[4e] Wish List

[Mr. Friendly]

Things you are hoping and wishing for in 4th Edition. Be it rules loopholes closed or new books or whatever.

Myself, I am hoping for a book that details new Power Sources all in one book, so Psionics, Incarnum and maybe something else. A 4e Tome of Magic sort of.

What would be really spiffy would be if said wished for power source book also gave a generic list of some other power source ideas, then listed a sort of basic template of Strikers, Controllers, Leaders and Defenders with some form of mechanics chart to let you (easily) build your own class.

[Shishnarfne]

Really, what I want for 4e is for a fun-to-play, reasonably balanced system.

A reduced amount of codex creep would be nice.
No loopholes would be ideal, but limited ones would be better than many.

But really, as long as it's fun, reasonably balanced, and not too hard to play, I'll probably end up playing it.

...and how many ninjas got here first?

[Azerian Kelimon]

Summin' a 367 item long list:

1) A system which is the perfect paragon (non pseudonatural) of High fantasy tabletop RPG gaming.

[averagejoe]

Less racism toward goblins & affiliates.

[Theli]

All I want from 4E is the capability to homebrew as easily as in previous editions.

[Serenity]

1. Warblade kills the fighter and takes his stuff.
2. Swordsage kills the monk and takes his stuff.
3. I'm mostly fine with Crusader and Paladin co-existing, but for simplicity's sake, combining them might be good.
4. Tone down the power of casters. Make magic a powerful and attractive option, but not one that can simply be the 'I win' button for every situation.
5. Thorough, thorough playtesting.

[Fax Celestis]

A CR system that works.
An LA system that works.
Incarnum updated.

That's really...about it, for me.

[Skjaldbakka]

5th edition. ASAP.

[SpikeFightwicky]

- Easy monster modification.
- Easy monster creation.
- The ability to have more memorable fights (at later levels, it seems combat ends in 1-2 rounds).
- Gnoll and Kuo-Tua fluff.
- Classes that play as well and fun as they look on paper or in theory (monk and fighter come to mind...).

[Glawackus]

I want to never be able to make up my mind about what character to make--not because I'm afraid not being viable in combat or not being able to help the party, but because there are so many good options that it's hard to pick just one. Make that part of character creation hard for me, Wizards.

(Oh, and an improved CR system and less Vancian-style magic would be great. :smalltongue:)

[wormwood]

I'll go one step farther than less Vancian-style magic. I say throw it out entirely because it was crap 30 years ago when it was written. That is my only wish for D&D 4th edition.

Looks like I'm not gonna get it, though.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Look like you just got lucky then, cause a little bird told me they're doing away with alot of Vancian Casting

[Morty]

Less racism toward goblins & affiliates.

While I heartily agree, it's a futile wish, I'm afraid.
As for my wishlist- it'd be too long to type, but what I'd really want is that they leave Vancian casting alone, as that's what made D&D magic unique and enjoyable for me. But sadly, they removed it for some elusive reason.

[Caxton]

Fools this is 4e, you get no wishes. Regardless, I'd wish for vancian system UPGRADE, more balance, and for the love of all things holy BRING BACK BIRTHRIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Fax Celestis]

While I heartily agree, it's a futile wish, I'm afraid.
As for my wishlist- it'd be too long to type, but what I'd really want is that they leave Vancian casting alone, as that's what made D&D magic unique and enjoyable for me. But sadly, they removed it for some elusive reason.

"Elusive" being "because 90% of the people who play the game dislike it for some reason"?

[Mr. Friendly]

Well for what its worth, according to what I have read, there will still be some Vancian casting and some Factotum-esque casting. So it makes for a good balance I would say. You keep your big guns as Vancian 1/day and the small stuff becomes at will or 1/encounter stuff. I can live with that as it sounds like as happy a middle ground between the camps of "Get rid of Vancian" and "Keep Vancian".

[Goff]

"Elusive" being "because 90% of the people who play the game dislike it for some reason"?

87% of people know that you can prove anything by making up statistics.

[Fax Celestis]

87% of people know that you can prove anything by making up statistics.

Well, of course I'm approximating, but even the people who like Vancian casting admit, "I'm weird because I like Vancian casting."

[martyboy74]

I'd like a fix on the environmental hazard rules.

I mean, really, healing via drowning?

[Goff]

Well, of course I'm approximating, but even the people who like Vancian casting admit, "I'm weird because I like Vancian casting."

My point is such statements are misrepresentative, especially when you have no evidence - evidence is the key, until you have that it's all hearsay. In fact the yea or nay (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67095) thread suggests a slight bias towards Vancian casting, for what it's worth.

On topic, I'd like to see the Tarrasque in 4ed, and I'd rather he not be trumped by a new-fangled epic monster in every other monster splat-book Wizards release.

[Fax Celestis]

My point is such statements are misrepresentative, especially when you have no evidence - evidence is the key, until you have that it's all hearsay. In fact the yea or nay (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67095) thread suggests a slight bias towards Vancian casting, for what it's worth.

I would presume that the bias presented there is largely due to the Vancian adherents being more vocal than those who are looking for something else...and possibly also because the people who dislike Vancian magic are also sick of the "let's argue about Vancian magic" threads.

[Goff]

I would presume that the bias presented there is largely due to the Vancian adherents being more vocal than those who are looking for something else...and possibly also because the people who dislike Vancian magic are also sick of the "let's argue about Vancian magic" threads.

Interestingly, I have only noticed anti-Vancian advocates being particularly vocal. Just because you and/or your circle of friends feel that something's bad, it's still presumptuous to assume that the majority of people agree with you. Alot of people like the way wizards work now and just want to see them rebalanced a bit (although I personally like the sound of the middle-ground between the Vancian flavour and never running out of spells).
Anyway, I've made my point, there's no reason to continue derailing this thread.

[Fax Celestis]

Interestingly, I have only noticed anti-Vancian advocates being particularly vocal. Just because you and/or your circle of friends feel that something's bad, it's still presumptuous to assume that the majority of people agree with you. Alot of people like the way wizards work now and just want to see them rebalanced a bit (although I personally like the sound of the middle-ground between the Vancian flavour and never running out of spells).
Anyway, I've made my point, there's no reason to continue derailing this thread.

I'm not presuming anything more than what I've heard and seen from my experiences with other people, through this forum or otherwise. But yes, let's stop derailing the thread. *goes to argue in the other thread*

[Metal Head]

I'd like a fix on the environmental hazard rules.

I mean, really, healing via drowning?

Wait, what? *goes of to check the DMG*

[Alyosha]

Most of the things I would like out of 4e is some more concise rules that allows more fluid gameplay. I've been playing DnD for a year and a half now and I still don't get all the rules for grappling (glad they're fixing it), trip attempts, terrain features, natural hazards, destroying objects, etc.

Oftentimes if I want to learn a rule in the current edition of DnD, I make a portion of the adventure apply especially to the rules I want to learn. It's a pain.

[kpenguin]

Less fluff in the core rule books.

[clericwithnogod]

I would presume that the bias presented there is largely due to the Vancian adherents being more vocal than those who are looking for something else...and possibly also because the people who dislike Vancian magic are also sick of the "let's argue about Vancian magic" threads.

Funny, it has always seemed to me that the opponents of Vancian casting have been a very vocal minority on message boards rather than a largely silent majority among the DND population. There certainly hasn't seemed to be any reluctance to throw "getting rid of Vancian magic" into threads.

I've played with a lot of (A)DnD(Xe) groups over the years for multi-year campaigns, one shots and everything in between. I can't recall a complaint about Vancian casting (and certainly not usage of the term Vancian casting) in any of them.

[Fax Celestis]

Funny, it has always seemed to me that the opponents of Vancian casting have been a very vocal minority on message boards rather than a largely silent majority among the DND population. There certainly hasn't seemed to be any reluctance to throw "getting rid of Vancian magic" into threads.

I've played with a lot of (A)DnD(Xe) groups over the years for multi-year campaigns, one shots and everything in between. I can't recall a complaint about Vancian casting (and certainly not usage of the term Vancian casting) in any of them.

//shrug Maybe I'm wrong then. Prove it to me.:smallamused:

[Wordmiser]

Less fluff in the core rule books. So many people want this that I can't understand WotC's constant tendency to describe the Warlock and Paladin as "dripping with flavor."

[Azerian Kelimon]

Really odd. I want MORE fluff.

In a separate chapter from mechanics, of course. A template world, a few short beginning for adventures, and maybe a few encounters, all in a special chapter in the DMG.

[Goff]

Really odd. I want MORE fluff.

In a separate chapter from mechanics, of course. A template world, a few short beginning for adventures, and maybe a few encounters, all in a special chapter in the DMG.

Hear hear!

[horseboy]

For it to offer me something other than just nostalgia.

[Mr. Friendly]

Ok, trying to get the discussion back on track. 4th Edition: things you are hoping and wishing for, be it supplements or rules or whatever.

If you want to discuss Vancian vs. Non-Vancian, head over to the other thread. :smallbiggrin:

[Reinboom]

The ability to enjoyably play monsters - and be balanced.
Less full caster power.
Ability to multiclass freely/easily.
A license similar to the OGL that allows me to homebrew easily.

[Accersitus]

87% of people know that you can prove anything by making up statistics.

Don't forget that 10 out of 9 get fooled by statistics.

[Inyssius Tor]

1. An obvious difference in some portion of the underlying system, arrived at through very thorough playtesting.

If I'm going to shell out ninety bucks for 4E, I want something more than "3.5, but not as broken."