4th Edition

[Loki_42]

Given that new generations seem to skip generations, (such as Haley's granddad being a 1st edition thief, and some of the older people appearing in the comic being 1st and 2nd edition characters) if any of the characters were to have children, would they be 4th ed.?

[Sahaar]

It IS plausible, but I don't think Teh Giant would do that for two reasons.

1. The story will most likely ALWAYS be focused on the current characters.

2. 3.5>4.

[PopcornMage]

V does have children.

They're adopted.

I wonder if that says something about the relationship between the editions.

[Katana_Geldar]

3.5>4.

Editions wars FTL

But no, he won't. And he's said so.

[BobTheDog]

3.5<4.

You got your math wrong, but don't worry, we're here for you. :smallbiggrin:

Unfortunately I have to agree with the giant in this one... Even if 3.5 -> 4e conversion jokes have enormous fun potential, OotS is now at a point where it would detract from the story.

Plus, the best jokes on lately have been of the more "editionless" generic-RPG jokes. Or even the "that's what HE said" bit (which made me LOL for the first time in a few pages).

Anyway, I'm half expecting to see something along the lines of:

:vaarsuvius: Firecube?
:elan: *whisper* I guess he's using the new distance system?

:elan: *casts* Majestic Word!
:roy:
:elan: Uhh... I mean... Cure Light Wounds!!

[Katana_Geldar]

What I'd like to see as a joke is a group that comes across a 4e party, as 4E does exist in the OOTS world.

[Xykeb Zraliv]

I'm pretty sure this was a hypothetical question regarding whether the offsprings of the main characters (which, other than V's kids, will probably not ever actually star in the comic except maybe in an epilogue or something similar) would follow the pattern of younger characters being of current editions and older characters being of older editions, and not whether an actual conversion between 3.5 and 4 would actually happen throughout the course of the story.

Although at the same time, expressed this way the question doesn't really have an answer at all.

[JRKlein]

3.5>4.

Let's all argue about which edition is best. Actually, let's not. I have seen into the future, and I have seen that 5th Edition will be the best edition ever.

Anyway, we don't know what edition-rules Roy's dad used, nor his grandpa. His grandpa teaches him a feat, and IDK if 1st edition even had feats. So... *shrug*

[Katana_Geldar]

No, his grandpa teaches him a MOVE and says he will need to spend a feat, not the same thing.

[PopcornMage]

Anyway, we don't know what edition-rules Roy's dad used, nor his grandpa. His grandpa teaches him a feat, and IDK if 1st edition even had feats. So... *shrug*

Leaving out some house rules, no, it didn't.

But maybe he picked it up in the Afterlife. People can convert.

[Eldan]

If V's kids are adopted Orphans, maybe they are Pathfinder?

[Dr.Epic]

I don't see how the giant would spend time showing this. Not to mention nearly none of the main characters have children.

[Ancalagon]

If V's kids are adopted Orphans, maybe they are Pathfinder?

Aren't they longer around than 4th (both in-comic as well in regard to RL-time)? Their first mentioning surely was before 4th, so they are not good candidates.

[Leecros]

Not to mention nearly none of the main characters have children.

...yet,


Admittedly though 9 chances out of 10 none of the main characters will have any kids until the end of the story(if they survive).

Pregnancy in a story like this on one of the main characters is more of a stumbling block than good plot exposition.:smallsigh:

[Souhiro]

There was a lot of joker about the inclusion PathFinder in this world.

<Roy> Vaarsuvius! I need you to polymorph me into a better being. Something stronger, something more skilled... Polymorph me into a HUMAN!
<V> Wait a moment! I have to polymorph me into a more suitable and intelligent being, capable of bolster my mental prowess into a maxium; a form more suitable to overcome the hardress of the spell resistance of the beings that dwells into this world. I will Polymorph me into an ELF
<Belkar and Durkon> Can anyone polymorph us into something that favores our classes?
<Belkar> Yeah, but not a halfling, Charisma Sucks!

[gooddragon1]

2. 3.5>4.

QFT.

(Btw, I spent a good amount of time fighting in the edition wars :) (http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d12/gooddragon1/2.jpg))

[Morty]

Honestly, I've never seen Haley's "Dad was a 1st edition Thief" as anything more than an off-hand joke made in the earlies days of the comic. After all, many characters way older than Haley's father - or not much younger in case he really isn't just a human - are 3rd edition characters.

[Psyren]

What I'd like to see as a joke is a group that comes across a 4e party, as 4E does exist in the OOTS world.

It's not clear however whether it exists as separate "laws of physics" that applies to some heretofore unseen adventuring party, or simply as a tabletop pastime within the universe.

We see Kubota reading a sourcebook and Durkon makes a "power source" joke, but that doesn't mean there are actually 4e adventurers running around in OotS-land.

[Jothki]

A conversion to 4th edition can never happen because the Warlord class exists, and Roy having to either switch to it after spending so much time claiming that Fighters can make good team leaders would be embarrassing.

[Kish]

You left out one of your clauses. Also, considering the amount of time he's been the team leader and the recent demonstration that the group completely falls apart without him, your premise needs work.

Which isn't to say that they're ever going to convert to 4ed, just that the reasons they won't have nothing to do with "theoretical optimization."

[PopcornMage]

A conversion to 4th edition can never happen because the Warlord class exists, and Roy having to either switch to it after spending so much time claiming that Fighters can make good team leaders would be embarrassing.

Nah, it's easy as pie.

:roy: <insert random Warlord Power of Awesome Sauce here>? Well now that's WHAT I'm talking about!

The real trick is:

:haley: Wait, I have to switch to a hand crossbow??

[gooddragon1]

Personally, I love how oots makes use of illusion spells like invisibility and image creation to advance the plot as well as other spells that are more than just damage. That's one of the reasons that I feel that oots will never convert to 4e. Because 4e is just damage and a few modifiers with "sticky note (http://schools.u-46.org/images/image/EHS/facs/post-it%20note%201.jpg)" effects pasted on to them. I feel that only 3.5 (though other editions before 3.5 were great too) can provide the correct tools to Rich that make the story as good as it is. Otherwise, he'd probably have to rely on GM intervention all the time just to make the story work.

[Loki_42]

I wasn't really thinking that the comic would convert or anything. Just a random thought that popped into my head.

[TreesOfDeath]

The order will convert to 4th edition about the same time Duke Nukem Forever comes out.




Wait that has a realse scheduled now? Nevermind...


1) Rich dislikes 4e as do many readers 2) This is mostly definately a 3.0/3.5 comic.

Theirs a chance you might see more 4th edition jokes (ignorance power source blah blah) and maybe even some one shot 4th edition guys as the butt of a joke, but now main characthers in the main comic.

I guess the tc's suggestions are possible for an Epilogue, who knows?

[faustin]

I think comic strips nº 175-176 show author frank opinion about converting to 4th edition.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0176.html

[PopcornMage]

Hexes are problem from a different edition, or even a different game.

OoTS, not shy about taking advantage of opportunities to be funny.

[Darakonis]

I think comic strips nº 175-176 show author frank opinion about converting to 4th edition.

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0176.html

Care to elaborate on what connection exists between those strips and your point?

Peace,
-Darakonis

[Mando Knight]

1) Rich dislikes 4e as do many readers 2) This is mostly definately a 3.0/3.5 comic.

Theirs a chance you might see more 4th edition jokes (ignorance power source blah blah) and maybe even some one shot 4th edition guys as the butt of a joke, but now main characthers in the main comic.
I believe you're putting words in Rich's mouth. When the Giant said the comic wasn't converting to D&D 4e, he noted that at the time he hadn't even read the rules, that the characters' capabilities were too developed as-is to try to translate them to another set of rules (as indeed, many character options weren't available at the time, including Elan's entire class), and that the story has progressed quite a ways from being just cheap cracks about RPG rules (both in general and D&D 3.5 in specific) anyway.

In fact, your point 1) as a reason for nonconversion is specifically denied in the same news post:

But not in the way you might think. I’m not making some ideological stand about how the current 3.5 Edition is superior or any such thing. I’m simply saying that there will not be a conscious and visible change in the comic strip, wherein the characters convert to a new set of rules as they did in the very first strip. There are many reasons for this, not the least of which is that the purpose of the comic has shifted away from its original goal of simply poking fun at a game to an actual story, and it is that story on which I would like to focus.

Equally important is the fact that the new edition departs radically from prior versions of the game in terms of what classes and races are initially described. Whether or not this is good for the game isn’t really my concern; I’m more interested in the fact that converting would introduce dozens of unnecessary changes in my story. At the very least, I would need to devote many strips to showing off the ways that characters have been changed by the new rules, strips I would rather devote to advancing the story. This sort of thing isn’t as crucial a problem for a gaming group considering the new game, but when switching would force several of my main characters to significantly change their powers and abilities—and some wouldn’t even have their new abilities defined yet for at least another year!—it becomes less palatable. Again, though, to be crystal clear: This is not a condemnation of the new rules by me. I have not read them yet, having failed to get my hands on an advance copy some time ago. They may well be the finest fantasy roleplaying rules ever written. I wouldn’t know. What I DO know is that they are not suited to my needs as a storyteller at this time.

However, this does NOT mean that I will stop making jokes about the fact that the characters exist within a world that operates like a roleplaying game. Nor will I limit myself to either jokes about 3.5 Edition or 4th Edition. I’ll go where the humor takes me, and if that happens to create gross inconsistencies, then so be it. As an added benefit, I expect it will drive the fans who try to figure out exactly what is occurring in each strip from a strict D&D rules perspective absolutely nuts. If it really bothers anyone, simply imagine that the OOTS world follows someone’s homebrewed hybridization of 3.5 and 4th Editions, using bits and pieces from whichever ruleset they think works better.

[faustin]

Sorry, I though it was a subtle comparison about 4th edition square combat and movement.

[PopcornMage]

It's from 2005, and the strip itself is based on concepts in 3.5, so I'd be doubtful of that.

[Kish]

1) Rich dislikes 4e as do many readers
Pretty sure that's Telephone Game. If Rich has ever indicated any particular opinion on 4ed, I haven't seen it.

OotS will, of course, not convert, for many reasons.

[Zevox]

Sorry, I though it was a subtle comparison about 4th edition square combat and movement.
Considering that 3rd edition uses square-based grids for combat and those comics were posted long before 4th edition was so much as announced, no, no it was not.

Zevox

[silvadel]

5th ed will play itself.

Who knows -- maybe it is 4th ed inside the snarl. I know that is where I would consign it to.

[gooddragon1]

5th ed will play itself.

Who knows -- maybe it is 4th ed inside the snarl. I know that is where I would consign it to.

That's a bit extreme, I'd say by 5th edition they'll turn DDI into an actual MMORPG with the rulebooks that you buy working for tabletop but a whole lot of pressure (and even advertising in the rulebooks themselves) for players to go to the MMORPG. Expect level caps like in Fallout 3. As for the tabletop itself, the game probably won't change too much from 4th ed other than to be even more MMORPG format friendly so that they can make DDI into one. Think of it like this: pick a few cards from a magic the gathering deck and depending on mana cost you can play them either once per match with the other player, once per game with the other player, or every round with the other player. You can't use more than one ability once per round though. Also, you take penalties for going multicolor. That's pretty much what it is now, but with the new 5th ed you'll get even more tack on effects to make it feel less like a pure numbers game.

EDIT: Also, the Snarl would not present nearly as much of a challenge if it were the container of 4e. I could use more flavorful (not profane) comments to make light of 4e and the Snarl but I'll hold back.

[Boogastreehouse]

♪♫ Resist, resist, resist, resist the urge to insult 4th edition. ♪♫♪

[Souhiro]

There is another PIVOTAL point:

In D&D4, A Lich's philacterie is replaceable. You destroy the Lich, and the philacterie re-spawns the lich. And you destroy the philacterie, and the lich makes another new. Since the main enemy is a lich, and I'm pretty sure that The Giant has in mind a way to use the Kriptonite-factor of the philacterie; removing the Only and Fatal weakness of the Lich would trash many plans of the final battles again Xykon.

[Winged789]

Guys, first page of the freak'n comic, PC's get updated to 3.X. It's not generation based, if one fighter is 3.X they all are, thus even if you were a first edition rogue you are currently a 3.X rogue. So no, any offspring will not be 4th ed unless the whole world slides on over.

[Leolo]

Personally, I love how oots makes use of illusion spells like invisibility and image creation to advance the plot as well as other spells that are more than just damage. That's one of the reasons that I feel that oots will never convert to 4e. Because 4e is just damage and a few modifiers

In fact such things exist in 4E and could be used by Rich, and the "there's only damage" thing is not really plausible.

The bigger Problem would be the power level. Rich is telling an epic story and 4E has a much lower power level than 3.5 including epic rules. And of course some of the things that are good for the game does not really work out in a stick comic strip. For example i would really like to see Roy using more than 1 or 2 combat options, using different maneuvers and improvised options in every fight. Because it would fit the character. But how would this be shown? Would roy call the name of the attack in a speech balloon? Would it be shown as drawn moves?

Possible. And it would look cool without any doubt. And it would be fun to play such a character. But in the comic it would take the place of his puns and funny little sarcasm. And i would rather have this than cool moves for roy. There are many things in OOTS that are based on things that are not perfect in 3.5. Maybe 4E does really makes them better at the gametable, but that does not translate into a better comic. Think about the half giant power gamer with a spiked chain. It summarizes so much that is bad on the system. But it is funny.

Of course some other jokes would actually work. For example V could still be rather a blaster wizard than using the classic optimization route. And there could be still gags about bards being weak based on elans intelligence score and the point that he is not even using his spells for something useful. And belkar would work better as a 4E ranger anyway. But there are so much jokes based on things that are fixed or do not work any longer like before that it would just kill some fun.

[Kish]

Guys, first page of the freak'n comic, PC's get updated to 3.X.

No. First page of the comic, PCs get updated from 3.0ed to 3.5ed.

Which may not directly relate to your point, I just don't want more people thinking the Order was 2ed before the first online comic.

[Souhiro]

You know. I don't expect that, because that joke was used in the very first panel. Jokes about that pitiful 4ed; or about Pathfinder would be welcomed, but upgrading jokes... nieh!

[faustin]

My GM always says :"Palladium system is like the deformed son who, casually, has a more normal life than his brothers and cousins".

Sorry, i cannot post here his texual opinions about 4TH edition because forum rules about rude language and verbal insults.:smallredface:

[gooddragon1]

In fact such things exist in 4E and could be used by Rich, and the "there's only damage" thing is not really plausible.

Sure, anything is "possible" in D&D or any other tabletop game when the DM just says it happens. The difference is 3.5 has better mechanics for it and has them actually integrated with certain classes. Rituals take too long for combat applications anyways.

Furthermore, I mentioned sticky note effects in addition to damage. What I mean by this is: damage+stun, damage+move target, damage+sticky note effect. That's all 4e is. They had to reduce it to numbers to balance the game. It's true that it does balance the game, but at that point your really might as well play an MMO. The only niche 4e fits is those who want a quick story through massively simplified combat while having flexibility in being able to describe their actions. That's why it alienated a huge segment of D&D. Because people realized they could play an MMO with more content than a DM could ever release faster than a P&P game trying to do the same thing when the only difference between the two is how flexible the game was in letting you describe your actions. Besides, our ability to describe our imaginations these days has nothing on the graphics of WoW (with the exception of Rich's comic, which is in fact, awesome).

Lastly, you might note, that for doing the same "2 attacks over and over", Rich has made it so that Roy's attacks seem to be much more varied than that. He has done this by taking advantage of the same differentiating factor that 4e seeks to achieve against MMO's: The descriptive ability of D&D.

I feel that 4e sacrificed too much on the altar of balance when they should have realized that DM's do exist and are not stupid. I play 3.5 and no one in the party tries to use cheese, but even if they did, I know he would just say no to it. 4e treats both players and DM's as though they don't know what they're doing.

[PopcornMage]

I'm pretty sure as a DM, I don't make my players fight the same thing every week for months on end. I might not have the art skills, but I think I can do slightly better. :smalltongue:

[gooddragon1]

I'm pretty sure as a DM, I don't make my players fight the same thing every week for months on end. I might not have the art skills, but I think I can do slightly better. :smalltongue:

Making players fight bunches of 1hp minions is just as bad. :smallamused:

[Leolo]

Sure, anything is "possible" in D&D or any other tabletop game when the DM just says it happens. The difference is 3.5 has better mechanics for it and has them actually integrated with certain classes. Rituals take too long for combat applications anyways.

Furthermore, I mentioned sticky note effects in addition to damage. What I mean by this is: damage+stun, damage+move target, damage+sticky note effect. That's all 4e is.

The problem with this logic is: There are powers that grant (for example) invisibility. No damage. Just invisibility. They exist within the game, no one has to ask the DM if he can handweave it. The same for many other effects. (Including illusionary effects)

So - no, the described pattern is not all 4e is, and yes - effects like the effects described above could be used.

The time rituals would take might really be a hindering thing sometimes - but it is not unknown within the story. In fact Rich has already proven how casting time can be used to evolve the story. (As V does not want to wait 10 minutes for Roy being back to life (s)he went to Xykon alone)

As said above there are simple bigger problems with using 4E as OOTS system than the question if durkon could cast wind walk within 6 seconds to get elan and himself to the rest of the group or if he would have to cast 10 minutes to get a similar effect.

You have to look at it from a story perspective. From those things that are hindering the characters are no problem as long as the story evolves.

The bigger problem are how you can make fun out of those things. It is no problem to make a joke about a wizard who assumes he is almighty and responsible for every problems solution. You just have to let him or her fail by ignoring some detail or just too much faith in the own power. This is much harder if the class has less reason to be such arrogant in the first place.

So it is a good thing for gamers to bring balance to the game. But not automatically a good thing for a webcomic. The problem with 4E are not that parts of it that are bad. The problem are the good parts. You can not make fun about them.


Lastly, you might note, that for doing the same "2 attacks over and over", Rich has made it so that Roy's attacks seem to be much more varied than that. He has done this by taking advantage of the same differentiating factor that 4e seeks to achieve against MMO's: The descriptive ability of D&D.

And that would actually be a point for really using 4E as a game system. Rich has always ignored the rules when they does not match to the story. And - as you said above: He sometimes already did it in a way that matches what the new version did. (Same reason: It is simple a good idea that a fighter is not bound to a stereotype).

And 4E dungeon mastering is all about "do what makes your evening exciting" that could easily translated in "do what ever makes the story exciting" for OOTS purposes.

But as said above. I do not think that it would be a good idea to convert over all. Too much effort, too much problems with existing story facts and character conversion.

Though a 4E webcomic from the start on would be great.

[Darakonis]

It's true that it does balance the game, but at that point your really might as well play an MMO. The only niche 4e fits is those who want a quick story through massively simplified combat while having flexibility in being able to describe their actions. That's why it alienated a huge segment of D&D. Because people realized they could play an MMO with more content than a DM could ever release faster than a P&P game trying to do the same thing when the only difference between the two is how flexible the game was in letting you describe your actions. Besides, our ability to describe our imaginations these days has nothing on the graphics of WoW (with the exception of Rich's comic, which is in fact, awesome).


Right, that's why I play D&D. It's not because of the communal storytelling experience wherein I'm immersed in a plot that is tailored to my character and his backstory, where my contributions to the gameworld are unique, where I can devise clever plans that no computer game system can ever hope to replicate for decades to come, where wit and a silver tongue can be deadlier than a +5 Vorpal Longsword, where there is always another dungeon to pillage, another realm to conquer, another plane of existence to explore, where the actions of my character can shake the very foundation of the world...

1e, 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e... There always have been, and there always will be, haters. But at the end of the day, D&D is D&D, and no computer can EVER reproduce the experience that a good DM can provide, and no edition of D&D can remove the heart and soul of pen-and-paper RPGs: the roleplaying.

Enough with the edition wars.

Peace,
-Darakonis

[PopcornMage]

Edition Wars, what are they good for, absolutely nuthin!

[gooddragon1]

The problem with this logic is: There are powers that grant (for example) invisibility. No damage. Just invisibility. They exist within the game, no one has to ask the DM if he can handweave it. The same for many other effects. (Including illusionary effects)

So - no, the described pattern is not all 4e is, and yes - effects like the effects described above could be used.

The time rituals would take might really be a hindering thing sometimes - but it is not unknown within the story. In fact Rich has already proven how casting time can be used to evolve the story. (As V does not want to wait 10 minutes for Roy being back to life (s)he went to Xykon alone)

As said above there are simple bigger problems with using 4E as OOTS system than the question if durkon could cast wind walk within 6 seconds to get elan and himself to the rest of the group or if he would have to cast 10 minutes to get a similar effect.

You have to look at it from a story perspective. From those things that are hindering the characters are no problem as long as the story evolves.

The bigger problem are how you can make fun out of those things. It is no problem to make a joke about a wizard who assumes he is almighty and responsible for every problems solution. You just have to let him or her fail by ignoring some detail or just too much faith in the own power. This is much harder if the class has less reason to be such arrogant in the first place.

So it is a good thing for gamers to bring balance to the game. But not automatically a good thing for a webcomic. The problem with 4E are not that parts of it that are bad. The problem are the good parts. You can not make fun about them.

And that would actually be a point for really using 4E as a game system. Rich has always ignored the rules when they does not match to the story. And - as you said above: He sometimes already did it in a way that matches what the new version did. (Same reason: It is simple a good idea that a fighter is not bound to a stereotype).

And 4E dungeon mastering is all about "do what makes your evening exciting" that could easily translated in "do what ever makes the story exciting" for OOTS purposes.

But as said above. I do not think that it would be a good idea to convert over all. Too much effort, too much problems with existing story facts and character conversion.

Though a 4E webcomic from the start on would be great.

Somehow, perhaps it is just me, I feel that I could play an MMORPG and get the same entertainment value that I would get out of 4e. 3.5 Just has... more to it than 4e. If we assume that a game has a good DM then there really isn't any benefit in switching to 4e. There are however the hindrances of having to make up new rules all the time for the many things 4e took out (summoning for example?). So, Rich would probably be forced to make up new things more than focus on the story as a result. I can see your counterpoint with 4e being okay if you use the descriptive strength of D&D, but really, 3.5 can do that too. Therefore, since the only benefit of balance that 4e had over 3.5 was not needed due DM's not being unable to think, I believe that 4e was wholly unnecessary. It should not be as it is. Perhaps that is why I've yet to see any advertisements for it these days on the gaming sites I usually visit. No one felt that they needed to "upgrade". I know companies need to make money, but there must have been a better way.


Right, that's why I play D&D. It's not because of the communal storytelling experience wherein I'm immersed in a plot that is tailored to my character and his backstory, where my contributions to the gameworld are unique, where I can devise clever plans that no computer game system can ever hope to replicate for decades to come, where wit and a silver tongue can be deadlier than a +5 Vorpal Longsword, where there is always another dungeon to pillage, another realm to conquer, another plane of existence to explore, where the actions of my character can shake the very foundation of the world...

1e, 2e, 3e, 4e, 5e... There always have been, and there always will be, haters. But at the end of the day, D&D is D&D, and no computer can EVER reproduce the experience that a good DM can provide, and no edition of D&D can remove the heart and soul of pen-and-paper RPGs: the roleplaying.

Enough with the edition wars.

Peace,
-Darakonis

I agree, no matter what happens to D&D, no edition will ever remove the roleplaying. However, it can make it more difficult. I'll cede that both editions can then capture the true flexibility of D&D and therefore be fun, but I still feel that 3.5 had so much more to offer and it was killed in it's prime. So, on the extent of the peace thingy (and everyone want's peas peace), I'd say that among the prohibited topics on the forum should be edition wars. I looked and it's not there.

NOTE: I'd always hated 4e so much (TBH, I trolled the WotC boards for 6 months (PsionX) with 10 different accounts (8 of which got permabanned) and the last 2 I alternated between before I just decided to stop), but at least now, I realize that what matters most isn't the system but whether you roleplay or not. I'll have to share that revelation with the 2 people who are pro-4e in my D&D group that I always make jests at.

[Boogastreehouse]

I read a conversation that I came across on a random a gaming forum (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/22029837/?pg=last) where a 3.5 player was contemplating ways in which he might use the spell Mordenkainen's Magnificent Mansion in new and creative ways, specifically how he might use it in a combat situation.

As I was reading though the thread, I realized that this was exactly the sort of thing that they were trying to stamp out in 4th Edition.

While some of the possibilities discussed are kinda cheese, and should probably have been disallowed by the DM, the fact is that 4E took that decision away from the DM altogether. Every character's abilities became so cookie-cutter similar and carefully defined, that there was no longer any wiggle-room; no opportunity for the the DM or player to spring the occasional surprising application of a spell or magic item on the group.

I played 4E long enough to get my wizard to 10th level and, sure, there was some fun to be had, but I just kept waiting for the rest of my group to get tired of the system and go back to 3.5 (they did).

I'm glad I didn't actually buy any of the books, because not only would they be collecting dust right now, but also because I didn't reward them for striving to make the game a little less fun.

[Aron Times]

4e powers are mainly used for combat. For everything else, there are rituals and roleplaying.

Yes, roleplaying. If you want your wizard (or any other character) to investigate the mysterious disappearances of his colleagues during a solar eclipse, you roleplay talking to random NPCs, gathering information, finding clues, etc. instead of casting Scrying and instantly solving the mystery without having to do any roleplaying.

Or perhaps you want to figure out which of the nobles in the masquerade ball is a changeling assassin. Instead of casting Detect Thoughts to instantly expose the spy (and violate innocent people's privacy at the same time), you have to do some actual detective work to uncover the assassin before he kills again.

Yes, there are countermeasures to the abovementioned plot-breaking spells, but this simply reinforces how broken these spells are. Noncasters have no chance of figuring the mystery out since they can't cast the necessary spells to do so, and it gets even harder when the enemy uses magical countermeasures.

The fact that 3.5 has a spell for everything has spoiled most gamers who rely too much on such plot-breaking spells in place of actual roleplaying.

[Eldan]

You can do just as much roleplaying in 3.5. Probably more, for the simple reason that it has these spells, which open up entirely new avenues of RPing. Honestly, ask any player in my Skype games: there's a lot of detective work. Scrying doesn't solve any riddle instantly. You have to know where to look, when to look and how to interpret what you see.

And see, I don't want powers which just have combat uses. Combat is mostly boring, and I feel as if I'm wasting my characters resources by even learning such powers. But 4E doesn't really give me the option not to do that.

[Aron Times]

Powers in 4e are intended for use in combat. D&D 4e (and all editions) assume that the player characters are adventurers, and adventurers get into combat a lot. 4e succeeds exceedingly well at being a game of adventure, of dungeons and dragons.

The various spells that open up avenues of investigation in 3.5 are only available to casters. That's fine if you like your casters to be able to do everything, but it sucks for the fighters and rogues who are stuck using mundane and inferior methods of information gathering. The DM literally has to go out of his way to negate abovementioned detective spells in order to provide a challenge for the casters. He also has to go out of his way to make the fighter and other noncasters useful, since they don't get enough skill points or any abilities that can actual help them with these tasks.

Anything that proves challenging to casters become impossible challenges to noncasters. I'd rather have a game where the fighter can actually protect the party instead of one where he becomes dead weight past the earliest levels.

4e powers may look like they "only" deal damage with some status effects tacked on, but most 3.5 spells are like that. 4e takes out all the superflous fluff and condenses spell writeups into power blocks.

If you look at my signature, I have more active 3.5 characters than 4e ones. 3.5 is playable if you intentionally hold back and try not to break it, but 4e lets me go all-out with customization without worrying about breaking the game.

Edit: Basically, you don't have to sacrifice fighting ability for cool, noncombat powers in 4e. Powers and rituals were intentionally separated so that you don't have to choose one or the other. Combat spells in 3.5 = powers in 4e, while noncombat spells in 3.5 = rituals + roleplaying in 4e.

[gooddragon1]

Powers in 4e are intended for use in combat. D&D 4e (and all editions) assume that the player characters are adventurers, and adventurers get into combat a lot. 4e succeeds exceedingly well at being a game of adventure, of dungeons and dragons.

The various spells that open up avenues of investigation in 3.5 are only available to casters. That's fine if you like your casters to be able to do everything, but it sucks for the fighters and rogues who are stuck using mundane and inferior methods of information gathering. The DM literally has to go out of his way to negate abovementioned detective spells in order to provide a challenge for the casters. He also has to go out of his way to make the fighter and other noncasters useful, since they don't get enough skill points or any abilities that can actual help them with these tasks.

Anything that proves challenging to casters become impossible challenges to noncasters. I'd rather have a game where the fighter can actually protect the party instead of one where he becomes dead weight past the earliest levels.

4e powers may look like they "only" deal damage with some status effects tacked on, but most 3.5 spells are like that. 4e takes out all the superflous fluff and condenses spell writeups into power blocks.

If you look at my signature, I have more active 3.5 characters than 4e ones. 3.5 is playable if you intentionally hold back and try not to break it, but 4e lets me go all-out with customization without worrying about breaking the game.

Edit: Basically, you don't have to sacrifice fighting ability for cool, noncombat powers in 4e. Powers and rituals were intentionally separated so that you don't have to choose one or the other. Combat spells in 3.5 = powers in 4e, while noncombat spells in 3.5 = rituals + roleplaying in 4e.

Got a little something on that last point there: You sort of are required to optimize in 4e. In 3.5 you don't have to. I actually play a suboptimal elven cleric (elven because I need enough time to get an immortality feat approved by my DM (he wouldn't allow elans)). The cleric is a fire/luck domain cleric and I'll get the fiery burst feat. Already have heighten spell. So all I have to do is heighten my burning hands spell to the highest slot and prepare healing or a few utility spells in the rest. Technically, I'm playing somewhat like how 4e does, but I don't have to if I don't want to. It's possible that my group is the exception rather than the rule, but as it is none of us really do anything to break the game. It's a joint effort to balance between the players and the DM.

[tcrudisi]

Got a little something on that last point there: You sort of are required to optimize in 4e. ... It's possible that my group is the exception rather than the rule, but as it is none of us really do anything to break the game. It's a joint effort to balance between the players and the DM.

Required to optimize in 4e? The game is balanced. By definition, no one is required to optimize. Ever. If you have 5 people who have never played D&D before create characters, they certainly won't be the best characters ever, but they will be decent and they won't be an unplayable mess like if they created characters in another system.

And, no, I suspect your group is the norm for 3.5. My group typically had 1 person break the game every time and it just sort of rotated between us as to who did it. We didn't always do that, though, and when we didn't, the Wizards always made the Fighters look bad. It wasn't intentional, and must of our Wizard optimization-fu consisted of Glitterdust. But that was enough to make the non-casters look bad. They won out-of-combat and in-combat. Yeah, we still played our Robin Hood or King Arthur rip-offs and had fun, but it was frustrating to feel powerless next to (what I have since learned is) horribly played Wizards. "I've got a spell that'll fix this for us if we rest for the night" were words very, very commonly heard around the table. It's fine having a character that can shine in one aspect of the game, but when your character is completely out-classed in every aspect by another character, it does become frustrating. That's why, I think, we did the rotating broken characters. And it's now why all but one of us (out of approximately 12 without counting) made the switch to 4e. And I fully expect we will make the switch to 5e, when 5e fixes the problems with 4e, until we have the absolute perfect system for us.

(While we didn't know the first thing about optimizing a wizard, we did figure out jump-chargers and 30-armed monstrosities that do 2000 damage in a round.)

[gooddragon1]

Required to optimize in 4e? The game is balanced. By definition, no one is required to optimize. Ever. If you have 5 people who have never played D&D before create characters, they certainly won't be the best characters ever, but they will be decent and they won't be an unplayable mess like if they created characters in another system.

And, no, I suspect your group is the norm for 3.5. My group typically had 1 person break the game every time and it just sort of rotated between us as to who did it. We didn't always do that, though, and when we didn't, the Wizards always made the Fighters look bad. It wasn't intentional, and must of our Wizard optimization-fu consisted of Glitterdust. But that was enough to make the non-casters look bad. They won out-of-combat and in-combat. Yeah, we still played our Robin Hood or King Arthur rip-offs and had fun, but it was frustrating to feel powerless next to (what I have since learned is) horribly played Wizards. "I've got a spell that'll fix this for us if we rest for the night" were words very, very commonly heard around the table. It's fine having a character that can shine in one aspect of the game, but when your character is completely out-classed in every aspect by another character, it does become frustrating. That's why, I think, we did the rotating broken characters. And it's now why all but one of us (out of approximately 12 without counting) made the switch to 4e. And I fully expect we will make the switch to 5e, when 5e fixes the problems with 4e, until we have the absolute perfect system for us.

(While we didn't know the first thing about optimizing a wizard, we did figure out jump-chargers and 30-armed monstrosities that do 2000 damage in a round.)

I think that if a system generally tries to balance towards an expected power level, if you deliberately go below that power level you are going to run into problems. 3.5 left it to the DM to set the power level much more than 4e. I suppose you could throw lesser encounters though. Anyways, I've never seen anyone in my group try anything remotely broken. And lolwut 30 armed monstrosities? I'm no optimization guy. I've read the core and that's about it.

EDIT: Oh rite, well in our games if you want a spell outside of the core rules or an item costing more than 1000 gp, it either has to show up in an adventure or you have to request a special adventure for it. That helps a lot in reducing what we get access to.

[Mystic Muse]

Okay, lets try to get back on track here.

To the OP. It's a possibility. I can't really say much else because I'm not Rich. Their kids could be 1E,2E,3E,4E,5E, or 101E. It's up to him.

[Aron Times]

I think that if a system generally tries to balance towards an expected power level, if you deliberately go below that power level you are going to run into problems. 3.5 left it to the DM to set the power level much more than 4e. I suppose you could throw lesser encounters though. Anyways, I've never seen anyone in my group try anything remotely broken. And lolwut 30 armed monstrosities? I'm no optimization guy. I've read the core and that's about it.

EDIT: Oh rite, well in our games if you want a spell outside of the core rules or an item costing more than 1000 gp, it either has to show up in an adventure or you have to request a special adventure for it. That helps a lot in reducing what we get access to.
It's harder to accidentally gimp your character in 4e unless you go out of your way to do so. And if you want to play a character who sucks in combat, D&D 4e is not the game for you. As I mentioned above, the game assumes that you are playing an adventurer who goes out on quests for fame and fortune, and a player character who is useless in a fight is basically an NPC.

Playing a noncombatant in D&D is like playing a mortal in Vampire. It could work, but you're missing the point of the system.

Also, Ignorance is bliss. You do realize that 90% of the broken stuff is in Core? 3.5 relies on a DM to balance it, while 4e was built to be balanced by itself. You're committing the Oberoni Fallacy right there, which can be summed up as, "There's no problem because the DM can fix it." If there was no problem, the DM wouldn't have had to fix it in the first place.

I like 3.5, and still play it (note the 3.5 characters in my signature). However, I am not willfully blind to its flaws. I accept that it is broken, but I'm having fun with it anyway. Denying that a problem exists doesn't make it go away.

[Aron Times]

Back on topic...

It would be funny if the Giant did a dream sequence where the Order is converted to 4e.

Order of the Stick

:roy: Roy becomes a warlord, which is a leader/striker. He has done little defending throughout the strip, focusing more on leading the Order and dealing damage. He gets the irresistible urge to pull off Xanatos Gambits. And he can heal!

:haley: Haley switches to a crossbow, since rogues can no longer sneak attack with bows in 4e.

:durkon: Durkon downgrades to chain armor and becomes a balanced cleric (melee/ranged).

:belkar: Belkar gains the ability to dual-wield scimitars with no penalty. Scimitar Dance + Stormwarden = SEXY, SHOELESS, GOD OF WAR!!1!1

:vaarsuvius: Vaarsuvius becomes a tome wizard with a ton of spells and rituals in his/her spellbook. If he stays an elf, he gets Elven Accuracy (he will not miss with that daily), while if he turns into an eladrin, he gets Fey Step (BAMF teleport).

:elan: Elan becomes a valorous bard with Vicious Mockery refluffed into Vicious Punnery. Gets knocked out cold by Roy on a regular basis since the latter can now heal him back up from 0.

Team Evil

:redcloak: Redcloak is now a laser cleric. We've never seen him go melee, so laser cleric is a perfect fit.

:xykon: Xykon is still a lich sorcerer, though I'm not sure what kind. Dragon? Cosmic? Chaos? Storm? Probably Dragon or Cosmic Sorcerer, as he is strong enough to manhandle O-Chul and Vaarsuvius.

Tsukiko becomes a cleric|wizard and is more powerful than her 3.5 incarnation.

Linear Guild

:nale: Elan's evil twin is basically a refluffed bard. Quite ironic, considering how Nale disdains bards.

:thog: Nale's psychopathic manchild companion is now a primal character, and he channels nature's fury through his rages.

:sabine: Sabine is now a devil instead of a demon, but that doesn't really affect thing since the Blood War is over.

[faustin]

There is some elements I like from the 4th edition, like the variety of pacts for warlocks :Illidan pacts, HarryDresden fairies pacts, Cthulhu pacts, FullMetalAlchemist Pride pacts, etc..... for example, Dark Suns templates have more sense as warlocks (king sorcerer pacts) than paladins (divine casters).

[SoC175]

etc. instead of casting Scrying and instantly solving the mystery without having to do any roleplaying. Except there are rituals that allow the caster to do things like Gathering Information (well, Streetwising actually) from the whole city at once without even having to leave his room by simply tapping into the "subconscious hivemind" of all inhabitants. Or first ask the murder victim some questions, then see the last moments through it's eyes and then "scry the past" of the crime scene for good measure. Or if you happen to have the murderer's weapon you can just "past scry" anyone who ever wielded it. And if you still have no pieced it together you might ask a powerful devil/demon/deity.

By now 4e has all these things back and more on top of that.

[tcrudisi]

Except there are rituals that allow the caster to do things like Gathering Information (well, Streetwising actually) from the whole city at once without even having to leave his room by simply tapping into the "subconscious hivemind" of all inhabitants. Or first ask the murder victim some questions, then see the last moments through it's eyes and then "scry the past" of the crime scene for good measure. Or if you happen to have the murderer's weapon you can just "past scry" anyone who ever wielded it. And if you still have no pieced it together you might ask a powerful devil/demon/deity.

By now 4e has all these things back and more on top of that.

Yes, but here's the inherent difference: anyone can cast rituals in 4e. Whereas a Fighter in 3.5 cannot cast spells in other editions without giving up his chosen class, any class in 4e can learn rituals for, at most, 2 feats (and usually just 1).

So if the Fighter feels as though he isn't contributing enough out-of-combat? It will take him at most 2 levels to fix this: retrain at his next level-up then use his next feat on ritual casting. Alternatively, since you get feats slightly more than every-other level, there's a better than even chance he can just re-train and take the feat as soon as he levels up.

[Eldan]

Playing a noncombatant in D&D is like playing a mortal in Vampire. It could work, but you're missing the point of the system.


Interesting. So my entire group had been missing the point for the bigger part of four years. We usually did one combat every two sessions, and tried to keep that one short.

Really, though, I guess we just expect different things from our games. I dislike both the fluff and rules of 4e, or what I have seen of it. My main problem with the rules is that I basically can't exchange combat power for out-of combat power if I want to: all my characters will always have combat power. I don't want to be forced to be good in combat. It should be my choices the player.

[JoeSkull]

Interesting. So my entire group had been missing the point for the bigger part of four years. We usually did one combat every two sessions, and tried to keep that one short.

Really, though, I guess we just expect different things from our games. I dislike both the fluff and rules of 4e, or what I have seen of it. My main problem with the rules is that I basically can't exchange combat power for out-of combat power if I want to: all my characters will always have combat power. I don't want to be forced to be good in combat. It should be my choices the player.

Hmmm... I was of the opinion that we dont need rules to roleplay. If your group wants to spend all their time RP then whip up some out of combat powers that they get whenever they get combat powers.

Im getting up set with all the people that think that just cause they got rid of the castle price/lvl chart they dont want them to RP anymore. They dont give you out of combat rules because only combat needs rules.

{Scrubbed}

[Aron Times]

Interesting. So my entire group had been missing the point for the bigger part of four years. We usually did one combat every two sessions, and tried to keep that one short.

Really, though, I guess we just expect different things from our games. I dislike both the fluff and rules of 4e, or what I have seen of it. My main problem with the rules is that I basically can't exchange combat power for out-of combat power if I want to: all my characters will always have combat power. I don't want to be forced to be good in combat. It should be my choices the player.
But you still had combat, even if it was just once every other session. Characters who can't fight have no place on the battlefield. They just get in the way and end up getting themselves and their comrades killed.

The thing about 4e is that you do not have to choose between combat power and out of combat utility. You get to have your cake and eat it, too. A character that can't fight has no business being an adventurer. You don't lose anything by taking combat powers; you get them on top of all the noncombat abilities your character has.

You don't have to have a combat encounter each session in 4e. You can run a session where there's no combat at all. However, your character still has the ability to defend himself by default just in case you run into trouble.

[Maximum Zersk]

Guys, can you please stop with the Edition Wars? I don't wanna see this thread locked! -Puppy eyes-

Hmm, I would think that it would be quite amusing, indeed. But what classes would, say, V's kids be?

[Eldan]

Hmmm... I was of the opinion that we dont need rules to roleplay. If your group wants to spend all their time RP then whip up some out of combat powers that they get whenever they get combat powers.

Im getting up set with all the people that think that just cause they got rid of the castle price/lvl chart they dont want them to RP anymore. They dont give you out of combat rules because only combat needs rules.

If you really need rules to tell you how to RP then it seems to me that you are doing it wrong.

We had fun the way we did it. And I didn't say we didn't need rules, we just didn't fight much. But having rules for skills, character creation, spells and so on definitely helped a lot.

Anyway, I'm still very much of the opinion that the materials used have a lot of influence on what kind of roleplay is done. Compare an AD&D Planescape monstrous appendix to a 4E monster manual. Theoretically, one could roleplay a game of battleship or monopoly. But it isn't done. The rules don't encourage it, and they certainly aren't helping.

[Aron Times]

Guys, can you please stop with the Edition Wars? I don't wanna see this thread locked! -Puppy eyes-

Hmm, I would think that it would be quite amusing, indeed. But what classes would, say, V's kids be?

They're noncombatants, along with Kyrie, which means that they don't have stats. Note that even a level 1 wizard in 4e is not some mere apprentice casting his first cantrip, but a skilled spellcaster who has graduated wizard school. Likewise, a level 1 fighter is not a new recruit still in boot camp but a well-trained soldier who knows how to fight.

A player character in 4e is somewhere between the power level of an elite monster and a solo monster of the same level.

[Eldan]

They're noncombatants, along with Kyrie, which means that they don't have stats. Note that even a level 1 wizard in 4e is not some mere apprentice casting his first cantrip, but a skilled spellcaster who has graduated wizard school. Likewise, a level 1 fighter is not a new recruit still in boot camp but a well-trained soldier who knows how to fight.

A player character in 4e is somewhere between the power level of an elite monster and a solo monster of the same level.

Which are another two problems. If my players want to fight them (they probably wouldn't) they won't have stats and I'd have to make them up. And 4E wouldn't give me the possibility to play an apprentice or recruit.

[Little_Rudo]

Which are another two problems. If my players want to fight them (they probably wouldn't) they won't have stats and I'd have to make them up. And 4E wouldn't give me the possibility to play an apprentice or recruit.

I believe (I don't have a copy at hand) the Monster Manual has stats for level 2 minion Human Commoners. I'd make those the generic non-combatant, civilian NPCs of the game world, and just refer to those stats in the rare instances mechanics are needed.

[tcrudisi]

Which are another two problems. If my players want to fight them (they probably wouldn't) they won't have stats and I'd have to make them up. And 4E wouldn't give me the possibility to play an apprentice or recruit.

If your players want to fight them, they suddenly have stats. They are now combatants. You give them stats. Flip open the MM, find an appropriate monster, and bam - they now have stats.

I can actually see an easy way to play an "apprentice or recruit", and I'd do it the exact same way I'd do it in 3.5, ironically. But since it's a house-rule for both, that doesn't really fit in with the debate at hand.

As for those of you begging for the thread to get back on topic? It was never really on topic to begin with. Let's look at the very first response given at the beginning of this thread:


2. 3.5>4.

It was hijacked at the beginning and I doubt there will be any "getting back on track," unfortunately. Which is a pity because I liked the initial question and it had absolutely nothing to do with "which is better between these two editions?" at all.

[Aron Times]

Which are another two problems. If my players want to fight them (they probably wouldn't) they won't have stats and I'd have to make them up. And 4E wouldn't give me the possibility to play an apprentice or recruit.

They don't need stats because even if they did, the PCs would one-shot them, making statting them in the first place a waste of time. So if your PCs want to fight someone that can't fight back, just tell them that they kill them before they could even react. This has the double benefit of speeding up the game and not rewarding the {Scrubbed}

[Eldan]

It has nothing to do with psycho muchkinism. I can think of any number of scenarios where the PCs are utterly justified in attacking commoners. You know, roleplaying.

[DeltaEmil]

And these commoners who ought to be weak and pathetic in comparison to trained brigands and spellslingers need combat stats for what? Because that's what hit points, defense values and attack bonus are here for.

If players are making their characters attack npc children and bakers, then the gm either did something seriously wrong, or it's a superhack-and-slay-psycho-game where statting out time-wasting non-combatants is useless anyway. If it's not a psycho-hack-and-slay-game, and the gm wants to teach the players a lession by making super-commoners who can wipe the entire party like in MMORPGs, where every town guardian is like maximum level, then the gm is wasting time anyway.

[Aron Times]

It has nothing to do with psycho muchkinism. I can think of any number of scenarios where the PCs are utterly justified in attacking commoners. You know, roleplaying.

But again, they're going to one-shot them anyway. And if they don't get one-shotted, they weren't commoners to begin with. And if your PCs are attacking commoners, you have bigger problems than having to stat every single Average Joe NPC in your game.

I'm not going to argue further, as you're committed to disliking 4e's design chocies. Let's get back to the Order of the Stick using 4e rules.

[Darakonis]

Just a note about stat-ing out commoners... In real life, if someone is hit by pretty much any kind of weapon wielded by a professional (or even a punch by a trained warrior), they're down. So it is fair to assume that commoners are minions. Further, since commoners are not trained in combat, and 10-11 are their average ability scores, any attacks they perform will be basic melee attacks without modifiers, and they obviously have no combat powers.

What is there to stat out? If you have time to spare and want to make one commoner who is tougher, one who is more agile, one who trained for years in the use of the club, that's fine--4e doesn't prevent anyone from doing that.

D&D has always been a rules system intended to focus on adventuring warriors. Is it wrong to have a party that consists of a butcher, a baker, and a candlestick maker? Absolutely not--but there are other systems better suited for that. I would recommend checking out GURPS (Generic Universal RolePlaying System). It's extremely versatile, can adapt to any setting, and is chock full of rules to govern non-combat oriented skills and abilities--infinitely more so than D&D 3.5.

Peace,
-Darakonis

[Kish]

D&D has always been a rules system intended to focus on adventuring warriors.
4ed is the first edition of D&D to explicitly make almost all the rules about combat. Is that good or bad? Opinions differ. Certainly it's a change. Certainly it's presumptuous to tell the people who consider the removal of those rules a loss that they're "doing it wrong."

[Felhammer]

Which are another two problems. If my players want to fight them (they probably wouldn't) they won't have stats and I'd have to make them up. And 4E wouldn't give me the possibility to play an apprentice or recruit.

Why do you need a book to tell you how to make a commoner? :smallconfused:

[Darakonis]

Certainly it's presumptuous to tell the people who consider the removal of those rules a loss that they're "doing it wrong."
I certainly hope you didn't infer that I was telling anyone that they're "doing it wrong," because there was no such implication. My point was that the D&D rules assume you're going to make a heroic fantasy figure, whereas the GURPS rules allow you to create absolutely anything you want to make, from a flying superhero that shoots lasers from his eyes to a 10-year-old boy genius to a mundane farmer.

Of course removal of rules is a loss--removal of any content, whether it is loved by all or loved by a minority--is always a loss. In a perfect world, I'd play a game system that had rules to govern every minutia imaginable, and would have searing back pains from having to transport the hundreds of tomes required to govern such rules.

Peace,
-Darakonis

[Kish]

I certainly hope you didn't infer that I was telling anyone that they're "doing it wrong,"
No, that was JoeSkull.

[Morph Bark]

Daigo and Kazumi Kato's child will no doubt be a hybrid/multi-classed [insert every 4E class here].

But he won't ever rise to Paragon levels as he just isn't a PC. :smallfrown:

Too bad we won't see them again for a while...

[Loki_42]

You know, its a shame that you can't even be original when derailing a thread.




I'm not going to argue further, as you're committed to disliking 4e's design chocies. Let's get back to the Order of the Stick using 4e rules.

Its funny, because that's not even what I was ever suggesting. A one time joke with a 4th edition child. That is all.

[JRKlein]

Like it or not, here is what 4e does right: it's cheap. Instead of paying who-knows-how-much on an assload of books, all you need to pay now is $10 per month for a DDI subscription. It's also accessible; character creation is very streamlined, and even inexperienced players can make a fairly useful character.

[Forum Staff]

After several requests to get back on topic, this thread is still derailed, and treading heavily on infractable comments disparaging other people's play preferences. Thread locked. Scrubs and infractions may follow.