|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:29PM
#161
|
Date Joined:
Jan 27, 2010
|
People alwasy say 4e is more like a video game but the evidence just isn't there. Name one video game based off the 4e framework? just one.
Final Fantasy Tactics.
At least, was EXACTLY what I noticed when I read the PHB the first time.
World of warcraft?
Star wars: old republic?
Almost everyother MMO :P
League of legends?? XD
Well you know, every game that needs a defender, healer/support, striker etc.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:31PM
#162
|
|
|
People alwasy say 4e is more like a video game but the evidence just isn't there. Name one video game based off the 4e framework? just one.
Final Fantasy Tactics.
At least, was EXACTLY what I noticed when I read the PHB the first time.
World of warcraft?
Star wars: old republic?
Almost everyother MMO :P
League of legends?? XD
Well you know, every game that needs a defender, healer/support, striker etc.
So 4e resembles DnD and everything spawned from it.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:32PM
#163
|
|
|
This is my biggest concern with DDN. How in the world are the last two posters ever s'posed to sit and game at the same table?
No single game can be everything to everyone.
This is why I'm thinking we are going to see two editions published at once, DDN and 4E. I know that they said no to this but the split is pretty clear. Either let the old timers go to Pathfinder or keep the WoWers and hope they don't change their flavor in games as they age...
That's somewhat insulting. I've played through every edition of D&D and don't touch WoW, yet 4e is my favorite.
That's actually very insulting. I've ALSo played through every edition of D&D and dislike WoW; and 4e is also my favorite iteration of the game.
There is no young/old divide in who prefers what.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:34PM
#164
|
Date Joined:
Nov 13, 2011
|
can anyone actually point me where in the book it states that you need a defender, leader, controller & striker in 4th ed beyond being recommended and is unplayable otherwise?
last i checked i played many a game of 4th ed without that loadout and it worked out fine, nor have the fun police/WotCNinjas confiscated my books.
hell, i would say pre-4th was more akin to the MMORPGS if only because if you lacked a dedicated magical healer in some fashion (either a PC or a wand you passed around) you'd have to sit on your butts for several in-game days to heal if you got into a fight.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:35PM
#165
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2007
|
4e doesn't resemble FFT except in the most superficial ways. And those ways are built on earlier Final Fantasies which in turn was built on early DnD.
I guess they both involve tactics.
Main class, dabbling into a secondary class, reactions, support, and great emphasys on movement and positioning. Surely, not a perfect transition, but at the time, there was no other game I played that had so many similarities. BTW, I'm a big fan of FFT and 4e. Seeing it gave me multiple nerdgasms.
[<()>]Proud Brazilian. Typos are free bonuses. Good Quotes
Show
Metaplot is to DMs what railroading is to players.
There are really three types of feats, in my opinion. My ratings are based on how much they add flavorwise to your character:
Feats that you pick because they fit your character: For instance, Jack of All Trades, Disciple of Lore, Skill Focus, Potent Restorables. In my game, my Artificer studied healing and magic extensively. He had a strong belief that while it wasn't possible to be the best at everything, it was important to understand a bit of everything. These feats didn't add any more opportunity to roleplay; they reinforced the ideas already presented with mechanics to back them up.
Feats that you pick because they represent what your character is becoming:For instance, Multiclass feats, White Lotus Evasion. My rogue is taking a Warden multiclass; representing him overcoming his fears of primal spirits. My artificer is taking White Lotus Evasion, because it represents him returning to his elven roots. These feats accompany adding ideas to your character, and add mechanics that allow these ideas to function where if they were missing, it would not.
Feats You Pick Because You Need Them Or Solely Because of a Mechanical Bonus: For instance, Weapon Proficency, Arcane Implement Proficency, Expertise. If you need to take a feat in order either 1. Complete a reasonable archetype (Enchanter who fights with Sword and Spell) or 2. Meet the expectations that the group puts on you (ie; In order to play in this Super Optimized group, I need to have X otherwise I'm pulling the group down), then it fits this. On the same end, sometimes you're going to pick a feat because it makes combat more fun; not because it adds to your character in any way. Expanded critical hit range? Makes the game more fun; but other than "My character got better", there's not much to it.
I would say that general feats often fall more often into the "Solely Because of a Mechanical Bonus" column. There's exceptions of course (Skill Power), but that's generally how I perceive things.
My DDI subscription is renewed. I really missed the compendium on my table.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:36PM
#166
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2007
|
It's not like we old timers hate everything 4th (at least most of us don't I think) what we don't like is what we ended up with as a game in the end, a soul-less corpse of what was once D&D.
I'm a tad offended when you say "us old timers". My regular group has been playing D&D since 1980, our youngest member is 42 and we've had a blast with 4E (and every previous edition of the game too).
Each and every edition has had its flaws.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 4:44PM
#167
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2002
|
I'm sorry, but I tend to disagree with OP; this packet doesn't make me miss 4e at all. In fact, from what I've seen so far, I absolutely love the direction 5e is going. For me, the combat system of 4e was far too rigid for my tastes; if I wanted to describe some kind of awesome attack, or novel stratagem to overcome an enemy, I could do so but only if said description ended with my character using one of a limited set of abilities that he possessed. If I wanted to, for example, slide down a bannister, leap off of it to land beside an enemy, grab him, and smash him into a wall, I could, but only if my fighter possessed an ability to shift an enemy a set number of squares.
Let's see...
Move with an Acrobatics skill check.
Do a Grab maneuver
Make a Strength check on the next round(or with action point) to drag the enemy along with you.
Done.
NETH4-1 Containing Shadow (co-author) Handbooks
Show
Builds
Show
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 5:13PM
#168
|
Date Joined:
Jan 25, 2007
|
I'm sorry, but I tend to disagree with OP; this packet doesn't make me miss 4e at all. In fact, from what I've seen so far, I absolutely love the direction 5e is going. For me, the combat system of 4e was far too rigid for my tastes; if I wanted to describe some kind of awesome attack, or novel stratagem to overcome an enemy, I could do so but only if said description ended with my character using one of a limited set of abilities that he possessed. If I wanted to, for example, slide down a bannister, leap off of it to land beside an enemy, grab him, and smash him into a wall, I could, but only if my fighter possessed an ability to shift an enemy a set number of squares.
Let's see...
Move with an Acrobatics skill check.
Do a Grab maneuver
Make a Strength check on the next round(or with action point) to drag the enemy along with you.
Done.
Exactly, that claim is simply wrong. Skill checks and ability checks are hardly any different in 4e than previous editions.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 5:16PM
#169
|
|
|
Right but there is alreay 4th stuff in what I see already and I'm fine with it, it works, its good. It's not like we old timers hate everything 4th (at least most of us don't I think) what we don't like is what we ended up with as a game in the end, a soul-less corpse of what was once D&D. As long as the flavor of the game remains, as long as the key elements remain fine. Like I said, so far I don't see anything in these rules I hate.
Speak for yourself.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 25, 2012 - 5:23PM
#170
|
Date Joined:
Feb 12, 2009
|
I'm sorry, but I tend to disagree with OP; this packet doesn't make me miss 4e at all. In fact, from what I've seen so far, I absolutely love the direction 5e is going. For me, the combat system of 4e was far too rigid for my tastes; if I wanted to describe some kind of awesome attack, or novel stratagem to overcome an enemy, I could do so but only if said description ended with my character using one of a limited set of abilities that he possessed. If I wanted to, for example, slide down a bannister, leap off of it to land beside an enemy, grab him, and smash him into a wall, I could, but only if my fighter possessed an ability to shift an enemy a set number of squares.
Let's see...
Move with an Acrobatics skill check.
Do a Grab maneuver
Make a Strength check on the next round(or with action point) to drag the enemy along with you.
Done.
replace acrobatics with dex and you can do the same thing in 5e. heck given a high enough dex the banister slide can just happen no check. Use the improv action for the grab attack and make something up I will most likely go with str vs str or str vs dex or something like that.
|
|
|
