4e is too complex.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:58 am

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
Voss wrote: This is another of the reasons why it isn't worthwhile. Game mastery isn't really worthwhile.
Honestly I've never really been a fan of game mastery. It means that some concepts are better than others because the game is imbalanced.

I just don't see how it improves the game at all to have choices that suck ass. And that's what game mastery is all about. Include shit choices that only inexperienced players will choose.

That isn't game mastery. At all.
That is purely & simply the designers failing with specific feats/spells/whatever.

Game mastery is about making the most of the abilities you do have, and using them effectively and sometimes unexpectedly. It also means combining abilities in effective ways. It doesn't necessarily mean breaking the game, though it does mean that sometimes encounters won't be as challenging as the DM thinks. But thats OK... players should be rewarded for clever thinking rather than just bulling through every encounter.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:59 am

SphereOfFeetMan wrote: -3.x is tactically divergent. It is as simple or complex as the Dm and players make it.

That's kind of true, but only for mages and only if the DM is willing to invent a lot of new spells or rules.

I mean as written RAW there's just no great counter against teleportation if you're not a cleric capable of casting forbiddance. Since monsters usually don't have cleric spells, they probably aren't going to be protected against that.

There is very little counter to being gated in and soul trapped. Bets you can do is a contingent teleport, but you've got other crap you want contingent too and you only get one contingency at a time, unless you allow contingent trigger items from Complete Arcane, in which case shit just becomes a game of crazy contingencies.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:25 am

Voss wrote:That isn't game mastery. At all.
That is purely & simply the designers failing with specific feats/spells/whatever.

RC, read this again until you're prepared to argue about it.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:35 am

Voss wrote: That isn't game mastery. At all.
That is purely & simply the designers failing with specific feats/spells/whatever.

Then apparently there is quite a lot of failure with specific feats/spells and whatever, because like 90% of the stuff is unusable and making a good character is pretty much 95% of the decisions you've got to make in 3.5

It's really a lot like magic. Most of it involves just making up your deck. Actually playing the deck is fairly straightforward. In fact, the best strategic decision you can make in 3.5 is writing druid or wizard on your character sheet.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:56 am

RandomCasualty2 wrote:Then apparently there is quite a lot of failure with specific feats/spells and whatever, because like 90% of the stuff is unusable and making a good character is pretty much 95% of the decisions you've got to make in 3.5

Yeah, and I don't think anybody argued against that. It's just a couple steps ahead of a crap systemic base - helped by the fact that you can improve 3.x's balance a lot just by writing stuff out, while 4E ... isn't a game: you'd have to write it again to have something a non-retard* would play.

*: non-retarded people can play 4E, by the expedient of being extremely drunk. And the aftermath still might feel like waking up beside someone ... undesirable.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 1:59 am

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
Voss wrote: That isn't game mastery. At all.
That is purely & simply the designers failing with specific feats/spells/whatever.
Then apparently there is quite a lot of failure with specific feats/spells and whatever, because like 90% of the stuff is unusable and making a good character is pretty much 95% of the decisions you've got to make in 3.5

You do realize that this board largely exists because of the failures of 3rd edition, right? All the criticism and new ideas come from the problems, not the good points.

But that doesn't explain why you think game mastery is something completely removed from what it actually is.

95% is something of an exaggeration. Yes, you're going to have problems if you choose shit. But here's an interesting thing: if you can take the shitty stuff and do something impressive with it at the table, you'll vastly improve your game mastery. You'll actually get better faster than the people who curbstomp the monsters with the broken shit- take the toys that make them win away, and they're going to suck ass. This works in magic, too. The really good players can take an average or crap deck and bitchslap the power-decks.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:05 am

Voss wrote:The really good players can take an average or crap deck and bitchslap the power-decks.

Really? I haven't played magic much, but there seems to be more luck than skill once the deck is made. I think this is very true of things like fighters (cough soul calibur, dead or alive, etc cough), but magic seems to have a lot of dependance on the cards since there is no "block or counter their combo" inherent to every deck.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 2:39 am

Its been a while since I've played but I can remember some of the old tournament standards back in the early days, and people who could just crush them on a fairly reliable basis.

Its a lot like sports with handicaps. Some players are just better than others, others are more practiced. Some just manage the intuitive leaps when they need them.

SphereOfFeetMan · Post by **SphereOfFeetMan** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:41 am

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
SphereOfFeetMan wrote: -3.x is tactically divergent. It is as simple or complex as the Dm and players make it.
That's kind of true, but only for mages and only if the DM is willing to invent a lot of new spells or rules.

I mean as written RAW there's just no great counter against teleportation if you're not a cleric capable of casting forbiddance. Since monsters usually don't have cleric spells, they probably aren't going to be protected against that.

False.

You don't have to invent new spells or rules. You need to use existing spells or rules.

Hallow/Unhallow is the classic example. In 3.5* (and similarly in 3.0) a half-fiend/half-celestial with 13 or more hd can use Hallow/Unhallow as a SLA and attach Dimensional Anchor. It isn't difficult for a society, or a cult, or a group of mid level characters, or an intelligent monster to attain the services of either a half-celestial or a half-fiend. Anyone that needs to be protected from teleportation, will be.

*(For whatever stupid reason, Andy Collins nerfed Hallow/Unhallow in 3.5, but it is still a functional counter.)

rapa-nui · Post by **rapa-nui** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:50 am

Few Magic decks just "play themselves". Some of the more broken combo engines can be like that, but in virtually every modern Standard game the combo decks face crucial choices about when to try and "go off" specially against control decks. Recent combo decks include: Pickles, Dragonstorm, Dredge Bridge, and Reveillark.

That said, RC's point on class balance in 3.5 still stands.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:55 am

Voss wrote: This works in magic, too. The really good players can take an average or crap deck and bitchslap the power-decks.

Not true at all. You can take any of those store bought prebuilt decks and give it to a great magic player, and you can hand a newbie a type I tournament deck and the newbie is going to win pretty much every time.

The basic strategy is pretty simple:

-If you have a land, you play it.

-Then you just play every card you can as fast as you can, so long as the need is relatively great.

-Whenever it is safe to do so, you attack with your creatures.

Now this changes when you play better decks, but against a crap deck, you just do what your deck is built to do and you're going to win.

I mean a few decks take a bit of finesse, like a counterspell style deck, but if you're playing something like weenie rush or a land destruction deck, an idiot could play it.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:18 am

Feel free to prove that. Seriously, go find a dozen 'great magic players' and a dozen newbs and try it.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:25 am

Voss wrote:Feel free to prove that. Seriously, go find a dozen 'great magic players' and a dozen newbs and try it.

I don't really have to. I mean all you have to do is get a quick and easy newbie strategy. Lets take a land destruction deck.

1. If I get a land, I'm going to play it.
2. If I have enough mana and can cast a spell that destroys a land, I cast it.
3. If I have enough mana to cast a creature spell, I'll summon the creature. Always summon the most powerful creature you can.
4. Cast any remaining permanents that you can, like artifacts or enchantments.
5. If you can attack, you attack.

Seriously, just follow that algorithm or a variation thereof, and you'll be fine playing against a shit deck with an awesome one. And that's a realistic strategy a newbie could use, and takes virtually no brains to execute.

I mean when one guy is got moxes and black lotus and the other guy is playing with homelands cards, he is fucked, regardless of how godo his strategy is, he's not going to win. He doesn't have the tools to even formulate a decent strategy, because he lacks the cards. There's only so much you can do.

Username17 · Post by **Username17** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:03 am

RC, your grasp of tactics never ceases to amaze. Land Destruction decks can't keep up with land playing, the lock is achieved by subverting specific land or chaining multiple land destructions together to drop your opponent's ability to do things on key turns after you've made a hand glut or purged creatures.

Seriously, your plan of playing a top tier Land D deck is almost destined to lose against virtually anyone.

With your amazing grasp of tactics, I'm not surprised you keep defending 4e D&D, where that level of tactical ability is seriously more than adequate.

-Username17

K · Post by K » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:07 am

Ideally, a game system would allow for as much tactical variety as a player can stand. That being said, people with more tactics are generally perceived as "more powerful" because there are more times when they can act during an adventure, and there is more potential to do tactically original things.

On the tactics-heavy side, you have 3e. There are a lot of potential tactics in even the SRD. Heck, there are a lot of tactics available if you just use silent image as your one and only tactic.

In 4e, there are 6-7 tactics available to players, and around one per two monsters (lots of overlap). The trick is to take those 6-7 tactics and use them against the hordes of monster tactics.

At the end of the day, there are such things as better players. In 3e or 4e, some people are still going to use what they have better than people who have the exact same set-up. Less experienced or tactically minded characters will always shine less often than experienced or tactically minded people.

The flaw of 3e is that it lets people take bad tactics in their effort to give lots of tactics, while the flaw of 4e is that it tries to eliminate the gap between experienced/tactical players and their counterparts by removing tactical complexity from all the players.

At the end of the day, 3e rewards immersion in the system by accepting that some players are better while 4e attempts to punish it by neutering the game experience to a point where even the designers bemoan the lack of tactically interesting things to do (see the article on the first 4e adventure's design).

Both are failures.

No one has seemed to figure out that the solution is "lots of original tactics and none are bad." You have to be pretty creative to do it, but that's the answer.

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:27 am

So, here's some wacky ass shit. Wizards put up a 4e version of a module they put up on the website last fall. Its an interesting look at how much 4e diverges from 3rd. It should be noted that its, 1- written by Ari Marmell, the genius who brought the epic fail that is the shadowcaster to the game, and 2- a blatant Lovecraft rip.

Both versions are in this archive:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/duarch/ad

And wow, does this shit diverge wildly. The levels are roughly the same, but the stat blocks make me laugh out loud. Partly because the 4e ones aren't significantly shorter than the 3rd edition ones, and partly because these fuckers made a completely different game.

Example:
3rd edition

Althanis, Cult of Dagon Leader CR 8
LoM 61
hp 42 (7 HD); DR 5/magic
Male pseudonatural human cleric 7
CE Medium outsider (augmented humanoid)
Init +1; Senses darkvision 60 ft.; Listen +3, Spot +3
Languages Common
AC 19, touch 11, flat-footed 18
(+1 Dex, +7 armor, +1 shield, 2 deflection against good only [protection from good]))
Miss Chance 20% (ranged only) entropic shield
Immune mind-affecting (good only, protection from good)
Resist acid 5, electricity 5, fire 10 (resist energy); SR 16
Fort +6, Ref +3, Will +8; +2 against good (protection from good)
Speed 20 ft. in breastplate (4 squares), base speed 30 ft.
Melee mwk morningstar +5 (1d8–1)
Ranged mwk light crossbow +7 (1d8/19–20)
Base Atk +5; Grp +4
Atk Options rebuke water creatures/turn fire creatures 5/day (+2, 2d6+9, 7th), rebuke undead 5/day (+2, 2d6+9, 7th)
Special Actions alternate form, spontaneous inflict spells, true strike
Cleric Spells Prepared (CL 7th, 8th for evil spells):
4th—poison (+7 melee touch, DC 16), unholy blightD(DC 17)
3rd—bestow curse (DC 16), cure serious wounds, magic circle against goodD, wind wall
2nd—fog cloudD, hold person (DC 15), resist energy†, silence (DC 15), spiritual weapon (+7 melee touch)
1st—bless, command (DC 14), doom (DC 14), entropic shield†, protection from goodD†, sanctuary (DC 14)
0—detect magic, guidance, light, resistance (2), virtue
D: Domain spell. Deity: Dagon. Domains: Evil, Water.
†Already cast
Abilities Str 8, Dex 12, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 14
SA rebuke water creatures, rebuke undead, turn fire creatures, true strike
SQ aura of chaos, aura of evil
Feats Alertness, Improved Initiative, Sudden Still (Complete
Arcane; as Still Spell, but can be applied spontaneously
without increasing spell slot, 1/day), Swift Horror (unique feat; allows Althanis to adopt his alternate form as a move action)
Skills Bluff +5, Concentration +11, Knowledge (religion) +4, Knowledge (the planes) +5, Listen +3, Spellcraft +5, Spot +3
Possessions masterwork morningstar, masterwork light crossbow, masterwork light steel shield, +1 breastplate, pearl of power (1st), 20 bolts, holy symbol of Dagon
Alternate Form (Su) As a move action, Althanis can take the form of a grotesque mass of rubbery, squidlike flesh with numerous writhing tendrils. Despite the alien appearance, his abilities remain unchanged. Other creatures receive a –1 morale penalty on their attack rolls against Althanis when he is in this alternate
form.
True Strike (Su) Once per day, Althanis can gain a +20 insight bonus on a single attack roll. In addition, he suffers no miss chance against a target that has concealment or total concealment when making this attack.

4e guy:

Althanis, High Priest of Dagon’s Cult (A) Level 9 Elite Controller (Leader)
Medium elemental humanoid XP 800
Initiative +6 Senses Perception +8; low-light vision
Dagon’s Blessing aura 2; allies that begin their turns in this
area gain a +2 bonus to damage rolls until the start of their
next turn
HP 194 Bloodied 97
AC 25; Fortitude 20, Reflex 23, Will 24
Resist 5 acid, 5 cold, 5 poison
Saving Throws +2
Speed 6
Action Points 1
m Mace (standard; at will) ✦ Weapon
+14 vs. AC; 1d8 + 4 damage.
r Dagon’s Fang (standard; at will) ✦ Psychic
Ranged 10; +13 vs. Fortitude; 2d6 + 6 psychic damage.
r Dagon’s Flame (standard; at will) ✦ Radiant
Ranged 10; +13 vs. Fortitude; the target is pushed 1 and
blinded until the end of Althanis’s next turn.
R Dagon’s Maw (standard; at will)
Make two Dagon’s fang attacks, two Dagon’s flame attacks,
or one of each.
C Winding Serpents (standard; recharge 4+) • Necrotic
Close blast 5; +13 vs. Reflex; 2d8 + 6 necrotic damage, and
phantom serpents wind about the target, restraining the
target until the end of its next turn.
R Command (standard; encounter) ✦ Charm
Ranged 10; +13 vs. Will; the target is dazed until the end of
Althanis’s next turn, and the target slides 4 or is knocked
prone.
C Ring of Terror (immediate reaction, when an enemy moves
adjacent; encounter) ✦ Fear
Close burst 1, triggering target only; +13 vs. Will; the target
is pushed 4.
Horrific Repulsion (immediate reaction, when first bloodied;
encounter) ✦ Fear
Althanis recharges and immediately uses his ring of terror.
Horrid Form (immediate reaction, when first injured in combat;
encounter) ✦ Polymorph
Althanis takes on the form of a grotesque mass of rubbery,
squidlike flesh with numerous writhing tendrils. All
enemies take a –1 penalty to melee and ranged attacks
against Althanis in this form until he is bloodied. Despite
the alien appearance, his other abilities remain unchanged.
Alignment Chaotic evil Languages Abyssal, Common
Skills Religion +9
Str 10 (+4) Dex 14 (+6) Wis 18 (+8 )
Con 17 (+7) Int 10 (+4) Cha 22 (+10)

Its also worth noting how the bog standard fish-guys change. The level 1 rogues with 16 hit points become 77 hp meat shield lurkers. And there are more of them. Its a nice reminder of how fucked up the 3rd edition CR system is, and how fucked up the 4e system is in a completely different way.

K · Post by K » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:41 am

I think the most telling thing is that I can skim the 3e block and know how to use him almost immediately, while his 4e block requires that I read each of his unique powers and then figure out his best strategy and tactics.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:09 am

FrankTrollman wrote:RC, your grasp of tactics never ceases to amaze. Land Destruction decks can't keep up with land playing, the lock is achieved by subverting specific land or chaining multiple land destructions together to drop your opponent's ability to do things on key turns after you've made a hand glut or purged creatures.

Well the idea is to slow the other guy down, and pound on him with creatures that double as land destruction, like avalanche riders. Now I don't really know the latest magic sets since I haven't kept up, so I'm not sure what a type II land destruction looks like, but type I you pretty much just slowed the guy down, plus probably mix in some artifact destruction to hit moxes and sol rings and such then you just chewed him up wtih a few creatures.

Cynic · Post by **Cynic** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:14 am

Virgileso speaking:
Land destruction decks require more detail than that list of if/then statements you gave, as timing and target selection matter immensely.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:19 am

K wrote:I think the most telling thing is that I can skim the 3e block and know how to use him almost immediately, while his 4e block requires that I read each of his unique powers and then figure out his best strategy and tactics.

Well yeah, but that's largely because he's just a cleric. The rest of his block is shit, so you're just going to skip to the spells and see what he's got prepared. It's all you really need to know fro a cleric. In this case, it seems all he does is run up and try to touch people and poison them or use bestow curse. Definitely doesn't seem CR 8, especially considering for a touch attack based guy, his AC is pathetically low and he has only 42 hit points.

So basically he runs up to try to poison someone and the party fighter tears him to bits. Hell, even a monk would shred him at level 8. He's lucky if he survives long enough to cast even one of those spells he's got.

virgil · Post by **virgil** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:34 am

*sigh*
Wind Wall (if ranged present), Fog Cloud, Unholy Blight, Silence, Hold Person, likely in that order and modified based on party composition

'slightly' different results if you use tactics

Voss · Post by **Voss** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:54 pm

He's in a fairly small room, so I wouldn't bother with the first two. The spell selection is a bit... wacky based on location and what he is. He also already has entropic shield & protection from good up, and has a passable SR based on the level of the PCs (who are supposed to be 6th), so I wouldn't bother with many more defensive spells, especially if you have to burn actions in combat.

Because Ari is an incompetent ass, there are also a lot of errors in the stat-block. Notably, Init and spot/listen aren't modified by his feats.

Bigode · Post by **Bigode** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:51 pm

RandomCasualty2 wrote:Well yeah, but that's largely because he's just a cleric.

Yeah, because the earlier and lesser failure didn't use EBD, you know.

Talisman · Post by **Talisman** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:54 pm

Bigode wrote:
RandomCasualty2 wrote:Well yeah, but that's largely because he's just a cleric.
Yeah, because the earlier and lesser failure didn't use EBD, you know.

EBD = Eldritch Break-Dancing?

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:03 pm

Talisman wrote:
Bigode wrote:
RandomCasualty2 wrote:Well yeah, but that's largely because he's just a cleric.
Yeah, because the earlier and lesser failure didn't use EBD, you know.
EBD = Eldritch Break-Dancing?

We wish.