This thread is for discussing D&D 4e and the games it in

>>54313634
I liked most of the new Cosmology. Astral Sea, Elemental Chaos and I liked that power sources were kinda linked to them, though I would have liked a greater thought put into it. "Arcane" magic was just a bit too wide spread, I'd prefer the power sources to be more specialized. Perhaps limiting each power source to only three of the four roles or something.

>>54314101
But the power sources were specialized.
Martial specialized in Striking.
Arcane specialized in Controlling.
Divine specialized in Leading.
Primal specialized in Defending.
Psionic specialized in being flexible.

>>54314272
Don't forget Shadow, which specialized in being bad.

>>54314272
>Psionic specialized in being flexible.
spamming one power was okay too

This may sound kinda weird, but how would you run a 4E game set in the Napoleonic era?

>>54314408
Very, very carefully. I equate 4e with higher powered heroes vanquishing evil and creating legends. I equate more historical stuff as very grounded and low power.

>>54314436
>I equate 4e with higher powered heroes vanquishing evil and creating legends

So basically every edition of DND, but with a more mundane-magic setting where it's everywhere and non-fantastic, and extra unnecessary classes are thrown in, with death being something that's frowned upon happening to PC's?

>>54314408
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxtyM9mFMQQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUtDkfHlzgs


Yeah, it could work.

>>54314340
Shadow was a mistake. I wanted to avoid mentioning it.

>>54314341
Well, yeah. Having that option in the first place is a form of flexibility.

So I want to run 4E without a grid because my games are feeling a little too much like a tactical combat simulator.

Any good ways of doing this?

>>54315985
You probably want to use a different system entirely. Maybe try 13th Age?

>>54314272
>>54314340
Elemental also technically exists
Sadly, it never got more than one class

>>54314408
Napoleonic era works well enough, but I wouldn't do Napoleonic amry battles in 4E. Overall, the game would be about as realistic as Three Musketeers, Die Hard or Baron Munchausen

>>54314272
>Psionic specialized in being flexible.

I always wanted to see Ki as its own thing instesd of folding the Monk into Psionic. What would a Ki Controller, Leader, and Defender have looked like?

>>54316105
13th Age is pretty much 4e with more emphasis on theatre of the mind. Although the escalation die should be used in all d20-based games, it's that good.

>>54316440
>I always wanted to see Ki as its own thing instesd of folding the Monk into Psionic. What would a Ki Controller, Leader, and Defender have looked like?
Monk, Psion, Ardent and Battlemind.

>>54316469
>13th Age is pretty much 4e with more emphasis on theatre of the mind
and broken math on top of poor class design.

>>54316440
Depends on how you define it thematically and mechanically. You can't really extrapolate much from a single class.

>>54316572
>Psion, Ardent and Battlemind.

No

>>54316635
>Depends on how you define it thematically and mechanically. You can't really extrapolate much from a single class.

haven't thought about it in a long time desu

I don't just want to make Ki classes "wizard with slanty eyes" but I'm sure there's some space for them mechanically

Thematically? Fuck if I know. I tend to approach things from the mechanic side first.

Posted this last thread, but might as well get more feedback on the idea-

How would you feel about a 4e inspired system that removed 'more numbers' feats entirely? Anything that just gave a bonus to a number with no other flavour or benefit is gone, trying to make every single feat actually interesting instead?

Along with this, getting rid of the class feats that are straight up upgrades everyone playing that class should take, and instead giving each class 'talent' or some such slots, where all those quite dull mechanical bonuses are reassigned. You can't take all of them, but everyone gets a decent selection of them as they level up, letting you improve your features and such.

Possibly combined with reducing the number of feat slots overall, to make each and every one a more interesting, meaningful choice.

>>54317703
4e probably could have avoided a good number of them if they had more time to tune the system before launch. Weapon Expertise, Improved Defenses, etc. were all math fixes which could have been avoided with more attention on the monster math. A reboot with those fixes baked in is not a bad idea.

Splitting off class feature feats into 'talent' slots is a mixed bag. A bunch of classes will need to have extra talents added because they're short relative to other classes, and a good number of class feature feats are meant to key off multiclass or racial picks. I'm thinking you'll need to do some sort of balance pass with a value target rather than simply siloing these feats from the generic list.

Reducing feat slots isn't necessarily bad, but it further disincentivizes taking feats that aren't directly combat related. That is an unavoidable problem since feats became the default method of adding small customization options, but you're going to need a very clear direction to tackle it.

>>54318718

There are still lingering examples of plus numbers feats though, that I don't really see much value in in an of themselves, like the various '+2 to a defence' feats or scaling resistance to a damage type. While not innately bad, they just always strike me as pointlessly dull, better off being given a bit more texture to make them a more meaningful, enjoyable choice.

We're doing a full rewrite, so reworking and adding various extra 'talents' is on the cards. Balancing it might be tough, but hopefully we'll figure it out.

And something we're actually pondering, in parallel with splitting Utility powers into Utility (out of combat) and Support (combat) powers is having dedicated non-combat feat slots, or something equivalent.

A pet hate of mine is when systems force you to choose between cool, fluffy options and actually being useful, so I'm trying to avoid that as much as possible.

>>54318835
>dedicated non-combat feat slots
I like that.
>A pet hate of mine is when systems force you to choose between cool, fluffy options and actually being useful
I feel that.

>>54318835
Those +2 defense feats are part of those math fixes, monster attacks were scaling too fast relative to player defenses. Elemental resistance feats are one of those niche feats I've never seen anyone use, but mostly because it's a poor value relative to other feats. Too much opportunity cost typically, although for a very specific campaign I can see it becoming extremely valuable (e.g. you're about to take down a fire god cult, grab fire resistance and retrain it out next campaign).

Splitting combat and non-combat into separate resource pools is really the only way to prevent players from building towards one side at the cost of the other, but on the other hand the 4e combat framework is extremely detailed and the non-combat side isn't. Your non-combat rules are going to need a lot of fleshing out to make non-combat feats interesting without becoming yet another +x to rolls in these circumstances.

>>54319362

We're planning on doing a lot with the non-combat side. More out of combat powers and removing the GP costs from all non-permanent rituals are big things. We're thinking of making all rituals that don't have a permanent effect cost Surges instead, using them as a general resource rather than something specifically focused on combat.

>>54318835

I did this when playing 4e- that is, I required all the RAW feats and powers to be combat related, then I gave the players a separate budget for non-combat utility powers and feats. It worked quite well, other than the fact that we all felt that over time the amount of combat powers got a bit overwhelming.

>>54319458
Spending surges on rituals is weakening the split between combat and non-combat. It's tempting to reuse existing resources instead of defining new ones, but it puts you at risk of players shying away from using them once again.

If you want to rework some sort of generic metacurrency I'd probably start with Action Points, switch them regenerating every encounter instead of every other (and non-combat events counting as encounters) and keep the limitation of 1 AP used per encounter barring special circumstances. But you really need a better idea of how you want non-combat to play out to really design a good system.

>>54317703
I'm on board with the rest, but fuck off with your reduced feat bullshit. More feats, not less!

>>54314408
Channeling Brian Blessed reading an incredibly pulpy version of The Scatlet Pimpenel, I'd reckon that's how.

>>54319362
>>54319458
>>54319489
>>54319623

Can you 4etards think outside of builds and combat powers or is that beyond you.

>>54317703
I'm all for an all-around cleaned-up version of 4e. Maybe adjust/remove some powers while we're at it.
But who would make such a thing?

>>54320903

Well, I've seen a few different groups on /tg/ mention it, the one I'm part of is having a crack at it.

Our initial design goal is putting together the Heroic tier components of the four classic classes- Wizard, Rogue, Fighter and Cleric- with a single archetype and set of powers for each.

This will act as a functional prototype of sorts. We'll present the tweaked core mechanics and iconic character options to people in threads like this and elsewhere, with the general aim of having them be just as appealing, if not more so, than their 4e equivalents. We'll use that small selection to tailor things and figure out the strengths we should most capitalise on, before expanding our thoughts in both breadth and depth, more classes, more features as well as getting into the higher tiers of play.

>>54320966
Well, best of luck to you.
I'd love to see a full rehaul someday.

Assuming your prototype works out, is there any way for you to monetize? Like Patreon or something?
Because no matter how great your dedication, I can't imagine anyone finishing a project of that scope in just their free time.

>>54321076

We're keeping our options open. Maybe a Patreon to fund development and receive updates once we have enough to show to make it worth it, maybe a Kickstarter for printing and production costs further down the line. Although we also have some contact with a couple of different smaller publishers, and going for a traditional funding deal over crowdfunding would probably be better if we could manage it.

Still, we're not really thinking about money until we have something we think is worth selling.

>>54321164
I was thinking more about covering running costs than making money off of it in the end.

>>54320966
>>54321164
I just want to ask if you're aiming for just a 4.75 version, some sort of 4.pf or a whole new deal of it.
Because just math fixes looks unappealing because 4e have the chargen to help build. Some sort of chargen would be nice for any new take on 4e have the least of interest if it is only some minor fixes.

>>54313634
Found this wiki, which might be a good edition to the opening links: http://dnd4.wikia.com/wiki/D%26D4_Wiki

As for fluff changes... um, can I just say everything? I literally loved every idea that 4e had for changing up from pre-4e's lore.

>>54321595

The patreon idea is the closest thing there, but that depends on having something to show as an indication that we're worth funding.

File: worlds and monsters green dragon.jpg (33KB, 391x265px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 391x265px

>>54313634
But it is.

So, this's been bugging me for a while... we all know that, of the non-Nentir Vale (Points of Light? Can never tell what people prefer to call it) settings, Forgotten Realms was widely hated, but Eberron was received more or less neutrally and Dark Sun was received positively, correct?

Do anons think 4e would have been better received if it hadn't posted a Forgotten Realms setting at all?

Because, I know they were trying to address a lot of the complaints about the setting, like the overabundance of novel characters and shit, but you can't deny the hateful backlash against FR was really pouring gasoline on the anti-4e flames.

>>54322086
>Do anons think 4e would have been better received if it hadn't posted a Forgotten Realms setting at all?
I don't give a rat's ass about the setting (or any other published setting for that matter), but Swordmage is one of my favorite classes, so no.

>>54322086
>>54322161

I'm similar. I very rarely care about established settings, although 4e Eberron is pretty fucking cool.

Given how bad a fit FR is for 4e, and how much shit they got over it, not doing it at all would probably be an idea. I just think it's a kind of shitty setting though.

So, folks, what were your favorite races in 4th edition, including the various Dragon Magazine-released "subraces" like Blood-Crowned Courtier Tieflings and Winterkin Eladrin?

Particularly interested in hearing if there was any love for the non-Tolkienian races.

Myself? Out of the corebooks, I loved the Dragonborn, the Tieflings, and the Shardminds best, though Minotaurs were also great stuff (thematically, if not mechanically and Vrylokas were pretty cool.

When I got my hand on it, the Dungeon Survival Handbook enthralled me with its Svirfneblin, Goblin and Kobold races. It rescued the former from its shoddy lore of old, as 4e had done with Gnomes, and the latter two finally had decent mechanics to make their race interesting to play.

Dragon Magazine really came through for me on the racial front; Gnolls, Shadar-Kai, Bladelings... so much goodness, but I think my absolute favorite were the Forgeborn Dwarves. So awesome.

>>54322877
I thought the way the dwarves, and by extension the azers, galeb duhrs, and eisk jaats, were linked to the giants was a really good way of doing dwarves.

>>54322086
>if it hadn't posted a Forgotten Realms setting at all
Then all the FRfags would just bitch that it was shit cause they didn't have their pet setting in it.

It wouldn't have helped.

File: 1338915921495.jpg (116KB, 869x810px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 869x810px

>>54313634
reminder that leader classes are best classes

>>54322877
do you have the numbers for the Dragons they were in? I think I have all the pdfs saved somewhere and would like to read them.

>>54322877
I fucking love monster races. Viable and interesting Kobolds and Goblins, Bugbears, Thri-Keen, etc. The over-all favourite has to be Gnoll though.

>>54325713
Right here; I spent weeks going through Dragon and scouring D&D troves to put together this article, but requests like this make it worthwhile.

https://1d4chan.org/wiki/List_of_D%26D_PC_Races#Dragon_Magazine_5

That link will take you to the 4e Races that appeared in Dragon Magazine.

>>54325949
thank you so much!

>>54313634
do you guys know where I can find the 4e comics?

>>54326920
http://readcomiconline.to/Comic/Dungeons-Dragons-2010

Here you go mate :)

>>54327030
>54327030
thank you, my friend!

>>54322086
without forgotten realms we would have never gotten the most patrician dnd class of all time, the swordmage

>>54327496
Well, I'm sure we could have figured out some other way to have it, but yeah, for the Swordmage, the Drow and the Genasi alone, 4e FR deserves its place, no matter the whingers who complain about the Spellplague.

So, whilst still wanting to hear >>54322877 I was curious now; what races do you wish had gotten the 4e treatment as well?

I've gotten familiar enough to Mystara to know I would have loved a 4e Aranea or Lupin, personally.

>>54327613
Yuan-Ti, Lizardfolk (and Poison Dusk variant) were races I was always looking forward to in 4e

File: Ettercap1.jpg (101KB, 625x600px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 625x600px

>>54327613
With a few changes, ettercaps as presented in 4e could have been a good race.

Azers seemed like they could easily have become a player race, too.

I honestly kind of wonder how long would it take for /4eg/ to homebrew an expansion for Shadow.

>>54329108
Eh, I would have rather had Chitines or Aranea for a playable spider-folk race, myself.

>>54330542
Who knows? I had a complete "Necromancers as Pure Shadow Controller" class way back when WoTC's forums were a thing, but I lost it, and my googlefu is too weak to see if the Wayback Machine can help me recover it.

>>54330542
Fuck that, Ki expansion when?

>>54330821
Come up with a way to make Ki anything more than "Psionics with an Asian Name", which WoTC admitted is why they made Monks a Psionic Striker, and sure.

>>54330844

I could see it if you go with the idea that Ki is the flow of life energy through everything. It means that Ki is just well...Primal. We have that power source. Doesn't really make for a 'Ki Expansion' like that guy wants though.

>>54330821
Ki currently doesn't exist, so it can't be expanded.
And Ki has not been defined thematically or mechanically, so we can't make stuff for it either.

>>54330865
>>54330872

Yep. I think Wizards literally put out something admitting that, in the end, all of their studies pointed to folding Ki and Psionics as the best way.

After all, what "Ki Classes" are there? Monk works, as we saw in the PHB 3. But Bushi? That's just a Japanese Fighter. Ninja? Japanese Rogue or Assassin. Wu Jen? Well... maybe you could argue its "Five Elements Magic" was unique enough to make it a possible class, but I don't really see how. And the Basic wu jen was essentially a wizard/monk hybrid.

>>54313634
Question about 13th Age:
I hear it bandied about a lot that this game has a clusterfuck of math imbalance, but I can't really find anything about the math issues with it online other that a blog post about the ranger's dual-wielding. Can someone explain them to me? Would also be nice if you could link to a fix if you know of one.

>>54330887

Wu Jen at this point works 100% fine as a Animist Shaman imo.

Which sorta goes into 'Monk could have been Primal and it would have been cool/ki is fine as primal'

>>54330926
Touhou has talked about the issues, in these threads for example:
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/43530325/#43533070
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/47191606/#47197304
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/54189262/#54189845
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/51201312/#51212350
The last two ones also have some links to various fixes, though I haven't tried any myself.

>>54330938
Not so sure I see it as a Shaman, myself. Maybe I ought to track down what they said about Ki - I think it was an issue of Dragon where they revealed the first teasers of the Monk?

Talking of dragons... everyone knows that Dark Sun 4e found a place for dragonborn, one of the more controversial changes of that sourcebook. However, they actually weren't taking the piss with the Dark Sun fandom; there really is a race of draconic humanoids in Dark Sun, and has been since AD&D.

They're called the Dray, and were created by Dregoth, the Sorcerer-King Lich. They appeared in the adventure "City by the Silt Sea" and were even presented as a playable race when they did.

But... statistically, they don't mesh up very well with Dragonborn.

I can understand why WoTC did it, but I'm curious; any anons have thoughts on what a proper 4e conversion of Dray might have looked like?

>>54331705
>Not so sure I see it as a Shaman, myself. Maybe I ought to track down what they said about Ki - I think it was an issue of Dragon where they revealed the first teasers of the Monk?
Dragon 375 according to this site: http://www.highprogrammer.com/alan/gaming/dnd/4e/role-source.html

Don't have it on hand to check.

>>54330844
>>54330872
It exists in the sense that the Monk works on a totally different frame than the Psionic classes, which have Power Points and a small number of powers that they augment for Encounter and Daily equivalents.

>>54331850
The problem there isn't that we need more ki classes, because monk does that well enough alone, but rather that there's no power=point using psionic striker

Which there really should be, Wilder works really well for that

Is there a link to PDFs?

I ask my local store if they have any of the books and they said they haven't had them for years :_:

>>54316440
Runepriest and Seeker started out as Ki Leader and Controller, respectively.

>>54332832
Proofs? I can kinda see it for Rune priest, no idea about seeker though

>>54332913
Some article on WotC site I've read forever ago

>>54331850
So you define the Ki power source thematically as
>Like a Monk.
and mechanically as
>Like a Monk.

That's not the Ki power source, that's the Monk power source. And we don't need anything like that.

>>54333922
>So you define the Martial power source thematically as
>Like a Fighter.
and mechanically as
>Like a Fighter.

>>54334143
While it's true that Martial, Arcane and Divine correspond to original DnD classes, it doesn't mean Rangers or Rogues are defined by being a variant of Fighters

>>54334143
No, we define the Martial power source as the commonality between Fighter, Warlord, Ranger and Rogue, i.e. raw non-magical skill and higher damage output than is usual for the class's role.

Whereas the Ki power source is currently defined as the commonality between Monk, i.e. Monk-ish-ness and Monk class features, powers and feats.

>>54334189
Then neither would a Wu Jen or Sohei be defined like that.

>>54334238
Wu Jen is more of an Elemental class anyway.
Sohei might work, possibly as a Striker (and Monk can be Controller, where he probably belongs). What would other classes be?

>>54334263
>Sohei might work, possibly as a Striker
Self-correction: I was thinking about Kensei. Who's Sohei again?

>>54334291
What would either have in common with Monks both mechanically and thematically?

>>54334263

>>54334263
>Wu Jen

Just one of the few Oriental classes I could remember from 3.5 lol

>>54334291
Sohei are like the weeb paladins, yeah?

>>54334316
Do you want Ki-powered classes or Monk-powered classes?

>>54334263
>What would other classes be?

The Ki controller/artillery can be all DBZ style ki blasts and shit

>>54334347
Sooo... Zen Archer... Seeker in other words, but less shit and with less poison

>>54334337
Well, I'd love some kind of suggestion for a definition of the Ki power source that isn't "something somehow related to Monks".
I mean, I might have overlooked something, but so far, the only thing anyone has established about Ki as a power source is that Monks are in it.

>>54334335
>Sohei are like the weeb paladins, yeah?
Well, historically, they're buddhist warrior-monks, so I guess yeah

>>54334386
You also might've missed the fact that unlike Arcane/Divine bullshit, Ki or Qi or Chi is a real-world term. So Ki classes would be ones that rely on mastery of their internal inherent energy, which, admittedly, is something between Martial and Psionic, which is why Monk got kicked into the latter when Ki was cut for being "Being Asian the Power Source"

I've got some interesting ideas for Ki classes which I guess I should type up.

I always thought that the Full Discipline powers were sort of odd, in how they restrict you to using your move and full action from them in the same turn or you waste part of it, which usually wasn't a huge problem but just felt awkward.

>>54334482
>which, admittedly, is something between Martial and Psionic
Yes, and that is why that definition is completely useless in designing a Ki power source for 4e.
If Ki is to stand as its own distinct power source, we need some sort of definition that clearly distinguishes it from both Martial and Psionic.

>>54334555
To be fair here, lore for Psionic is that it isn't really natural and inherent, it's the consequence of the destruction of the Living Gate and the way the world fights against the Far Realm

Martial is an odd duck in that it's not supernatural and reliant on training and mastery of your body... but it's also clearly capable of results that would make a "realism" junkie bleed from his ears. I like to think that this is explained by this fantasy reality simply being unlike ours.

Ki could be like >>54330865 put it, based on being through training and meditation in tune with the all-permeating energy of the world(s). Though I disagree that it would be just like Primal, because that one clearly works via Primal Spirits

>>54334546
>I've got some interesting ideas for Ki classes which I guess I should type up.
Yes, you should

>>54314272
But... not really?

Each power source has a variety of classes and archetypes beholden to it and primal had some heavy offense to its name.

Barbarians did obscene amounts of damage, but could offtank as necessary. The warden was tankier but I found they did almost as much damage via aoe as the barbarian did to single targets.

>>54334555
Thematically who cares, 4e is all about fluffing anyways.

Mechanically though, I would say Ki should be about mobility and flexibility, chaining combos from turn to turn, and self-buffing. I would probably design them such that they are low powered to begin each encounter, but if you play them right they are quite strong. For example, your Sohei defender fights a fire giant - using Flame of the Inner Being technique he absorbs fire damage and uses that power up to his ki to shed a status effect, then he uses Iron Crane Iajutsu to attack a second fire giant. On his next turn he can use the second part of Flame of the Inner Being, since he used the "tank" part successfully last turn, to punish an enemy this turn, and his damage is buffed against the giant he marked with his Iajutsu attack and he has n interrupt technique from it available for the off-turn.

>>54334689
Maybe when it's not 2 am.

>>54334840
>Flame of the Inner Being technique
>Iron Crane Iajutsu

I don't care how cheesy it is, I'm a sucker for this shit.

Kick should use stances a lot, since kung fuck movies always have guys who win via their super sekrit Drunken Monkey stance or w/e

What is in your opinion the worst class for each of the 4 roles and why?

>>54334673
>in tune with the all-permeating energy of the world(s)
That's another problem.
Each power source is ostensibly a source from which power stems.
>Martial: Material self
>Arcane: Cosmic energy
>Divine: Gods
>Primal: Nature
>Psionic: Far Realm (probably)
>Shadow: Shadowfell
>Elemental: Elemental Chaos
Your definition paints the source as "everything" and even if not, you're stepping on both Arcane's and (one interpretation of) Psionic's toes.

>>54334807
>Barbarians did obscene amounts of damage
Striker, duh.
>they did almost as much damage via aoe
That's a case for controller, if anything.

The common thread between primal classes is that they are far harder to kill than those of other sources, starting at their HP and surges being one category higher than their role's standard and extending to their powers. The only exception being Shaman, because their extra HP are present in the form of their Spirit Companion..

>>54334968

Excluding Essentials?

Assassin is worst striker, because it doesn't work. Seeker is worst Controller for the same reason. Beyond that, not sure, I don't think Anything outside of them just fails to work as intended.

I guess possibly Battlemind for worst defender because not getting Melee Training (Con) for free was a stupid fucking oversight.

Are there any Leaders with similarly gaping design flaws?

>>54335073
>I guess possibly Battlemind for worst defender because not getting Melee Training (Con) for free was a stupid fucking oversight.
And Mind Spike kinda sucks for depending on the target's damage output.

>>54335073
>>54335120
Battlemind does have lodestone lure or w/e that singlehandedly makes it great though

>>54334968
Vampire is pretty shit

>>54335073
Seeker is just bollocks thanks to their powers being "normal controller faire but worse" save a few things like Feyjump Shot which is an actually really cool power.

As for Leader, Cleric, not because of inherently being bad but because there's no real reason to not be a hybrid.

>>54335051
Your definitions don't quite match my impressions of the stuff in the books.
Arcane is literally least coherent one and is only around for legacy reasons. Warlocks are powered by their patrons, Sorcerers by some internal or outside (Cosmic ones) source, Wizards, Artificiers and Swordmages by knowing cheat codes for reality and Bards I have no idea by what.

Primal works from Primal Spirits, which aren't Nature, they're creatures of the same magnitude as Gods and Primordials, they just come from the Prime-Feywild-Shadowfell trinity

Psionic isn't Far Realm, it's more like anti-bodies produced by reality because the defense that kept Far Realm away was destroyed

Proposed Ki would stem from Prime itself

>>54335388
They have pretty good at-wills imo.

Makes them pretty nice for hybrids.

>>54331118
I personally feel that it's a bit compounded because the more compelling parts can be replicated by simply having a robust Session 0 to make sure everybody has meaningful connections to the world and groups of interest, and being on the permissive side when it comes to considering a player's competency floor in matters where their background is relevant.

Or just like, use Fate Core's Session 0 worksheet stuff where you all work together to outline all the major players and stuff.

How weird would be a Defender class without marks or Knight Aura, that boosts allies' defenses instead?

>>54330926
Generally you don't see much because A) not as popular as DnD and B) the balance issues tend not to be that noticable during actual gameplay. 13th Age isn't as mathmatically tight as 4e, but it ain't 3.X neither.

>>54335977
Sounds like a Leader to me

>>54334968
Runepriest
Vampire
Knight
Seeker

>>54335441
>Primal works from Primal Spirits, which aren't Nature, they're creatures of the same magnitude as Gods and Primordials, they just come from the Prime-Feywild-Shadowfell trinity
Primal spirits are explicitly linked to the natural world. They are tied to natural cycles, places, etc and were it's defenders during the dawn war.

>>54339635
Man, I wanted to like Runepriest, but it just got no feats or powers after release.

>>54339635
>>54340038

I'm playing one at the moment, and the lack of support does hurt them. I'm enjoying it still, but there are also some weird design decisions, like keying their rune states to adjacency. They seem built around the idea that people will cluster, but in my experience that isn't often a thing, especially given how many classes like to stay mobile.

>>54334875
The cheesiness is half the fun, though.

>>54342321
yeah but you have plenty of people who are all REEEEEEEEE WEEBS GTFO MUH PURE EUROPEAN RPG

>>54340185
>>54340038
I could never quite wrap my head around how it actually works, and never got a chance to play it to figure it out.

>>54343795

Their At Wills and Encounters have two different effects, Rune of Destruction and Rune of Protection.

In addition to changing what the power does, selecting one of the two puts you in a different Rune State- Run of Destruction gives allies +1 to hit against enemies adjacent to you, Rune of Protection grands adjacent allies Resist 2/tier.

Protection kinda sucks in comparison, it's a lesser benefit that's harder to get, but you'll still be forced to use it at times because some Destruction effects on powers are really good. There are also alternate Rune States you can get, from PP's or from items.

It's all kind of a mess, honestly. Interesting ideas but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Still fun to play, in my experience, but I'm always noticing things I think they could have done better.

>>54335977
Marking/auras already give allies effective +2 AC/NADs.

>>54344658

Superficially, yes, but how it actually interacts with other mechanics, features and powers is very different.

>>54343854
Wait, so if I'm in Protection and then use a Destruction power I swap states? And if I'm in Destruction and use Destruction again I stay there? Seems like it doesn't really matter then, since you can essentially change at will.

How would you have improved it?

>>54335977
There was an Avatar (the Last Airbender) homebrew that had Earth Benders as a defender class that marked allies instead of enemies, selecting an ally it wants to protect every turn.

>>54317634
I would have liked that to anon. Would have liked to ki done up like the monks full disciplines. A move action mixed in or other such things mixed in with the powers i think that would have been a huge leap for ki as a power source

>>54346937
Definitely a sucker for the full action economy of the monks powers for and the class abilities are open to what classes wed want. Like could you imagine a wu jen with a full discipline spell that could blast a fireball and then leave behind a trail of fire as they move. Or summon a wall of ice only to take a minor action to debuff foes before hand against it. Or as an anon stated a defender type that has an actual warriors spirit aura. Shit like that makes me want this so bad

>>54347130
This could work as well with keeping the monk a striker type class perhaps giving it some more shadow oriented powers to cover for a ninja type role. What the defender role could be idk since id want it to be bushi but i think thats just me pidgeon holing it but i think you could wrap sohei and seeker into one role one for up close the other a more zen archer type of leader. Controller could be a wu jen shugenja mix with a choice of two different five element schools possibly. Again just spit balling.

>>54343126
The counter, of course, is to go full large ham. It has to sound like Brian Blessed reading Robert E. Howard in an incredibly acoustic church.

>>54346114

Make both states equally valuable, more interaction and value in switching states, along with making the bonuses less finnicky.

>>54314340
>>54314876
One of my dreams has been to do some fansplat and MAKE SHADOW GOOD FOR ONCE.

File: 5408594-olgierd.png (1MB, 700x831px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 700x831px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqv2ZsdIXlw

How would I go about building a character sort of like Olgierd in 4e?

>>54334968
Defender: The Knight
The Knight isn't terrible, but it simply lacks the utility of the vanilla fighter that makes them good. Once you reach mid heroic, the knight is not able to do his job effectively, though you might be able to squeeze some more use out of it through world serpent's grasp.

Vampire is pathetically bad. There is flavor to the abilities, but it's an utterly directionless class that just doesn't have the tools to really do its job well.

The Runepriest is the worst leader, and even then, it's not bad. The Runepriest has the unfortunate fate of being a non-psionic PHB3 class, which means it got no support after it's initial print. There is potential, but it was never realized. THANKS ESSENTIALS!

And finally, the Seeker. The seeker is a confusing mishmash of a class. It lacked support, just as the runepriest did, but lacked the solid foundation that the runepriest had.

>>54349861
I'm thinking swordmage, what with the teleporting and magic sword shenanigans

>>54349861
My first thought is swordmage, due to all the teleporting and the fact that he's expressly magic. But hexblade and bladesinger might also be choices.

>>54349961
>Bladesinger

No. Bad Anon, no biscuit.

>>54350246
Not him but what's wrong with bladesinger?

>>54350268
They get normal Encounter powers as their Dailies. Let that sink in.

>>54350246
In my defense, I didn't say it was a GOOD choice. Just a choice.

>>54349921
Knight is far better than the Cavalier and is one of the two Essential Classes to not be shit when looking at the bigger picture (the other being the Mage). Two uses of Come And Get It, MBA shenanigans and the punishing shifts with Opportunity Actions REALLY make the Knight a decent pick.

>>54350960
the problem with "two uses of come and get it" means that you're using strength as a knight, which is a poor choice considering how many of their features use constitution

>>54350268
>>54350335
Bladesingers are subpar strikers that for some reason are listed as controllers

>>54334968
That's a surprisingly tricky question, do you include essentials classes? and if so, where do you put classes that were misplaced in Essentials? Like Berserker, Bladesinger and Sentinel?

>>54352237
Building on top of that, for a new take (homebrew) of 4e, do you fa/tg/uys would prefere to "mess with" the AEDU concept from the start? Like the Martials have a take on Dailies quite different from the Divine or Arcane, something that was tried in the Psychic and Essentials classes, when developers were more confident to play around with AEDU.

>>54352119
The point of Come and Get It is just getting people near you, Strength doesn't really matter in that case. In any case, the best ones don't even use Constitution as much, the preffered stat is Charisma (Half-Elves with Sonnlinor's Hammer shenanigans, Tiefling doing Tiefling shenanigans) with Intelligence a close second, particularly for Eladrin.

>>54352806
but come and get it still needs strength in order to hit at all, and you'd rather dump strength than boost it as enough of a secondary to actually hit with

>>54352969
You're missing the point, you don't need to hit with Come and Get It and the Defender Aura is an always-on thing. Also you nearly wanna dump Strength.

>>54353059
Why not?

Come and Get It doesn't have a miss effect, it only pulls on a hit, so you're only getting people close to you if you hit with it, and if your strength is low, you're not hitting with it

>>54353082
Check the errata.

>>54353862
funin.space doesn't use the last errata?

>>54349861
Eladrin knight?

Feycharger builds in general could do it too.

Just thinking about a Ki Leader, would like some feedback. The fluff is all pulled out of my ass, the mechanics are what I was focusing on.

SHUGENJA
Role: A leader with a side of either melee striker or defender (or maybe ranged controller)
Stats: Wisdom primary, with either Dex (Yin, defender/controller) or Strength (Yang, striker) secondaries.

Class Features:
Unarmored Defense: Get WIS to AC when wearing cloth armor, or something along those lines

Flow of Yin: this class feature gives you a power that's the Shugenja's Healing Word equivalent. Minor action, more range than HW, probably a bit weaker in exchange for being usable more frequently, and using it gives you a Yin point. The more Yin points you have, the stronger your Yang effects.

Surge of Yang: Gives you a power that grants an ally some kind of attack buff, I was also thinking it might allow the target to mark an enemy or grant them temp HP or something. Gives you a Yang point. Same as Yin, the more you have built up the stronger the opposite is.

Harmony: When your Yin and Yang are at the same level, you gain some sort of bonus - maybe apply your Wisdom bonus to things twice instead of once, apply both Flow of Yin and Surge of Yang at once, etc.

Nature of Yin or Nature of Yang: Choose one, Yin is based on Dex and gives you a defender/controller flavor, while Yang is based on Str and gives you a striker feel.

Powers: The powers for the class would also manipulate your Yin and Yang levels. Riders would be a major part of most powers and depend on your Nature, while their strength might be determined based on your Yin or Yang point level.

Basically, you have your yin and yang and raising or lowering them as you feel the need to kick ass or help allies. You should be trying to achieve harmony most of the time without it being too easy to do so. Your power will increase over rounds as your yin or yang build up.

>>54354803
He could have "yin" and and "yang" effect lines which both trigger if yin=yang.

>>54354803
I feel like there should be also be a Leader+ option based around being in Harmony more than the other two that is like a Healing cleric, Lazylord, etc.

>>54313634
>tfw start as wizard
>tfw gm gives you a +2 tome that lets you cast rituals for free if you spend more time on it

i think i'm about to get Enchant Magic Item, but I'm not sure.

>>54353881
It is, I'm just a moron. Anyway, Knight beats Cavalier and the Knight also has MBA shenanigans.

>>54354803
Seems pretty sweet, now you just need some powers!

>>54354803
Sounds awesome. I like the idea that Yin and Yang effects both trigger if they are equal, that alone makes the class pretty interesting. Here's my ideas for some at-wills:

>Radiant damage attack that gives +2 defences to an ally (Yin) or -2 defences to your target (Yang)
>Cold damage attack that raises Yang, but if Yin is higher lets you slide a nearby ally a square or two.
>Fire damage attack that raises Yang, but if Yin is higher gives a nearby ally a power bonus to attack rolls for a turn

Basically, I'm thinking that attacks that increase one bar get a bonus if the other bar is higher. This would encourage characters to mix and match their at-wills and manage their utility. I'm also thinking this could be a nice power for them to start with:

Rebalance (Encounter Utility Power): As a minor action you can raise your Yin or Yang by 1. At level 11 you can raise it by 1 or 2. At level 21 you can raise it by 1, 2, or 3.

>>54354803
What sort of powers should it have. If we're gonna tie it to yin and yang you could split the elements down the middle really.

>>54360889
Hell yes this sound awesome!

>>54360889

My one worry is that both numbers constantly getting higher could get annoying to deal with.

Maybe only track relative difference instead? Print a track on the character sheet, balance in the middle, sliding it one way or the other for imbalance. Maybe some kind of effect triggering if you imbalance it all the way/would break the scale, one both harmful and hurtful?

>>54361349
Yeah could be good. Another thought is to simply cap it to your Wisdom mod, or 1/2 mod+1 or something.

>>54360889
I think Rebalance should drop instead of raise, because if it raises you can just go ham with one and then easily bring the other up to it, effectively increasing your power and action economy for free.

>>54354803
You could have harmony work more as a balancing act between yin and yang. Like a third achetype or you could have it activate only when both are equal allowing both yin and yang effects to activate then the pool empties. Sort of like the monk abilities from diablo3 or something. Just tossing ideas out there.

>>54313634
Why do 4e fans bring up "natural language" as though it has anything to do with the reason some people just didn't enjoy 4e? I have never seen that complaint come from anyone except for 4e fans dismissing someone who didn't enjoy their preferred game as being too stupid to understand it.

One thing that makes me cautious of this Homebrew is what Leader niche is this guy going to fill. Warlords are enablers to its fullest potential, Clerics especialize in debuffing, the Bard works a lot with reorganizing the battlefield, the Shaman's got a decent defensive tool and can do pretty much whatever, the Ardent has ultraspecialization in whatever field he'd like, the Runepriest and the Artificer grant out several buffs in their own similar but different ways. What on Earth does our Shugenja do primarily? What is his Leader focus?

>>54364744
>our

You ain't do shit nigga

good question though

If we go with the monk and what Shugenjanon said so far, Ki might just be flexible.

Would it be wise for someone who hasn't played 4e as either DM or player, to start DMing if they had only played as a player for PF/5e/Shadowrun?

How much of reading the DMG would be required for Session 0 and 1?

>>54365455
Not sure how much you HAVE to read, but 4e DMG is pretty good and worth a read by itself, mostly for the tips it gives about running the game and finding out your player's interests than for the mechanics, most of which got errata'd later (two big ones are the improvised actions and the skill challenges).

Getting a handle on encounter building guidelines is a must, but they are not hard.

>>54364721
Because once you have become experienced with something, you start to understand where criticisms come from (and at times, why those criticisms are wrong.

You're literally the first person to bring up the term natural language in the thread so I can't specifically address what you're saying, but if I had to take a guess: 4e has a syntax and its own vocabulary, and the game is much better once everyone understand the vocabulary.

>>54364744
Well let's come at it from the other angle, what "design space" is empty?

>>54366252
More "straight hybrids" like the berserker maybe?

>>54366252
Action Enabling. The Warlord touched a bit on it with Knight's Move, but I really like the idea of granting allies actions. You could grant move actions, minor actions, standard actions, action points... I feel it'd be almost a perfect fit with the Monk's experiments with action economy as well, it's a nice callback.

>>54366264
By definition a Hybrid isn't filling empty design space.

Martial Controller was never officially filled, unless you count the Hunter.

Honestly the "what do they do" question is not as interesting to me as "How do they do it" - I don't care if we have five enabling leaders if they all work differently enough mechanically.

>>54366658
I dunno, that seems like it could turn into a serious shitshow

>>54366658
Maybe you could hand out powers like the skald aura? I always really liked that.

Maybe like a sensei type. Basically Monk, but you hand one half of your actions to an ally instead of doing it yourself.

>>54366717
It'd be really finnicky for sure, but you could make it work. You'd just have to balance it.

>>54365455
Both DMG's are excellent reading material, but not massively required. I'd suggest using a pre-made adventure or at least an encounter to do some of the legwork for you when starting, give the earlier Acquisitions Incorporated games a glance to see how the edition plays in terms of player/DM dynamics, players using powers, etc if you're really unsure.

The DM is in a position where I feel they should know a bit more than the players, in order to answer any questions, but if everyone is on the same page and learning together it's usually perfectly fine to be leaning on the run.

>>54366658
That could work perfectly honestly. Especially if we're gonna go with the idea that Ki works on a full round action economy. It could allow other PCs to take extra actions on their turn, perhaps a rider that allows characters to use an action or power with said action. So other Ki power source users could possibly combo off of it as well?

>>54370238
>>54366658

I'd be leery on seeing anything less than a Daily grant a full Standard action. Bonus action economy is very often the most powerful option in any system that allows it. And god only knows the heinous shit some Strikers could pull if you let them take three standard actions in a row with a power, their turn and then spending an AP.

>>54370323
Not arguing. I was thinking more along the lines of an extra move action, or a minor action, or take a second wind without spending an action. Stuff like that. Denying enemies an action would be nice to.

>>54366728
I had this idea like... a year or so ago. Maybe more.

Anyway, Sensei's using a full disciple system like the Monk, with the twist that the OTHER part of the disciple can be done by anyone he chooses.

So it'd go like...

"Water pushing the Wheel:
Attack

1d8, push target 1 square

Move

Shift 1 square. Until the beginning of your next turn, if a target would be pushed, slid, or moved into your square, slide him to any adjacent square and knock him prone."

>>54370969
Forgot to finish the thought there.

So, with that power he could be the Water, and the other character could be the Wheel, or vice versa, depending on the situation.

Maybe he could direct two characters when he used his Healing Word equivalent.

>>54370323
There are a couple of daily powers that already exist that grant standard actions

"Haste", level 16 bard utility, takes a minor action to grant an ally a standard action, and "Time Stop", level 22 wizard utility, takes one minor action to grant yourself two standard actions that can't be used on attacks

Personally I'd like to see an epic tier power that costs a standard action to give an ally an entire turn, or an at-will utility that takes a standard action to grant an ally a move action

In the most basic, at-will level, you could have things like the classic "you make an MBA with my attack" leader at-will but in ways like "an ally of your choice may make a Basic Attack as a Minor with some bonus". It's essentially very similar when you try and make sense of it, but it's got sort this thing that makes it feel very different. Maybe if the ally does so they get a bonus according to your Yin and your Yang levels until the end of their next turn, starting with that attack, for example.

>>54373098
>"an ally of your choice may make a Basic Attack as a Minor with some bonus"
This could work as an Encounter Power like:
>the flow of battle
Immediate Reaction
Trigger: An ally hits an enemy with a melee attack
Effect: That ally can make a MBA against the triggering enemy.

Modyfing the action economy (BA as minor) of other player away from your turn may lead to everyone forgetting it.