Let's Make a D&D 4th Edition Character

[@gothicchocobo]

I played 4e on a D&D podcast a while back, and although I started off not liking it very much, I grew to love it after learning how to use it. Not to mention that the Character Creation tools and the Virtual TableTop were the best that I have ever used!

[@zigmenthotep]

The character builder is on of those things that works, but a bit too well sometimes. The way that it presented all of the content is one of the things that made "overly optimizing" characters so easy since you had every single feat, power, item, etc, right at your fingertips. It also provided content without context which added to the overall mechanics over story feel of the game. One time we had a player equip their character with the Eye of Vecna because to them it was just an item that showed up in the character builder with a price 0 gold. But that might just be down to my experiences and the kind of people I was playing with. I wasn't aware that the virtual tabletop actually came out. They were advertising it in the original core books, but in the entire time we were playing 4e it never materialized.

[@gothicchocobo]

@@zigmenthotep the virtual tabletop was bought by a third party and basically released as was. It was really good, but they shut it down. The group went to roll20 and it was just no where near as good.

[@gothicchocobo]

@@zigmenthotep I made a video to show the group how to do some things because they never looked into how to use the table, kzbin.info/www/bejne/mKXUaqd8jLR5ias

[@zigmenthotep]

@gothicchocobo Well that certainly does look convenient, did it track all the various status effects? That was always the most annoying part of running the game.

[@gothicchocobo]

@@zigmenthotep yeah, it tracked everything and you could set moves up to inflict automatically (if I'm remembering correctly). It was super nice to use and nothing has come close to it imo.

[@MrNetWraith]

The idea that 4e classes are overly complicated to put together is a really bad meme. Even at higher levels, it's not that hard, because 4e classes actually only have a fairly small pool of powers compared to other editions, favoring a "replace old, obsolete powers when you grow past them" paradigm.

[@EmeralBookwise]

This video claims that 4e could get wildly imbalanced at high levels, but provides no context for the numbers you try to use as an example. Maybe +24 to hit at level 16 sounds like a lot compared to other editions, and it is still on the higher end for 4e, but the math was pretty tight in that edition and so anything less than a +21 would have been underpowered (assuming we are talking about a weapon wielding class). To fill in the missing context, at level 16 an average monster would have an AC of around 30 or 31, and bosses could have as much as 34. Not sure where those damage numbers are coming from though. I'm not aware of any class and weapon combination to get those dice at that level for an at-will... unless maybe you were including the bonus dice that only apply on a critical hit? Also, 4e published new books at about the same rate as 3.5e did, so I have absolutely no clue how it could be singled out for supposedly rushing out books. Not to mention that while where on the subject of comparing editions, because 3e/3.5 put out so many more books, by the time that edition ended you could pay things a lot crazier than a mere pixie vampire.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

I love how some people claim that 4E was imbalanced, since even most of the haters agree that balance was one of the things that 4E got right. Numbers may be high, but all classes stay within the same power level and enemies of appropriate level are evenly matched with players (though some creatures do fell like they have hundred or so HP too much).

[@EmeralBookwise]

@@Eemi_Seppala: HP values could be a little high, and admittedly I tend to cut them in half whenever I DM, but the biggest reason why some people think 4e monsters have too much HP is because those people also design encounters wrong. The intention with 4e is that half or more of the enemies in any encounter should be single hit minions, but that was such a "radical" concept at the time that a lot of people coming out of 3.5 wouldn't use them at all. Instead, they'd just use under-leveled standard monsters (as per 3.5 encounter design) who were not only spongier than minions, but because lower level also meant lower attack, they wouldn't even be a threat to the party, resulting in long encounters where basically nothing happens.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

@@EmeralBookwise I was actually just part of a short 5E Lotr campaign using Adventures in middle-earth handbook and the GM used pseudo-minions. Whenever they'd take damage GM would roll to see if they died. This made a fight of 6 vs 20 very tedious since the "minions" didn't die in one hit and there were no wizards to blast them. Also there were enemies that caused fear aura each turn and others that could stun lock us and we had no ways to counter those abilities.

[@nagashtheforsaken]

4e was imbalanced at high levels, but most versions of D&D are far worse, IMO. 4th has better combats even at high levels. And you can play up to level 30. That's how good it was. I can't even imagine trying that with a 5th edition game.

[@christianroy5663]

Tim Shaw would be better off wearing hide instead of chainmail because he would have the same amount of AC (Intelligence and Dexterity both increase AC for wearing light armor) without reducing his speed by 1. Thanks for helping keep 4th Edition alive with this video!

[@zigmenthotep]

It seems you are correct. I feel like I must have had a reason (other than my love of chainmail) but maybe I was just rusty at making 4e characters.

[@tartisan5663]

4E was a fantastic edition. This video got a few things wrong (like skill progression), and didn’t cover some of the great elements. 4E was the only edition to remain balanced all the way to level 30. My group has played all editions, and some of our best stories and roleplaying were in 4th. It also gave the most flexibility in characters, where each class wasn’t the same cookie cutter creation as a different character of the same class. Too bad the echochamber of complaints on 4E gets so much wrong.

[@Arcboltkonrad13]

4e is, hands down, my favorite RPG

[@AAron-gr3jk]

The Dark Sun setting was well done. Encounter builder was great. It had a lot going for it. Building characters and selecting feats and then combat.. too much choice. Everything started to feel "samey"

[@dimas3829]

blasphemy

[@GrandNagusEli]

Have you tried Lancer? You should if you also like Giant Robots

[@Arcboltkonrad13]

@@GrandNagusEli I have the book in PDF format but have not really played it since my go-to mecha rpg is Battle Century G Remastered.

[@GrandNagusEli]

@@Arcboltkonrad13 Lancer takes a whole lot from 4e. And it has a great setting

[@MCPicoli]

Pixie vampire is "just" an OP mosquito!

[@dangercat8919]

I get why ppl hated 4th but... it had the most balanced, engaging, and fun combat of any D&D game.

[@rodh1404]

To be honest, at higher levels things got a bit crazy. Then again, I don't know any edition of D&D where things didn't get crazy at higher levels.

[@nagashtheforsaken]

@@rodh1404 Yeah, I was thinking, high level combats in 4th drag out. But they do in every version of the game and Pathfinder, too!

[@ArielCarmona]

Actually you weren’t stuck with the skills you chose because during level progression you got opportunities to retrain them. Basically swapping one for another

[@ketercognitohazard]

4th edition is by far the best edition of d&d. Yeah, I said it. Edit: I turned 37 today (12/07). I've been playing D&D since I was 12. I've always been the DM. I've only ever been a player once. In a campaign (3.5e) that only lasted 3 sessions. So I make my claim as a DM, not really a player.

[@AAron-gr3jk]

pick up Dark Sun then, it's an excellent conversion.

[@lisaradusblack1730]

Powers was the most important and fun part of that edition, and you skiped them.

[@MrSmileylife]

You love doing calculous don't you?

[@jackshiltsov2242]

@@MrSmileylife Powers are not about calculations, but about what tricks you can do in battle.

[@cavalier973]

You heard the guy. If you play 4e D&D, you can do calculus, no problem.

[@jackshiltsov2242]

@@cavalier973 It's not about my math talents. I was disturbed by the fact that the author skipped half of the character creation.

[@graveyardshift2100]

@@cavalier973 you roll a d20, if you hit you roll the damage dice. Some powers also move you or your target. If that is complicated, then I am so sorry for you.

[@dakvesser9588]

I love 4th ed, started a campaign today :)

[@zigmenthotep]

Well hopefully it went well.

[@dakvesser9588]

@@zigmenthotep only character gen so far, doing the scales of war campaign path, but thank you 😊

[@thebirds4588]

Never played 4e but I think I would like to do a one off 4e D&D game.

[@dakvesser9588]

@@thebirds4588 honestly it's so good

[@AAron-gr3jk]

The 4e DM side is so advanced and appreciated: monster block stats are so clear and dynamic. 5e took many of these ideas here, which shows how solid it is. You can easily run a tactics game with interesting encounters. The Players side is where the 4e system is reviled: Characters are basically computer assisted spreadsheet lists of powers.

[@zigmenthotep]

Whenever I think about running 4e I remember my DM despondently saying "[The Monster] took 50 damage for starting its turn!" There were good things, personally I liked the minions, but there was a lot of extra work that I never felt enhanced the experience.

[@Charger8117]

4e is great

[@Pit_Wizard]

Honestly, I'd play 4e over 5e any day. At least you can make an interesting character build in 4e.

[@BrookTheUndeadDM]

"The least amount of classes for any advanced D&D edition" Yet completely disregards the other books that offer more classes than any other edition. Not to mention he allowed other books for the PF2E episode, so it seems he's a bit bias against 4e for no reason

[@zigmenthotep]

First, Third Edition easily has more classes than Fourth Second, it's been dead for 10 years, maybe get over this little "People are mean to me for playing 4e" victim complex.

[@BrookTheUndeadDM]

@zigmenthotep 66 classes in 3.5 vs 77 from 4e. Factually incorrect and as someone who has a large following, you should know better than to insult viewers publicly when they correct you and show the injustice you show between systems. Shame.

[@zigmenthotep]

@@BrookTheUndeadDM 66 classes excluding everything other than base classes, versus 77 counting every variant, including the hybrid options. I'm surprised you didn't try to count every possible hybrid combination as a separate class.

[@BrookTheUndeadDM]

@zigmenthotep Hey, if you are allowed to put out false information about 4e and clearly show bias against it for no reason, I can show favoritism towards 4e. Also, only a handful of the classes in 3.5 are actually playable with no weird interactions the designers didn't intend and 4e is better designed than 3.5 by a country kilometer. Anyway, I have to get off. Mom says I have school tomorrow, but nice talking with someone who tries to deflect criticism and bias towards him on his audience in a veiled attempt at proving someone wrong when you are the one in the wrong. Goodnight 😃

[@EmberMusic000]

Wowser. this guy is mad online about a glorified board game.

[@alyxtheexorcist]

Seems like 4th is getting some love back. :)

[@zigmenthotep]

Well yeah, people who started with 4e as teenagers are now in their 30s and looking back at the perceived hippieness of their youth through a lens of heavy nostalgia

[@alyxtheexorcist]

@@zigmenthotep I would gladly host a game for them. And there are plenty of new figurines and maps you can use from the current 5e! 😃.

[@Arcboltkonrad13]

With the OGL debacle a while back and now more and more games coming out whose authors wear with pride their love of 4e, yeah, it's getting a small come back.

[@motokuchoma]

I don't particularly like that 4e's status as the "MMO Tabletop game" is mostly based on aesthetic choices. Nothing 4e did was radically new, powers are basically just how spells worked and because in 3.5 a fighter could do "hit with sword" or "twiddle thumbs" and a wizard had a morbillion options they figured "hey lets make sure everyone gets to make decisions in combat" - that said, I'm not too big of a fan of d&d in general, including 4e because it still didn't address D&D's longer standing issues. Skill checks are a terrible system dnd is stuck with, alignment is completely useless and its stuck with it, the attribute system doesn't work (4e in particular is very all on in on one attribute, but this is an issue for 3e and 5e too) and on top of it, 4e was stalked by both a very quick change in leadership and also a double murder involved with its virtual tabletop system. Unfortunate but those issues basically cemented the death of an edition with an idiotically restrictive license model that drove off all 3rd party publishers. I enjoy playing 4e but I think most people unhappy with its status as "the bad D&D" should really consider maybe giving other tactical roleplaying games a shot, especially now with the advent of pathfinder 2e and one d&d everyone seems to rediscover the stuff that they liked about older (including 4e) editions

[@DrPluton]

I only got to play 4th edition once. I made an eladrin wizard and flubbed my choice of at-will powers because I didn't know I'd need area effect spells that much (minions are easy to kill but can wreck the party without a good controller).

[@JeremyNoblitt]

4e is still the best version of d&d. In a world where every edition is more of the same, 4e chose to be very different. No class is better than another, melee characters have powers like magical ones, and each character has self healing with powers and down time. No character gets boring.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

Your defense for the 4th sound a bit like "Every edition seem similar to other editions, but in 4th edition, every class is similar to each other". But I do get what you mean and I agree with the first sentence. Bloodied is still used in our circles as a term even in games that don't even use dice. And quite many who have tasted the sweet nectar of at-will powers, came to think the "basic fighters" as boring options for combat, since they just move & hit, move & hit.

[@AXSLA3]

A friend of mine was brief commenting D&D 4th edition: "They went back to Chain Mail"

[@russellharrell2747]

D&D has always been a struggle between crunchy war game simulationism and fluffy roleplaying. Sometimes (2E) you got crunchy roleplay which doesn’t help anyone but the people who love accounting and filling out tax returns.

[@AXSLA3]

@@russellharrell2747 Agreed, but those you mention at the end feel confortable playing Rolemaster (or sort of).

[@alasanof]

I liked 4th edition for how many powers there were. As a player it's neat seeing everything I could do, though I never gave any thought about how it'd be for the DM.

[@zigmenthotep]

Well basically it goes like this: "okay the dragon starts it's turn, it takes 15 damage from this, 9 damage from that, is blinded, immobilized, and stunned, so I guess it's turn is over"

[@Eemi_Seppala]

@@zigmenthotep Players dish out some damage, throw few heavy hits and two turns later, they are out of Encounter and Daily powers. That is the point where the scale begins to turn and now they have nothing to stop the dragon with. Also, I believe 4E was built for more of a "Whittle them down" style of combats; throw in few combats that make players use their resources or have far harder battle and the big combat rewards the players who didn't waste their daily powers against 5 kobolds while looking for dragons, since now they get to do the "50 damage, blind, immobilized and stunned" combo on the boss. Then in the next dungeon, maybe others begin to reserve their boss killer attacks for the actual boss, which in turn makes the dungeon harder.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

​@@wombatgirl997 There's also the fact that enemies are varied in their abilities. Yes, there are Soldiers, Controllers, Leaders etc. and each race usually has same mechanics tied to them, like having Warrior's surge for orcs and Shifty for kobolds, but when combining these traits you get vastly different creatures to throw at your players. The Ogre controller and goblin controller have the same purpose in battle, but might play in extremely different ways and the abilities those creatures have are mostly unique to them, unlike in (let's say) Pathfinder 1E where most of the spells and similar abilities are shared by large number of foes as well as the players themselves. Also, creating custom creatures into 4E campaigns is so effortless and in my opinion easy to balance. Out of every edition of DnD as well as the dozen other systems I've ran in last decade or so, 4E just hits the spot for me where you can make actually fair and challenging encounters with the tools you are given, unlike in something like Dark Heresy where the enemies are classified as "Xenos Minoris" or "Malleus extremis". I love that system, but it's not the most GM friendly one out there. Sorry about the long rant, TLDR: I agree.

[@GiantSpaceCrabGrab]

Thank you very much! I'm running through an old module with some friends to see if 4e is as bad as I remember and this is a big help!

[@zigmenthotep]

Glad I could help.

[@PataHikari]

4e wasn't "much-derided" it was hated by a small minority mad that Wizards weren't OP. It's actually a game with design, which is more than you can say for every other edition bar Basic.

[@robbnoble1509]

The crowd that hated 4E was far larger and for more reasons than you are implying. WoTC was pumping out books for 3.5 like crazy -a mountain of them unlike ant previous edition. These people now had a mountain of 3.5 books and WoTC releases a game that is completely incompatible, with radical changes nobody was asking for to attract a wider market, in the early stages of development that was clearly unpolished. Oh, and by the way, they're also going to be releasing new books even faster than they did with 3.5, which they are obviously now discontinuing support for. Tbh, I can't imagine a worse/more adversarial way for a company to release a new game. But most people would have likely eventually moved past that, and came to accept or even love 4E if another company didn't pounce on the opportunity to release a game that was almost exactly like 3.5 and compatible with almost everything from it, and still releasing new content for it. Not only that, but this old crowd was much louder than the new crowd and sort of smeared the reputation of the game by making very vague and sometimes unfair/false criticisms of it, pushing others away from trying 4E and into 3.5 or pathfinder. I love 4E, but I don't blame the people who were alienated by it. I do dislike when people who clearly haven't played it criticize it as if they had. But ultimately the blame for the stigma attached to 4E belongs to Wizards of the Coast for alienating their existing customer base so advertently in an attempt to capitalize on another, larger, market.

[@PataHikari]

"Radical changes nobody asked for" is just another way of saying "Wizards aren't OP"

[@EmeralBookwise]

@@robbnoble1509: What are you talking about 4e releasing books even faster than 3.5? Both editions had nearly the same release schedule of about two books per months. Speaking of release schedules, that's exactly why 4e had to be such a radical departure, because people already had a MOUNTAIN of 3.5 supplements and so increasingly less reason to purchase more new books if they were only going to be minor variations on things they already had. Yes, 4e was a fresh start for a new audience, but it's not like discontinuing support for 3.5 made that MOUNTAIN of books it had disappear, and so players who wanted to stick with that older edition still had more options to choose from then they could probably ever use in a lifetime of gaming.

[@Okamooki]

Maybe it'd be interesting to do traveller (1981) character creation, as i've always wanted to see a rpg veteran's take on the system? I'd also like to see something from one of the storyteller system games (WoD/Exalted)

[@Dracopol]

Classic Traveller (as patched up a bit by the 80s) is fun. Players can pick their general class for a character, but the skills that come out are a bit randomized. Each four-year Career term you are down to rolling on your choice of skill TABLE with six entries each, but you don't get to add exactly your choice of skill -- even if you pay to learn at a university or military school! And what will Zigmenthotep say about a character progressing after a certain amount of play? There are no levels, you could have a look at the character two game-years into the campaign but they will not really add many skills. You only had one, two, or at best 3 skills-levels in every 4-year Career term. On a 2d6 basis a +1 from a skill is a bigger deal, but still. Rules about training skills were a little vague. Levelling up is less of a concern since characters are more seasoned; there are no rank 1st-Level beginners like in D&D. You could increase characteristics like STR only with a rigorous training program. But here is where the GM can say you do have periods of full-time training available, in the Jumps which leave you in Jump Space isolated for a week each.

[@Dracopol]

And periodically, the classic Traveller Starter Set from the early 80s is downloadable absolutely free. People should get it and look at it to see there were other contenders for RPG rules systems. If you want to play fantasy in Traveller rules, there were certain hacks about that but the most interesting is the recently released Sword of Cepheus (based on the Cepheus Engine retroclone of Traveller). www.drivethrurpg.com/product/80190/CTSTStarter-Traveller

[@alexandersmith1777]

Would love to start a 4E game online, but sadly have no people to play with...:(

[@zigmenthotep]

As such is the like of tabletop gaming.

[@chartreuseraccoon162]

I’m game!

[@MericWolf]

I'm game too

[@paulcoy9060]

Matt Colville has some good insights about 4th edition, worth a watch.

[@5paulo]

Ah, D&D 4E... I liked how light actually stuff outside of combat could be, but the combat. It was fun to prepare, don't get me wrong. I even was able to just make up monsters on fly for the combat. But because of all interactions and options, my players spent so much time on each round, I was mentally worn out. On one hand- you can tell they were engaged, and that's good, but on the other hand, it was just taking a lot of time and focus... (I suppose having to challenge people who were dedicating time to play Warhammer Fantasy Battle didn't help XD).

[@matthewpopow6647]

I played a LOT of 4e. I had an amazing dm who was able to keep the game alive at times it felt, in spite of the game itself.

[@lance6574]

Thank you so much! It's been years since I played 4e and am glad for the concise refresher as I'm about to play a new campaign soon :)

[@KnightFerrocous]

From your final spiel and some of your replies it is pretty clear you didn't get 4e. You complain about poor balance but your only evidence is "I got big numbers at a certain level" when those numbers are only barely off of curve. You complain about power creep as if several of the options in Players Handbook 1 weren't still part of the meta charop when the game ended. Also part of power creep is that you recommend the Essentials books which did actually have a few power crept feats but they also had by far the weakest and least fun classes printed for the edition. I see you complain in the comments about how bad 4e is to DM but you never go into why? Was it the clean monster blocks and common sense encounter building? Was it the entire page of advice on how and why you should allow creative play? Was it how if you wanted it to it held your hand through the whole process? Of course not because those were the good points of DMing 4e that 5e threw out with the bathwater. Is 4e perfect or even the best TTRPG? Hell no but it does not deserve the reputation it has. Do I believe you played it when it was new? Yes but I believe you played it with a group who weren't familiar with the system and jumped blindly into a mid-level game and were confused and overwhelmed like anyone would be. Its fine to not like 4e but its not fine to be factually wrong about something and make that why you don't like it.

[@KnightFerrocous]

And to add you complain about them running out of ideas and adding stuff like Pixies and Vampires as if 3e and now 5e didn't also have their share of wacky stuff added as they putted along. You didn't even do a wacky character right. An entirely feasible character in 4e is a zombie triple vampire werewolf lich. In case you wonder how is you take Revenant as your race with Vryloka as your previous races, so now zombie vampire, take the vampire class and the Vampiric Bloodline feat, making you now triple vampire, you take the Werewolf theme and at some point you multiclass into a divine class so you can take the Epic Destiny Demilich.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

In my opinion, 4E is at its worst when you try to play it as an "we are nobody adventurers" game. The system deliberately let's players to create what is essentially an action hero within a fantasy setting, and unlike in 5E or pathfinder, you can actually make a decent character at 1st level. Essentials tried to tone down the action hero stuff, and to me it felt like making a strawberry shortcake with blueberries. Most people who complain about 4E have either never even tried it, claim that it's just an MMO or think it will play out like 3e , 5e or Pathfinder, but different games require different mind sets. You cannot start playing Maid RPG thinking how you'll min max everything or get mad at the Dark heresy system when your attempted healing spell results in a sudden boss fight.

[@EmeralBookwise]

@@Eemi_Seppala: This, and I loved 4e for it. I think most other would too if they just gave 4e a real chance, especially seeing how common it seems to be to advise people to skip 1st level in other editions because it's too fragile and you don't start getting good options until 2nd or 3rd level... but in 4e you are literally awesome out of the gate and of all the things 5e walked back on that might be the one that makes the least sense.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

@@EmeralBookwise I can understand the design philosophy of having weak characters in the starting levels, but why can't players be given at least some fun tools and options to play with. It's kinda like making the first hour or two of your video game boring.

[@EmeralBookwise]

@@Eemi_Seppala: mostly because of how multiclassing works. If 3e and 5e frontloaded their classes the way 4e does, then every time you multiclass you'd get exponentially more powerful. 3e and 5e have to dole out the "good" stuff piecemeal so you aren't just jumping ship every level.

[@PaulRaasch]

I'd love to see you talk about HackMaster! The story behind the "4th" edition is fascinating, from a D&D spoof in a comic to a actual Game of the Year award winner that was perhaps the first OSR. The "5th" edition then completely redesigned the game from the ground up to make an incredible product unlike anything else that captures the old school feel, but with common sense rules and one of the most customizable character generation systems ever.

[@dangercat8919]

Unless you compare 5th to Pathfinder, sure.

[@acestar07]

Sorry but this is not the way to create a character in 4th edition. You choose the class first, then the race, then you do the matrix. Because the class efficiency is dependent of one ability. Warlord is dépendant of Intelligence as Magician, Warrior is dépendant of strength, Rogue is dexterity, warlock is Charisma or Constitution and go on…. And this is a shame because you present only the basic race and class from the Player Hanbook volume 1. You have 50 classes (without the hybrid) and 46 races (depending on which world you play). Please search better before doing something like this completely wrong and even not showing the powers that is a part of the character creation...

[@EmeralBookwise]

There's nothing wrong with choosing race before class, not every character has to be perfectly optimized. Admittedly one would normally choose class before setting ability scores, but based on how he placed his stats, it's pretty clear he already knew which class he was going to choose, since Warlord is literally the only class in in the PHB that uses both STR and INT. Speaking of being the only matching class the first PHB, I'm pretty sure the point of only using those limited options and not evert single supplement was to provide a beginner friendly demonstration of 4e at its most basic fundamentals. It's a short example of how to get started, not how to become an expert.

[@erfarkrasnobay]

@@EmeralBookwise there is wrong to make Ability Scores before choosing class

[@craftsmenMC]

Wanna try getting into 4e: despite the focus on combat rather than roleplay, it actually seems pretty fun compared to 5e, which was abysmal for me to run. Just two problems 1) I still hate that I need to buy 3 whole books 2) from what I can tell the monster manual is abysmal Anyone got some tips?

[@alejandrotuazon4831]

Yarrrr :) I had physical copies of all the essentials line of books but yarrr!

[@craftsmenMC]

@@alejandrotuazon4831 ehhhhh, I’d much rather have physical books when available than pdfs. I wanna actually flip through the pages etc as I read.

[@fortello7219]

Hmm. A Pathfinder Second Edition character would be interesting to see you make now.

[@zigmenthotep]

Yeah, but if I do Pathfinder Second Edition, I'll have to do First Edition, and I can probably reuse a lot of the assets from the 3e video so I'm probably going to do that.

[@undrhil]

I had one fourth edition character whose perception score was 30 and he could give that to himself in an ally once per day for initiative

[@cedricflattery4287]

Thank You for the video. After seeing it multiple times even me started to understand how the fourth edition creation is working. Is it possible to get your character sheet somewhere? Can i use it in an upcoming video?

[@nmathew01]

Great job getting me 1:50 in and using that stat block for an Eladrin Warlord. Peace out.

[@Facebooker413]

In todays day and age, people only hate on 4e because they were told to. Back when it was the most modern D&D it was derided for "Gamist Language" as opposed to "Natural Language". Both of these are not real flaws

[@AkhierDragonheart]

The saddest part about 4th edition is that it was a fun game. It just wasn't D&D. This is not a dig at it. The only problem with it not being D&D is that corporate wanted it to be the successor to 3rd (including the infinite splat books to sell). They could have probably marketed it as a side game specifically for miniatures or some such and while it wouldn't have been as immediately profitable, it might still be alive. Because as many people at the LGS I frequented when it came out said, it was like an MMO Miniatures game.

[@gonkdroid4086]

great video, really underrated

[@zigmenthotep]

I totally agree, although I guess I may be a little biased.

[@jessecollins3652]

You forgot about all the extra races and “classes” in the two other player’s handbooks.

[@percussion44]

Going from level 1 to 2 You started at 22 HP added 5 and ended up at 32....huh?

[@Grimmlocked]

math and reading are hard

[@willh1655]

one of the feats gave 5 health.

[@Cloakedinvision]

what character sheet are you using?

[@zigmenthotep]

Custom made for the video.

[@douglashazen8392]

Shadowrun gurps or big eyes small mouth.

[@jojothepirate87]

This was a great video!

[@willh1655]

I made a Bugbear barbarian that could equip large weapons and I think after some levels gained a feat let me equip even larger weapons. I had a giant great axe that was 6d6 or something crazy like that.

[@Theycallmetomu]

4E isn't really that interesting if you're just relying on the PHB...

[@EmeralBookwise]

That's arguably true of most editions.

[@Theycallmetomu]

​@@EmeralBookwise Yes, but there's a lot of stuff *missing* from the PHB in terms of math balance. Still you have a point, 3.x is also really kind of boring if it's PHB only.

[@EmeralBookwise]

@@Theycallmetomu: The only math "missing" from the PHB are the expertise feats. Other than the addition of those in PHB2, the math for 4e stayed pretty much the same from start to finish. Even without the expertise feats, it was pretty easy to "balance" the math at higher levels by just using lower level monsters.

[@marcraygun6290]

Do 3.16 carnage among the stars...it has two stats FA (fighting ability) and NFA ( not fighting ability)

[@marcraygun6290]

@@wombatgirl997 I ran it modified to be based on 2000ad story nemesis the warlock it was great campaign

[@Saibrock]

Could you shit on this game any harder?

[@zigmenthotep]

Yes, yes I could. It would actually be incredibly easy.

[@zephyrstrife4668]

for 4th edition... it was built to appeal to strategy gaming, assuming that the players would have miniatures, battle grids and boards. Everything was basically meant to be Final Fantasy Tactics... which was cool, if that was something you were into doing with your RPGs. A lot of people who were fans of 3.5 though, didn't like such a drastic change, which is why it was sunk before it could get ground to stand on.

[@PataHikari]

Dungeon and Dragons, a game descending from wargaming homebrew, famous for not assuming characters have miniatures and battle mats

[@xezzee]

dnd 5e I was considering Vambire could be custom race where you pick up race that is your bases for look and stat bonuses and rest comes from vambire. What I considered Grater dark vision Sunlight sensitivity -if you stand in direct sunlight for 1h you take 1 exhaustion -being covered while in sunlight for 2h you take 1 exhaustion -being in shadow while in daylight prevents you taking exhaustion but wont stop the timer -after being in direct sunlight you have to spend short rest in dark place with no sunlight to reset the timer. Bite & Drink Blood -you deal 1d4 + str mod dmg and heal ½ and gain your level amoun temp hp -On following rounds you can deal 1d4 extra dmg as bonus action healing ½ -Drinking blood cures one point of exhaustion -Drinking blood gives enemies 1 level exhaustion maximum of 3 (disadvantage on attack rolls, saving throws and ability check, speed is half) -you can't cure exhaustion with long rest, you suffer exhaustion if you don't drink in 24h. -You can drink blood from blood potions, lower quality blood potions expire faster. -You are allowed to drink party members Simple but you can take exhaustion and cure it by drinking people but doing so it considered to be taboo. I don't know how op this would be :\ I would ques a F ton and just giving Sunlight sensitivity itsel is not enough so standing in sun gives you exhaustion forcing you to drink blood or hide during a day. This poses interesting play style imo which for DM might be fun. Sure party can offer their blood and heal then but considering average commoner 1d8 hp from 1 to 8 drinking blood (4) twice probably kills the person. with 20str you suck 6 to 9 where 9 will insta kill anyone under 5 hp

[@acetraker1988]

1:00 Seriously I prefer my own custom ability array. 16, 14, 12, 12, 12, 10.

[@davemustang8173]

I think Projared put it best when he described 4e. "It's great if you run combat encounters sparingly and you treat it like an epic battle." 4e is combat focused but if you only run a combat encounter like once every 2-3 sessions it's perfect

[@MrPsyren99]

You probably also think 5e recommended number encounters per day is a dumb idea too don't you

[@allopez8563]

I liked 3.5

[@zigmenthotep]

A lot of people did, that's why Pathfinder was a thing.

[@drizztdourden1060]

Wierd Races and Heavy Metal Classes

[@Okamooki]

I had the misfortune of playing a minotaur guardian (summoner druid) in a 4e campaign a few years back and it was miserable. The class skills did have a good consistent theme of CC, but there was little to actually do with it in most encounters. If the damage had been somewhat decent it might have been tolerable, but with most skills only doing unmodified d6/d8 damage, i might have well been doing no damage at all.

[@zigmenthotep]

Yeah, that was just one of those hings with 4e, so many classes were overpowered that playing anything else would put you at a severe disadvantage.

[@richmcgee434]

@@zigmenthotep Name them, please. I'm really curious as to what you think was an overpowered 4E class and why. If there's one thing 4E focused on as a design goal it was more balance between classes and definite roles for each class in a party that ran on teamwork, something it arguably tried too hard to achieve.

[@zigmenthotep]

@@richmcgee434 Okay, off the top of my head, sorcerers attacks added Charisma and Strength or Dexterity to damage, if you chose Strength you also got to use Strength for your AC, the only real drawback of spell-casting classes was not getting armor, but adding half your level to AC and getting magic cloth armor quickly made up for it. Also at higher levels battleminds got one of the most broken abilities in the game which allowed them to save versus any attack with no damage on a success and half damage on a failure. Which paired with their mark ability to deal automatic damage to the target when they attacked another creature equal to the damage they dealt. Which basically let them completely lock down a monster while everyone else just blasted it.

[@richmcgee434]

@@zigmenthotep The sorcerer was a striker role and tapping an extra stat mod for damage was just their "boost" trick, akin to rogue sneak attack but different - more reliable, but less raw damage. The armor class bump was to keep their defenses on the curve, which wouldn't have been the case otherwise. Dex sorcerers were already getting AC from their secondary stat, and without that Str sorcerers would have been insanely multi-attribute dependent. 4E was obsessed with keeping its spread of defenses and attack bonuses within a very narrow window, after all - which might not have been great for character variety, but it sure helped balance to not have one PC getting hit on 16+ while others were being tagged on 2+, something that certainly happened in earlier editions. So that one's a feature (maybe an unwanted one, but deliberate) not a bug. The battlemind I'm rusty on, never having had one in a group. Sound's busted, but I don't recall the exact powers and abilities involved. That was a the psionic defender role, right?

[@MericWolf]

@@richmcgee434 yeah this the psionic defender, and the ability he's taking about is an at-will utility power called iron defense that you get at level 12; it's a standard action, until the end of your next turn you can roll a d20 as soon as you take damage and on a 10 or higher the damage is 0, or halved if the result is 9 or lower; you get that power through the iron guardian paragon path, which means that, depending on your original build, this might not be the paragon path for you, but anyway, that's a defender role alright, nothing OP here to be pining down one enemy.

[@StarkMaximum]

Going back through some of these older videos for funsies, and man the comments on any 4e video always remind me of how insufferable many 4e fans are. I really didn't like 4e when it came out, the aesthetic of the books and art didn't mesh with me nearly as much as 3.5 and none of us had as much fun with the characters. But now looking back I can see it's a solidly well designed game with some good mechanics and it resulted in the spark of a lot of the ideas that made future games great. But a 4e fan will have already stopped listening once I said "didn't like it back in the day" because they just want to assume "oh, you're just a hater! You're buttmad and scared of change! You're just too _stupid_ to get 4e, clearly you just don't _understand!"_ and nothing pushes me away from anything harder than That Guy.

[@rodh1404]

To be fair, since you've admitted all that, YOU are "that guy" to 4e fans. You see, I'm a 4e fan and I read everything you wrote. Which you said I wouldn't do.

[@StarkMaximum]

@@rodh1404 That's nice, dear.

[@mattbond3512]

Best decription I have ever heard for 4e, it a good board game

[@Arcboltkonrad13]

No, no it is not. It is just as much an RPG as any other D&D edition.

[@Angelfyre.]

4e an edition of love and hate, it has some great aspects which they brought to 5e and many, many bad aspects which thankfully were dropped

[@robbnoble1509]

I think they kept a lot of the worst aspects of 4th edition when they made 5th (full heal long rest, non-customizable skills, etc.) and dropped some of the best ones (minions, defenses, keywords, 5 minute short rest, etc.)

[@jamestaylor3805]

System was meh. It wasn't as bad as some want to believe and it's nostalgia value for some give it positive reviews it might not really deserve. Personally my least favorite edition of the game I've played since that old ass red box. Personally it felt like there was an attempt to codify more things than ever before that had been left flexible for dynamic table calls prior. Having been there for the entirety of the jungle that is the 2e catalog, I wasn't phased or upset with the new character builds. It was another step away from a game that used to remind it's players why survivors of such heavy and frequent battle are drinkers.

[@knghtbrd]

I see people like 4E … statistically someone has to, and it can't be all bad. PF2E takes the idea of fortitude, reflex, and will from 4E I guess, and some of the stuff people like in 5E comes from 4E as well. But this was too complex (not complicated, but complex) for me to enjoy before you'd finished filling in the character sheet numbers. I like it simple and light.

[@Facebooker413]

Fort/Reflex/Will are much older than 4e. Even PF1 has it

[@JTMC93]

Ah D&D 4e... A good system poorly marketed in the wrong genre. It makes a great basis for a dungeon crawling game and/or miniature game. (Think Rangers of Shadowdeep style or Relicblade where you control a small group of models.) EDIT: Its main issue was that it needed some heavy balancing and maybe some more options besides the combat stuff. EDIT2: Also the odd restrictions on how many powers you could have... It felt oddly arbitrary and limiting. (Also I now have some game ideas I need to bash out...)

[@PataHikari]

"It makes a great basis for a dungeon crawling game and/or miniature game" In other words, Dungeons and Dragons.

[@robbnoble1509]

You can do just as much roleplay in 4E4E4E as you can in any other edition. All the tools are there, with some extras like skill challenges to boot. But the major differences were primarily related to combat, and that's what people focus on.

[@tigriscallidus4477]

It did not need heavy rebalancing at all. It did get rebalancing because they were so much concerned about balance. But even just PHB 1 is quite more balanced than 5E. Additional there are more rp centered rules than in 5th edition. Character theme, epic destiny, skill challenges, and skill powers.

[@JTMC93]

@tigriscallidus4477 Once you get past the PHB 1, the game gets unbalanced.

[@tigriscallidus4477]

@@JTMC93 Unbalanced in which way? Classes powerlevel is still quite close together, compared to something like 3.5 or also 5e. And encounter design can be adapted if it becomes too easy because of too much optimization. There are some classes which are a bit weaker but they still can do their job.

[@shinrafugitives3880]

Ah yes. The edition that was deliberately made difficult to develop.

[@PataHikari]

No it's just the edition that has the most consistent and transparent design. It's "dfficult" to develop because it's very obvious when something is garbage at a glance, unlike other editions

[@Cynidecia]

4e. A decent boardgame, a horrid roleplaying game.

[@TerrariaGolem]

ahh, 4th edition, the second original sin.

[@joshaqy]

This brought back memories. Not very good ones.

[@anapoda3081]

1) chose between the alliance and the horde

[@CamelotGaming]

I got my start DMing with 4e, and...yeah it was bad. I can't believe how bad it is. After playing Pathfinder and 5e I can't go back.

[@zigmenthotep]

Yeah. it was a hell of a game to DM. You had no idea is monsters were going to be an appropriate challenge, or a total pushover, and if the players all decided to unload all their daily powers on a boss they could end up with like 12 debuffs, but you can't just assume that's what's going to happen and use an overpowered monster because it might not.

[@Eemi_Seppala]

For me it's complete opposite, I long to play(or rather GM) 4e after the stagnation of 5e and Pathfinder 1e. Thankfully, I found my answer in alternatives like Through the breach, Anima: Beyond fantasy and Dark heresy. Though we are starting up a new 4e campaign soon.