Well, it did have some problems with things like encouraging parties to use the same tactics in every fight: open with the encounter powers, then switch to at wills once you used the encounter powers, and fights dragging on because party damage output didn't keep up with the way monsters grew in durability.
Well, it's not like using the same tactics every fight was a new thing to 4th edition, it's not like 3e or 5e don't do the same thing. You'd probably need a random powers system (say, a deck of power cards where you only get a few of them) to really get variance in tactics. Higher level slog was an issue, but it's not like it was the only edition that started seeing considerable scaling problems after level ten or so.
Well, it did have some problems with things like encouraging parties to use the same tactics in every fight: open with the encounter powers, then switch to at wills once you used the encounter powers, and fights dragging on because party damage output didn't keep up with the way monsters grew in durability.
Well, it's not like using the same tactics every fight was a new thing to 4th edition, it's not like 3e or 5e don't do the same thing. You'd probably need a random powers system (say, a deck of power cards where you only get a few of them) to really get variance in tactics. Higher level slog was an issue, but it's not like it was the only edition that started seeing considerable scaling problems after level ten or so.
I do think there's at least a small psychological difference between "I guess I hit it with my hammer again" and "I guess I'll use this same At-Will Power again". That said, it did feel kind of cool to have "powers" as a martial at all...
What I miss from 4e is the Warlord (not really a "rule", I guess). 5e Paladins and Bards could be built to mimic their skill set to a degree... but it's not quite the same, ya know?
I do think there's at least a small psychological difference between "I guess I hit it with my hammer again" and "I guess I'll use this same At-Will Power again". That said, it did feel kind of cool to have "powers" as a martial at all...
I think the main psychological difference is that it lampshades the fact that more interesting options exist, plus the fact it has flavor text makes it more restrictive than a normal basic attack. I'm reasonably sure that the intent was that routine fight should take about long enough for you to use all of your at-will and encounter powers once, and a big fight should also add dailies, and since the higher level just has more abilities, it should take longer, but I'm not at all convinced that was good design (I found Heroic tier fun in 4e, and stuff really started bogging down once you hit Paragon).
What I miss from 4e is the Warlord (not really a "rule", I guess). 5e Paladins and Bards could be built to mimic their skill set to a degree... but it's not quite the same, ya know?
You can kind of do a warlord with some choices as a battle master fighter, but they're fairly mediocre choices.
Third Edition, characters could attempt to trip, disarm, bull rush, or sunder an enemy's weapon or shield in combat. No feat necessary (though they greatly improved your chance of success), not dependent on limited-use class abilities. It was always funny to see a wizard's face when you disarmed his Staff of Wizardry.
Some monsters had Rend, which if they hit with two claw attacks (usually it was claws) they'd automatically hit with a third, high-damage attack. Also, trample was a fun ability for big monsters. And finally, way more monsters had damage vulnerabilities: being able to exploit those added more depth to combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, it's not like using the same tactics every fight was a new thing to 4th edition, it's not like 3e or 5e don't do the same thing. You'd probably need a random powers system (say, a deck of power cards where you only get a few of them) to really get variance in tactics. Higher level slog was an issue, but it's not like it was the only edition that started seeing considerable scaling problems after level ten or so.
I do think there's at least a small psychological difference between "I guess I hit it with my hammer again" and "I guess I'll use this same At-Will Power again". That said, it did feel kind of cool to have "powers" as a martial at all...
What I miss from 4e is the Warlord (not really a "rule", I guess). 5e Paladins and Bards could be built to mimic their skill set to a degree... but it's not quite the same, ya know?
I think the main psychological difference is that it lampshades the fact that more interesting options exist, plus the fact it has flavor text makes it more restrictive than a normal basic attack. I'm reasonably sure that the intent was that routine fight should take about long enough for you to use all of your at-will and encounter powers once, and a big fight should also add dailies, and since the higher level just has more abilities, it should take longer, but I'm not at all convinced that was good design (I found Heroic tier fun in 4e, and stuff really started bogging down once you hit Paragon).
You can kind of do a warlord with some choices as a battle master fighter, but they're fairly mediocre choices.
Third Edition, characters could attempt to trip, disarm, bull rush, or sunder an enemy's weapon or shield in combat. No feat necessary (though they greatly improved your chance of success), not dependent on limited-use class abilities. It was always funny to see a wizard's face when you disarmed his Staff of Wizardry.
Some monsters had Rend, which if they hit with two claw attacks (usually it was claws) they'd automatically hit with a third, high-damage attack. Also, trample was a fun ability for big monsters. And finally, way more monsters had damage vulnerabilities: being able to exploit those added more depth to combat.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.