Apologize.

>>51734650
Why? We didn't want it either.

I'm sorry 4e. You were an amazing game that was misunderstood, slandered, then intentionally crippled and taken before your time. You were too good for this world, and we may never see your like again.

>>51734650
I have nothing to apologize for.

File: Essentials.jpg (76KB, 400x525px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 400x525px

>>51734682
Apologize RIGHT NOW.

>>51734650
I agree. 3eaboos should apologize for the way they unfairly maligned the vastly superior edition that followed simply because they'd been so thoroughly poisoned into believing their garbage game in any way deserved to be called D&D or a roleplaying game.

>>51734695

Don't post pictures of mutilation like that. It's just disgusting.

>>51734650
I'm not apologizing for anything, World of Warcraft.
You know exactly what you did.

>>51734650
4E was underrated, it was a good system

>>51734650
This shit is not even a RPG, get out of here.

It wasn't a very good system anon. 2e will always be the best D&D edition.

It also was directly responsible for ruining Forgotten Realms.

>>51734756
You never tried it, don't lie. It is just as much of an RPG as 3rd edition, as you can roleplay in it. The only real difference is the combat systems, where one is balanced (4E) and one is not (3E/Pathfinder). Just because you don't roleplay, doesn't mean others don't

>>51734650
But I've always liked 4e

>>51734790
I played two adventures, about 12 sessions, they were shit. It's a miniature game, you spend hours counting fucking squares in a gridmap and choosing stupid non-sensical powers("I have this really good sword move, but I can only use it once a day). The system gets in the way of the roleplaying and the resistance rolls are dumb, you basically fail 50% of the time.

>>51734859
>It's a miniature game
That's literally why it exists, you have AD&D and 5e now if you want more abstract combat

>>51734859
Here's the thing: just because there's not a specific rule for something doesn't mean you can't do it. I know it's hard for you to believe, since you came from 3e, but it's true.

>>51734876
You didn't need miniatures for 3.5 either. Only 4e plays like fucking World of Warcraft on a paper.

>>51734892
You fucking liar

>>51734859

>>51734876
>>51734887
THIS

File: in pathfinder.png (2MB, 1074x4369px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1074x4369px

>>51734892
>You didn't need miniatures for 3.5 either
PFFFFFT HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

>>51734892
You can't just hate something for doing exactly what it's supposed and doing it fairly well

>>51734859
>The system gets in the way of the roleplaying
The system literally has now rules for roleplaying outside of the skills
How is it "getting in the way of the roleplaying" if it doesn't touch it?

>>51734914
He clearly has never played 4E

>>51734650
Don't see why, I liked it, my group liked it.

The saves were legitimately stupid though.
And skill challenges weren't explained well at all.

>>51734887
Nigger, I played every single D&D edition there is for years, except 5e because at that point I lost my interest in the game completely. It's not about not having a specific rule for every situation, it's about having rules that are just nonsense and forcing the players to view the game like some kind of chess with wizards instead of a RPG.

>>51734904
I played 3.5 for a long time and never used miniatures, I just used common sense when someone should get an AoO.

>>51734905
Fine, it does a really good job in being a shit game.

>>51734914
No, it doesn't.

>>51735012
You can hardly blame the system for your lack of imagination, just like you can't blame us for spotting the holes in your lies.

>>51734892
Go back to your tabletop Diablo.

>>51735045
I said no lies and I don't have a lack of imagination, but I usually want a game that allows me to present a situation in a logical way, and 4e just gets in the way, with stupid healing surges and such.

>>51735064
No, that would be something similar to 4e. I prefer actually good RPG systems, such as BRP, Burning Wheel and RuneQuest.

>>51735012
>>51735080
Darkie got owned, just like the old days

>>51735096
"tabletop diablo" was an argument against 3rd edition levied by some angry 2e players. There's a somewhat famous magazine clip floating around on the matter. It's thus kind of funny when pathfurries cry about "tabletop wow".

Though I guess you wouldn't know that because you don't play shit systems like pf and also don't play good miniatures games like 4e

>>51734650
>4e almost a decade old
>there will be millenial scumbags who started with it and try to argue that it was good
Anyone born after the 80's was a mistake

>>51735111
>>51735126
trips confirm

>>51735096
>No, that would be something similar to 4e.
Dude, 3e openly and deliberately ripped off several mechanics from Diablo. Except they did a worse job of it. One of the biggest thing 4e did was get rid of that crap.

>>51735126
You mean the people who didn't grow up getting lead poisoning?

>>51735140
>>51735111
Stop samefagging. It only degrades you.

>>51735152
>>51735126
>>51735096

Would ask the same for you

>>51735080
>I usually want a game that allows me to present a situation in a logical way
So any game with a non-retard DM?

>Stupid healing surges and such.
>Why can't I have/be a healbot instead of going for tactics and strategy?

File: Capture.png (25KB, 946x345px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 946x345px

>>51735156
But you implicitly admitted you were samefagging. So you accomplished that much.

>>51734650
forget apologies and just fuck Mearls

>>51735126
4e is my favourite edition and I started with 3.5

But then, there's always the possibility that the only reason why 4e is my favourite edition is because Pathfinder felt like such an insult

>>51734650
I'm sorry 4e, you were not even good a being bad. 3/3.5 was even worse than you. And 5e is more mediocre than you. You should have killed more sacred cows but in the end you were a fucking coward.

>>51735173
I was merely acknowledging my gained trips, if you call that "samefagging", then so be it.

>>51735200
Which sacred cows would you have liked to seen removed?

>>51735216
If you're trying to convince me you're not a jackass you're failing.

>>51735236
>jackass
>was the first to use racial terms

>>51735241
I'm the one who said "nigger" and I'm not that guy.

>>51735241
> Racial terms
You're on 4chan.

>>51735252
I believe you

>>51735241
Jesus, man. You're just a trainwreck of a human being. You can't even shitpost right.

Multiclassing was pretty dumb too.
Themes were criminally underused. Could have made all of the setting books awesome. Instead of just rehashes....

>>51735306
Themes were poorly used in general, there were themes that should have been classes, like wilder, and classes that should have been themes, like vampire.

I was fond of 4e multiclassing though, even if in the end, much like 3.5, the vast majority of multiclassing was done for optimization purposes

>>51735166
a non-retard DM can get around shitty systems like 4e, but a non-retard DM with an actually good system can provide an experience much richer to his players.

>Stupid healing surges and such.
>Why can't I have/be a healbot instead of going for tactics and strategy?

I will just let this guy respond to why 4e is a shit game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LIB5MVCXuk

>>51734859
Are you talking about 3.5 or 4e?

>>51734650
I started with 5e. All I know about 4e is a bunch of memes about it being too MMO-y. Can someone explain what 4e's actual deal is? How does it differ from other editions?

>>51735345
It balances mages and martial by using a "powers" system, where things are defined as either "at-wills", "encounter" or "daily" abilities. It is the most balanced version of D&D, but requires a bit more combat time as a result. It also simplified certain unwieldly rules like grappling

>>51735345

Basically 4e is much more combat focused and it circumvents most "save or lose" type shit by having the primary conflict resolution mechanic be dealing damage to enemies.

However on a superficial level classes are "the same" in that they get the same type of power at the same level (of course powers are completely different) so...

>>51734887
Truth.

>>51735345
All memes about 4e are true. Don't let 4rries deceive you.

4e was an excellent tactical skirmish wargame that suffered from reliance on hilariously expensive miniatures and trying to reinvent what D&D was. It's a damn shame; if it were a standalone game, it could've done well, and I adored a lot of the new races, classes, and setting stuff.

It also got me into tabletop and so scarred me that I've exclusively been playing rules-light storygames ever since.

>>51734892
Nice lie. Also its almost like they wanted to do that because of the popularity of said game. That is what you retards get by funding and making WoW popular. Others see that shit and jump right on.

>>51735345
The classes are much more standardized. Every class (sort of) gets the same progression: at-will powers, encounter powers, daily powers, utility powers, and they gain new encounter, daily, and utility powers at certain fixed levels.

They got most of their class features at 1st level, though they chose a specialization at 11th level and 21st level that granted them new features.

There was a lot of variety within those molds, though. The classes were divided into four roles (defender, leader, striker, controller) but the different ways they fulfilled those roles and dabbled in others gave each class a unique flavor. The fighter, the swordmage, and the warden were all defenders but you played them all completely differently.

3.5 was all coy about "no seriously you can play without a grid! Now read these detailed and mandatory rules about AoO, cover, areas of effect, movement..." 4e just embraced it and built its combat rules to work with a grid.

It stripped away and modified a lot of the out-of-combat rules to make it more freeform like earlier editions. Exploring a dungeon or solving a puzzle actually involved thinking about how best to solve problems instead of trying to guess the magic solution to the problem the DM planned out ahead of time because the game requires so much goddamn energy to run, as in 3e. (5e is better about this.)

To this day it's the most DM-friendly edition. The 4e DMG contains some of the best advice on running a game I've ever gotten in terms of making interesting and engaging challenges both in and out of combat.

>>51735404
4e is not, and never has been, WoW on paper

It's Final Fantasy Tactics on paper, with heavy grid focus, small parties, rounds that consist of every combatant getting a single turn, with reaction features that can activate on the turns of other combatants, be they enemies or allies, but not your own.

>>51734650
Murder-Suicide is a hell of a way to go, 4e.
>>51735400
As a miniature wargamer, I feel like I should apologize. D&D minis are terrible in all aspects except for corporate brand recognition, and there are so many more, better alternatives.

Points of Light was a good setting

>>51735400
>trying to reinvent what D&D was
No, it just no longer tried to hide the direction D&D had been going in by that point and focused on making the best of that.

>reliance on hilariously expensive miniatures
What are you talking about?

>>51735404
> That is what you retards get by funding and making WoW popular.

Stop projecting, cuckboy.

>>51735426
One of my biggest gripes with 4e was that it took the stuff 3.X did with bloat and didn't react harshly enough (5e is almost right). It was a decent attempt but it has little nostalgia for me because I recall all the awful furry races it added and the pointless classes simply to fill the stupid role system. I'd be perfectly happy with the roles existing had they not been labeled and every power source not had to have one of each type just for "completeness". Balance isn't a problem but senselessly filling out round numbers contributes a lot to the "blandness" people felt. Take away the labels for the roles and some of the bloat classes and it becomes far less crass. A false choice or a poorly fleshed out one really is the apple that spoils the bunch.

Furthermore, the fluff stuff for 4E was among the worst the game had ever put out. I would be happy to give 4e a try after all these years away but there's really nothing there to sweeten the deal other than the lovely DM aids.

>>51735562
There's no martial controller, unless Essentials (which I skipped) added one. That might be the only example, but still. certain rogue builds could do controllery stuff though.

>>51735562
Fluff only really matters if you only go by pre-fab modules; making your own worlds, you can modify lore to fit your desires; hell, you can even bar any use of the furry races if you can't stand them so much.

You can also limit classes players can use to suit your own world, people do it all the time (most common I've heard is no Monks or asian weaponry)

>>51734650
It's an odd combination of criminally underrated and highly popular.
Even though it's not an RPG, it's easily the best thing WotC/Hasbro put out under the D&D IP.
But they earned their negative publicity with that shitty smear/ad-campaign. People tend to resent ad hominem.
It's fine to tell it like it is, but 4e wasn't really an alternative to 3e so at the end of the day it was just bitching.
You reap what you sow.

>>51735618
Wait, how is it not an RPG? Please explain.

>>51735590
there was an essentials ranger variant that was a controller, I think called a scout?

>>51735607
It's the first taste you get and along with the language choices in how 4E was presented were as big a reason for the negative reaction as anything else if not more. Roles and stuff like Raven queen in the PHB in particular comes to mind as unforced blunders.

File: Minilogo2007.jpg (36KB, 263x130px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 263x130px

>>51735624
There's no roleplay in 4e.
It gets hamfisted at times, but everything is rollplay.

Still, props to WotC for redoing pic related so well.

Original D&D is great but AD&D 2nd edition is the best Fantasy RPG.

>>51735663
Huh? When I played and DM'd there was plenty of roleplaying. Maybe you just had a shit DM?

>>51735663
IIRC there were no rules for it, which is how it should be. I hate the "i roll perception to find hidden doors" of later iterations of the game and it's the biggest legitimate gripes OSRfags have.

>>51735659
what's wrong with the Raven Queen?

>>51735631
i stand corrected. anyway it never really stood out to me as a major problem. The real issue was how terrible some of the later classes were, and they never got fixed with supplements

>>51735671
2nd edition is probably the second best edition, after 4e. the top three are probably 4e > 2e > BECMI, shuffled around for personal preference

>>51735659
I still don't get why people bitch about the Raven Queen. She is literally the divine version of a carrion bird and is basically the Morganna with the name changed.

4e deserves it if only for shitting on Dark Sun and ensuring that the 5e incarnations and beyond will be ruined and pumped full of setting breaking trash like Tieflings. Stupid shitty primordial shit holy fuck you RUINED IT

BUT I WANNA PLAYA DRAGONBORN/TIEFLING/WARFORGED IN EVERY SETTING WAAH WAHHHHH

DRAGONBORN AND TIEFLING ARE IN THE PHB!!!! COME ON >:(

Thanks 4e

File: Untitled.jpg (240KB, 1019x1319px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 1019x1319px

>>51735680
>IIRC there were no rules for it,
Skill Challenges.
">i roll perception to find hidden doors"
>

>>51735671
You should really try games other than D&D.

>>51735702
They bitch because she wasn't in 3.5.

>>51735762
Sounds like a player problem and not a system problem, something that can be solved by a competent DM. If a DM doesn't want a certain race or class in their campaign, they can put their foot down on it, all roleplaying systems go on about how the DM is the final arbiter of the game

>>51735804
>You should really try games other than D&D.

when will the dungeon world meme end?

>>51735762

What's wrong with either of those races?

Objectively they're no worse than orcs or elves.

>>51735814
Of course but that shit doesn't belong in core rulebooks. Having to have to untrain bad habits and take the candy bar away from some know-nothing newbie is gonna seem arbitrary in a system that is rules on the rules-rulings spectrum.

>>51735826
(You)

File: also, the actually playerbase has to learn about this.jpg (415KB, 900x1164px) Image search: [Google]

415KB, 900x1164px

>>51735820
Once new shitposters start to think it's old-hat.

this thread reminded me why i hate 4th ed

>>51735836
I've DM'd many different systems for new players, and the special snowflake syndrome of wanting to be everything at the same time is a near-universal trait regardless of most systems (including most past versions of D&D). Again, player problem not solely attributable to 4E

>>51735820
You should really try games that do not have the word 'dungeon' in the title.

>>51735845

No really.

What makes either of those races worse than orcs or elves?

>>51735858
Because the memes from butthurt grognards tainted your view of a good roleplaying system?

>>51735864
Don't put it in the core rulebook. Even good players make worse characters with these cliched awful abominations.

>>51735820
>dungeon world meme
please, the idea of people playing dungeon world is probaly the one thing that triggers the autists here even more than the idea of people playing D&D

>>51735820
G U R P 'S
U
R
P
S

>>51735858
shitposters? don't let bored 13-year olds on the internet affect your ability to enjoy a game.

>>51735870
>You should really try games that do not have the word 'dungeon' in the title.

there's no such thing!!!

>>51735880

What makes either of those races worse than orcs or elves.

>>51735877
no i had forgot about the hachetjob done to dark sun

>>51735872
Orcs and Elves are FAR less likely to clash with the theme of a 'generic' or 'stereotypical' setting.

>>51735880
Then either let them have their own version of fun, or act like a proper DM and put your foot down. Don't blame 4E for giving more options for different DMing styles/settings; act like a DM and deal with it

>>51735877
>>51735889
Because OOC options are basically non-existent, the scaling skill system is retarded, combat takes too damn long, and its too shackled to grid-combat

>B-but anon there's fixes for all those things! That makes them not legitimate reasons to hate 4e!

There's fixes for caster supremacy in 3.X too, that doesn't make it stop being a problem with the core system.

>>51735906

I mean granted that's true but that doesn't make those races bad it just means autists who want "muh D&D" have to deal with changing times and interests

>>51735914
I dont play 4E because it's just another mediocre superhero game like 3 and 5E. Other games do that sort of thing better.

File: Good shit milf.jpg (104KB, 701x907px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 701x907px

I'm in 3 4e games right now.

It's my favorite D&D edition.

WoTC should fucking apologize to me for the shitshow that Essentials was and promising 5e wouldn't ostracize 4e players when it did exactly that.

>>51735923
not prev poster, but please tell me about this caster fix, as a 3.5 DM i am genuinely curious

>>51735934
Other *not D&D games*

>>51735923

>OOC options are basically non-existent

What do you mean by this?

>There's fixes for caster supremacy in 3.X

PFFFT nothing actually worthwhile or substantial.

>the scaling skill system is retarded

If you're talking about there being no granularity between a trained and untrained skill... there are literal feats and origin skills you can take?

>>51735934
>superhero game

Now I know your opinion was tainted by memes propagated by D&D oldfags

>>51735426
>To this day it's the most DM-friendly edition
I agree with you at pretty much every point except for here. I didn't at all enjoy DMing 4e despite a few earnest tries at it, because I felt like there was a lot more I had to do to have the game come together in a way that played to 4e's strengths at all. Running it was exhausting and, ultimately a bit unpleasant. I found Gamma World 7e to be a better experience, as it was so much more of a skeleton in how it put things together, which I found more welcoming.

I'd always BS'd a lot in 2e, 3.5, and Pathfinder, as a GM is wont to do. As you said, 3.X was very coy about how reliant it could be on cold hard stats, which means that it's ultimately not so chafing and much easier to talk around them. You could say I treated it as more art than science; though, I usually hate being a player of 3.5/PF because even among my friends other GMs aren't likely to be so liberal with how they interpret the rules or mindful of how they impact the pace of the game.

In 4e the statistical, portioned, mechanically separated stuff is all so very front-and-center and you absolutely had to answer to it. In hindsight I think with enough experience GMing 4e perhaps I would have gotten to the point where I could more intuitively use its design elements like I do in other editions of D&D. But that would not have been a fun time.

That said, I appreciate what 4e did and why it did it, even if I don't like the game in execution. It stinks that there isn't a good spiritual successor to carry the torch, outside of the practically-unfinished Strike!. Or that it never got a video game adaptation, which would have been the most natural thing in the world.

>>51734786
>It also was directly responsible for ruining Forgotten Realms.

You can't ruin what's already shit.

>>51735923
what OOC options were there in the 3.5 core rulebook that weren't in the 4e rulebook? I remember picking race, class, feats and spells, and aside from that both editions handled OOC stuff thru roleplaying

>>51735942
don't play past level 6 was the popular one last time I checked. it didn't really work that well but it prevented things from getting even worse

>>51735942
Tomb of Battle+Psionics OR Tier 3 classes only

My feelings on 3.X and 4e are both generally negative, but while 3.X is the more flawed game in terms of balance and the rules doing what they intend, 4e I just find unbearably boring. Its probably my least favorite RPG of all time.

>>51735968
3.5 works fine with the E6 ruleset.

>>51735968
Tomb of Battle + Psionics? Can you elaborate please, as I'm unfamiliar with what your fix is involving these

>>51735967
4e gutted most of the useful utility abilities, turning them into Dailies or Rituals, and due to the ridiculous costs of Rituals [both in money, but far more importantly in time] they just never were as useful as a mundane method.

>>51735986
Examples? I don't recall ever feeling restricted in my abilities when playing, and none of my players did either when I was DMing

>>51735985
Basically he rips out the core classes and replaces them with classes from expanded psionics handbook and tome of battle.

>>51735680

>Not rolling a skill to find things means you're roleplaying

wat

>>51735985
Its a common "fix" for 3.X, where you make the only classes allowed the classes from Tomb of Battle [Warblade, Crusader, and Swordsage, including Unarmed Swordsage] and the Psionicist classes [Psion, Psychic Warrior, Wilder, etc]

Refluff psionics as magic if you want, and if you want a further limit on power make Level 6 or 8 the level cap for the setting instead of level 20.

It doesn't "fix" 3.X, but it does make it more balanced.

>>51735967
>don't play past level 6 was the popular one last time I checked
Also included buying feats and attribute boosts with xp.

>>51735745
>Shitting on dark sun

How so? If anything it was a return to the 2nd edition form of dark sun, where player characters are super-powered in a world built to kill super-powered things

File: F.jpg (37KB, 680x383px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 680x383px

>>51734668

>>51735995
Well good for you, thats not even remotely how the game works however so I can only assume you're either lying or played with extensive house-rules.

4e was my first real RPG to play, so it was my introduction to the hobby [besides some online semi-freeform crap before that] and I had all the books, and compared to other systems i find it unbearably restricted in terms of actual mechanical benefits or special powers besides damage or maneuvering enemies.

Not because there weren't powers that did out of combat things, but because they took way too much money, time, or combat resources to use.

>>51735986
>I can't spam my broken spells like I can in 3.PF!
>I need to actually spend time and resources, instead of just memorizing them every day!

Fuck entitled wizard fags.

>>51735562
>pointless classes simply to fill the stupid role system

Which classes were pointless? The only one I can really call pointless is the Vampire and I don't think any 4e person was happy with the Vampire.

>>51736025
Not lying, and played pure. Maybe the DMs make a difference in how tough a time players have

>>51735906

That's all well and good but 4e was set in the Points of Light setting. Where a major historical event was the class between the Dragonic and Infernal empires. Tieflings and Dragonborn are very much core races for the corebook setting. There was no reason not to have representatives of the two biggest historical empires not be playable with the core book.

>>51736044
Vampire should have been a Hybrid-only class from the beginning. In fact, that's a good compromise between making niche concepts like that into a theme or a full class.

>>51736044
The best examples I can think of are the Battlemind/ardent, the Avenger and the Warden

I mean, they all do unique things in 4e, but it's easy to just see them as "defender/leader psychic warriors", "striker paladins" and "defender barbarians" respectively

>>51736025
I think anon was asking for actual specific examples. What was something your wizard couldn't do in 4e that you felt your OOC options were limited? Feather fall?

>>51736040
It has nothing to do with 'spamming broken spells' it has to do with being able to actually RP like something besides a combat-role.

In another RPG, if I have a power that says "Water Walking" then I can use it to, however many times per day or under whatever restriction, walk on water. If I have the power to fly, then I can fly. If I can talk to the dead, then I can talk to the dead.

In 4e, any of those actions takes 10+ minutes in rituals and a ton of money, and Flight is basically impossible even at epic levels, you have to land at the end of your turn which completely breaks immersion.

I'd played OD&D. I'd rather have one spell per day that is actually usable, then a Ritual that costs so much money and time its ALWAYS a better option to use mundane methods.

The question isn't whether I like 3.X's magic system either, I don't. I don't even mind magic being long and formulaic, if that fits the theme of the game. But I can't stand the effects being unusable due to sheer impracticality.

>>51736077
That is exactly what I was asking, figured he just dodged the question, but maybe not

>>51736080
So, your complaint is that truly remarkable actions like walking on water, flying, and talking to the dead was not mundane enough to be done easily?

>>51736080
>It has nothing to do with 'spamming broken spells'
>lists effects that trivialize/bypass noncombat challenges

Okay, sure.

>>51736068

Honestly, I'd have just made it something they experimented with VERY late in the game but I feel was a rather good idea

Things that only existed in multiclass form. They had an option for an exotic weapon wielder in on of the Dragon Magazines that worked on that front.

It's a very good idea imo for things that are way too narrow in theme to be a full class. At the same time, I think it could have worked as a theme once they started introducing optional powers for themes.

>>51736076

I dunno, I'd call the Avenger and the Warden two of the best designed (Both fluffwise and ruleswise) classes in the game. The whole 'Wrath of God' assassin thing is an area rather untouched in D&D where it tends to go 'Divine magic = Heavy armour' and really missed out on Zealots and Hassassin sorts.

The Warden is incredibly cool thematically, a shapechanger drawing on not just animals but concepts and the seasons themselves. It's a raw and (This is a bit redudant considering the power source) primal sort of thing that didn't really exist otherwise. I also loved it mechanically.

I mean, I can see how people can dislike them but I'd not have called them redundant.

Funny thing though: The Battlemind came from a 3.5 class (With an even worse name). The Psychic Warrior.

>>51736004
>Only pretend social encounters involve playing a role

wat

>>51736080
Ok, are you somehow unaware of the fact that water walking is an encounter wizard cantrip and an encounter monk utility power, powers that give flight are super-common across multiple classes, and there's an avenger paragon path that gives permanent flight at level 16, and speaking with the dead takes 10 minutes to even begin in every DnD edition?

>>51736080
>In another RPG, if I have a power that says "Water Walking" then I can use it to, however many times per day or under whatever restriction

You still can, only now the restriction is a fair chunk of time (when out of combat) and some finances. A lot of these are meant to be done as a pre-emptive measure for a near future encounter (hence the time needed), and finances limit the "spamability" of said power, retaining its remarkable nature

In other words:>>51736100

>>51736080

>Flight is basically impossible even at epic levels, you have to land at the end of your turn which completely breaks immersion.

It's a single item away in epic. Heck, you can get permanent flight in paragon with the right path.

And...yeah, it's kinda important before then not to have hovering flight. Or else the game would just turn into 'Flying rangers and wizards, the arrow showering'. That was a mechanical design decision to prevent issues.

>>51736091
My complaint is that the limitations on the magic system and the out of combat utility system in general make it completely impractical for actual use in game.

I have played almost every class in 4e, at every level this side of Epic, and this is a persistent problem, in being able to RP a fantastic character, of any shade, with OOC abilities.

Compare with 5e

I can be a Warlock who can fly around, shoot fire at people, change my appearance at will, summon a sword from nowhere, and has a familiar who can help me out.

I can be a wizard who can mind control people, create illusions, summon demons.

I can be a monk who can jump super high, run up walls and over water and beats up people.

In 4e, I can't play any of those archetypes well, because the non-combat abilities, while not ABSENT, are so stunted in that they cost so much resource and money and time, that they are effectively unusable.

I can remember using a Ritual make 2-3 times in my entire 4e career, because there was always a more effective mundane option.

>>51736117
>Funny thing though: The Battlemind came from a 3.5 class (With an even worse name). The Psychic Warrior.

To be fair, that was also pretty bad in 3.5. It was basically filling out the "we need to have a 4/9 6/9 and 9/9 psychic class!" quota.

It's also a pretty meh class, sadly. I feel like there was potential there.

>>51736137

Well, also the 'We need someone who can be psionic who's not just a pasty nerd'

>>51736080
the level 1 wizard gets 4 at-will cantrips, none of which are combat-only. By level 2 you can feather fall and jump. By level 6 you can web, dimension door, disguise self, dispel magic, cast invisibility, levitate, and create walls of fog. Not a single one of these are rituals.

In addition, OTHER CLASSES now also get out of combat abilities. I don't mean boring +5 to hide or whatever like you get in 3rd edition, I mean Rogues can now burn a special ability to move straight up a wall at their move speed.

Are these heavily scaled back compared to 3.5? Yes, absolutely, at least for wizards. But that isn't a bad thing.

>>51736130
It breaks immersion when even flying enemies are landing all the time.
>>51736129
>>51736128
>>51736100
Look you can justify the design decision all you want, I'm saying its shit. It turns the game from "Only wizards can have nice things" to "Nobody can have nice things"

I don't even play either system, I play 5e or World of Darkness, and sometimes Mutants and Masterminds, so I don't have to justify Pathfinder's bullshit, and pretend thats the ONLY other option in terms of balance.

>>51736135
>I can be a Warlock who can fly around, shoot fire at people, change my appearance at will, summon a sword from nowhere, and has a familiar who can help me out.

If I was not at work, I'd build you a 4e warlock that does all those. It doesn't even sound hard.

>>51736135
So....don't rely so heavily on magic, only using it when magic is pertenant? What I'm hearing more and more is that you can't play your special snowflake superhero character. Which, alright, play a more casual system then...

>>51736152
>5e is a superhero system
>OD&D is a superhero system
>Runequest is a superhero system

This is why no one lies 4rries.

>>51736154
>5e is a superhero system
Yeah, it is.

>>51736147
Actually, I could also build

>I can be a wizard who can mind control people, create illusions, summon demons.

>I can be a monk who can jump super high, run up walls and over water and beats up people.

pretty easy.

Anon, were you only using core books without CBLoader?

>>51736135

>I can be a monk who can jump super high, run up walls and over water and beats up people.

Bitch, I do that in 4e all the time. Heck, the monk I play managed to:

>Get in a race with a horse drawn carriage and win
>Leap from tree to tree like it was crouching tiger hidden dragon chasing after kidnappers
>Punch a goblin spellcaster off the back of the lightning rail while it was running at full steam.

>>51736147

I believe that's just called 'A Hexblade Warlock who took the familiar feat'

>>51736158
Ah, so you're retarded. Got it. Almost wasted my time reasoning with you there for a second.

>>51736154
4rries? Is that all you have? No real opinion or counter-argument?

>>51736144

>It breaks immersion when even flying enemies are landing all the time.

Most flying enemies don't have that limitation. Save Draconians but 'Can't really fly' is major fluff for them. It's 99% player powers that prevent hovering until Paragon.

Once you hit Paragon that goes away though.

>>51736173
Don't bother, he has never really played 4E, he is just a troll using D&D oldfag memes

>>51736163
>>51736165
I did not say those abilities couldn't be gotten, I said they were impractical to use given the monetary costs and character resource costs involved.

I have every single 4e book in PDF, including most of the Dragon magazine articles. I played it for years, I know you CAN do some interesting builds with it, but I always found the out of combat aspect hopelessly cluttered and limited, even compared to gritty systems like OD&D [which I have also played]

Its a question of usability. I'd rather have an ability I can use at will, only once or twice, then an ability I never use because it costs me tons of money and needs me to sit down for 10 minutes to get ready when I need it RIGHT NOW.

>>51736135
I don't understand how you missed all the 4e features that let you do most of those things for almost no investment beyond a utility power.

I will say, I agree that Rituals could have been handled better. Also it was kind of a shitty design decision to mix clearly combat-focused abilities in with fun out-of-combat stuff all under the Utility heading.

Like great, my rogue leveled up and now I get to pick a utility power. I can either pick the fun one that gives me a bonus to bluffing or the one that helps me reposition myself in combat. Fuck. Utility should have been out-of-combat stuff only.

>>51736180
Most Utility powers are Dailies and have short durations.
>>51736173
>PCs can fly without landing at Paragon

Bull fucking shit. Link me a level 11+ power that lets you do that.

>>51736181
THANK YOU

>>51736178
>I said they were impractical to use given the monetary costs and character resource costs involved.

What the fuck is impractical in a wall/water running monk in 4e?

>>51736191
Well, yeah

There's no point in a power being an encounter power that lasts for an encounter, because then there's no reason to not have it up all the time, so they're either daily powers, or they last for one round.

Also http://funin.space/compendium/power/Falcons-Flight.html

>>51736200
Finally found the only other person in the world to agree with your rediculous complaints? top kek

>>51736181
Sure, I'd agree with that.

They were still not prohibitive though, like >>51736178 is trying to argue they were.

>>51736181
I disagree, because a lot of combat utility powers are really fun and offer great tactical elements

I'd say instead you should get two utility powers at 2, 6, 10, 16 and 22, one combat-related and one non-combat related

>>51736211
Nice

>>51736224
This is how it shoulda been done.

>>51736191
>Most Utility powers are Dailies

Most 3.5 wizard spells could be cast once before you had to rest and re-memorize them too.

>>51736216
I'm not fully jumping on board with him, I'm just saying Rituals could have been handled a little better. I like the idea behind them and they're easy to fix, unlike 3.5's caster supremacy. Hell even with no fixes I'll take RAW 4e over RAW 3.5 every time.

File: Exalted Angel.png (1MB, 1105x788px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1105x788px

>>51736211
What book is that from? Because I have open Divine Power, and even as an Exalted Angel [an Epic Destiny] you still have to land with your winds until level 30.

>>51736216
>Only one other person thinks 4e is awful

Tell me again how much market share 4e has.

>>51736238
Not that anon, but >>51736216
was clearly hyperbole... come on dude...

>>51736237
Yes but the difference between Spells and Rituals is that most Spells don't cost money, and don't require a ton of time to perform. If I'm running from the guards and arrive at the lake I can just cast Water Walk in most editions of D&D.

Not in 4e.

>>51736238
Sold better than 3.5, according to the guy who killed it.

>>51736245
I think that is what magic items and potions are for

>>51736250
Which is how I ended up supplementing my Monk PCs [Monk was my favorite 4e class] so he could actually do shit like run up walls and jump high more then once an encounter.

Still was prohibitively expensive, but it made [that aspect of the game] playable.

>>51736238
>Tell me again how much market share 4e has.
To be fair, what did you think was going to happen to a system that wasn't only discontinued but actively purged of the digital resources it was built to use?

>>51736250
This. Rituals are for when you want to brute force a solution to a problem. They are the magical equivalent of taking 20.

>>51736238
Heroes of Forgotten Kingdoms

But hey, that's essentials, and I can understand why you might discount essentials stuff, so here's Favored Soul, which, due to not specifying that you need to land, gives you flight with hover as a permanent feature at level 16 (Favored Soul was also in Divine Power, page 23) http://funin.space/compendium/paragonpath/Favored-Soul.html

>>51736257
So, again.... the limitations make magic more impressive and... dare I say... MAGICAL

Play a superhero system if you want constant ridiculous superhuman powers

>>51734650
Not going to since I love the system and plan on running it again soon.

btw check out the link below

funin.space

>>51736270
Yeah, no offense, but it sounds like he wants to play Spiderman with that monk.

Although, thinking about it, thief has an at-will that gives climb speed... I think it's a rogue utility as well.

>>51736270
It has nothing to do with wanting to be a 'superhero', it has to do with me saying the limitations on the 4e magic system are shit.

Look at OD&D or AD&D for a better comparison, at least at single-digit levels.

You have limits on the magic system in the form of Spells cast per day, having to be prepared ahead of time, and being interruptible by combat. All of which are limits on magic.

Or look at other game's magic systems, such as Dark Heresy or Warhammer Fantasy, where you can cast magic as much as you want, but its very dangerous to do so.

Or systems where magic is slow and formulaic [such as I believe Runequest, I haven't played that but my friend has explained it to me] but usable.

Go read the GURPS book on magic systems, even if you don't play GURPS. There are a TON of ways to balance a magic system and make it thematic besides the way 3e and 4e do it.

>>51736245
What the fuck are you smoking?

http://funin.space/compendium/power/Careful-Stride.html
http://funin.space/compendium/power/Water-Stride.html

In 4e it's a minor action for wizards and a move action with baked-in movement for monks

>>51736285
If true, sounds like a Monk/Thief split would make his character idea quite viable/possible

>>51736250
>I think that is what magic items and potions are for

And teamwork, and out of combat solutions, and roleplaying.

Great, you can't water walk because you're a wizard and that's a monk thing now. Maybe the rogue can bluff his way past them. Or the Fighter can intimidate them. Or if you're dead set on using powers only, the Ranger gets one that helps prevent being ambushed and he can increase his own run speed. Or if you're dead set on using Wizard spells only, the Wizard can cast Jump to get up in a tree (utility spell, not ritual) then throw a rope down for his bros.

>>51736285
>Although, thinking about it, thief has an at-will that gives climb speed... I think it's a rogue utility as well.
correct. but that doesn't count as roleplaying, because it's not a wizard spell.

>>51736293
>Move your speed across water, for one turn

Wow, that is definitely going to let me cross a body of water. Definitely isn't going to end in me looking like the JC lizard and just collapsing into the pool 30 feet in.

Dumbass.

File: Chrono-Trigger.jpg (97KB, 550x305px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 550x305px

Here's the thing:

I don't think 4e was perfect. I don't think 4e was a miraculous godlike game that came down from the sky and purged the land of all evil. It had its frustrating elements. Its flaws. Its... stananks.

But unlike EVERY OTHER EDITION OF D&D OUT THERE? It had something. It had a design goal. It KNEW what it was and it did a decent job of it. It wasn't like 3.X/PF where it tried to give you subsystems for cohorts, running a kingdom, a bunch of skills with vague and sometimes meaningless definitions. It wasn't like 2e that had an okay idea of a foundation that collapsed when any splat material was introduced and had all sorts of obtuse rulings about different XP values and freaking level caps for classes/races and convoluted steps for simple attack mechanics.

Every other edition of D&D didn't really know what the hell it wanted to be. Was it "gamist"? It sure had a lot of rules. Was it "narrativist"? A lot of spells simply described things that happened and people sure liked to ignore everything but the core resolution mechanic. Was it "simulationist"? I've yet to see a definition of that term that doesn't collapse in on itself when examined deeper. D&D before 4e was none of these things because nobody knew what D&D was so it was a hodge-podge of grab-bag shit with a Rule 0 tacked on at the beginning so nobody had to have any accountability.

4e was a game that had a stated goal and even if it didn't always succeed with flying colors it accomplished it more admirably than any other edition's "attempts". And the real frustrating part is that despite this nobody thought "You know lets see if we can tweak and perfect this formula". Instead they backpeddled as hard as they could.

It's frustrating that WoTC had been lost in the woods for sooooo long, then happened to start taking a step down a worthwhile path, and suddenly decided no fuck that we're going back into the woods.

>>51736288
>Cast per day
Yup, like say...once per day, once per encounter...
>Having to be prepared ahead of time
Like rituals? Or do you mean memorization? Acquiring spell components?
>Being interruptible by combat
Casting anything that takes multiple rounds will cause that effect, something that is also in 4E

I genuinely don't understand your problem with 4E. Please elaborate for a change

>>51736257

But monks can do all that shit a HEAP. That's the entire point of full discipline powers.

>>51736306
You can double move or sprint.

You can even spend an action point for more movement. Or, since this sounds like a non-combat application for speed, you could roll Athletics.

Either way, you'll have more than enough headstart on those guards, unless you want to run across a sea just to be sure.

>>51736245

So you want instant-use, no cost powers that let you just negate skill rolls entirely?

>>51736306
End of your NEXT turn, so 2 turns. But if you can't even read, then maybe this conversation is too much for you...

>>51736324
Don't forget they also either have to be at-will, or last long enough that they may as well be at-will.

>>51736314
1e/2e/3e/5e: "I have X spell slots. I prepare these spells. I encounter a problem and use this spell to effect this problem."

4e: "I have a problem. I either use a Ritual [supposing I have 10 minutes or more and plenty of money spent on reagants ahead of time] or I use an Encounter or Daily power which is probably more geared for mini-combat then the noncombat equivalent of past and future editions"

Gee, definitely no difference. The fact that they use the same names for the powers makes them play the same.

>>51736328
Well, the monk power is end of "this" turn, so you're getting 60 feet across at least before you fall in

Most likely 70 or 80 feet, maybe even 90. Or anywhere from 90 to 135 feet across if you use an action point

>>51736313
You have to blame the shits who got really butthurt about 4e for that.

>>51736306

>http://funin.space/compendium/power/Water-Stride.html

End of NEXT turn. You can use that then run for 2 turns.

Let's say you are a slow ass movement 5 dwarf.

You have still gone (5+2) x4 24 squares. You have run over 36m (Not feet) of water.

God forbid you have the monk feat that increases your speed by 1 or be a race with average movement speed.

>>51736328
Wow, 2 turns, thats so much more distance! Now the guards will have to squint when they fall into the power.
>>51736334
>>51736324
>>51736322
>The only way to balance magic is by making it take awhile to cast, be middling in effectiveness, and cost money. There definitely isn't the option of limited use [1e/2e/5e], danger [Warhammer], or only time duration [Runequest]

>>51736353
There is limited use you dumb nog

>>51736353

But you were JUST bitching about limited use with the encounter powers.

Right Here. >51736306

>>51736337
>I encounter a problem and use this spell to effect this problem.

You forgot the part where the spell may still have costly material or time components in those editions as well.

You also forgot that in old editions there's no fucking guarantee you get the spell at all. And to be a spellcaster, you would have to deal with having d4 hitpoints/level, and about 1 spell/level (or be a cleric and deal with either smaller list and even less spells/day, or, in old editions, possibly the DM giving you spells instead of you picking them when you pray).

The only editions where magic is a convenient does-all tool are 3.5 and 5e.

Go eat a dick.

>>51736324
>So you want instant-use, no cost powers that let you just negate skill rolls entirely?
it's always this. i've been arguing about 4th edition on this godforsaken shithole of a website for so long it depresses me to think about it, and when you keep pulling at the threads of a complaint it always turns out to be fucking this

>>51736362

Whoops. I fucked up there.

>>51736306

>>51736349
I just blame Mearls

I saw Essentials, I can see how much he wanted 3.5 back, just look at the difference between the power level of the knight and the mage classes

>>51736365
agreed, he just wants to play a superhero in D&D but doesn't want to admit it

>>51736353
>being able to run through 120 feet of water every 5 minutes is middling effectiveness.

You are a retard.

>>51736360
>>51736362
The problem with the Encounter power there is that it doesn't last long enough to be worth the use.
>>51736364
>>51736365
>Keep saying I hate 3.X and its magic system and prefer OD&D, AD&D, Warhammer, and a wide variety of other systems and their take on magic.
>4eries only argument is to attack me for wanting 3.X-style magic, which i explictly don't.

You guys are worse then Paizofags when it comes to acknowledging flaws in your system.

>>51736367
Wasn't he partly responsible for 5e though?
The essentials classes aren't the worst, ie sentinel druid is actually good, but I can see where they definitely shit the bed.

>>51736384
Stop flipflopping

>>51735012
>it's about having rules that are just nonsense and forcing the players to view the game like some kind of chess with wizards instead of a RPG.
in other words: it had largely disposed of its simulationist roots and became full-on gamist.

>>51736313
>Was it "gamist"?
>Was it "narrativist"?
>Was it "simulationist"?
As the original TTRPG, D&D is above and beyond these worthless categorizations, which fail to predict what will happen in the actual game, and bring no contribution to RPGs besides causing gullible game designers to pigeonhole their creations into self-imposed limitations, for no reason.

Guys, just let the fucktard continue playing PF.

>>51736384
>attack me for wanting 3.X-style magic, which i explictly don't.
Then what, pray tell, do you want? Because so far all you have done is bitch that you can't just ignore anything resembling challenge with a wave of your hand.

>>51736384
>>51736305

>>51736385
Sentinel druid is the weakest leader class in the game

Granted, it's a pretty good controller, but as a leader it sort of fails

Also he's the project lead for 5e, yes

>>51736384

What water do you need to run along that 120ft won't cover it? The only time I can think that sort of distance wouldn't be enough is if you were trying to run from shore to a ship out at sea.

>>51736365

Running LOTW has led to this wonderful thing I've realised that all my years of 3.5 really didn't cover: You can just fucking use skills. The sheer amount of times I've gone 'You want to use your Fire Chi like a blowtorch to carve through the lock? Sure, I'll allow it. Roll Finesse to do it with fine control' or such.

You don't need super special abilities to do stuff out of combat. Having a source of magic might change how you do it (Like in that example using Finesse (Fine Control) rather than Might (Smashing it) or Craft (Picking it) for getting rid of the Lock) but you can happily go back to skills most of the time.

>>51736378
Tell me when that will EVER come up. When will I EVER need to cross 120 feet of water?

Surely not when crossing a lake, I'd use a canoe for that.

Can't use it to get away from guards very easily, any body of water I'd be crossing is likely far more then a measly 120 feet across.

Can't use it to fight underwater creatures.

So please tell me, when I would fucking EVER need "Run over 120 feet of water" beyond for the sake of looking cool? I would much rather have

1e/2e/5e-style: Walk across water for an hour, but only once a day.

Warhammer-style: Walk across water for an hour, but roll on the Table of Horrible Things when you cast the spell.

Runequest-style: Walk across water for an hour, but take 5-10 minutes to inscribe the spell-circle or invoke the water goddess.

>>51736418
this times infinity

>>51736384
If you dislike 3.5/5e magic system, why the fuck are you arguing for it in 4e?

I listed the limitations older editions had on magic that you conveniently forgot to mention. Why don't you focus on that? Why do you forget that a level 1 wizard in OD&D had a single spell, while the level 1 wizard in 4e has 4 utility at-will cantrips?

>>51736421
You just gotta know how to play to its strengths, it can function in several different roles and know how to play with your teammates.
In that respect, as a team player, it's actually pretty good.


And it turns out 5e was very well received.

>>51736429
>Can't use it to get away from guards very easily, any body of water I'd be crossing is likely far more then a measly 120 feet across.
have you literally never seen a river? do you live on the moon?

>>51736429
Crossing a large and dangerous river? Helping someone who is drowning nearby (like, leaping off a boat, taking a turn to drag a person closer to the boat, then jump/climb back on board next turn)? Just 2 off the top of my head, only took a second

>>51736418
>>51736433
Answered here. >>51736429

4e's effects are time-consuming, have limited uses, cost money, and STILL don't amount to much. I'd rather they either be

1. Just time consuming
2. Just be very limited use
3. Just be dangerous to use

Which is how such effects work in every other system I play.

>>51736429
>Runequest-style: Walk across water for an hour, but take 5-10 minutes to inscribe the spell-circle or invoke the water goddess.

You mean like the water walking rituals and boons you could have in 4e?

>>51736429

>Runequest-style: Walk across water for an hour, but take 5-10 minutes to inscribe the spell-circle or invoke the water goddess.

That's the 4e Water Walking ritual.

>>51736429
>Tell me when that will EVER come up. When will I EVER need to cross 120 feet of water?
On a ship and need to get to another ship or maybe land?

File: Lost within the mist.png (30KB, 625x790px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 625x790px

>>51736429
>Why do these spells take time and preparation to cast?
>Why can't they be like this other system, where they take time and preparation to cast?

WHAT
H
A
T

DID

HE

MEAN

BY

THIS

>>51736454

>4e's effects are time-consuming, have limited uses, cost money, and STILL don't amount to much. I'd rather they either be

But not all of those at once.

Powers are:
>Generally but not always limited use
>limited duration.
>Fast
>Don't cost money

Rituals are:
>Cost Money
>Time Consuming
>Have long durations
>Have large effects
>Have no limit on uses.

>>51736463
>On a ship and need to get to another ship

god damn that would actually be a fuckin' sicknasty move

>>51736454
So a more casual/relaxed system where magic is easier to wave away problems (and have no magic items/potions to make that easily possible)? Ok, ignore the entire system of 4E (instead of your current cherrypicking/ignoring blatant aspects of the system) and play something else; but don't shitpost inaccurate statements about 4E you retarded nog

>>51736449
True, sentinels make poor leaders, but great "fifth mans"

>>51736461
>>51736459
Difference being there it doesn't cost alot of money. One of the better house-rules I discovered for 4e, was the idea of giving people with Ritual casting "Free" arcane reagants allowing for such and such number of rituals a day or week to alleviate this.

Never really got to use it, since by that point we'd moved on to better systems, but I imagine if I ever went back to 4e I'd probably do something like that.

>>51736478

Water Walk is 20gp. That's not really 'A lot of money'.

While I will agree that rituals could have been better I believe the idea was good to move a lot of effect (Especially long-range teleportation) away from powers and into rituals.

>>51736478
>One of the better house-rules I discovered for 4e, was the idea of giving people with Ritual casting "Free" arcane reagants allowing for such and such number of rituals a day or week to alleviate this.

That's not a house rule. The WBL is set up so that the money spent on rituals is not lost, it's only "tied up" until you get the next batch of treasure.

Handing out treasure in the form of reagents/residium is recommended, even.

>>51736471
Too bad >>51736429 is not clever enough to find the utility of these spells

File: parenthood_pt__2___beerus_x_pregnant_reader__by_mei_senpai_chan-d9d209a.jpg (24KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 400x400px

>>51736472
>>51736470
>>51736466
By Jove you're all right. I've seen the light. Glory and Hallelujah! 4e is the one true system, has not only no flaws, but no weaknesses that could make one dislike its magic or combat system on a subjective basis.

I have seen the error of my ways, because of your words on an anonymous imageboard. Its magic system is EXACTLY the same as all those completely different alternatives I mentioned and 4e is the only way to balance magic without resulting in 3.X style wizard shenanigans.

HOSANNA OH HIGH! I'm off to be baptized using my run 120 feet across a river Encounter Power!

>>51736406

>oDnD, Chainmail or ADnD
>simulationist

S'a bit of a stretch, mate.

>>51736508
Nobody has ever claimed it was flawless you jackass

>>51736508

It's almost like if you spout bullshit, people call you on it.

Oh hey, I completely forgot about feather step

http://funin.space/compendium/power/Feather-Step.html

Check it out, permanent water walking in 4e. I don't tend to play battleminds because I find their mark-punishment method frustrating

>>51735444
This.

The only reason idiots call it WoW is because they enjoy FF Tactics and need to separate the two to keep their internal 'logic' functioning

>>51736532
And pretty low level also, could make a nice and easy multiclass if you are just dying to have that ability, in say... a monk? top kek, nice job dude, above and beyond on those links to prove the jackass wrong

>>51736532
I actually have nothing negative to say about Battleminds. I love their fluff, their mechanics are decent, and they're probably my favorite class in 4e that originated in 4e.

Go Battleminds.

>>51736508
Are you actually a retard?

>>51736546
Now just have a player be a bullywog or some other toad/frog race... Battletoads!

>>51736543
>There is exactly one ability in one class in a side-splat that allows for one example you gave of the disliked game element.
>This proves the disliked game element doesn't exist

Paizo-tier reasoning. For your next trick, maybe you should find the ONE build of Monk in Pathfinder that can defeat an equally leveled Wizard. That will prove they're balanced.

>>51736557
Dude, he provided at least 4 different abilities across multiple classes, quit being a nig

>>51736546
I don't like how they're a defender class that needs to be adjacent to their enemies to enact their mark punishment, but are terrible at keeping their enemies adjacent to them.

>>51736557
...Feather step, if you had looked at the link at all, was in PHB3. aka, the book that introduced the battlemind class, and psionic classes in general

I would hardly call that a "side-splat"

Certainly not that fuckmuppet but I will admit: 4e Rituals could have been done a bit better. How would you tinker with them if you had the chance?

I'd likely tie them to more skills. If you are a ritual caster, you've learned enough minor magic to to some pretty crazy stuff but I'd tie them to the skills they are closest to as you require a deep understanding of how such things work in order to use them.

A big protective ward? Yeah, that's endurance.
Turning your group invisible? Yeah, that's thievery.
Warding an area with an alarm spell? Yeah, that's perception.

That way more people can play with rituals rather than just 'I'm an Int/Wis guy, let me do all the rituals'

That and I'd give more rituals a cost in Healing Surges rather than gold. Healing surges are a nice temporary cost that people actually care about rather a bit and easily represent tiring yourself out drawing on the magic.

>>51736556
I love how they're essentially just normal guys who are so full of themselves or overflowing with shonen willpower that reality is psionically shifted into not contradicting them.

>That story in I think PH3 where some chick literally teleports behind someone to dodge an attack just because she couldn't stand to lose a sparring match.

>>51734668
Hahahaha.

This is bait. Bad bait.

It was a halfway decent set of mechanics sabotaged by a company running headlong into a shit show PR factory, sabotaging the whole thing with a wide variety of bad no mechanical business decisions.

>>51736557
wtf, you're the one who's been harping on the water walking thing like it's some key issue that brought 4e's entire house of cards tumbling down

like you're not even wrong about rituals. They could have been handled better. nobody's saying 4e is perfect. but when you have to start pretending to be retarded to keep supporting your position it's time to re-examine things

>>51736585
I generally just reduce costs

Or, for rituals with lower gold costs, I have them cost healing surges instead

>>51736585
As a person defending rituals, maybe have some sort of method of turning player select rituals into other types (either through level scaling or some sort of regainable feat)

>>51735964
The many people who used to buy lots of new product, and tons of novels, and now homebrew fanon instead and pretend everything post 2006 never happened, and are simply building up collections of the old books hunted down on ebay would beg to differ.

>>51736313

>Was it "simulationist"? I've yet to see a definition of that term that doesn't collapse in on itself when examined deeper.

'Simulationist' is a pointedly disingenuous title for a painfully facile craving from a pointedly self-deceiving crowd: 'verisimilitude that matches up with my world view'. It's that simple. That's what every 'simulationist' wants, and it's what 'simulationist' games try to achieve. They want to feel secure in their make-believe, they feel the need to rationalize and to attach value to the experience, to make it something worth while. Peace of mind, relaxation, these are pursuits for weaker, lesser mortals who lack the mental fortitude to really TEST themselves between 5 and 10 of a Saturday over at Tom's flat with beer and chips. They don't want realism, they want things that have the basic appearance of realism while also affirming whatever set of values or beliefs they feel are thwarted by the inaccuracies of the world at large.

>>51736605
Water walking was an example of my broader point, which was that utility abilities in 4e were prohibitively limited, to that point that my group probably used rituals enough times to be counted on one hand the entire time we played. And Utility Powers were hardly better, and oftentimes worse.

Finding me a convenient way to water-walk doesn't erase my point, it just gives me a convenient way to water-walk.

In other magic systems, which are limited by limited use, danger involved, time involved, or other such factors, 4e's magic system is IN MY OWN VIEW AND THE VIEW OF MY GROUP a perfect storm of shit that renders it practically useless in gameplay, with only a few exceptions.

You guys can keep calling me a superhero for hating 4e's magic system all you want, I can just go back to the OSR thread and laugh at you, but I stand by it being shit.

>>51736582
Yeah, stickiness is the one thing you need to work on for a battlemind, which is a shame, but quite doable.

>>51736471
I did that in a 3rd party Pathfinder game once., Shit was sick.

>Playing multiclassed Aegis/Soulknife with unarmed archetype, going full KAMEN RIDERU!
>Have a number of different "modes" that I set my Aegis points to
>Ship combat happens
>We're losing
>Decide fuck it, Im a MAN
>Tell others to destroy the enemy ship's wheel
>FIST OF JUSTICE, UNDERWATER MODE
>Jump off our ship and swim to enemy ship at jet speed
>Use my POWER FISTS OF JUSTICE to punch the everloving shit out of the rudder
>We sail away, enemy ship can't pursue because the wheel is busted, and even once it's fixed they basically have no rudder anymore

Shame that game died out, I was looking forward to spending literally all my points on fly speed and flying jet plane fast and doing RIDERU KICKS from halfway across the continent.

>>51734892
The only things like wow is that class roles are codified, and marking is vaguely reminiscent of aggro.

It's more like a disappointing gameplay (but better class balance) tabletop version of FFT, badly pretending it's still D&D.

>>51736624
GNS & The Forge was a mistake.

>>51736646
>You proved me wrong in my provided example
>My group is shit and refused to adapt to limited magic, changing systems to play as superheros
>You guys are TOTALLY wrong, and I am gonna run away now to a circlejerk to make myself feel better about the roasting I have experienced. Screw you guys I'm going home

>>51736647
The one path that was in.... Dark Sun? Can just teleport next to enemies for a feat.

Also, once you got lightning rush, it's a non-issue.

I'm more annoyed by their punishment being eeeeh, and really needing melee training for CON.

>>51736679
Again, Paizo-tier reasoning

If someone points to a systemic issue with a game using a particular example and you attack the example instead of the issue, you're practically admitting defeat.

>>51736646
The point you ended up making is that you don't know 4e as well as you think you do

>>51736697
this

>>51736701
>>51736697
Yes, clearly the fact that Battleminds can move on top of water as an At-Will disproves an argument I made about the Ritual System using water walking as an example.

These two things are definitely related!

>>51736684
Needing a feat tax was hardly uncommon in 4e, in fact I'd say the prevalence of feat-taxes is one of the great flaws of the system

Until Mearls ruined everything by nerfing melee training for no good reason, thereby nerfing battleminds pretty freaking hard when they were already lagging behind paladins, swordmages, wardens and especially fighters

>>51734650
We are sorry 4e. We never played 3.5/Pathfinder, but we played you a lot and we never liked you. We play Fate now and we have fun. We are sorry you are not Fate.

>>51736690

The issue is that you haven't really pointed out how it's a systemic issue.

>>51735826
Dragonborn are an awful furry race.
Tieflings have no more right to be a legitimate race than any crossbreed races, such as half-elves or half-orcs. Which is, none, this concept is stupid.

>>51736710
It seems that your naturally dark melanin-tainted skin is making it difficult for you to see how roasted you got in this thread. You got owned, clearly you knew nothing about the 4E system, and your game group is utter shit as reading rules/ lateral thinking

>>51736719
I've done so repeatedly, and you've responded by attacking my example and trying to find a way to perform it easily [first finding it as a Monk encounter, then a Battlemind at-will, when my point was about rituals anyway] then calling me a superhero for wanting magic to be balanced using other limiting factors. I even provided other systems I think handle it better, and you responded by calling OSR superhero shit.

>>51736729
Then come up with at least ONE example that stands under scrutiny.

>>51736719
Not that guy, but open ended utility abilities are the most fun part of 3.X. I can't imagine playing 3.x and not playing it for 10-17 caster play. That's what it brings to the table.

Otherwise I'd just play 5e, conan, Unisystem, or gurps dungeon fantasy.

>>51736710
Yes, yes it does

Because every point you made was countered by an easy solution to the problem you presented, and since you used them as examples you clearly thought there were no solutions for those problems, displaying a lack of familiarity with the system thanks to how easy so many of those solutions are.

Look, you want to complain about rituals being poorly laid out and overcosted? Sure, you're right, 100%, rituals were clearly an afterthought on the behalf of the game designers and in the games I've played, we tend to avoid using any but the resurrection rituals and comrade's succor. But I've never felt stifled by the system as a result of that, and neither has anyone in my group, even if they need to be reminded rituals exist every now and then.

>>51736729

No, you really havn't. You keep saying 'I can't do this so it's bad' but that example doesn't work and doesn't point to an actual systematic issue.

>>51736737
...

And 4e has way less of that, and what's there is significantly nerfed, so if that's what I wanted, I definitely wouldn't pick 4e.

I would basically pick 4e for complex one-off skirmish wargaming battles. It would be great for that.

>>51736720
At least dragonborns aren't as furry as they were in 3.5

I understand that that's poor defense on behalf of dragonborn

But seriously, 3.5 dragonborn are horrifying

>>51736737
Really? The fun I always had in 3.5 was putting together the silliest builds I could think of and seeing them in action

File: 1451978833202.jpg (1MB, 1000x900px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1000x900px

>>51736736
I have provided several. The problem is that what I percieve as a problem [the fact that non-combat magic is extremely limited in use, money, and casting time] you don't percieve as a problem.

The objective fact is that 4e's non-combat magic can be broadly divided into abilities that are extremely limited in usefulness and limited to once an encounter or per day, or abilities that take up money and considerable casting time to use. That is the objective fact of the magic system [barring any subjectively surrounding the phase 'limited usefulness for encounters/dailies']

Anything past that is just subjective analysis on top of it. I think its shit. We could describe the magic systems as existing along certain axis. Fast vs Slow. Dangerous vs Safe. Limited Use vs Unlimited Use.

All my favorite systems use either

Fast, Dangerous, Limited
Fast, Safe, Limited
Slow, Safe, Unlimited

4e's magic is, by and large, Slow and Limited, and I find them awful. If you find that not awful, more power to you. I hope you enjoy your game, even though your opinions are wrong and your game is shit.

>>51736767
You were so close to apologizing, but that last bit cemented your stupidity

>>51736773
That last bit was tongue in cheek.

File: questionable choices....jpg (96KB, 1016x768px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1016x768px

Again, why is D&D still a thing?

Why does everyone not play GURPS?
1) You can make any character, no matter how powerful (sort of?)
2) The system can be used to make/play ANY setting/campaign style
3) It's fun to say
4) You only need D6 which are fun, easy to count, easy to do math for (and possibly adjust game mechanics if need be), and easy to replace
5) It's easy to learn and easy to master
6) Character creation is endless amounts of fun
7) ENDLESS!!!
8) It's not D&D
9) Unlike D&D, GURPS gets BETTER with each new edition
10) I could go on...

>>51736767
But you have no examples

You have given nothing at all that is fast, safe and limited outside of 4e, but not in 4e, or slow, safe and unlimited outside of 4e, but not in 4e

With no viable examples, your argument holds no water, you might as well be shouting about how underpowered wizards are in Pathfinder

>>51736767
>The problem is that what I percieve as a problem [the fact that non-combat magic is extremely limited in use, money, and casting time] you don't percieve as a problem.

The problem is that this is false. It's either limited in use OR limited in time and money. It's not both. Your perception of the game does not align with how the game is.

Look...

>Fast, Dangerous, Limited
No equivalent... possibly skill rolls, as those can fail, so there's a danger.
>Fast, Safe, Limited
Daily utilities
>Slow, Safe, Unlimited
Rituals

>>51736767
I also shared your dislike of those aspects of 4e. I would not choose it for a campaign under any circumstances.

I might be open to using it as a "build a team/encounter" wargame, as
>>51736754 suggests. Are there rules for using it as a wargame, or would you have to homebrew the terrain placing and team building rules? Perhaps via 3pp?

>>51736784
I said in my post the magic could be BROADLY DIVIDED into those two categories.
>>51736791
A buddy of mine used to play 4e Chess, where both players make 4 or 5 man parties and have them duke it out over fictional pre-set terrain. You can find the online char generator to speed up unit creation.

Its a pretty slow wargame though.

>>51736779
GURPS is a good game.

But it's a lot of work for a new GM, trying to make sense of which options to include for whatever they want to run.

A lot of work for an older GM too, compared to D&D.

It also has basically fuck all for published adventures.

And I'm sorry bro, but I don't think it's ever gonna get another edition.

>>51736767
Literally all I'm seeing is you bitching that you can't use magic to bypass noncombat, even though Wizards are still inarguably the best noncombat class in the game thanks to them having hands down the best utility powers for noncombat.

>>51736797
>I said in my post the magic could be BROADLY DIVIDED into those two categories.

Yes, and I'm saying that those are exactly the same as

>Fast, Safe, Limited
>Slow, Safe, Unlimited

>>51736779
11) You can make any ability/spell/attack/whatever using an advantage (is the advantage called Power?)
12) The basic magic system is awesome

>>51736779
And the d6s are awful. I hate rolling d6s. They don't roll well.

Maybe one of these days I'll shell out for a bunch of d12s numbered 1-6 twice.

>>51736797
>I said in my post the magic could be BROADLY DIVIDED into those two categories.

Except it can't. It can be broadly divided up as>>51736784 said.

>>51736797
I was thinking like, you would build encounter teams using various published monsters and minions, and have rules for including PCs as heroes.

But yeah, it would probably be on the slow side.

>>51736804
That is probably due to your weak intellect and plebian birth.
>>51736806
Except Rituals are not unlimited, they cost money. Your other point is semi-valid, so I'll add another axis, "Strong-Weak" to my categorization, with Fast 4e utility magic generally being the latter.

>>51736816
I've never tried playing 4e Chess with monsters, so I don't know. Technically I've never even played 4e chess, it was another guy and his brother who would play it in-between our campaign days.

>>51736808
The basic magic system is kindof shit. Sorcery and rpm, on the other hand...

>>51736817
Kee moving those goalposts, the breeze feels great.

>>51736817
give us another example besides water walking, please.

>>51736817
DMs are encouraged to make spell components part of adventure treasure, so maybe your shitty game group sucks as DMing 4E? Also, perhaps magic shouldn't be the end all solution to problems, only being whipped out when they are truly needed?

File: mentok37.jpg (111KB, 1023x768px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 1023x768px

>>51736799
>using published adventures
>being this lazy of a GM
In each new addition (and since as old as I can remember, probably around 3rd or 2nd edition) they've included helpful tables and charts for all tech levels from stone age to hyper-advanced for everything from equipment to weapons to jobs to vehicles and more, and although it is more work to make enemies because there's no standard 'monster manual' (being that it's a generic system) it's really easy to just make them up on the fly instead since stats and combat/ability mechanics are all so simple

either way I see it as superior, both for GMing and Playing

>>51736830
I imagine, given the age of 4e, if he ever had better examples, they're long gone

>>51736824
prove it

especially since with that one advantage (pretty sure it's Power) you can pretty much make an ability (or you can call it a 'spell') that does anything you want it to...

>>51736817
This is the strongest argument you've made and you're still making mistakes with it, because gold in 4e is common enough, or, by the standards of the treasure guides in the DMG, should be common enough, that level-appropriate rituals are practically unlimited.

Not literally unlimited, obviously, but you'd have to do a level appropriate ritual ten times over at least before it started to be a significant cost, and even then it's not going to leave you broke, and this is assuming the ritual caster is paying for the ritual entirely by him/herself, which they shouldn't be, because the party should be pitching in to get the ritual done in the vast majority of scenarios

>>51736817
>Except Rituals are not unlimited, they cost money.

Earlier rituals are cheap enough where they might as well be unlimited by level 5 or so, especially if you break down magic items you aren't using anymore into Residuum.

Later rituals are expensive, but also had pretty big effects that made it worth it.

Plus there were feats you can take to do rituals of a certain type for free x number of times a day, and some epic destinies had similar things.

My Epic Level Master of Moments Psion made plenty of use of 2 free Wind Master's Mantle(2 hour long effect giving your party Overland Flight 20) made getting around pretty easy before we started getting permanent teleportation circles set up.

>>51736817
>Except Rituals are not unlimited, they cost money.

But there's no daily limit on them, and you get the money back in the form of WBL anyway. It's a non-limit.

There's also no fucking way the limit actually comes up in play. I can't even imagine a situation where I'm like "hmm, I wish I could use water walk for the 200th time today!".

>Your other point is semi-valid, so I'll add another axis, "Strong-Weak" to my categorization, with Fast 4e utility magic generally being the latter.

Well gee, thanks. It's almost as if you are slowly giving in to the idea that we have been hammering you over the head that you just want to play with strong and convenient magic. Want to set up new criteria then for the games you play?

>>51736842
>Published adventures
Probably 60% of the time. And not short modules, full campaigns.

Massive time saver. I don't generally run them as is, but modify them to fit my tastes/group/campaign runtime (typically 4-6 months).

But from time to time I build a bunch of custom random event tables and an enclosed setting and run a sandbox campaign in it.

>>51736846
I'm sure there are plenty of examples. the issue is 4E's magic system is broad and useful, just not tweaked toward solving every single problem by itself like in 3.5.

So if you're willing to throw away any pretense of good game design, you could probably come up with plenty of examples of "Well my wizard in 3.5 was able to use this one single spell to bypass an entire encounter, while in 4e the same spell was limited in some way so the party had to work together."

>>51736859
and unless the GM says so there's no limit to the number of those you can make/have for your character (unlike other games which artificially limit the number of spells you can have)

4e could've done even better if people were less autistic and butthurt.
You didn't like what they did with 4e FR? Don't play in that timeline and use another system.

Anti-4e are all "stop liking what I don't like".

>>51736859
Not invested enough to prove it, but that's my opinion. 230, on my phone, should be asleep. You win this round.

>>51736870
As a GM I like to world build (and I usually build everything) and D&D just does not give me the freedom that GURPS does to adjust the setting mechanics (especially for fantasy where I like to have different magic levels in different places and build race templates, etc. - which is all extremely difficult in D&D)

Then again I also almost never make event tables but still strive for a completely wide open sandbox where my players can have their characters go anywhere and do anything (that they would do that is - I'm not running a tabletop GTA, just very fleshed out settings)

I think we drove away the moron with the blatantly objectively incorrect opinions of 4E. Fucking finally, I hope at least some of our logic was hammered into his thick skull. Who knows, maybe his gaming group will become less shit over time, but I doubt it

>>51736878
People get butthurt when you scorched earth policy their favorite media franchise.

I stopped buying new fr products when 4e came out and butchered the setting. The only exceptions were the Menzoberranzan book which was edition neutral, and elminsters fr (also basically edition neutral).

Prior to that I was probably spending like 250-300 a year on FR stuff, if you count novels and seeing books and 2e PDFs.

People also get butthurt when you remove access to their legally purchased PDFs, because you've decided to stop selling PDFs for several years.

After they took my books away on dtrpg and I couldn't get them back after a home robbery where my PC was stolen, I boycotted WOTC, and refused to give them any further revenue. I stopped doing so when they started returning my books I paid for up to 2008 - something they didn't do until 4e was being discontinued.

>>51736928
You could consider being less autistic.

>>51736936
What the fuck man, that's legit criticism (shit taste aside).

>>51736928
So, you hate the fluff (which you can just substitute past fluff or your own should you desire) and WOTC business practices. So, the system itself is good? Ok, glad you agree

>>51736881
>Sorcery and rpm
Thought these were different systems for a second,

Sorcery is the formalized version of building spells with advantages it looks like and I havn't checked out RPM but it looks interesting. Been using the basic system without problem for so long I didn't check in for their updates

>>51736923
>I think we drove away the moron with the blatantly objectively incorrect opinions of 4E.

either you need to grow up or you're just him being butthurt. either way quit gettin' mad at games

>>51736946
You said nothing about the system.

>>51736928
>I stopped buying new fr products when 4e came out and butchered the setting.

You mean like how the Time of Troubles did? 'Everything gets shitted over when editions change' is kinda a FR tradition.

File: 1437990017016.png (144KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 500x281px

4e is the only edition of DnD I have ever played. Played it once as a player and once as a GM. I did some really cringey stuff but I did enjoy how easy the mechanics were to work with from the gameplay standpoint. Especially when it came to creating my combat encounters, which my entire group praised for being fun and imaginative.

Then the usual GM drowned a cat in his sink which made me bail the fuck out. I dont miss the group but I do miss playing.

>>51736956
not the anon you replied to, but that jackass he is referring to shitposted for nearly a quarter of this otherwise good thread. Fuck that anon

>>51736936
Spent a lot of money on PDFs on the understanding that I would continue to have access to them. WOTC reneged. Why would I give them more money?

So from 2008ish to 2012 I gave WOTC no income.

I played in a 4e campaign for a year or so, using pirated PDFs and the GMs ddi account.

And I bought other RPGs new. Some Pathfinder, but mostly Shadowrun, and hunted down old Fr stuff on eBay.

>>51736947
Hated the discontinuation of the franchise I wanted to buy. That cut off half of the income I was giving them. Hated their dishonest business practices.

The mechanics were fine, but nothing to write home about.

>>51736964
I wasn't the one making that criticism. But his points are legit. If you antagonize your fans with your new product, they'll lash out.

>>51736973
>Then the usual GM drowned a cat in his sink

wat

>>51736974
You realize people actually believe that, don't you? This is a reason why Pathfinder did so well and a reason for their grievances and butthurt against 4e.

File: mentok31.jpg (123KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1024x768px

>>51736909
I guess what I'm saying is I somehow enjoy wasting even more time on this crap than is absolutely necessary to enjoy it

>>51736974
I enjoyed it

He was completely wrong and I got to point out exactly how wrong he was, which he responded to by being more wrong

Maybe he was just shitposting, but it made me feel good, so it can't be that harmful

>>51736989
Wont blog about it further as its off-topic

The cat was getting old and the sick fuck wanted to "end her life himself" because it was his cat, instead of paying for a vet.

>>51736972
4e was orders of magnitude worse. Not just a couple gods dying and moving forward a couple years.

100 yr timejump.
Several Countries exploded.

Basically all that stayed was waterdeep and a few characters whose novels I didn't care for anyways.

>>51736984
>>51736988
Whatever makes you feel like the bigger man. What makes you think Wizards cares what you do or don't do?

>>51736992
He shitposted not because of his opinion, but rather that his opinion was not backed up in any reasonable way, as other anons were able to destroy any argument he had. If he had just provided valid examples he would have been contributing to the thread

>>51736984
>>51737008
Then just don't use the fluff. Why the fuck is that so difficult, you fucking autist.

>>51737001
Another anon who contributed to the roasting, I enjoyed it also

>>51737004
this is why you should always game online if possible, people usually have to decency to at least mute their mics if they have to go drown an animal. usually.

>>51737014
sure but that's a far cry from "having wrong opinions" about 4e, which is completely missing the point about WHY the guy is an idiot.

>>51737010
Me personally? Nothing.

But I wasn't the only one who stopped giving them money.

They lost a lot of customers, and those customers generated a lot of negative press.

Which is why 5e backpedaled as much as it did.