D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023

Thomas Shey said:

I guess it depends on your use of "most". There's no lack of dedicated generic systems out there; I could probably name a dozen on the fly, not all of them old.

Click to expand...

Hussar said:

Sure, there's things like Savage Worlds. Fair enough. But, again, are you going to argue that the number of generic systems out there are equal to the number of specific systems? I certainly wouldn't. Most games, outside of a handful, thrive on being firmly planted in a pretty specific niche. Which isn't a criticism at all. But, what that means is that for a lot of gamers, because they use D&D for every niche they can fold the system into, I'd argue that the D&D tent is pretty darn big.

Click to expand...

Hussar said:

And yet... there's the Battlemaster standing right there. With nary a quibble.

Complete with non-magical mind control - "Goading Attack" (regardless of the tactical situation, I can force an enemy to attack me), "Rally" (regardless of what your character thinks about my character, my battlemaster can inspire you and give you temp HP), "Maneuvering Attack" (I hit an enemy and you get to move your character. How? I dunno).

But, again, it falls below that objectionable threshold so it's fine.

It does make the conversation REALLY hard to take seriously when ten powers became this HUGE issue and even the idea of "martial powers" is a problem too when people are perfectly happy with martial powers in 5e - many 5e fighters and rogue sub-classes have all sorts of martial powers, and have no problems with the same things appearing in 5e.

It's such a minefield. I'm not allowed to question why it's fine in 5e, but not-fine in 4e. There's some sort of magical threshold beyond which there are "too many" changes. Which, when you think about it, explains the 5e playtest a LOT. They started the playtests with big changes. Got feedback, and then walked back those changes until the feedback was suitably positive. WotC has proven pretty adept at finding that magical threshold and then toeing that line.

Click to expand...

tomBitonti said:

I’m finding the damage on a miss discussion amusing, in that, if we accept that hit points represent such things as exhaustion, morale, and luck, then both the attacker and defender should potentially gain or lose hit points on any attack. After all, ought not a successful attack improve the attackers morale, and ought not a very successful attack be at times strenuous, and therefore increasing the exhaustion of the attacker? And if a defender uses a limited resource to deflect or dodge a blow, are the not weakened by expending that resource?

Click to expand...

Pedantic said:

Right, but those are all post 4e. The audience that objected to 4e came from 3e, and drew the line at daily barbarian rages and the rogue special ability Defensive Roll that honestly I don't think anyone noticed had a daily limit, because no one played a rogue for 10 levels, and if you did Improved Evasion was right there.

5e's abilities are reactions to 4e, and were in no small part as well received as they were by being less frequent, more systemically isolated, and viewed as a step down from the universal powers structure. You'd have gotten the same pushback trying to write a Battlemaster feat chain for a 3e Fighter.

The point though is that it's never just Come and Get It, or Reaping Strike, or an attack roll on Magic Missile. It's always all of it, all at once and in direct comparison to how things were before.

Click to expand...

Pedantic said:

The point though is that it's never just Come and Get It, or Reaping Strike, or an attack roll on Magic Missile. It's always all of it, all at once and in direct comparison to how things were before.

Click to expand...

Zardnaar said:

I've always said 4Es main offenses was universal AEDU/powers in general

Click to expand...

Hussar said:

I know that you're right. I get that. It just gets so frustrating to see all those things that were completely and utterly rejected during 4e come back in 5e, largely with what looks like to me, a new coat of paint, and get passed on joyfully.

I keep trying to keep the other side's point of view in mind and whatnot, but, it's not always easy and it's often very, very frustrating. Because it's so difficult to know where that tipping point is. And then I see all those people who did gleeful donuts on the grave of 4e turning around and singing the praises of 5e for, what looks like to me, the very same things, and it does, from time to time, honk me off greatly.

Click to expand...

Pedantic said:

The point though is that it's never just Come and Get It, or Reaping Strike, or an attack roll on Magic Missile. It's always all of it, all at once and in direct comparison to how things were before.

Click to expand...

tomBitonti said:

Come and get it has a special place of shame: The problem was not the power structure. The problem was that any reasonable interpretation pushed you into problems. In 3E, a similar ability would either be a telepathic compulsion, which ought not to affect mindless creatures, and should be either supernatural or spell-like. Then WTF is the fighter doing casting telepathy? Alternatively, the ability could be a taunt, which sits a little better, but would require sight and sound, as well as mindfulness, and would be charisma dependent. Something for a bard more so than for a fighter.

TomB

Click to expand...