|
The worst thing about Strike! along this axis is actually the exact opposite; it presents as setting-agnostic and then has a ton of classes whose mechanics really clearly map to narrative concepts like "necromancer" or "guy who turns into a giant squid" and then goes "sure you can reskin these to whatever."
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:09 |
|
|
Ferrinus posted:I think Strike would be significantly worse if it had the Attacker Through Remote Proxies rather than the Summoner or whatever, and not just because the latter kind of class name makes it much easier to think of powers. Though there's not an official Strike setting its classes do suggest a default one, which I guess is a kind of Final Fantasy-ish tech-friendly fantasy world in which you've got both wizards casting spells and engineers laying mines. Yeah it's not really something with an easy solution, it's just there's this suggested world that isn't elaborated on and I can understand how that would nag at someone. I'm running my Strike! campaign as a Live-a-Live style "every genre of cheap paperback fiction exists in the same multiverse" kind of deal and it's working pretty well.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Gort posted:It does seem reasonable to discuss games inspired by 4e in the 4e thread, honestly. The best thing to come out of this topic was the giant list of 4E retroclones, although sadly a bunch of the links are dead.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
Fuego Fish posted:Spelljammer: Dungeons! In! Spaaace! Imagine Jules Verne's Star Trek and you're not far off. It's a truly fantastical cosmos where you gad about on magical flying ships (with their own atmosphere and gravity), voyaging between planetary systems contained within crystal spheres. Each of these spheres may contain one of the other settings, in fact, but that's not as important as what you might encounter out in the greater cosmos: evil beholder empires (who are in a state of neverending genocidal war with each other), giant bugs out for slaves, cool hippopotamus gunslingers, and giant hamsters. No, really. Descriptions of Spelljammer always make it sound so much cooler than Planescape in theory, but I've never had the chance to test it in practice.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:That's a good idea and I will if I have the opportunity. Robe of Useful Items dates back to AD&D 2E, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
D&D is about making tactical decisions that average out to correct over the long term (because you're rolling dice and there's variance) and a lot of the depth comes from the possibility for teamwork or target prioritization among multiple enemies. One-on-one dueling has literally none of that. Basically you've either got to invent a whole new minigame, settle for something mechanically uninvolved like an opposed roll, or just hand your player a foam noodle and fight to first bonk.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 01:38
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Thing is, it's the sort of thing you see in fantasy stories so to just plain rule it out feels like you're cutting off a lot of story options. Focus is one thing but a good heroic fantasy game shouldn't feel like you're doing something wrong if you veer one inch off the path of "group tactical combat in large open spaces with varied terrain". I agree, but I've also never seen a good dueling system.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2017 04:36
|
|
|
I'm still looking for a game where I can appropriately translate the booger-powered anti-Wizard class from Tales of Maj'Eyal into the game's mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:so if i inject simulationism into my blood in minute quantities i can protect myself against it? I hate it as an approach to game design probably even more than Cirno does, but a roleplaying game with no resemblance to reality and zero reliance on players' understanding of how real things work would be pretty bizarre. A little bit of "fire burns, swords cut, gravity makes you fall" goes an extremely long way towards making what would otherwise be pure game mechanics ("if you make this decision, this number goes down, and that number goes up") much easier to learn. So, ironically, yes -- sort of.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
I like multiclass feats well enough as a solution but I prefer systems where by default your character is built from a combination of multiple careers instead of it being a weird, obscure option that's only worth it in cases of high synergy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2018 01:32
|
|
|
Moriatti posted:I too am interested in making a Captain America Brawler so either this or counting a shield as a weapon is something I'm interested in. I've been working on this problem with Reik on Discord and while I'm not completely sure on the first part, there's a Spiked Shield in Adventurer's Vault that can be used as a weapon.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
Successful Businessmanga posted:The enchantment itself doesn't offer an enhancement bonus, so you'd have to rely on inherent bonuses to keep it up to par. You're also missing out on being able to use arms items, but thems the breaks when you wanna build something super gimmicky haha. Good news, at least assuming that wiki is accurate: quote:Although a character cannot use two shields at the same time, a character wielding a spiked shield enchanted as a weapon can employ arms slot items such as bracers.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Don't pull your punches, the whole point of marks as a system is that they enforce themselves. Be generous with respecs if this makes his character ineffective, though.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
dont even fink about it posted:3) I can't imagine how loving lame it would be to tell a guy to rebuild because you're too lovely of a DM to handle "guy with high AC" The problem isn't that that a high-AC fighter is hard to deal with, the problem is that a "high AC and nothing else" fighter isn't going to do very well if the GM is doing his job.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
After playing Shadow of the Demon Lord (which has both good and bad points compared to 4E) the biggest things I want from a theoretical 4E clone are, in no particular order: - Better multiclassing - No "adventuring day" -- no dailies, no Vancian casting, no healing surges, either make encounters completely discrete or have resources that refresh based on player-facing triggers ("when you kill an enemy, regain 2 uses of this power" or whatever) instead of an 8-hour rest - No initiative (fast turns / slow turns is loving genius and I wish I'd thought of it) - Enough dice to make a nice bell curve re: resolution mechanics - Encounter budgeting rules that are 100% airtight and playtested to death Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Jun 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 00:50
|
|
|
"No GM rolling" sounds awful though, the only way I want that is if your game just doesn't use random resolution models period (at which point you're not really talking about D&D any more)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
starkebn posted:when something is attacking the player, the player rolls their defence to beat their attack - when you're attacking something you roll to beat their defence Huh. If it works out to the same math I guess I'll adjust my position from "negative" to just "confused why this matters." I was imagining something where the GM has a deterministic model and the players had a random one, which just sounds like a recipe for frustration and unfairness.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 01:05
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:What are the pros and cons of the “adventuring day”? On the one hand, deciding whether to save resources until later and which encounters are difficult enough to justify their expenditure is a strategic decision that adds depth to the game. On the other hand, you're making that decision mostly blind which seriously limits the extent to which it's meaningful, and also it's a giant pain in the rear end and creates a significant incentive and/or psychological tendency to hold on to your cool things for bigger future problems that may not even happen. Also, "dailies" and the equivalent specifically can be a problem because they mandate at least some level of mechanically-significant timekeeping, which is fine and expected in some games, but is basically vestigial in modern D&D. If you're not actually doing anything interesting with timekeeping except that your powers refresh when you sleep (instead of once per session or once per encounter or what have you) then why link the narrative passage of time to the mechanical regeneration of abilities at all? dwarf74 posted:Pretty much so I can focus on running the game, and the players do all the math. In my experience my players usually know the rules less well than I do and any chance I get to do the math for them expedites the speed of the game, especially when I'm looking up stats that I've prepared and aren't on their character sheets, but on the other hand I've also complained about this exact thing (players not knowing / not needing to know the rules) so yeah, I could give something that puts the onus on them a shot in the hopes that it would pay off in the long run. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Jun 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
remusclaw posted:Kill the adventuring day, suddenly you only need to balance fights for a fully capable team. Kill the adventuring day, you only need to have fights when it is important for there to be a fight. Kill the adventuring day and every fight can be a challenging boss fight rather than a tedious resource drainer and time filler. Kill the adventuring day. Couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2018 23:18
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:D&D 4E is inherently a game that assumes you use some form of adventuring day much like it is a game that assumes you'll do a lot of fighting. It's not the right system for nonviolent diplomatic resolution and world simulation, and it's not the right system for fighting important isolated battles. I'd rather play to its strengths or else look for a game that plays to the strengths I want. What makes you say this? Particularly when Gamma World 7E (and to a lesser extent, Strike!) exist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2018 14:05
|
|
|
Reik posted:What are the best ways to speed up combat without super intensive houserules? Would things like "monsters have half health and do double damage" be okay? This is on top of the updated monster math. You're looking for First Level Damage Forever. I don't know if the above link is the only person who's worked it out, there may be others with a smoother expression curve or whatever. Hopefully someone who's played 4E more recently can help out if so.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
If you're using Inherent Bonuses, you don't need the feat tax feats, right? If so, would you still permit them in a game using Inherent Bonuses (as an additional leg up)?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:You still do: Thank you for the quick response!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
Doesn't the builder have a built-in function that lets you pick and choose what sourcebooks you want to use?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
BetterWeirdthanDead posted:It should. I'm curious if it rolls back errata / nerfs when you do this or if it just has one entry for "Magic Missile" regardless of where it's from.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 15:30
|
|
|
If I were going to change around the roles in 4E it wouldn't be to remove controllers, it would be to rip out the entire healer/tank/dps model by the roots and replace it with a completely different division of labor.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:How would you divide labour instead? That's a big question, but I'll make a post about some of the possibilities and their pros and cons when I get home, if you like.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 21:19
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:I would like that! Maybe in TG Chat? Yeah, that might make more sense than here.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Moriatti posted:I mean, I've had players who were playing a Wizard and ended up casting magic missile every round and didn't enjoy having a bunch of options. I had someone play an Artificer like this once. I didn't know that the class was a Leader until years later. It was a huge party and we a had a Cleric too, though, so it all worked out.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2018 14:24
|
|
|
For an Imposer Wizard, is it worth going (INT/WIS/CHA) 20/15/12 instead of 20/16/11 in order to get Spell Focus in Paragon tier rather than Epic?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2018 15:54
|
|
|
Those people don't need to play 4E. There are at least three other games in the D&D brand alone for them. Games should never be designed on the assumption that they're supposed to be all things for all people, because all that leads to is a muddled lack of vision. Just make a game that's good at what it does.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
I'm somewhat sympathetic to the idea of minimizing decisions during character creation, because much as I enjoy charop, it's the kind of thing that will eventually become a solved problem; there's nothing dynamic, no meaningful variables to respond to, when it comes to making a better character (and "failing" at character creation isn't a good feeling since it's so much effort and so permanent.) Minimizing the decisions you have to make in combat, however, is incompatible with what makes 4E good in the first place. It doesn't matter how popular it is or whether it's an onboarding route or not, making a good game is more important.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:I don't see how you can really argue that the mere existence of the E-classes alongside the AEDU classes makes the overall game experience objectively worse, since it's very easy to make mixed parties. E-classes can hit the same combat benchmarks as the AEDU classes fairly easily. Benchmarks are only half the problem. The point of having tactical combat is that you succeed or fail based on the decisions you make. If you have a class where you have no options and just fail to contribute no matter what you do, sure, that's bad. But if you have a class where you have no options and you succeed no matter what you do, that invalidates the entire premise. (This is presenting it as a binary when it's really more of a spectrum but the same problem still applies, just as a matter of degrees rather than absolutes.)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
The parenthetical and the end of that post is pretty important. Besides, this conversation isn't being framed in terms of "different classes can have depth baked into them in different ways." That's fine, although it can make balance tricky and I think it's generally better to have robust universal mechanics as a backbone. It's "some people are so afraid of making decisions that we need to help them avoid this in case they're scared away from TRPGs forever" that I object to. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Aug 1, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Is there any game with a fighter that good? SotDL fighters are super strong in combat, and most spells in SotDL are specifically attack powers rather than "I'm better at everything you have to roll skill checks to do, and I Just Succeed when I do it", but there's still a significant disparity in the number of options a pure martial character has vs. a caster.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
it's a bad idea like the whole premise is based on the concept that decreasing a number by a certain amount and losing the rest of your action is intrinsically more interesting than just losing your action, which is silly you have extra stuff happen on a failed roll in a narrative / skill check context because otherwise the game grinds to a halt. in combat, there is no risk of this happening. the consequence of missing is that an enemy that would otherwise be dead or disabled gets to do a thing before you do, and gets to do more things in total before being removed from play. e: now to be fair it could be a good idea if done for completely different reasons, like making combat faster, attacks more reliable, and the whole situation more deterministic and skillful but if you want to do it for those reasons you really have to consider the math and the consequences almost on a case-by-case basis and that's a lot of work Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Sep 29, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
Spiteski posted:I mean, the dislike stems from boredom intrinsic in waiting for your turn, then having nothing happen on it before having to wait again. So it's both about speed ofcombat and also not feeling like your time is wasted at that point. Stealing miss tokens from Strike! might be a less drastic alternative. It provides insurance against the worst-case scenario where you miss over and over against the odds and never get to do anything, without completely upending the combat math. Plus even if a miss token isn't incredibly impactful by itself getting a physical benny when it happens at least offsets the psychological side of things a little. I mean I'm being a little harsh here when, in all honestly, "4E with to-hit rolls eliminated or dramatically de-emphasized" sounds like my dream game. It's just that you're talking about a radically different game at that point. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Sep 29, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
Impermanent posted:yo have you played gloomhaven I haven't had an in-person group for tabletop in a very long time, unfortunately. Believe me, it's on my list.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:WotC abandoning Eberron is half of what makes me like 4e more than 5e. 4e is also better in almost every mechanical respect but the Eberron thing is just infuriating. Eberron is the coolest thing that D&D has. strange way to spell Dark Sun and/or Spelljammer that said 4E has the best take on Dark Sun too so it's still a good justification 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 16:09 |
|
|
While 4E is the best D&D, it's still D&D and it can't entirely escape the contradiction between the urge to make narrative decisions "real" (or at least weighty) by embodying them in mechanical consequences on the one hand, and the absolute freedom to be whatever you want on the other. e: I actually tend to come down on the former side, but "death to abilities scores" is equally justifiable either way; for the former because it represents a false choice, for the latter because it represents an inhibition on free choice. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Aug 24, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2020 04:04
|
|