You know, let's start over.

We can't very well have a discussion on how to fix 4E without understanding what is wrong with it.

We should have started by identifying things we consider to be problems first before going into how we'd change it.

Quote from: Cave Bear;887215You know, let's start over.

We can't very well have a discussion on how to fix 4E without understanding what is wrong with it.

We should have started by identifying things we consider to be problems first before going into how we'd change it.

That's an excellent point, no snark:  What is broken about 4e, that people want to fix?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;887217That's an excellent point, no snark:  What is broken about 4e, that people want to fix?

I'll start:

I. Combat Pacing

Problem: Combat takes a little bit longer than most of my players would prefer
Reason 1: Monsters have too many hit points.

Solution: If using MM1 and other earlier monsters, divide HP in half and increase monster's average damage by +1. Or, use MM3, Monster Vault, and other later monsters. Be wary when using brute, elite, and solo monsters.

Reason 2: Whiff factor; attacks miss too frequently.

Solution 1: Make sure everybody has an expertise feat. One popular houserule is to give everybody one free expertise at character creation.

Solution 2: Make sure that everybody has magic weapons/implements appropriate to their level, or use the inherent bonus optional rule from Dark Sun/DMG2. Be wary when using soldier, elite, and solo monsters.

Reason 3: Late combat feels like a boring slog compared to the exciting 'alpha strike' of the earlier rounds.

Solution: You might consider refreshing encounter powers halfway through combat. Maybe after players use their second winds or spend their action points. Monsters should attack in waves.

Reason 4: Players take too long to select actions on their turn.

Solution: Use an egg timer.

Actually, I've realized I do have issues with the game, as a player:

The Ranger Class.  Mechanically speaking, Twin Strike was the most power ability in the game, everything was compared to it, for utility.

Secondly, the amount of 'free' or 'reaction' attacks the class got was OBSCENE.

Quote from: cranebump;887175*Keep the different defenses: I REALLY liked how spellcasters had to "roll to hit," just like everyone else. (though I guess you could do that with 5E by just adding +10 to the relevant stats to get static defenses).

5e has casters roll to hit for quite a few of the spells, and those that dont oft allow a stat save. Different approach. Having to roll "to hit" just to heal someone would get more than tedious really fast.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;887221Actually, I've realized I do have issues with the game, as a player:

The Ranger Class.  Mechanically speaking, Twin Strike was the most power ability in the game, everything was compared to it, for utility.

Secondly, the amount of 'free' or 'reaction' attacks the class got was OBSCENE.

Well, Twin Strike is the most powerful striker power in the game, I'll grant you that.
Defenders, controllers, and leaders don't need to concern themselves with having an effective damage-dealing power like Twin Strike since that isn't their job. But the fact that other striker classes don't have good equivalents is a problem.

Solution: Every striker class should have some variation on Twin Strike; a power that grants two attacks during their turn.


As for free and reaction attacks: Is it the abundance of free and reaction attacks the thing that concerns you, or is there something inherent in how free and reaction attacks work that bothers you?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;887213There's nothing wrong with it.  It may not be what you LIKE (I don't), but it's perfectly functional and does exactly as it says on the tin, it runs a fantasy game.

I agree theres nothing wrong with 4e as it is. But its touted as an RPG. But even non-RPG players notice very quickly that it plays more like a board game or wargame. Thus it fell short of being a RPG.

Totally YMMV of course if the GW version is any indicator. That feels more like an RPG and does not have the heavy board game feel. Did come with lots of pogs and battle maps though.

So what did 4e D&D GW excise or change that made it work?

Quote from: Omega;887224I agree theres nothing wrong with 4e as it is. But its touted as an RPG. But even non-RPG players notice very quickly that it plays more like a board game or wargame. Thus it fell short of being a RPG.

Totally YMMV of course if the GW version is any indicator. That feels more like an RPG and does not have the heavy board game feel. Did come with lots of pogs and battle maps though.

So what did 4e D&D GW excise or change that made it work?

Okay, this might be a discussion to spin off into another thread, but;

OD&D plays like a wargame. Because it started out as a wargame.

Do wargame/boardgame elements preclude a game from being an rpg?

I mean, what is an rpg if not a wargame/boardgame that generates emergent narrative and richly characterized game pieces?

Quote from: Christopher Brady;887221Actually, I've realized I do have issues with the game, as a player:

The Ranger Class.  Mechanically speaking, Twin Strike was the most power ability in the game, everything was compared to it, for utility.

Secondly, the amount of 'free' or 'reaction' attacks the class got was OBSCENE.

I put alot of effort into playing 4e and making it workable...I honestly just don't see the reward/effort ratio being worth it today.

The "reaction" stuff was just ridiculous once the players got half a dozen levels under their belt. You put 5 people around a table, and every time the monster moved a space you had to ask permission from each player for the privilege...then you had to do it again for each attack...and you had to do it again, for each reaction...and for each counter-reaction...and for each counter-counter-counter reaction.

I'm pretty sure 5e's "you only get 1 reaction a turn" is a response to this mess...and I'm pretty sure you'll need something similar if you wish to pursue the quixotic dream of making 4e really viable.

Then comes the saving throw issues--again it happens at too many places. Save at the end of your turn, beginning of your turn, end of monster's turn, beginning of the round...that's ungainly.

Then you've got the meta-powers, Battlemind being the worst--immune to damage, rather silly in a system where the only way to harm a character is damage. There were plenty of others, though.

Seriously, going through all the things that didn't work is too much trouble.

You may as well build from the ground up a totally new game, with perhaps using 1 or 2 core ideas from 4e.

Quote from: Doom;887227The "reaction" stuff was just ridiculous once the players got half a dozen levels under their belt. You put 5 people around a table, and every time the monster moved a space you had to ask permission from each player for the privilege...then you had to do it again for each attack...and you had to do it again, for each reaction...and for each counter-reaction...and for each counter-counter-counter reaction.

This is a forum full of oldschool guys. Somebody get Gronan in here and ask him how Gary used he used those simultaneous action rules in Chainmail.
If it's relevant, we might take a page from the oldschool playbook for fixing reactions.

QuoteThen comes the saving throw issues--again it happens at too many places. Save at the end of your turn, beginning of your turn, end of monster's turn, beginning of the round...that's ungainly.

Having played and DM'd 4E on numerous occasions, I am quite certain that is absolutely not how it works.
When did a player character ever have to save at the end of the monster's turn in your campaign?

QuoteThen you've got the meta-powers, Battlemind being the worst--immune to damage, rather silly in a system where the only way to harm a character is damage. There were plenty of others, though.

What are you on about?

Quote from: Daztur;887063OK, assuming you keep the basic 4ed design goals in place (many of which clash pretty badly with standard D&D play) how would you go about fixing 4ed?

Don't use it for D&D, use it for sports inspired fantasy games like Blood Bowl.

Otherwise, fix it by setting the books on fire.

Quote from: jeff37923;887229Don't use it for D&D, use it for sports inspired fantasy games like Blood Bowl.

Otherwise, fix it by setting the books on fire.

Hey, at least we made it to page 3 before this crap showed up.  Now, all we need is Gronan to show up and tell us how it was back in his day, and we call it a week!

OK, I'm going to go ahead and point out more problems and possible solutions.

II. Unsatisfactory Non-Combat Segments
4E's gameplay outside of combat leaves something to be desired. The designers included skill challenges as an all purpose solution to devising non-combat encounters but it comes off as a bit... stilted? Bland? It just doesn't have the same rigors of 4E's combat and character creation mini-games.
Utility powers don't seem to help much.

I think the solution to this problem lies in genre fusion. If 4E's combat feels like a wargame, then we might take a different sort of game that acts as a counterpoint and use that as a basis for a more detailed non-combat portion of the game.

I've thought about incorporating worker-placement mechanics (from such games as Settlers of Catan, Agricola, and Lords of Waterdeep!) into 4E as a domain management mini-game.
4E's designers cite influence from Euro-games, so why not?

Every time 4E comes up

A) someone mentions their negative experiences with it, followed by

B) someone hops on to tell them they played it wrong.


Every. Fucking. Time.

Quote from: Omega;8872225e has casters roll to hit for quite a few of the spells, and those that dont oft allow a stat save. Different approach. Having to roll "to hit" just to heal someone would get more than tedious really fast.

Well, if you're healing someone, they wouldn't be defending...

Familiar with 5E to hit spells. I like them wish they all worked that way. Creatures could still take half damage or whatever on a "miss," thus providing the same effect as current, but allowing casters to roll.

Just a preference...