Re: [4e] RE: Design and Development - The Zombie


Hmm, sorry 'bout the upcoming ramble.

Malachias Invictus wrote:
tussock wrote:
Malachias Invictus wrote:
<snip>

I would need a list of both in order to comment. Care to provide one?

I am going to assume the first, huge list is the "things that ain't
broken" list, and the smaller list is the "real problems" list.

Well spotted. 8]

CR/EL system doesn't let you mix monster types and/or traps.

I consider this to be a problem worth handling.

I consider it to not exist. I have mixed monster types, traps,
terrain issues, and various challenges since day one, using the rules in
the DMG and simple extrapolations thereof.

I want rules for calculating encounter difficulty for environmental
hazards and traps.

They're in the DMG, basically, +1 if it's tough, +2 if it's /really/
tough.

I also want those hazards and traps to scale all the way up.

Unless you've banned SBT, the only "traps" of note at high level are
anti-scrying, de-buffing, and anti-telporting spells. Anything short of a
TPK is just a couple of spells to fix anyway.

As it stands now, traps top out at 10th level or so. Grimtooth has
shown this need not be the case.

I find my players are always the sort to go around. /Way/ around.
Like just don't bother with that whole trapped dungeon crap in the first
place, or get someone more stupid to do it.
Verisimilitude. The PCs are the ones who live, for a reason.

Characters often totally run out of powers five minutes after getting
them, so everyone needs useful unlimited stuff.

I agree with this completely. If the Wizard has to fall back to
crossbow use, I consider that a failure.

Of the guy playing the Wizard. Scribe Scroll isn't there to fill in
space on the character ***.

Reserve feats fix this somewhat, but it could be done better.

Pick spells with a concentration duration, use your scrolls, use your
cantrips (which you'd know to do if you played more 1st level), and use
more scrolls. I really don't get how people are burning everything up in
one encounter.

The per day/per encounter/per round thing is a great idea, because it
allows for a more precise degree of balancing playability.

Straitjacketing, I think you'll find. A better option is open slots
that can take either type of thing at the player's option, which they may
well be doing.


You can't have encounters come from more than one room in 3e.

I am not aware of anyone saying this.

I'd dig it up, but the wizards website is getting ever worse to
navigate.

On the other hand, it is a different design paradigm to make groups of
rooms synergize well into a single encounter. It is not often done in
official adventures, for example.

3e framerates suffer with too many enemies in view. 4e is lowering
the polygon count, allowing the level designers more freedom to go all
Doom II on things.

Starting characters must be able to easily beat an equal number of
Orcs, and three times their number of goblins.

I do not recall reading anything about this.

Website ditto.

<snip>

The race pick should be really important, even when you're a god.

I agree with this completely. I want the races to have meaningful and
important differences, even at higher levels. Racial level substitution
was a great move in that direction, but better implementation of that
concept is needed.

They should be going toward a racial talent tree or two each, that
would allow the best of both worlds. So one can dwarf out if that's your
thing, and I can ban it. 8]

You didn't like playing monstrous PCs anyway.

I am sure that is coming. The 3/3.5E version of this tended to be
clunky, and I would rather have a streamlined system for monsters as
player characters. I am willing to bet there will be lots of options.

PHB38, Fungal PCs are /fun/, tell your friends!

No one likes the classic mix of classes.

The classic mix of Fighter/Cleric/Rogue/Wizard will still be there,
along with others. They are throwing in the Warlock, which I like. I
am sure they are going to add in classes like crzy once things get
rolling. A new edition almost always curtails options; that is the only
way to reset the system bloat.

They're stealing the Barbarian. Again. Oh, and changing devils and
demons, and messing with alignment. Didn't 2nd edition do that? Didn't
doing that kinda suck last time?

You like the game best from 5th-15th level, so the low level feel is
gone and we're adding in all the Epic stuff to core.

I doubt the low level feel will be gone.

If my 1st level party of five finds fifteen goblins to be not that
much of a problem, the low level feel is gone. End of story.

On the other hand, if they lower the likelihood of one-shots on 1st
level PCs, I would not fuss at all. The 3E Epic rules suck ass. I
would rather see Epic included in Core, and done right.

Right? Which right? BXCM-Immortals rules? Arduin? Darksun 21-30?
Elminster and the other Mary Janes? I reckon they're not doing any of
that, just stretching 20th level power out to level 30, and removing epic
alltogether. But that's mostly guesswork. 8]

Wuxia jumping tricks are awesome, realism sucks.

You disagree with this? D&D characters, beyond a certain level, are
practically superheroes. D&D is not particularly realism-based, and it
never has been.

My words aren't the best there. DnD was pretty low level heroism for
a start, and for a very long time getting past "a certain level" took a
good few /years/ of play. Up 'till the 3e treadmill kicked in most people
played realistic heroic characters all the time.
Action movie, not wuxia. Defying probability rather than physics.
Even old-school magic used to kick the caster in the ass if he relied on
it for too many things.

All classes need round-by-round choices about power activations,
because doing the same thing twice in a fight is boring (but doing the
same three things in a row every fight totally isn't).

Having played a Warblade and seeing how this actually works, it is
dramatically superior to playing a straight Fighter. Using the right
Maneuver at the right time is a challenge, and it is highly
entertaining.

Eh? Charges, trips, disarms, sunders, grapples (and pins, etc),
overruns, and bullrushes are all straight Fighter (moreso if you don't
use the newer Fighter "+" feats and displace all his combat options),
only you could do them whenever they made sense to try. Sure, it's only
ten options; what does the Warblade get again?

It is not at all the way you seem to be implying. You don't do lather-
rinse-repeat, you pick what you are going to do according to the combat
situation, more or less like a spellcaster does.

If I wanted to play a spellcaster, I'd play a spellcaster. Not
everyone does, you know.

No one likes having more magic items than Bilbo Baggins (ignoring how
many artifacts and near-unique powerful items BB actually carried).

Sorry, but *** the Christmas Tree effect.

Bah. It's /tiny/ now compared to ADnD. My characters used to have
*pages* of items by 8th level, gear falling out their ears, enough spare
+1 swords to start a revolution. And still, they were kinda cool, I have
some real fond memories of making use of all that junk back in the day.

Now, it's all a little formulaic these days, and the whole permanent
+6 to everything should obviously just be folded into the characters, but
you know what I mean.

D&D characters need too many magic items to be remotely effective at
mid-to-high levels. That is one of the reasons I like Iron Heroes so
much: the *characters* are badasses, not their gear. Sure, gear can
help, but I want characters that are like Captain America (he has an
awesome item, but he kicks ass even without it), not Iron Man (he is a
gimp without his stuff).

Fair enough, I do believe I agree. I /still/ want powerful magic
items though; Helm of Brilliance, Vorpal sword, Horn of Blasting, and
Staff of the Magi sort of stuff. That's part of my DnD.

Items shouldn't make you powerful, that's not DnD.

I don't have a problem with items making you *more* powerful, but you
should not be a piece of crap without your "super kewl gear."

Heh. I do dislike that players are more attached to their characters
gear than to their last HP, that a sundering giant is more feared than a
Banshee. 8]

High level characters are too powerful relative to low level characters
and monsters (it's nothing to do with the advancement rate).

I have not seen this, but at the same time, I would like to see a wider
range of characters able to adventure with each other. That may be due
to my group, though.
<snip>
The experience bump that comes from being lower level certainly helps,
though.

Sure. Catch up mechanics are a little slower now than ADnD (where
you'd just about catch people from 1st level before they levelled even
once again) but they still help the intermittant player groupings.

I tend to use multiple PC groups within the same world that know each
other, and try to tidy things up each session, so characters can
logically come and go and swap into groups that match levels better, and
leave the high level ones alone for a while.
Not always practical or desirable of course.

I do like the idea that monsters remain challenges for a longer stretch
of levels; the band of monster usefulness is a bit too narrow as-is.

Because of how fast characters level in 3e. I have no problem with
characters eventually being demigods, able to stand before a whole army
of what was once an individual challenge.


Now, here are the "real problems."
<snip>
It's far more than save-or-die that's wrong with the magic.

Sure. Don't you think the per day/per encounter/per round thing is
going to help? What about the fact that they said they are going to
separate combat and utility spells into two groups?

That's not what's wrong with the magic either; it's that magic trumps
everything. Not just HPs, but distance, barriers, senses, skills of all
sorts and fighting ability, enemy attacks, and even opposing magic. When
magic is trumps, the guy with the magic wins and everyone else watches.

If magic's not trumps any more, it's a whole new game. 4e's nerfing
the /Teleports/ by the sound of it, and if they go all SWS like on skill
bonuses that'll help too. Will they nerf /Invisibility/ some more? /Fly/
even more than they already have? The divinations?

I mean, magic divination doesn't need to be superior to regular old
Gather Information (or 4e equivalent), and could be much less useful if
it can cover much wider ground. That sort of thing.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
.