A VERY positive review of 4E

Keith Davies wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>> Keith Davies wrote:
>>> Del Rio wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>> As tussock says,
>>
>> Not all my words by far, that, but never mind, good anyway.
>
> Well, no. You've written a *lot* of words.

Vernacular issues? Um, anyway, I meant that the things you attributed
to me there were mostly written by, uh, Doug it would seem, at least
initally. Not all /my/ words.

> However, on this topic I figured it was a reasonable summary.

It was, and I completely agree with it.

>> 4e's using 1/4 max HP for all heals, plus a bit more if a Cleric
>> triggers it. Their trick of giving Fighters two or three times the
>> healing capacity per day of Wizards, but only 50% more HP, that's
>> brilliant.
>
> Is this sarcasm? It could go either way...

No sarcasm. See, I've always liked Wizards having to stay out of
combat. The older method of them being rather easy to kill if you could
get to them was one way of doing that. This keeps the result but changes
the method, they're not so painfully vulnerable to sniping, but they
still need to be kept out of combat and be well protected to ensure the
group can continue in the long term.

All the party dymanics intact, none of the crippling vulerability.
Wizards *can* get attacked now, they just won't want to, and it's still
in everyone's interest to protect them.

<snip>
>> 3e equivilent would be something like healing at about 2 HP per level
>> (3 for Clerics, probably unlimited), max number of times per day per
>> target = best HD size.
>
> Might be. Or you could go as simply as 'one day's healing per shot', as
> I did before, then make more of them available.

True that. If you make it a swift action for Clerics to trigger, with
the 4e method of swapping move and standard for extra swifts, they can
push more healing as they need.

<snip>
Agreement all 'round.

--
tussock

I'm like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gunna get.
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

tussock <scrub.DeleteThis@clear.net.nz> wrote:
> Keith Davies wrote:
>> tussock wrote:
>>> Keith Davies wrote:
>>>> Del Rio wrote:
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>> As tussock says,
>>>
>>> Not all my words by far, that, but never mind, good anyway.
>>
>> Well, no. You've written a *lot* of words.
>
> Vernacular issues? Um, anyway, I meant that the things you attributed
> to me there were mostly written by, uh, Doug it would seem, at least
> initally. Not all /my/ words.

"Not all my words by far" Of course not, you have written many words on
many topics. I was referring to only a small number of them.

And ah, now I understand. You meant 'not all the words were mine', I
read 'those aren't all of my words'.

Anyway, enough about that.

>>> 4e's using 1/4 max HP for all heals, plus a bit more if a Cleric
>>> triggers it. Their trick of giving Fighters two or three times the
>>> healing capacity per day of Wizards, but only 50% more HP, that's
>>> brilliant.
>>
>> Is this sarcasm? It could go either way...
>
> No sarcasm. See, I've always liked Wizards having to stay out of
> combat. The older method of them being rather easy to kill if you could
> get to them was one way of doing that. This keeps the result but changes
> the method, they're not so painfully vulnerable to sniping, but they
> still need to be kept out of combat and be well protected to ensure the
> group can continue in the long term.

Okay. That makes sense.

> All the party dymanics intact, none of the crippling vulerability.
> Wizards *can* get attacked now, they just won't want to, and it's still
> in everyone's interest to protect them.

Yep. I think I'd just start everyone at 'fourth' level (it isn't quite,
but still 4HD; for several reasons) and drop the max hit points at first
level thing.

I may pinch aspects of the 4e healing, though. I'd keep healing at one
day's natural healing (HD+mCon) per unit. Give a number of units of
free healing equal to your (max? average? HD size). The Wizard has an
average of (2.5 + mCon) * HD hit points and can recover HD+mCon, 4 times
per day. The Fighter has (5.5 + mCon) * HD hit points and can recover
HD+mCon, 10 times per day.

Hmm. Spreadsheet time, brb.

Interesting. At mCon=0, the ratio of total healing to hit points stays
constant (to be expected). As mCon goes up, the ratio drops as level
goes up (reasonable, mCon gets multiplied by level for hit points, but
only added to level for healing). Bigger HD means bigger ratio.

I'm undecided about number of uses per day, though. Using the biggest
die really benefits someone who dips a big HD class (wizard dipping
fighter), while using the smallest die screws someone dipping a small HD
class (fighter dipping wizard). Taking the mean could be workable; a
Wiz9/Ftr1 averages 4.6, which rounds to 5, a Ftr9/Wiz1 averages 9.4,
which rounds to 9. Yeah, that seems right, and while it's more work,
it's done out of game and only infrequently.

><snip>
>>> 3e equivilent would be something like healing at about 2 HP per level
>>> (3 for Clerics, probably unlimited), max number of times per day per
>>> target = best HD size.
>>
>> Might be. Or you could go as simply as 'one day's healing per shot', as
>> I did before, then make more of them available.
>
> True that. If you make it a swift action for Clerics to trigger, with
> the 4e method of swapping move and standard for extra swifts, they can
> push more healing as they need.

Could do.


Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies.DeleteThis@kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies.DeleteThis@gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

"Del Rio" <delrio RemoveThis @panix.com> wrote in message
news:fqriiu$9dm$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <5IGdnTSMLueIeVfanZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d RemoveThis @comcast.com>,
> Tetsubo <tetsubo RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> 4E: The Unwanted.
>
> Actually it's amusing watching the newsgroup's slow drift from
> - "This sucks unbearably and beyond all measure!", to
> - "Well, it still sucks, but this one thing I heard about it
> is actually kind of cool", to the current state of
> - "Well, it has some things that are kinda neat, but it
> still mostly sucks, and I'm not going to play it!"
>
> I await the arrival of the next stage
> - "Well, I guess I'm gonna try playing it, but that doesn't
> mean I like it!"

From what I've seen, there's been drift in both directions. I know I, for
one, started out from "I like most of what I've heard about 4e, and can't
wait to play it!" to "Okay, most of it still looks good, but some of these
more recent revelations sound kinda sucky. I'll still buy it and I'm pretty
sure I'll enjoy it, but my confidence has been shaken."

We may find that the consensus (in the unlikely event that we reach one)
will be somewhere in the middle ground.

--
Mark.
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

In article <fqriiu$9dm$1@reader2.panix.com>, delrio RemoveThis @panix.com (Del Rio)
wrote:

> In article <5IGdnTSMLueIeVfanZ2dnUVZ_h-vnZ2d RemoveThis @comcast.com>,
> Tetsubo <tetsubo RemoveThis @comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > 4E: The Unwanted.
>
> Actually it's amusing watching the newsgroup's slow drift from
> - "This sucks unbearably and beyond all measure!", to
> - "Well, it still sucks, but this one thing I heard about it
> is actually kind of cool", to the current state of
> - "Well, it has some things that are kinda neat, but it
> still mostly sucks, and I'm not going to play it!"
>
> I await the arrival of the next stage
> - "Well, I guess I'm gonna try playing it, but that doesn't
> mean I like it!"

It's already been said.

However, I haven't heard a naysayer come close to suggesting they'll
reboot.

- Allen
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

In article <fqrhib$4pd$1@reader2.panix.com>, delrio.RemoveThis@panix.com (Del Rio)
wrote:

> In article <awessels-C98019.16230204032008.RemoveThis@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>,
> Allen Wessels <awessels.RemoveThis@EXPUNGEpacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> >I think we're going to see a lot of game mechanics in 4e that seem wierd.
> >
> >The fix seems to be don't think about it too much and play the game.
>
> *Every* edition of D&D has had weird mechanics that only work if
> you remember that it's a game, and not a simulation of anything
> other than "D&D reality".

Every RPG has this kind of issue. Since they all do, that's probably
not my point.

4e has simplified the game very substantially. My impression so far is
that that ugly parts of the frame show through a lot more without some
of the rules and trappings that smooth out the rough edges.

- Allen
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

Hadsil <forumite.DeleteThis@netzero.com> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 8:51 pm, Keith Davies <keith.dav....DeleteThis@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>
>> You actually have to make a choice at that point. Right now what I see
>> is the high Str, high Dex guys almost always go with the mobility route
>> because they end up with similar AC either way but big mobility hit if
>> they go with armor.
>
> That's because of RAW's speed penalty. If you initiate your proposal
> of no speed penalty in armor with which your proficient it becomes
> more personal flavor. Armor still has some natural hindrances such
> as weight, when it matters for crossing weak appearing bridges or a
> river, so some people will still for go it, while others would like
> the magic properties armor can provide.

Yes, this is RAW. With the no-penalty-for-proficient, it actually
becomes more of a choice. You're not inherently impeded by the fact
that you're wearing armor (you still have a base move of 30, you can
still run x4, etc.), but certain abilities and feats are blocked off
(Spring Attack comes to mind, and Fast Movement).


Keith
--
Keith Davies below you, right now: radioactive magma
keith.davies.DeleteThis@kjdavies.org above you, right now: hard vacuum
keith.davies.DeleteThis@gmail.com probably somewhere near you: a product with
http://www.kjdavies.org/ label warning you it is unsafe if misused
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

"Keith Davies" <keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote in message
news:slrnft1h5p.e6c.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
> Malachias Invictus <invictusebay DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Keith Davies" <keith.davies DeleteThis @kjdavies.org> wrote in message
>> news:slrnft17lg.e6c.keith.davies@kjdavies.org...
>>
>>> (Will saves -- having your tank turn against you is bad... can be fun
>>> for the tank player, mind, I've had it happen to me *g*).
>>
>> Alright, just *how* convincing was your "I'm sorry I have to do this"
>> face?
>
> Probably not very. But enough they decided it was worth the effort to
> drop me *nicely* rather than just kill me.

The last time this happened to me (my high level Half Minotaur Goliath
Fighter), the rest of the party was not *able* to drop me. Luckily, the
Wizard got in a good dispel check before I killed more than one party
member.

> It *was* fun, though. I was under a compulsion that didn't let me look
> for a gentle way, but didn't require me to be quite as nasty I could be.
> I went with the straightforward 'smash anything in my way' approach,
> rather than 'look for the fragile guy first'... though I *did* know
> enough that when that sneaky bitch tried to get in behind me I was able
> to nail him before he got me.

That sounds like good times.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

"Hadsil" <forumite DeleteThis @netzero.com> wrote in message
news:f9a7b12b-6f73-4d6a-8a94-8d1426a4edcc@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse... DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Hadsil" <forum... DeleteThis @netzero.com> wrote in message...

>> > I should clarify that when I say MAD, I mean dependent upon 3
>> > or more attributes. When a class is dependent upon three or more
>> > to do what it's supposed to do, it gets stretched thin and effectively
>> > can't do what it's supposed to do.

>> I think that depends greatly upon what your stat resources are.

>Agreed. While I don't think a particular character array of 18, 17,
>15, 15, 13, 12 means the campaign is doomed to implosion and can
>handle a MAD class quite well, too many DMs will have a conniption fit
>over it.

I find that incredibly strange.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

"Hadsil" <forumite.TakeThisOut@netzero.com> wrote in message
news:44d2527f-bc1b-4e62-95ca-0f1ad01dee2c@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...


>I would like them to develop the familiar into something useful. Now
>all they are really good for is scouting and the occasional touch
>spell attack if you can ensure their absolute safety. I wouldn't want
>them to become like the druid's animal companion to become another
>melee combatant, but since they are a wizard's familiar, they should
>emphasize magic assistance to the wizard. A wizard player should
>seriously consider wanting to have one without them becoming a must
>have.

I am with you all the way.

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

Keith Davies wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>> Mark Blunden wrote:
>>
>>> 'Solving' the problem of much larger creatures' overwhelming advantage
>>> in a grapple by just flat-out preventing them from doing so just
>>> doesn't sit well with me. Then again, I'm not sure what else would
>>> work.
>>
>> I view it as a feature, rather than a bug. I've seen vids of rogue
>> elephants, and people are just ragdolls to them on a scale that rodeo
>> bulls aren't even a shadow of. If anything, big guys don't get near
>> enough advantage in grapples and pushes by DnD rules.
>>
>> Accept your fate; get your buddies to stab it to death.
>
> The size rules I'm considering give some serious benefits to larger
> creatures. Sure, they're easier to hit, and they have a harder time
> hitting you than they do now, but when they do it's *gonna* leave a
> mark. Or turn you into one.

Yeh. Last incarnation I played with big guys doing quite a bit less
basic damage, but adding Str damage. Big guys break bones. Lead to some
interesting tactics here and there.

My current thing (after playing a little low level core again, and it
keeps _getting in the way_) is trying to simplify things again, so that'd
be conditions rather than stat damage (actually figuring points off stats
and effects thereof constantly is a pain).
Like, encumberance++, persistant condition++, on Size-based defence
after a hit. Two rolls per attack is fine without 3e's multiple attacks
per round.

> For those who want to complain "that's too random, it's not fun to play
> when PCs either don't get hurt or they get one-shot", I don't hear those
> noises.

I do to some exent. My "splat" events are down, incapacitated, and in
need of healing PDQ. Unless someone takes the time to finish you you're
nearly always savable, if a little short on Str and Con due to being
badly broken.

> If you want to keep your PC from getting slammed into goo against the
> side of the mountain, don't annoy that 18' tall giant... if you do,
> don't fail to appease him or put him down before he hits you... if you
> don't, don't complain to me.

"Shh, you're dead. Here, play the Giant, spread the love."

> If the thing you're fighting is three times your height and about 30
> times your weight, you *should* be in trouble.

At least until you're high enough level to leap over it's sweeping
attack, climb up while avoiding the waving arms, cut it's brain out
through it's nose, and leap across to the next one as it collapses.

> And that dragon that scares the *giant*? Well. Maybe it won't notice
> you.

Heh. How long's it been since you read The Hobbit? That sense of
sneaking into the dragon's nest. DnD doesn't really have it's Hobbits
being nearly sneaky enough, does it.

--
tussock

I'm like a box of chocolates; you never know what you're gunna get.
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

On Mar 3, 8:18 am, "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse....RemoveThis@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> <Lorenz.L....RemoveThis@gmx.de> wrote in message
>
> news:198d51bd-3b7c-4cda-bd6d-4b99cf844309@59g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > "Malachias Invictus" <invictuse....RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> <Lorenz.L....RemoveThis@gmx.de> wrote in message...
<snip>
> No. It really is not that big of a deal. I don't mind the extra counting
> for accuracy, but it noticeably slows play with a substantial number of
> players. Really, how important is it?
>
> > Maybe circle-shaped spell areas will be
> > replaced by quadrats too?
>
> I would not like that.

So everybody will be fleeing circle-shaped areas in
a diagonal direction from now on in border cases...

<snip>
> > ...which would be dishonest on WotC's part.
>
> I think it is pretty smart.

Being smart is no excuse for being dishonest.


LL
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

In article <o4-dneI9MLKb3U_anZ2dnUVZ_sGvnZ2d.DeleteThis@comcast.com>,
"Malachias Invictus" <invictusebay.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> "Hadsil" <forumite.DeleteThis@netzero.com> wrote in message
> news:f9a7b12b-6f73-4d6a-8a94-8d1426a4edcc@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

> >> I think that depends greatly upon what your stat resources are.
>
> >Agreed. While I don't think a particular character array of 18, 17,
> >15, 15, 13, 12 means the campaign is doomed to implosion and can
> >handle a MAD class quite well, too many DMs will have a conniption fit
> >over it.
>
> I find that incredibly strange.

A lot of DMs have either a poor sense of scope, a real desire to play
the "everyman as hero" campaign, or both.

That another of my worries about 4e. I see 4e bringing a lot of new
people to the game and introducing a bunch of people to DMing. DMing is
a gaming experience that I think is just about unique.

I'm very curious to see how they support DM "professional" development.

- Allen
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E 

Keith Davies <keith.davies.TakeThisOut@kjdavies.org> writes:

> Malachias Invictus <invictusebay.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Tetsubo" <tetsubo.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:5OednVOkg9v5iFLanZ2dnUVZ_qainZ2d@comcast.com...
>>> And I am feeling like I'm being marginalized by my hobby.
>>
>> Dude. It is really not that bad. There is still a ton of goodness out
>> there for 3.5E, and I am willing to bet there is a demand for new stuff
>> which will be filled by competent publishers.
>
> /me raises hand
>
> And amateurs. I *hope* to have OGC Library started by summer (putting
> my house on the market soon, so there's a *lot* of work involved in
> that... and I'm out of the house 10-12 hours a day just for work, even
> before considering things like my son's soccer, or my daughter's dance
> and swimming (not concurrent, or even consecutive) lessons.
>
> And once OGC Library gets going and populated, I think I'll finally be
> in a position to get my KSRD project *really* going.

Hmm.

How well will your data model be portable? The scope of your project
is a bit larger than what I want to do, but I could use the raw data
to base my own DM utilities on.

I am working on my own data model to import the current SRD content
in, and I am going to go with a PostgreSQL backend and some Perl
scripts to create/manipulate objects like NPCs and templated monsters.

If your raw data is easily imported into my schema, I'd like to grab a
copy. And vice versa of course, if I am ahead in importing OGC content
into a nicely normalised DB, you're welcome to a copy.

I don't expect to be finished before summer either though.

Mart

--
"We will need a longer wall when the revolution comes."
--- AJS, quoting an uncertain source.
 >> Stay informed about: A VERY positive review of 4E