WWFD: Scavenging 4e

[X-Codes]

(WWFD -> What Would Frankenstein Do?)

4e isn't total fail, but for the most part WotC fucked it sideways.  Posting this thread such that people can pool ideas as to what can be scavenged from 4e and brought to 3.5e.  Here are some of my ideas:

Shorter skill list: I've already re-written the 3.5e skill list for my own purposes, even though I've never gotten around to actually finishing that idea.

Timing rules: Immediate Interrupts and Immediate Reactions are extremely nice to know about.

Elevated baseline: A higher baseline for how strong PC-Playable races are.  Generally allows for a greater variety in the kinds of races that are playable (although I must admit that WotC is starting to repeat those as well).

Anything else you guys liked about it that also seems adaptable?

[Bozwevial]

Not so much a mechanic as a mentality, but a willingness to actually give everyone cool things. (Before errata, that is.)

Action point mechanics, maybe, but those have been around.

The system of standard, move, and minor actions is somewhat simpler than what 3.5e already has. Adapting it to 3.5 wouldn't be too hard.

[archangel.arcanis]

Attacker rolls. If there is a roll to be made make the attacker do it so there is always a chance of failure as well as success.

Choice between stats for some/most applications.

All classes keep in the same random number range. Unlike 3.5 where the Frenzied berserker can't fail a fort save while the wizard can't make it it on 20 while the reverse is true for will. Everyone should have a chance at success and failure for defenses and attacks. Its fine for some to have an advantage just not so overwhelming of one to make it suicide for the other guy to attempt.

[dither]

Anything else you guys liked about it that also seems adaptable?

I know Frankenstein wouldn't see it my way, but I think the whole system can be adapted if you play with people who want to play more than they want to optimize. I like to optimize my character, but I also know it isn't necessary to rock. I'm one of two optimizers in the group, and the other guy is kind of half-assing his character, too.

Yeah, I guess my stats and powers aren't the best, but I know if I die, I'm the first one the party's going to pool money to raise from the dead.

[bkdubs123]

Is it possible to play 4e without optimizing to a certain extent? I always found that the monsters were designed to kick serious ass and if your to hit and defenses and damage weren't all up to par you could be in a world of trouble. Granted, I didn't play 4e very much at all.

[dither]

Is it possible to play 4e without optimizing to a certain extent? I always found that the monsters were designed to kick serious ass and if your to hit and defenses and damage weren't all up to par you could be in a world of trouble. Granted, I didn't play 4e very much at all.

I've been playing since this spring and it seems to me that as long as what you're fighting is about your level, there shouldn't be any problems. Our party really isn't all that well optimized, only about half of us even use the Character Builder (the rest are working off just the Player's Handbook or prefab characters by the DM), and we only have problems when the DM is trying to use rules-sploits he gets off the Internet or from other games.

[awaken DM golem]

2nd on Skills.
I did a very short post on the same thing, and the Tome guys (k/frank) did something much more detailed.
Seems a generic confluence.
Interestingly, Search + Trapfinding + Disable Device are still separated a little.
Trained+5 but no Ranks, makes for an interesting feat, in 3e.

Bigger start = good idea.
I ballpark it at 2nd level for 3e.
I've said elsewhere that 4e caps at the 3e good 4th level spells.
So about 2nd level to 6th level, is the range of 4e translated to 3e.
Of course there are exceptions ... but not many.

Enchant Magic Item = all 3e Item Crafting feats rolled into one.
Wow.
I'd love that, but that's silly in a 3e context.

PPaths and EpicDs ... could easily be class features in 3e.
Say around 3rd level for Ppaths, and around 6th level for Epicds.
Some overlap and some hinkyness to work out.

[awaken DM golem]

Needing a feat to Multiclass, would solve lots of CO-board "problems".
Needing Bard or old Windrise, to multi + multi class, would solve even more.

No idea what 4e Hybrid would be in 3e.

[awaken DM golem]

Companion Characters from DMG2 might be a straight-hack.

+1 bab (ok)
+1 per level to saves (!!)
+1/2 level bonus to all skills (!)
Trained+5 to one skill (possibly more) (-/+)

max 3 attacks but with autoscaling damage (-)
rises with tier 1 class spell selection, or can be equivalent monster level (!!)
7 or 8 or more utilities, rising like a Wilder (-/+)

Can only use ONE magic item, and only gets a +1 from it to a stat. (--- but in a good way)
Totally eliminates the x-mas tree problem.
No feats (--- boo)


Kinda feels Tier 4 or 3 if CO-ed.
Maybe could be an alternative Wilder.

[bihlbo]

I'm more of the mind that if you want a better D&D, what are you going to cut out of 4e? More of the crunchy bits work in 4th than in 3.5, so why are you starting with 3.5?

[archangel.arcanis]

I'm more of the mind that if you want a better D&D, what are you going to cut out of 4e? More of the crunchy bits work in 4th than in 3.5, so why are you starting with 3.5?

While it may be possible to make a 4e based game, the people here mostly prefer the 3.x. Obviously you start with what you like and steal what you think could be good from the other system. Mechanically 4e mostly works pretty good but it feels like a half-assed minis battle game not an action RPG, which is what most of us really want. No one will ever be totally happy with any system so it is just finding what you like and takes the least amount of work to make it playable.

[bihlbo]

I'm more of the mind that if you want a better D&D, what are you going to cut out of 4e? More of the crunchy bits work in 4th than in 3.5, so why are you starting with 3.5?

While it may be possible to make a 4e based game, the people here mostly prefer the 3.x. Obviously you start with what you like and steal what you think could be good from the other system. Mechanically 4e mostly works pretty good but it feels like a half-assed minis battle game not an action RPG, which is what most of us really want. No one will ever be totally happy with any system so it is just finding what you like and takes the least amount of work to make it playable.

Well I don't mean to derail your thread, but what would it take to make 4e "an action RPG" and not a "minis battle game"?

These are the first things that pops into mind for me:

• Use grid rules and area templates from 3.5 - diagonals are 1.5 not 1
• For the most part rituals don't cost you resources
• Add rules for being able to accomplish things outside of combat

See, for me the best reason to not play 3.5 is that the entire magic system is borked. And while it can be fun to play a game with borked mechanics, I don't like it. When I've played 3.5 (or an OGL game) that didn't use magic at all the game was much more fun. So what is it about the rest of 3.5 that's worth keeping? (this one is hard for me to answer) And is there anything at all that's better than the 4e implementation? (I don't see much)

[archangel.arcanis]

Not entirely sure how you could give 4e that action RPG feel.
* I think the first thing would be to make it a bit less minis centric and have ranges in feet/yards/meters instead, honestly the counting squares breaks the 4th wall for me ( I would rather know how far away it can go and use the grid as a tool to figure that out quicker).
* Also out of combat options would be good to have rules for, though that leads to game bloat too.
* Interesting choices are better than a lot of the same stuff. Most 4e powers boil down to the same hand full of abilities with different amounts of damage added on.
* In the same vein as the previous one, I want spells/powers that allow for creative uses. I like to think when I game and be creative with how I use stuff, 4e doesn't lend itself to that nearly as much as 3.x does.
* Less stringent character creation rules. 4e really pigeon holes you into your class and what they think it should do. If I wanted to make a guy who was a wizard but liked melee then I should have the ability to make that happen with some effort.

[Hallack]

I like the idea of rituals for a lot of of the out of combat spells.

[archangel.arcanis]

I like the idea of rituals for a lot of of the out of combat spells.

My only real issue with rituals is that they cost money every time you use them and when combined with the screwy treasure system you actually end up with weaker characters (due to being under-equipped) for using them.

[Hallack]

I like the idea of rituals for a lot of of the out of combat spells.

My only real issue with rituals is that they cost money every time you use them and when combined with the screwy treasure system you actually end up with weaker characters (due to being under-equipped) for using them.

Yeah, I don't like that part of it.  The concept is cool though and I think easy enough to modify for various uses.

• Change certain spells into rituals to change feel and utility.
• Use rituals to reintroduce certain spells into the game in limited magic games (like E6)
• More use for skills like Spellcraft, perhaps even for non-casting classes.
• Perhaps, substitute ritual cost for normal spell cost when a caster uses appropriate level slot in the use of ritual.  (This would lower costs for casters with normal access to said spell.

for just a few off the top of head ideas.

[awaken DM golem]

These are the first things that pops into mind for me:

• Use grid rules and area templates from 3.5 - diagonals are 1.5 not 1
• For the most part rituals don't cost you resources

4e has a few ways to plink out rituals for free.
Otherwise, using Duplicate ritual, to make the possible non magical components, works.
Problem point is using this to make cheap magic items = golf bag of the gawds.

4e Grid is a simplification, and that's a good thing.
Even doing 1.5 math is hard (not for me but i'm special).
Counting to 5 this way, that way, and egad ... the other way too,
is much easier than: the square root of ( 50 * the square root of 5 ) ,
[EDIT] - holy snot I did the maths wrong ... square root of ~74  [/EDIT]
counted over similar space counted and measured cubes.
So what (?!) that in the "best" case scenario, the real range of the power is a little longer.
It evens the score against fliers.
3.xE has spells and bows with range over 20 ... oh wow yawn.