopgap measure until they came up with hybrid classes.
I liked what 4e did with skills, but I wished they had more flexibility; i.e. allowing a character to use different ability scores with their skills (e.g. Diplomacy and Intelligence to convince people with logical arguments, Arcana and Wisdom to notice magical effects, etc). If they did this, you could almost remove both the Endurance skill and the Perception skill (use Constitution for endurance skill uses, like staying hidden for long periods as snipers have to do. And use Wisdom for all perception uses of skills, like the aforementioned Arcana use).
Why Mechanics-Alignment Integration is Bad
Show
so why even play a fighter if you can play the paladin the exact same way behaviorally and get added power to boot. "Paladin" is about accepting better game-enhancing mechanics at the price of more rigid in game behavior.
Really? So it goes something like this?
Fighter: "I want to be a paladin."
NPC: "Really?"
Fighter: "Yes."
NPC: "Very well." Starts reading from a holy book while still in-character "Do you accept having to choose and stick to the lawful good alignment, eventhough neither of us actually knows that it exists or what it is?"
Fighter: "I do."
NPC: "Do you reject good game balance because you accidentally rolled a high Charisma?"
Fighter: "What?"
NPC: "I don't know what it means either."
Fighter: "Oh. Umm, ok I do."
NPC: "In the name of all that is metagamey and broken, accept these better game enhancing mechanics."
Fighter: "These what?"
NPC: "Just get out there and try to fulfill a million different people's notion of good while not violating and part of any of them."
So the system is designed such that every single hit needs to be described to avoid confusion? Here's a scenario. The players are nudists, everybody in the world are nudists, it's not weird, it's totally normal in this land. They are naked and they fight drakes taking damage throughout, but healing up with surges. Later they meet the guy who raised the drakes.
Part 1: I didn't describe any of the hits. What does he see?
Part 2: Lets say I described the drakes as biting the players, yet they healed up. What does he see?
D20 Modern Toon PC Race.
Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 10:13PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2007
|
- Skill Challenges don't work well; they taught me to give EXP for players' non-combat challenges, granted, but there just isn't a good reason to force so many non-combat scenarios into the constraints of "get x many successes before y many failures." Players sense the game-ness and it breaks the mood.
- Magic items shouldn't be so integral to gameplay. I'm one of those people that would like magic items to feel special and fun, not mandatory.
- Power bloat; classes shouldn't have operated solely on unique lists of attacks. It created a huge mass of redundant or near-redundant abilities.
- People don't use rituals as much as I'd like them to, so I think that they may cost too much.
- Themes shouldn't give combat bonuses or combat options. Like backgrounds, they should serve to bolster the non-combat aspect of your character. Which is not to say the theme can't have roots in battle (like gladiator), but that it shouldn't give extra attacks while animal master gives you a near-useless (if fun) bird buddy.
- Feats are too staggered in power level. Some give +3 to a single skill, but some give you +1/2/3 attack and +1/2/3 damage in slightly-uncommon circumstances. And these feats are seen as equals within the system, even though the latter has more practical use.
- Way too many redundantly useless feats. There's essentially no use for Flash of the Blade, after Cunning Stalker. And again, these are both options that would define one's character in battle, unlike what +3 to a single skill would do.
- Hybrids are definitely not overpowered; they could use a fair bit of help in the fun department. Making sure their abilities stay completely separate should be enough that each character could still possess 60% of the class features rather than about 20%. Although alternatively, I'd take the 20% if we instead could combine striker and defender stuff that is usually limited to one's own class attacks in hybrid form.
- Multiclassing is definitely not overpowered, but it's not elegant. It does not allow for the natural character growth of "hmm, it makes sense now that my character would gain a level in this class instead." I know it's largely meant to prevent cherry picking the best levels, but it could have been done better.
There's probably more. Mind, that I really do like 4e more than 3rd edition, on the whole. If this list looks extensive, I could make one that's twice as extensive about what 3rd edition could've done better. I've no experience with earlier editions than that.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 10:36PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 19, 2011
|
My main gripe with 4e is how taking a combat utility means giving up a roleplay/out of combat utility.
I think this could have possibly been fixed by giving you both a combat AND out of combat/roleplay utility when you hit the appropriate level, though thta may have just ended up leading to more power bloat.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 10:52PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Mar 28, 2012
|
Before I start, I need to put out there that I prefer 3.5 over 4E, but that i think 4E is a great game and i have played it quite a bit.
things i didn't like about 4E
To many changes that seemed to be made for no real reason other than "just because". From Combat through skills to the default setting and cosmology, there were changes that really didn't need to be made. I often feel like many things were done simply so the designers could say "This is MY dnd vision"
I really thought the skill system and the skill test system were done poorly. They took one of the few non combat parts of the game and made it feel more like combat.
I hated what they did with alignment, why does law and good have to be the same thing? Also i know law and evil can be really good friends. Either keep it how it was or just get rid of it.
I didn't like that PHB number 1 gave me two elve races and the dragonborn while xing out other iconic DnD races.
The game is waaay to much like an MMORPG. If i wanted to play and MMO i would.
I didn't like what they did with magic items or how they were acquired.
I thought class advancement, specially if you wanted to multi class, was less than spectacular.
So many feats and class powers were carbon copies with different names.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 29, 2012 - 10:56PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Aug 29, 2008
|
Slow Combat
Feat Taxes
Magic Items
Rituals don't integrate well
|
|
|
