I did a quick search and I was surprised to see this has not been covered yet.
What is your favorite feature of 4e? It can be a new rule, some new fluff or even just an enjoyable experience using 4e.
I did a quick search and I was surprised to see this has not been covered yet.
What is your favorite feature of 4e? It can be a new rule, some new fluff or even just an enjoyable experience using 4e.
For me it was the reaction of the players when i ran the first part of KOTS, I personally have doubts about, but they liked it specifcally noting that wizards could cast more than one spell before resting so for me that was it, a sign that there is more to 4e than gossip.
Rituals. I like them. I like the idea of them. I'm debating hiving off a certain chunk of spells in 3.5 and handling them like 4e rituals.
For me it was the reaction of the players when i ran the first part of KOTS, I personally have doubts about, but they liked it specifcally noting that wizards could cast more than one spell before resting so for me that was it, a sign that there is more to 4e than gossip.
Vancian magic always rubbed me the wrong way. I know I am not alone in that.
|
Multiclassing. I love the thematic nature of each class and the new multiclassing allows for the flavor of two classes to be mixed without losing the overarching theme of the primary class. Between multiclassing, the nature of feats, and the differing builds within each class a PC can build up a good mix of abilities without straying too far from the core class theme and role.
What is your favorite feature of 4e? It can be a new rule, some new fluff or even just an enjoyable experience using 4e.
I love the overall streamlining of the game. In 3E, combat would take forever because people were constantly looking up something. In 4E, combat takes the same real time but represent more in-game time because actions were easy to remember and rules much simpler (plus both the PCs and the bad guys are more durable).
My other favorite point is the balance in power between DM and PCs. I was reading Bart Carroll's article about the balance of power across editions. ( Original article.)
First Edition, in many ways, placed the power of the game in the hands of the DM. “Can I do this…?” and “What happens if I…” were essentially questions posited by the players to be answered by the DM. Not quite sure how a rule worked? Wondering what actions your character can perform? In the First (and largely Second) Edition campaigns I played, these were all questions that often needed answers from the DM. That was the relationship. You tell the DM what you want to do, the DM tells you if you can, you roll some dice, and the DM provides the result... Third Edition shifted this relationship, in my opinion, into the players’ hands. The DM still ran the game and mediated the story. But as far as the rules went, the players had much greater power in how they built their characters and what they could pull off. Pun-Pun is an example taken to the extreme, but min-maxing characters was commonplace, often limited only by the players themselves. In several campaigns, I witnessed the tension this caused between experienced players looking to build the most powerful character they could, and newer players using the character they were most comfortable with—usually, a simpler, less tricked-out character.
I agree with his assertion that 4E tempers the balance in power. Both the players and the DM have equal parts to play in the game. Some things can be done by the PC by virtue of the rules, but the DM still has authority over other aspects. The DM is encouraged to reward the ingenuity of the players, and the PCs are encouraged to respect the authority of the DM. Both sentiments are built into the rules set. And the rules set helps even the playing field between newer gamers and experience gamers.
|
|
Hands down its speed of DM prep and adpatability. I have been able to take several Paizo products and flip them to 4.0 very easily. It's very powerful in that regard.
4.0 has DM dependent design, and that's been ok for me. I have done a tone of work sloping encounters across multiple levels in LG and Blackmoor. The rules for templates and advancing critters etc. were very complex and usually created objects that many judges didn't know what to do with.
4.0 deosn't have as tight constraints in terms of design and advancement of mosnters. This has bene liberating for me and works well in a home game. NOTE: There is some clear hazard ehre in organized play.
The two things I've liked the most so far are DM prep which tends to be very quick and the speed at which a round of combat tends to go by so its usually my turn again within about five minutes.
combat actions outlined:
1 standard, 1 move, 1 minor. (and variations of course)
Players always get confused with full vs not full attacks in 3.5, and iritatives. This simplifies things so much.
Emphasis mine. Whether or not you misspelled that on purpose, that's hilarious.
As a DM, my favorite part, hands down, is the monster statblocks. It's so ridiculously easy to run a large group of monsters because the stat blocks are easy to read.
I'm also a huge fan of the implied setting. It's exactly what I've been trying to inject into my campaigns since I stopped using Forgotten Realms.
For me, it's the rules for NPC, monster, and encounter design. It's cut my DM prep time in half.
1) Having something to do every round no matter what class you are.
2) Never feeling like you wasted a round because you spent a whole round moving and now have to wait 15 minutes for your next turn.
3) No more vancian spellcasting.
4) Less math for designing and balancing encounters.
|
combat actions outlined:
1 standard, 1 move, 1 minor. (and variations of course)
Players always get confused with full vs not full attacks in 3.5, and iritatives. This simplifies things so much.
I agree. This makes switching or combining various actions simple and elegant.
I also like how Second Wind allows players to do a little self-healing and takes pressure of the cleric to be a heal-bot.
Rituals are nice too.
I have two things, both mentioned already.
Rituals. I like them. I like the idea of them. I'm debating hiving off a certain chunk of spells in 3.5 and handling them like 4e rituals.
This is the thing that sold me on the editon. I read about Rituals and jumped for joy. I love this concept.
combat actions outlined:
1 standard, 1 move, 1 minor. (and variations of course)
Players always get confused with full vs not full attacks in 3.5, and iritatives. This simplifies things so much.
I gotta say, after reading the rules this is what made me happest about the new edition. Simple, easy to understand, and very flexible. A very good way to improve the action system over the old irritating way. (And yes, i left it mispelled onpurpose. ;) )
I'm going to echo what other people have said here already, but I honestly believe the following to be 4e's greatest strengths:
1) simplicity! In terms of DM prep time, basic rules needed to play (especially good since I teach the game to a lot of newbies these days), and a stremalined combat mechanic, 4e has made my life as DM incredibly simple. I am currently enjoying converting the Curse of the Crimson Throne into 4e for my newest gaming group, and I will second the assertion that it is quite easy to do so.
2) every player has something to do every round. When I first heard Mike Mearls say this in an interview (something about never having to see the crossbow-firing, out-of-spells 1st-level wizard again), I couldn't believe it, but I am glad they delivered. At-Will powers are fantastic. Which leads me to...
3) NO MORE VANCIAN CASTING!!! D&D is my favorite RPG and my hobby of choice for two-thirds of my life, but its "sad devotion to that ancient religion" has been my ongoing point of contention since I started playing (20 years ago in two weeks and still going strong, btw)... I spent a lot of time trying to come up with homebrews and going through alternate rules (spellpoints, anyone?) that circumvented Vancian casting. Whoever did away with that fat, bloated sacred cow has my undying gratitude...
Now, my favorite innovation in 4e has to be skill challenges. I haven't had a lot of experience with them, but I like the concept and intend to tinker around with them a lot in my games. I realize that this is just putting a name to something that a lot of DMs probably already did, but it is fun to be reminded that not every obstacle you come across in D&D has to be beaten to a pulp (especially in a game that is so heavily oriented towards combat mechanics as 4e is).
M
As a gm, it's easy to create encounters and run the game, making more time available for adventure design elements; I'm not getting bogged down in the math.
As a player, combats are about tactics, and not so much about what character building tricks you've figured out; the player that never picks up the book except at the game table can create just as useful character as the person who twinks his character till it screams.
The "No Vancian Magic" and "Combat is simplified" help make those two things come true.
I like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily powers. It is really Vancian magic in sheep’s clothing but I think the At-Will’s make a big difference. Plus, everyone has them.
Encounter and Daily powers model cinematics well.
I like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily powers. It is really Vancian magic in sheep’s clothing but I think the At-Will’s make a big difference. Plus, everyone has them.
Encounter and Daily powers model cinematics well.
LOL, I guess you're right. However, it takes away the "damn, why didn't I memorize any ___ spells today?" factor from the equation. You either know you're prepared to deal with stuff, or you don't --- and that means that my 4e wizard is the most fun character I've had in a looong time.
M
I like the At-Will/Encounter/Daily powers. It is really Vancian magic in sheep’s clothing but I think the At-Will’s make a big difference. Plus, everyone has them.
Encounter and Daily powers model cinematics well.
I really agree with the cinematic feel as well. I think for a lot of people this is one of the biggest turn offs with the system but I feel it really works well for me and I think its a great style for a game that serves as the gate way game to the RPG hobby as a whole. There is definitely a place for hard core realism in RPGs but its probably not the best tack to take for the game that most people play first - not if we want to grow our hobby with infusions of ankle biters anyway.
|
|
I simply love the fiddly aspect of the system. In my head I must have built a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream "AWESOME!"
Topmost of them is probably the Tiefling Paladin I've been cooking up. Thanks to the way the powers are built I could easily make a Paladin that only uses Charisma for attacks (and Tieflings get a bonus to that already). In addition to that, Paladins are pretty much expected to be in the middle of combat taking hits, giving me plenty of opportunities to use the Tiefling racial attack (which also gets a significant boost from Charisma).
This will totally be the first character I play. Her name shall be Melody.
If I had to just pick one feature to list as my favourite I would probably have to say the end of the iterative attack scheme. This was one of the things I really grew to hate in high level 3E. I fighter types would take upwards of 15+ minutes figuring damage and then forget to add or subtract some piddling bonus and that was another 5 minutes of farting around. If it was just one player or something it wouldn't have bothered me but even the guy who always used a calculator was way too slow.
nice thread, keep it up.
Im almost encouraged to finally build my first 4e char...
I simply love the fiddly aspect of the system. In my head I must have built a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream "AWESOME!"
my experience to this day was more:
I must have thought of a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream"WE ARE BASICALLY THE SAME, DOING X DAMAGE AND EFFECT NUMBER Y OR Z !"
But honestly i let my worries stop every character creation after reading the available powers, so i maybe should just build a complete char and playtest him to judge the system properly...
|
|
my experience to this day was more:
I must have thought of a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream
"WE ARE BASICALLY THE SAME, DOING X DAMAGE AND EFFECT NUMBER Y OR Z !"
That was my first impression as well. Then I realized I was just building a bunch of first level characters. Heck in every edition of D&D a bunch of first level characters all seem to be the same. Then I built some 15th, 20th, and 30th level characters and the differentiation between them grew with each step. And then I played a bunch of slots at DragonCon and I saw the diversity of character builds and the homogeneity I had seen before just faded away.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I love the shallow power curve. One problem I frequently encountered designing 3e adventures was the narrow range of monsters available out of the box for a particular level range. I could really only use into monsters 2-3 CRs above or below the party level and it was harder to build a challenging encounter with a large number of foes because the EL increased so rapidly as I added additional monsters. The 4e range is more like 4-6 levels above or below the party level, and opens up a huge swath of the Monster Manual.
Excellent thread topic! As a DM my favorite feature is the reduction in preparation time. I'm running Rise of the Runelords once a week at lunch, and when necessary I can pull together the next encounter in five minutes. I spend more time customizing the treasures my characters will receive than I do the monsters they'll fight.
I simply love the fiddly aspect of the system. In my head I must have built a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream "AWESOME!"
Topmost of them is probably the Tiefling Paladin I've been cooking up. Thanks to the way the powers are built I could easily make a Paladin that only uses Charisma for attacks (and Tieflings get a bonus to that already). In addition to that, Paladins are pretty much expected to be in the middle of combat taking hits, giving me plenty of opportunities to use the Tiefling racial attack (which also gets a significant boost from Charisma).
This will totally be the first character I play. Her name shall be Melody.
You'll need wisdom for lay on hands. You can get by without strength though.
|
|
But honestly i let my worries stop every character creation after reading the available powers, so i maybe should just build a complete char and playtest him to judge the system properly...
Exactly. Actually, try several characters, and you'll just how different they really are, mechanics-wise. Paladins and fighters, for instance, are defenders, but their powers make them play quite, quite differently. And don't even get me started with rangers and rogues strikers....
I simply love the fiddly aspect of the system. In my head I must have built a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream "AWESOME!"
my experience to this day was more:
I must have thought of a dozen different characters of different races and classes all of which just scream
"WE ARE BASICALLY THE SAME, DOING X DAMAGE AND EFFECT NUMBER Y OR Z !"But honestly i let my worries stop every character creation after reading the available powers, so i maybe should just build a complete char and playtest him to judge the system properly...
I think you could narrow this down. If you are making a 3rd edition character lets draw some comparisons:
3rd ed
Fighter-generally has Power Attack, Cleave. combat actions are standard Attack with the odd cleave into the mix.
4th ed
Fighter-Can choose Feat Power attack, Power can be Tide of Iron(push enemies back to get yourself in a better position, Sure Strike(on very difficult to hit foes, Cleave(drop a minion and injure another foe), Plus your chosen Encounter Power for an extra boost in a round.
3rd Ed Cleric- chooses any spells available but will often blow most if not all spells on bless and healing.
4th Ed Cleric- has minor Prayers to heal and still fight in a round, has prayers to strike foes and heal allies(same time), has Daily and a variation of encounter powers.
Its true that most characters At-Will are going to be similar and cross over but compared to the 3rd ed option of 'I move and I roll to hit', I can't see why this is an issue. Its the encounter and Dailys that make a difference. WOTC have lined themselves for additional books to expand and individualize the PC's Powers but the ones in the book are the 'Basic' character class's.
Keep in mind that you can cross class to inject other class's elements. A cleric of a hunter deity could take Ranger as a cross class, or a Warrior take cross class Fighter or Paladin. Followers of Mask(thieves) inject some thief into the class. You have lots of extra feats now so customize.
The one thing that we found with Star Wars Saga Ed was the skill system made the PC's a bit clone-like. I've adopted a rank skill system. The Trained skill get a +3 instead of the +5 and the starting PC gets 2 points per trained skill to distribute plus the INT bonus. They can put the points any where but must put 1 pt in a trained still. The maximum is level+1. Each level after the PC gets 5+int bonus in skill points.
I also put the profession and craft skills back in plus Disable Device for Open Locks and Disable Traps.
The other thing is level advancement. Most 1st level characters will have a bit of a Power Crossover but by the time the character is 5th level there are a lot more options, likewise with 10th, 15th and so on!
Streamlined high level play!
So far my favorite feature has been how little I open the books to look up rules these days. It took a month or two to get the rules down, but now that we've got the hang of it, particularly with the DM screen, the encounters just fly by, with the rules intruding as little as possible. I think it's great.
|
|
My favorite feature has been how easy it is to play. When I played it to begin with I was disgusted with the "sameness" of all the characters and told myself I wouldn't play again. My wife talked me into trying it again because she had looked at the books and was wanting to try to run a game for the first time. So I started playing a game with my wife and kids and it has been a ton of fun. Playing the game, prepping the game, and everything else is so easy it's hard to believe it's D&D. The rules are easier to learn and keep track of.
Something I didn't expect from the game that has been a lots of fun for me, is that there are so many things I can do with my character to add to his complexity without increasing his book keeping all that much. I am playing an Eladrin wizard with a mix of control and blaster type spells and I can mix it up a lot in terms of what my character can do. As you go up in level and introduce paragon paths, epic destinies, multiclassing and so on it gets even better. The characters don't have the same "blah" feeling to me that they did the first time around.
I am glad I gave 4e a second chance. That said, the marketing and PR on the new system have still been amongst the worst I have ever seen. The game itself is quite good and has a lot of strong selling points. I wish they have focused on those instead of just trashing 3.5 at ever turn. Instead of dwelling on the limitations of the previous edition, point out what is exciting about the new edition. One final gripe is that they still don't have the DI working at the level promised. Since it was such a huge part of their marketing pitch, having it continually be behind and not delivering on the features it promised has been a major disappointment.
On the whole, I am really having fun playing 4e. It was a tough journey to get there though, and there are still things about the whole thing that grate my nerves. That said, I do think they did a good job on the game and system. Now if they could just carry that over to their adventure design, digital components, and PR I will be truely impressed.
|
|
So far my favorite feature has been how little I open the books to look up rules these days. It took a month or two to get the rules down, but now that we've got the hang of it, particularly with the DM screen, the encounters just fly by, with the rules intruding as little as possible. I think it's great.
True dat!
I don't think I have referred to the rules during the last four or five sessions I have run. Between the character sheets, the stat blocks, and the GM screen I have everything I need.
There is so much about 4e that I really love, that it would be extremely hard for me to name a single, favorite feature. However, here is a list of five of my favorite features (there are many more, but I've got stuff to do today), in no particular order:
1. Powers and Keywords. Powers prompt a lot of complaints from some quarters, but I love 'em. They appear deceptively similar, with their self-contained formatting and base mechanic of stat vs. defense, but they possess subtle (and sometimes, not so subtle) differences that can create vast differences in play; they also provide a framework for minor, exception-based subsystems further differentiating them from each other. Keywords are the conceptual building blocks of the game, and they can be combined and re-combined in various, delicious ways by a whole host of methods.
2. Feat-based multi-classing. Its definitely a break with the level-based mechanics of previous editions, and while it does sacrifice the granularity of 3e multi-classing in favor of balance and role preservation, it has proven to be a very flexible mechanic in its own regard. Currently, it can be used to broaden your character concept (traditional multi-classing), specialize your character concept (weapon specialization multi-classing), or even create an arcane mutant (spellscarred multi-class from the FRPG). I look forward to how WoTC and various 3PPs use this mechanic in new and interesting ways.
3. The Level 30 cap and Epic Destinies. The level cap allowed the designers to smooth out the game's overall power curve while providing a clear, endpoint for a campaign. Related to this endpoint are epic destinies; of the two sub-classes available to the players, they are clearly my favorite (and I'm not down on paragon paths). Not only do they provide truly epic abilities, the inclusion of epic quests meant that they were actively intended to be role-playing tools fully integrated into a DMs' campaign.
4. Artifacts. I really like how 4e changes artifacts; now, they're basically a melange of powerful magic item, autonomous NPC, and DM storytelling tool, and the best part, is that they are fully intended to be used at any level.
5. Diseases. I like how 4e diseases have a progression (which can get worse or better) and its based on your PC's health (with attacks vs. the Fortitude defense and Endurance skill checks). Diseases are made even more interesting by the fact that they are now much harder to cure. Make sure to invest in that Heal skil!
Vancian magic always rubbed me the wrong way. I know I am not alone in that.
My favorite part is everything about the new magic system. Especially the new role of implements.
...Feat-based multi-classing...
Also, the more I think about multiclassing, the more I like it.
IMO a person's class is the product of a lifetime of training. That previous versions so easily (and instantly) let you pick up a new class seemed silly. So Mordenkainen took 18 years or so to become a first-level Wizard, but Joe the fighter did it last month?
The simplified crits are the first thing I'm putting in my hybrid game.
Also, crits working on almost everything.
I'm surprised no one's said this one yet: no alignment restrictions.
I've been with this game since "elf" was a character class, and I've almost always been DM because D&D has always had a lot of complex subsets of rules and options. 4th edition - while I really don't like the "married to minis" aspect of it, and I've got some problems with some of the more "gamist" elements ("per encounter" powers, the four character roles, and so on) - is at least easy enough in comparison that other people are interested in running games. For that, I like it.
I'll probably stick to my own"divorced from minis" version of 3.x (what with pathfinder and everything, I think that rules engine is making great strides) as DM - those same "complex subsets of rules" expand the scope of the game - but I'll gladly play in a 4th edition game.
|
|
I'm running Rise of the Runelords once a week at lunch, and when necessary I can pull together the next encounter in five minutes. I spend more time customizing the treasures my characters will receive than I do the monsters they'll fight.
I see what you mean. I am going to play Second darkness with my group and the first fight in Shadow in the Sky I put together in just a few minutes, just by openning the Monster Manual. Some of the later stuff in Shadow in the Sky may need some work, but even that seems managable.
I'm surprised no one's said this one yet: no alignment restrictions.
I don't like the so called alignments in 4th.
You can port over Paladin behavior based on dieties, but you could just role play that.I don't know why they didn't just say "Caos is bad. If you have a caotic character we will cry." like they tried to talk players out of creating monster characters.
|
|
A stupid one, but a favorite: I'm a big fan of production. I really enjoy the tactile feel of the 4E cover template. The "flat" has a rough feel to my fingers, but when I hit the slick it is so cool, and smooth. It's like drinking straight tequila with an OJ chaser. The tequila is NOT KIND as it ravages your taste buds, but the OJ is so smooth and cool ... Being older, I like the larger typeface. I don't feel like I am trying to read an infernal contract.
I generally prefer a lower level of fantasy, but if you're going to do high fantasy, well, I think you can do worse than what 4E presents.
I *never* play wizards. Ever. Evereverever. Not because of Vancian magic (ROFL - sorry, insider joke) but because, while I can grasp difficult concepts and mechanics just fine I tend to get overwhelmed with options. When that happens I end up going "Thogg smash!" 4E has me practically wetting my pants to play a wizard! Not because they're stupid, underpowered, or whatever, but because the path has been cleared of so much dead wood I can see where to put my feet! I can't wait to get this guy in game!
I'm surprised no one's said this one yet: no alignment restrictions.
I suspect that most people who disliked them were already discarding them -- so 4e offers no improvement.
I'm surprised no one's said this one yet: no alignment restrictions.I suspect that most people who disliked them were already discarding them -- so 4e offers no improvement.
Not necessarily. I discarded them in 2nd but felt I had no real choice but to bring alignment back in for 3.x becuase it was so tied up into the mechanics that it was close to impossible to untie the two.