4E D&D Design and Features

In this video, we dig into the Design and Features of 4th edition of Dungeons & Dragons.
Have you played my new role Playing Wargame, Decimation - Kingdoms and Empires?
Get your copy at the below locations
Drive Thru RPG:
www.drivethrur...
Wargame Vault:
www.wargamevau...
Website
Print Copies now available in United States.
www.telliotcan...
*.PDF Version
www.telliotcan...
Patreon $5 Supporter tier get access to all published games and adventures along with early draft copies!
/ classic_dm
#dnd #dungeonsanddragons #4thedition
Music by Adrian von Ziegler
/ @adrianvonziegler

[@Classic_DM]

00:00 Introduction 1:00 Core Mechanic d20 Roll high, Round Down, Half your level as a across the game bonus) 2:40 Ability Scores (Greater Impact than in 1, 2, 3.5 editions) 7:00 Generating Ability Scores (Array, Buy System, 4d6) 9:00 Ability Score Modifier + 1/2 Level permeates everything (Attack, Ability Checks, Skill Checks) 14:00 Attack vs Defense in detail with examples 16:50 Skill Check in detail 18:07 Summary of Attack, Ability, Skill, 1/2 level + Ability Mod is everything! 18:45 Character Races in Core books (Player's Handbooks, 1,2 and 3) 2008-2011 31:45 Class Progression System (Heroic Tier, Paragon Tier, and Epic Destinies covering levels 1-30) 34:40 Class list Player's Handbook I (8) 36:00 Class list Player's Handbook II (8) 37:40 Class list Player's Handbook III (6) Weird classes TBH 38:24 Powers (At-Will, Encounter, Daily) The core of all player attacks! 42:20 Leveling, XP, Character Progression (Ability Scores, Powers, Feats, etc.) 45:45 Skills. Flat +5 (love this). Thematic headings 47:43 Feats (Class, Divinity, Multiclass, Racial) 49:55 Short Rest, Extended Rest (Love this) 52:52 Initiative and Surprise (Surprise is deadly!) 55:05 Actions in Combat (Standard, Move, Minor and all 5 combinations) 57:13 Melee and Ranged Attacks 57:56 Attacks vs Defense 59:20 Defense (Base 10+ 1/2 level, AC, Fortitude, Reflex, and Will) 1:02:05 Conditions and Damage over time (Ongoing damage) 1:03:34 (Critical Hits = Maximum damage!) 1:05:36 Combat Advantage 1:06:31 Action Lists 1:07:05 Attack of Opportunity and Healing Surges 1:11:38 Armor and Weapons 1:13:20 Movement, Positioning, and Gritty battle Map Rules. 1:15:05 Summary

[@jamesprice6015]

Hey, why do you hate tieflings dude?

[@jamesprice6015]

Hello?

[@Classic_DM]

@@jamesprice6015 hahaha! because of this! nwn2.fandom.com/wiki/Neeshka

[@Classic_DM]

@@jamesprice6015 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Zn7Fk5SGpt6pnZosi=MNDXGnn5OGsPixaK LOLOLOLOL

[@jamesprice6015]

@@Classic_DM Wait, that's it.

[@FMD-FullMetalDragon]

My favorite D&D. 😊

[@Classic_DM]

Great! I would venture to say, this is the best D&D system ever...EVER

[@dr3dg352]

Mine, too! 😄

[@dr3dg352]

Finally replaced my 4e core rulebooks (my originals were sadly stolen) and can't wait to play! Finally got a party together for a campaign set in Wildemount. ❤

[@Classic_DM]

Awesome! Unfortunately in my area it's all little ones playing MtG.

[@dr3dg352]

@@Classic_DM Aww! I met one of my players, the soon-to-be paladin, in my MtG Commander group. Fortunately, we're all adults who play at a local craft beer bar. 😅 Also met our elf wizard at said bar lol.

[@acecab5397]

4E is awesome!

[@pdunwin]

Pretty good overview, which I hope will encourage some people to try it. Monsters do have healing surges, but most don't have a way to use them in combat. If they survive combat, they can take a short rest like the PCs do can spend surges to regain HP. Daily attack powers and utility powers are different. Utility powers are often combat-focused, but not damaging. Many provide some useful advantage, like resistance to damage. Some, particularly for wizards and other controllers, might be useful outside of combat. Utility powers can be at-will (rarely), encounter or daily powers. I recommend making a video about rituals some time. That's where a lot of the classic spells made their appearance.

[@Classic_DM]

Awesome feedback, and thank you! I agree rituals and classes need separate videos.

[@dr3dg352]

I also really like how rituals and magic items introduced a simple yet detailed crafting system.

[@wareck9515]

As someone who's been playing since AD&D, I say 4E is best E. I have no plans to ever change to another edition...4E is the one edition that keeps *all* my players interested and wanting to play D&D, and understanding whats going on, as opposed to other editions, where my some of my players eyes glazed over pretty quickly, here, they pick up the rules easy enough to know how to do what they want. It fixed the whole "non-spellcaster/rogue classes get boring" thing. It is *incredibly* balanced...yes, the players shouldn't always run into things they can handle, but as far as the whole CR system and what not from other editions, 4E actually makes both planning encounters, and adjusting them on the fly so much easier. As a DM, 4e is a *godsend*...I can plan entire *campaigns* and have a reasonable amount of assurance that I can rely upon my plans. I do miss some of the more...unpredictable elements of magic from earlier editions, and often wish I could macguyver the older editions magic with 4e's core rules... Also, it's a lot like playing with nerf...lots of tpk's in other editions...in 4E, I don't have to worry much about that sort of thing...I do miss the threat/fear that sort of thing could have, the whole "save or suck" style of play...but overall, I feel like 4E is a better experience overall...and I've begun houseruling some of that stuff. yes, at higher levels, players have *lots* of options...but I *very* much appreciate that *all* tiers of play are designed to be fun and interesting as opposed to the whole "if you can survive the early levels, 5-10 are interesting, and then "epic" stuff is so overpowered and unbalanced as to be unplayable. With 4E they really made an effort to make things fun across *all* levels...no more "sweet spot" levels.

[@Classic_DM]

Awesome and detailed comment, especially about balance! I think we have to give a lot of credit to Rob Heinsoo, Andy Collins, James Wyatt, Mike Mearls, Bruce R. Cordell, and Robert J. Schwalb and many more folks not given accolades.

[@FirestreakRodimusPr]

4e was my edition and while I cut my teeth on the Redbox, 4e remains my preference and I purchased all the printed material (minus any magazine content) for it. I really, really wish WoTC would allow fans to make new content, the way they've done with other editions but I doubt that will ever happen.

[@tigriscallidus4477]

There is Orcus the 4E retroclone, for which you can easily make content and its fully compatible with 4E if that is an alternative for you. Also there are on drivethru actually still people creating new 4E content. Sage of Sorcery production as an example is still active.

[@Joshuadmathews]

Love 4e content. Do not have too big of a history with vast rpg experience but for me, Castle & Crusades feels like the better version (or one written for me) when it comes to wanting to play older D&D versions. 4e, on the other hand, is the game that more appeals to me from the recent D&D versions (4e's Gamma World's is a blast). Here are some video recommendations that I could think up Videos for all the classes would be great. I guess I would also be interested in maybe new classes that 4e that introduced and that were unique to the system. There were additional races, too, put out in player option books such as the Feywild and elemental book and I believe more races were put out in the campaign/playerbook specific books such as Eberon and Forgotten Realms/Neverwinter and Dark Sun. So maybe one, too, that explains the additional races specific to those books? Another mechanic that could be explained is the Themes mechanic that was introduced introduced later on. Also, Essentials was kind of considered 4.5, there are good chunks of differences between Essential characters and PH characters/classes, and I'm not sure if it is possible, but it might be cool to see how one could combine both and use Essentials and the PH books in character creation-- but a breakdown of differences might be a worthy subject, for example, do the feats differ between the ones presented in PH in Essentials/are the cross compatible (if I remember correctly, I even believe there were slight differences between weapon properties and armor between 4e proper and Essentials. I think another interesting subject is how concepts from 4e were used and borrowed to build off of for future games, 13th Age, Pathfinder 2e, and it appears that even 5e borrowed some stuff from 4e-- so maybe even a series that compares 4e to other rpgs that were inspired from 4e but where 4e differs.

[@Classic_DM]

Wow! Thanks for the insightful reply and such great suggestions. I need to get a copy of Feywild and I love the idea of the campaign centric races for a video. I have Forgotten Realms already. Class breakdowns would also be fun, and probably over 20 videos altogether! Let me see if I can get a copy of Feywild (hardcover) as I love reading the books outside in the shade :) Then use the PDF for graphics for the decks. Thanks for the engagement. It's motivating.

[@tigriscallidus4477]

Essential classes are fully compatible with non essential classes. There is not really an issue. They are not as strong as a PHB1 class like the ranger which got years of additional releases, when they fully optimize and just picks all the best options from all available ressources (2 martial powers X dragon magazines), but if you dont optimize to extreme values anyway, they are pretty feasible. Its also perfectly possible for (some) essential classes to pick some "normal" abilities. The Sentinel can pick a Cantrip also from other sources. The feats in Essentials are also quite regularily used by other characters. The weapons are the same, just more interesting weapon feats were released. I really like the later essential classes, since they had often great Flavour and they were more brave to experiment a bit. Some of the essential classes are slightly on the weaker side, but they can realy easily be improved. (If you google for reddit revised Sentinel you find one example of how to do it).

[@tigriscallidus4477]

Wow really great overview video! Was surprised to see it especially soo much in the video! The only thing I missed in the videos were the other non PHB classes including the essential classes, since I really like (some of) them. Not the ones in the first essential book but the ones after had some really cool ideas and were a lot more brave in experimenting. The Executioner assassin has sooo much flavour, as does the vampire. The Hunter Ranger shows how a simple Controller (which is almost Martial) can work. And it had also way more flavour than the PHB ranger. (With the wilderness knacks, the animal aspects and some really cool utility powers like the root bridge or the trap, which should be a class feature XD). Would love to see another video, which is less of a general overview and highlights more "great ideas" or just the classes more in depth

[@SamOnMaui]

Listening while I work. I love Point Buy in other systems (like HERO, Cyberpunk, etc), but not D&D oddly. It's a tried and true method from the 80's but for D&D? Gimme an array!

[@c.d.dailey8013]

Wow. This video is so interesting. I have only played the 5E version of DND. So I am not super tied to any earlier edition because of nostalgia. I watched this video because I was curious about 4E. The video game aspect has been critisized. However it doesn't bother me. I came into DND with a lot of WOW experience. The similarity is a good thing for me. Comparing the two games helps me kearn about how DND works. In WOW, Cataclism makes a lot of changes with having destruction rain down on old zones and with making the game easier. Personally I enjoyed and adapted fairly well. However I do know there was backlash as a result. I even know a player that quit WOW at the time. Maybe 4E in DND was like that. Shaking up the status quo is bound to piss people off. I wonder if Blizzard would ever offer Cataclism Classic servers. That would be weird. Dragonflight is the most recent retail expansion. That brought back old school talent trees. That was a feature that I missed the most. So bringing them back and allowing for easy switching is awesome. I can't complain. Wow. I am impressed with how robust 4E is and how many options it has. 5E has the advantage of being more streamlined and begginner freindly. I am glad I got into DND at 5E. If there will ever be DND 6E, I recommend having the best of both. First make the rules as streamlined as 5E if not more streamlined. The game actions can go without a lot of calculations. The game would be faster and more fun. It is better for begginners. The basic rules would be in the players handbook. This reduces complexity. Second offer all the options that 4E has. Players will enjoy the extra options. This can be offered in supplimentary books. More class and races can be offered. The extra class arcetypes in supplimentary 5E books are cool and all. Yet I get really excited with the extra classes in 4E supplimentary book. A ruleset for minitures should be optional. There can be a whole supplimentary book covering how minitures and tactics works. That is somethin geared towards the DND players that like fighting. The fighter players get what they want without alienating other players. Maybe there can be other books for other players. Explorer players can get a book that explains settings and the cosmology. Settings are things like Forgotten Realms and other such worlds. It could offer detailed tips on how to put together a dungeon map. Perhaps even social players can get thier own depth. I was thinking of factions, alignments, reputation and questing. Perhaps all this can be put together into a robust system. This can help players not only socialize but also dive into court politics. This isn't for everyone. However there is a subset of players that are into that. It seems interesting to me. I personally thought that Game of Thrones was an awesome show, and it never got boring. Heck I am even interested in real life politics. In real life there are new concepts like democracy, libertarianism, socialism and globalism. That can add interesting variety to factions. Adding options can be done without confusing begginner or casual players. That is adding depth. With game design it is good to have more depth for the complexity. It is elegent. The KZbin channel Extra Credit has a great video about depth and complexity. I recommend it.

[@c.d.dailey8013]

Classes was my favorite thing about WOW. I get involved deep into different fighting styles. It is my favorite part of the game. I am also a fan of the elements ("types") in Pokemon and the colors in Magic the Gathering. So I am excited about multiple classes in DND 4E. I wonder if I could incorporate them in 5E. I do like how 4E gives all classes special abilities even the martial ones. It seems more fair. This video talks about the potential for there to be a series on 4E classes. I say this. DO IT!! There are some things I notice that are like World of Warcraft. Among the various races, 4E offers the minotaur race. Awesome! That is just like the Tauren class in WOW. This is one of the few Horde races that I like. Tauren are essentially nice cattle furries. They are a noble and chill race with a deep connection to nature. They have a culture that closely resembles Native Americans. The classes I like to play are druid and shaman. That gets into the whole connection with nature. Tauren does have access to awesome classes. So I like to take advantage and go for the two nature or "primal" classes. Cattle furries are not in Lord of the Rings. They come from the Greek mythology of Theseus and the Minotaur. So I suspect DND got the idea from WOW. The DND minotaurs even get a racial bonus for wisdom. That is perfect for a race that is connected to nature. It is awesome that 4E offers both druid and shaman classes. 5E only has the former. That is another thing like WOW. The druid part has a weird case. In real life, druids are essentially the Celtic version of a shaman. Animals are an important part of shamanism. Druids don't have much more connection to animals than other kinds of shamans. In the fantasy games it gets weird. Since when did druid mean shape shifter? This is in WOW. I thought that was fine. It was just a unique spin. Then DND did the same thing. Really? I think DND is probably ripping off of WOW or the other way around. The Celtics have bard and ovate as other kinds of magicians. There is a trio. The druids are the most advanced. They tend to specialize in religious rituals. So I have my own spin on the druid class. That is something that mostly does nature magic, like a shaman. It also has access to some holy magic, like a cleric. I like to think of magic classes in terms of going in groups of four. That actually came from DND 4E.

[@c.d.dailey8013]

Of all classes, monk is the weirdest. Monks in real life are pretty straightforward. They are a type of clergy that studies holy texts. They also isolate themselves in a monistary. There are Christian and Asian version of monks. So this is mostly like a cleric. However the study is like a wizard. I like to imagine the monk having holy powers similar to a cleric. I classify this class as being mainly holy and partially arcane. However the monk has weird treatment in RPGs. It becomes good at martial arts due to Asian stereotyping. That is weird. It is unlikely for someone to be both a monk and a martial artist, even if they were Asian. Those are two very different fields requiring a lot of study. 4E classifies monk as psyonic. Why? Wouldn't it make more sense to classify it as divine? It can even be the divine version or an offensive class, like rogue or wizard. That makes sense. Does chi count as psychic for some reason? I am confused. That does remind me of Lucario from Pokemon. That is one of the Pokemon with the most confusing typings. It is a jackal furry, and it is a great fighter. It is mainly furry in texture with a few small spikes. Despite the fighting nature, Lucario can sense auras, for some reason. It even has a special attack called aura sphere. It makes sense for Lucario to be fighting-psychic type. It makes sense for aura sphere to be a psychic attack. However that is not what happens. Lucario is actually typed fighting-steel. Aura sphere is typed fighting. That is so confusing. The fighting type doesn't normally have mystical powers. The closest candidate is psychic. Ghost, dragon and fairy could potentially work to, since they are based on supernatural creatures. Psychic is still the best. There are are actual fighting-psychic Pokemon like Gallade and the Meditite line. Lucario is a weird case where psychic is mixed with something that involves fighting. It is a bit like the monk in DND 4E. In WOW monk is a straight up hybrid class. That does make sense considering the weird stuff that has been done with it. The class was introduced by the panda furries, which are a playable race. That does seem to come from Kung Fu Panda.

[@ArielCarmona]

The Barbarian has been around since od&d but was featured prominently in 1st edition’s Unearthed Arcana

[@embr54]

My man sounds like he’s struggling to eat a sandwich and read a players handbook at the same time lol

[@Classic_DM]

In my left hand was a massive slice of pizza and in my right a cold beer. The insights..priceless. 😂

[@embr54]

@@Classic_DM No shame here man haha, great vid!

[@Classic_DM]

@@embr54 Thanks. You're not upset I'm not yelling into the web camera with edits every 3 seconds? :O

[@ArielCarmona]

Shifters were not new to 4e they were introduced in 3rd as part of the races in Eberron

[@francescobarbaro7575]

Great content!

[@Classic_DM]

Thank you! It's appreciated when folks add comments both positive and negative.

[@ArielCarmona]

There was a warlock in 3.5

[@Classic_DM]

Player's handbook III also added the below player races. (not covered in the video as I only covered the Minotaur)) Githzerai, Shardmind, and the Wilden. Githzerai:Ascetic and disciplined, masters of body and mind and arch enemies of Githyanki Shardmind: Raw psionic ener8Y barely contained in a body of 8leamin8 crystalline shards Wilden: Nature's 8uardians-hunters and destroyers, keepers of ancient knowledge. IMO Shardmind and Wilden are throw away races with whacky themes that just don't fit.

[@pdunwin]

Minotaur was, for me, the whacky class. Who wants to play a cow? I like shardmind because I like living constructs, but otherwise, yeah, it's a but like "who ordered this?" Wilden are odd, but no odder than some other classes out there.

[@insomnicide94]

I had a shardmind head crash into a house the party were camping in as a plot point. It talks to the party Wizard telepathically and no one else, the head is searching for the same mage they are, but for very different reasons. He's a cool plot device if anything

[@yagsipcc287]

Loved it , it was my first edition we also tried out 3.5 but started a pathfinder first edtion campgain at the same time so we had a 4th ed and a pathfinder campgain at the same time and wow it was amazing! we had the same on going world for well over 2 years nearly 3 but then life stuff happened people had work, college and people moved etc.. hate 5th ED so dull, waterdown and look at what they have done to it now falling apart by people who in my opinion dont care about it.

[@Classic_DM]

Great comment. The memories of fun campaigns>5e any day

[@WayneBraack]

Why would your intelligence contribute to your armor class? I can't wrap my mind around that and make it make sense. Because you're a smarter fighter and therefore instinctively mitigate risk in combat?

[@Classic_DM]

www.reddit.com/r/4eDnD/s/DZ3EB0TQNP

[@tigriscallidus4477]

Intelligence stands for the speed of thinking. Thats why it adds to reflex defense and the same way as dexterity can add to armor (if you have light armor)

[@luc1829]

Robert Downey Jr style Sherlock

[@SheppiTSRodriguez]

Imo, one of the best systems ever created. Excelent ideas, but subpar balance. Solid mechanics, fun options, but Way too much heal, too grindy and slow, and samey. I Think PF2e perfected the balance a game like this should have, but ironically, didnt borrow enough from this (specially in the way options are formated), and got too stuck with dumb sacred cows from 3e

[@Theadalas]

Balance-wise I think this one is better than PF2e. With maybe one exception (binder) across over 50 subclasses all the available classes & subclasses were very playable. I think the main reason for this was that they've divided classes into four main roles but also every class had different keywords in their powers. So that clerics & paladins were better at fighting undead than warlocks & druids. This meant that every class had it's own niche.

[@pd1426]

4e was nice up to level 10. It was a bloated hot "cool" mess.

[@Classic_DM]

Can you elaborate? I played 4e over in Europe and with programmers at Ubisoft. We never got into the upper reaches as I started going hardcore back into Warhammer Online :)

[@FirestreakRodimusPr]

@@Classic_DM Like all versions of D&D high tier/higher level of play (epic in this case, 22+) were not always the most play tested. In this case, a lot of the Epic tier monsters just were not suitable to be epic and either got nuked or just made the combat grinded down. There's a reason why the Monster Vault, Monster Manual 3 and even the Dark Sun Creature Catalog are generally reccommended as the best monster books to buy.

[@yogapantsyogurtpants3365]

I defended this system for a solid 3 years during our campaign, then hung it up for a solid 5 years. In that time I learned to play some 15 new systems and when we took 4e for a spin after that long hiatus....I could see the problems with the game more clearly. 4e is a board game, with an errata book thinker than its core. The game is so bad we had to quit partway through, we couldn't stand it anymore. 5e is hardly any better.

[@Classic_DM]

I love the player powers (At-Wills, Encounter, Daily) Everyone heals is a little too much.

[@tigriscallidus4477]

The only reason it had so many errata is because it cared about balance! It was extremly well balanced comparing it to any other RPG and they wanted to keep it that way. If your players were not cheesing the system, then the errata was not really that much needed. Even the "new monster manual 3 math" was really only a slight change, people just misremember it. Most monsters from monster manual 1 would still fall under the Monster Manual 3 rules. Feeling a bit like a board game might not be for everyone, but its not a negative, given that gamedesign in boardgames advanced WAY more in the last 30 years than in RPGs.