I've heard a lot of folks defend 4E's class choices by saying "but this is only the first release! There are plenty of more books coming!" Which is absolutely true, but comparing PHB to PHB, 3.0 had more classes, and more choices.
Of course, some classes were more equal than others, but I digress. :)
Eventually, I think 4E will catch-up with some of those options, as we get the Martial and Arcane powers supplements, plus PHB II. But at the same time, there are some areas where I don't think it will ever catch up, because that's simply not the nature of the game.
And yes, I'm speaking of druid, cleric and wizard spell lists. Look at the wizards 1st level powers in 4E, then compare the same list in 3E. Now some of those spells can/will become rituals, but ultimately your daily choices as a wizard or cleric were far greater under 3E than 4E. The very nature of the classes has changed in the new edition, making both something more like an old sorcerer than a traditional Vancian spellcaster.
That's a fundamental design choice in 4E, because they want every class to be inherently balanced against one another by the number of powers they can execute in a given encounter/day. They truly are equal, in name and abilities, but to do that, they had to sacrifice the diversity of the spellcasters.
For folks who loved the depth and complexity of the 3E magic system, this is a deal breaker. Unless we see a radical overhaul of 4E's magic system, I don't think you're going to win those people over (they'll stick with 3.5 or Pathfinder).
Personally, I get why they did what they did with 4E. And I could see using it to run a campaign, particularly in something like Eberron, where I want to reinforce the differences between it and traditional fantasy. But the Forgotten Realms? Or Greyhawk? Well, I think that is a very difficult fit. It might get better as more options become available, but I think it's still round peg, square-h ole.
Sat, 08/09/2008 - 11:04am
I've heard a lot of folks defend 4E's class choices by saying "but this is only the first release! There are plenty of more books coming!" Which is absolutely true, but comparing PHB to PHB, 3.0 had more classes, and more choices.
Of course, some classes were more equal than others, but I digress. :)
Eventually, I think 4E will catch-up with some of those options, as we get the Martial and Arcane powers supplements, plus PHB II. But at the same time, there are some areas where I don't think it will ever catch up, because that's simply not the nature of the game.
And yes, I'm speaking of druid, cleric and wizard spell lists. Look at the wizards 1st level powers in 4E, then compare the same list in 3E. Now some of those spells can/will become rituals, but ultimately your daily choices as a wizard or cleric were far greater under 3E than 4E. The very nature of the classes has changed in the new edition, making both something more like an old sorcerer than a traditional Vancian spellcaster.
That's a fundamental design choice in 4E, because they want every class to be inherently balanced against one another by the number of powers they can execute in a given encounter/day. They truly are equal, in name and abilities, but to do that, they had to sacrifice the diversity of the spellcasters.
For folks who loved the depth and complexity of the 3E magic system, this is a deal breaker. Unless we see a radical overhaul of 4E's magic system, I don't think you're going to win those people over (they'll stick with 3.5 or Pathfinder).
Personally, I get why they did what they did with 4E. And I could see using it to run a campaign, particularly in something like Eberron, where I want to reinforce the differences between it and traditional fantasy. But the Forgotten Realms? Or Greyhawk? Well, I think that is a very difficult fit. It might get better as more options become available, but I think it's still round peg, square-h ole.
»