My Gripe with 4th Ed.

[Tadanori Oyama]

A little late but I would've just said that a 1st level Wizard has a base speed of 30ft vs a 1st level Fighter's 20 ft (armor reduction) so he doesn't really have to fight him. He can Rincewind it.

[Murph]

Expeditious Retreat: It is not my sole spell, it is a lifestyle choice.

[Tadanori Oyama]

Expeditious Retreat: It is not my sole spell, it is a lifestyle choice.

Remember, dear friend, it is not where you run to, but what you run from.

[malyss]

It's not that huge of an exaggeration.  It's certainly simplified.  But I'll offer an example that actually happened.  Our party consisting of a rogue, warrior, bard, cleric/ranger and a wizard, all around level 12 had just landed on an island.  Our DM had planned on us encountering a group of ogres, or some level appropriate  monstrous humanoids.  The wizard said "I'll scout ahead" and took the skies.  He rolled decent on his spot, so he saw the group of monsters.  He then flew above arrow range, and proceeded cast fireballs and the like at the monsters at the safety of 400 feet or so, killing all the monsters.  Then he flew back and the rest of the party felt disappointed.

So, in summary, the wizard was effectively a F14, I, the bard, could summon a tiny hut and perhapses speak to animals, and the fighter could swing his sword three times if he held still.


Look, 3.x was a a good game, but frankly, it had flaws, the greatest of which focused around balance.  Knowing what to do at character creation shouldn't be part of a game  Game design tends to get better with time, and quite frankly I'm glad they figured it out that its not fun when someone is a F14 while the other people get to sit in the tiny hut.

So he can cast fly (3rd) several times and I'm assuming he used some of his higher level spell slots for more fireballs (3+) and then what did he do for the other two or three encounters you had that day? (because if all you fought was some CR3 ogres, I want in...)

I am quite certain your fighter could have soloed the group as well. And your rogue probably if he was sneaky. The bard might be a bit more of a challenge, but they have a more general impact on the party as a whole.

Point is, that was a bad encounter to use as an example. Sure, it showed how a wizard could drop bombs, but how did the wizard fair against the demons with high SR? I played an encounter as a wizard and had every spell saved against or eaten by SR. Yeah, real helpful wizard there...

In 4E though, no one is useless in an encounter. Sometimes that can be a boon, but I find that it isn't paying off how it could. Sometimes the wizard should just sit down and sometimes the fighter should just sit down. 4E seems to have mostly gotten rid of that. Some may find that for the better, but I don't like having the choice removed. It is more work as a DM in that regard for me.

[malyss]

Actually, 3rd level if your a cleric.  Neat, gonna have to to try that.

Hold person doesn't work against NPCs. Its been tried and true by my group for more than five years. I stopped memming the spell two years ago.

But PC's fail the save 85% of the time.

It's true.

I have years of mocking to prove it.

[TigerStorm]

Expeditious Retreat: It is not my sole spell, it is a lifestyle choice.

Remember, dear friend, it is not where you run to, but what you run from.

It's better to have people say "There he goes" instead of "Here he lies"...

[Maze]

So he can cast fly (3rd) several times and I'm assuming he used some of his higher level spell slots for more fireballs (3+) and then what did he do for the other two or three encounters you had that day? (because if all you fought was some CR3 ogres, I want in...)

I am quite certain your fighter could have soloed the group as well. And your rogue probably if he was sneaky. The bard might be a bit more of a challenge, but they have a more general impact on the party as a whole.

Point is, that was a bad encounter to use as an example. Sure, it showed how a wizard could drop bombs, but how did the wizard fair against the demons with high SR? I played an encounter as a wizard and had every spell saved against or eaten by SR. Yeah, real helpful wizard there...

In 4E though, no one is useless in an encounter. Sometimes that can be a boon, but I find that it isn't paying off how it could. Sometimes the wizard should just sit down and sometimes the fighter should just sit down. 4E seems to have mostly gotten rid of that. Some may find that for the better, but I don't like having the choice removed. It is more work as a DM in that regard for me.

So you willingly want one of your players to stay on the bench and play with his dick while the others are fighting the great Gargalox? I don't see how that is less work.

Anytime I have a player not participating in a fight or event, I'll have something else for him to do. When it comes to a lot of D&D games, there isn't much beside fighting to look forward to, so what do you do with a wizard out of spell?

[malyss]

You ask them to manage their spells. Or get creative.

If you don't expect much from your gamers, they won't give you much. If you give in every time they try to solve every problem with a spell, that isn't role-playing; it's power-playing. It's like you are playing a card game instead of a role-playing game.

Why would a wizard every try to negotiate? Charm Person or Slay Living - their is their diplomacy. Why would a wizard even take skills? So what if I can't identify what he is casting; I just cast a bigger spell. That isn't role-playing. Go play a video game if that is all you want to do.

If everyone is filling the same role (lead killer, lead negotiator, lead healer etc.) what is the point? Should the only difference between a thief and a cleric be that one heals and one steals? Should a thief be just as effective against undead as a cleric?

Sometimes one player gets to shine more than others.

Remember, if everyone is special, no one is special.

Give them their time in the spotlight, and give the other players theirs.

[Akiira]

When it comes to a lot of D&D games, there isn't much beside fighting to look forward to

Perhaps this is your problem. I don't know what kind of games you have been playing but the non-combat in mine is always more enertaining then the combat.

[clockworkjoe]

You ask them to manage their spells. Or get creative.

If you don't expect much from your gamers, they won't give you much. If you give in every time they try to solve every problem with a spell, that isn't role-playing; it's power-playing. It's like you are playing a card game instead of a role-playing game.

Why would a wizard every try to negotiate? Charm Person or Slay Living - their is their diplomacy. Why would a wizard even take skills? So what if I can't identify what he is casting; I just cast a bigger spell. That isn't role-playing. Go play a video game if that is all you want to do.

If everyone is filling the same role (lead killer, lead negotiator, lead healer etc.) what is the point? Should the only difference between a thief and a cleric be that one heals and one steals? Should a thief be just as effective against undead as a cleric?

Sometimes one player gets to shine more than others.

Remember, if everyone is special, no one is special.

Give them their time in the spotlight, and give the other players theirs.

Why are the wizards require to basically play a resource management game that no one else has to?

What party in 3E travels when their spellcasters are out of spells unless they absolutely have to?

Why does every solution you present to spellcasters being more powerful than nonspellcasters in 3E involve weakening the spellcasters?

4E does niche protection much better than 3E. Each class has an explicit role and a lot of tactics and abilities require teamwork - the leader heals and buffs the defender who marks and sets up a flank so the striker can flank and attack while the controller keeps the rest of the bad guys under control. In my experience running 30+ games of 4E, every player does get a chance to shine individually during the same fight.

Tom and Mike lock down tough enemies with marks, preventing them from fleeing or moving. Cassius the warlord takes care of any problems the fighters can't while Dan and Cody blast the enemies and control the battlefield with their tactics. It requires teamwork and individual specialization in order for them to win a fight.

[Maze]

When it comes to a lot of D&D games, there isn't much beside fighting to look forward to

Perhaps this is your problem. I don't know what kind of games you have been playing but the non-combat in mine is always more enertaining then the combat.

That's not the point, you're saying that sometimes, during combat, the wizard has to sit out, and sometimes the fighter should be sitting out, I just want you to tell me what YOU as a GM do with those players that are not part of the combat due to crippling flaws.

[malyss]

That's not the point, you're saying that sometimes, during combat, the wizard has to sit out, and sometimes the fighter should be sitting out, I just want you to tell me what YOU as a GM do with those players that are not part of the combat due to crippling flaws.

They are part of the fight. Sometimes just surviving is your role. There are some fights that the players shouldn't let their characters get into (3rd level party trying to fight the dragon instead of negotiating would be an example). Sometimes you try the fight, lose, and have to come back with another plan. With 3E, you could do that. I find with 4E it is the same plan, every time, over and over. It's routine and boring. I find the fights my least favourite part of 4E, and the lack of structure in the other areas is somewhat frustrating.

[malyss]

1) Why are the wizards require to basically play a resource management game that no one else has to?

2) What party in 3E travels when their spellcasters are out of spells unless they absolutely have to?

3) Why does every solution you present to spellcasters being more powerful than nonspellcasters in 3E involve weakening the spellcasters?

4) 4E does niche protection much better than 3E. Each class has an explicit role and a lot of tactics and abilities require teamwork - the leader heals and buffs the defender who marks and sets up a flank so the striker can flank and attack while the controller keeps the rest of the bad guys under control. In my experience running 30+ games of 4E, every player does get a chance to shine individually during the same fight.

5) Tom and Mike lock down tough enemies with marks, preventing them from fleeing or moving. Cassius the warlord takes care of any problems the fighters can't while Dan and Cody blast the enemies and control the battlefield with their tactics. It requires teamwork and individual specialization in order for them to win a fight.

I have numbered your points to make it clearer which I am addressing.

1) So now everyone has to play a resource management game? I don't see how that is an improvement.

2) Mine. Continuously. Because the party wasn't based around the spellcaster, but around the story. If the spellcaster always gets to burn through whatever spells they want as fast as they can, and the rest of the party just has to deal with it, then yeah, it isn't going to be much fun. If you want to teach your spellcaster to hold on to one of those fireballs, have the next encounter be one in which his wasting of the spell previously wasn't needed and now it would have been really beneficial. You can condition your players to play the game to the story, not to just the rules, provided the rules are flexible enough.

3) I don't feel that I am saying to weaken the spellcaster. I'm saying just because a car can go 200mph doesn't mean it should. I'm not advocating giving it a smaller engine, but instead educating the driver to follow the speed limit. And when they speed, give them a ticket.

4) Oh, don't get me wrong, 4E does benefit from the roles it gives, but you can have success with a party made of all one type as well. If you play the roles tactically, it requires everyone. But it isn't as rewarding in my opinion. I don't however see how they get a chance to shine. Maybe for one action, but anyone can do that with a crit. I haven't played 30 sessions yet, maybe only about 20+, but I have found that there are still powerclasses, and that they aren't as interesting as in 3E.

5) Enemies aren't locked down with marks. They suffer some negative effects for being marked, such as suffering Opportunity Attacks and penalties to hit, but with the discrepancies in AC/Def, the -2 is negligible. The healing is the primary role of the leader, but any class can take a feat to gain abilities from another class, which just means you wait for them to be able to use that ability again (like waiting for the wizard to rest). It requires teamwork and tactics to win the fight, but it doesn't take specialization. Specialization is a method, but not the only one. I won't even say it is the most effective one.

I can come up with as many examples of how 4E is broken as I can about how 3E is broken, but I prefer the way 3E is broken to the way 4E is broken. To go back to my driving/car analogy, now everyone has a porche. And it can only go 60mph. You might have different tires, and yours might be red, and mine blue, but the engine is the same and the brakes suck. And still no cup holder.

[clockworkjoe]

In general, I think all players in a game should be equal. What sets them apart are their individual choices and decisions. In 4E resource management is there for everyone equally and it's not as bad, since you have encounter and daily powers to think about.

Your party is obviously an exception to the 3E norm. The 15 minute adventuring day is so prominent in 3E that changing it became part of 4E's design goals http://rampantgames.com/blog/2008/04/rpg-design-fifteen-minute-adventuring.html

If you want to use a car analogy, think of a race. All drivers use the same rules when it comes to their cars. Certain drivers aren't singled out and told "well you have to use a fuel efficient hybrid - but that's okay because once these high performance gas guzzlers run out of fuel, you can catch up!" I

I think the problem is that you think a level playing field is the same as "if everyone is special then no one is special" when what separates players are their individual choices and decisions. Virtually every board and card game since chess and poker require equal resources for players.

Also fighters in 4E stop the enemy's movement when they hit them with a OA. That's how they lock them down.

Multi class abilities are dailies usually - you get a bit of healing with it but not that much.

[Tadanori Oyama]

I like that my 4th Edition wizard doesn't need to rest before he can cast most of his spells again. I've got three spells I can cast anytime I want, as many times as I want, not counting my four cantips. It's like using the Reserve Feats out of Complete Arcana (or Mage, I forget which book they came out in), but I don't need to keep a reserve spell.

The addition of encounter and at-will based abilities makes it less of a focus on how many times a day something can be used, which was the primarily limitation in 3rd Edition. A party without any daily attack powers can still put on a big show.