A monk
A sorcerer/psychic warrior
A barbarian/wu jen
A bard
A ninja
Yeah...I feel your pain.
I mean, don't get me wrong, I appreciate the streamlining, and the new character options...but even if we wanted to compromise, only the wu jen and the sorcerer really have rough equivalents in the wizard, am I right?
::sigh:: Oh well. I'm sure the fans will PEACH us up some things to tide us over before too long, aye?
What a load...the campaign I'm currently running? The characters are:
A monk
A sorcerer/psychic warrior
A barbarian/wu jen
A bard
A ninja
Yeah...I feel your pain.
Well what else would you expect when you go from the huge selection of books available for Third Edition to the one PHB in Fourth Edition. If you suddenly went to the core 3.5 books, you'd have a similar problem as well.
Well what else would you expect when you go from the huge selection of books available for Third Edition to the one PHB in Fourth Edition. If you suddenly went to the core 3.5 books, you'd have a similar problem as well.
What are you on?
Core D&D 3.5:
A monk = A monk
A sorcerer/psychic warrior = A sorcerer/{fighting class}
A barbarian/wu jen = barbarian/wizard
A bard = A bard
A ninja = A monk/rogue or rogue/sorcerer
Only the psychic warrior really loses out, I give that an 80% translation score.
Sorry, but 4.0 Core is currently much more limiting than 3.5 core was.
Just because theirs less classes it doesn't immediately mean there are fewer options. Note all the powers available to the classes, enabling different builds and ways to play a class. 3.5 Emphasized the class name a little much, you can pretty easily combine classes in 4.0 to get what you want.
Sure warlords don't exactly sing but their similar to bard's in a few ways, ninja? I would consider that a rogue emphasizing stealth, perhaps even a ranger could do as well (taking into account double weapon fighting..).
The classes may not be the exact same but the fact is you don't need hard mechanics and a name to make a class.
seriously though where are the limits in a game designed to allow an infinate number of possible outcomes. I am not saying all the mechanics of 4th ed sit well with me but i am able to overlook the things i dont like becase the things I do like excite me. I can still scale a mountain or swim across the ocean or hold up a tavern if I wanted. I can still strike down the city guards or convince someone to let me out of jail. I can still throw a ball of monkey poo if I so desired and I can certainly still cut off a PC's hands for stealing from me. so i dont see these limits everyone keeps talking about. this game seems fine to me and it seems to me that the only limitation on your dungeons and dragons playing is YOUR imagination. if you dont want to wait till next year for the druid or bard class, make one up yourself. the game still allows for custom content to be added.
I guess he sort of took what point I was trying to make and elevated to new heights
The lesson is, imagination > What's written before you
A sorcerer/psychic warrior = A sorcerer/{fighting class}
Just to take the most obvious example, how is this at all difficult to do in 4e?
Sorcerer/Psychic Warrior --> Magic-User/Fighting Man... er, I mean Wizard/Fighting Class. Pick the fighting class closest to how the character was in 3.5.The new wizard is more than sufficient to stand in for the 3.5 sorcerer, in my opinion.
If you're allergic to spellbooks, it's not that huge a deal to let the character switch out their powers without them. Sure, you can no longer take their spellbook away, but there's no law of D&D requiring the wizard to end up being captured and stripped of their possessions in every campaign. If I was doing this I would ban them from taking the feat giving them bonus spells in the spellbook, but that's up to you.
Also, bard? Reflavoured warlord, possibly with rituals, or I suppose a reflavoured warlock with an instrument as their implement. Or a warlo[ck|rd]/warlo[rd|ck]. The ninja's a rogue, possibly with some magic. The barbarian is a fighting class whose player shouts a lot, and you already accepted wizard as the multiclass for that one.
The only one of those characters I can see a problem with is the monk, and I don't generally like monk-type characters and so haven't bothered thinking about how to do them in 4e.
whatever man, *points to the post 2 above this one* all i hear from that is "waah waah waah" DnD (any edition) is only limited by your imagination. end of story. this is the one game I know of where the rules are free to be changed and where there are limitless posibilities. I think that the 4ed Core is fine just the way it is. there have obviously been a bunch of thought put into it. from my peek through the game it self hasnt changed all the much just some simple mechanics. death and dying makes more sense to me now. the leveling system has been changed a bit but its all basically the same game it was before. enter dungeon, kill inhabitants, get the loot, rescue the princess and interact with the DM trhough roleplay and NPCs. if you dont like 4 core becuase of its "limits" (which by the way i dont really see.) then play the other versions and place 4th ed on the shelf, wait for it to get better and then poke it a few times with a stick to check for traps.
seriously though where are the limits in a game designed to allow an infinate number of possible outcomes. I am not saying all the mechanics of 4th ed sit well with me but i am able to overlook the things i dont like becase the things I do like excite me. I can still scale a mountain or swim across the ocean or hold up a tavern if I wanted. I can still strike down the city guards or convince someone to let me out of jail. I can still throw a ball of monkey poo if I so desired and I can certainly still cut off a PC's hands for stealing from me. so i dont see these limits everyone keeps talking about. this game seems fine to me and it seems to me that the only limitation on your dungeons and dragons playing is YOUR imagination. if you dont want to wait till next year for the druid or bard class, make one up yourself. the game still allows for custom content to be added.
While this is true, a flexible and adaptive system that allows options for what players want without house-ruling the system to hell and back is always preferable for ease of use, and is the reason I left D&D in the eighties. I came back for 3.x because it addressed these issues. I'm currently staying clear of the tactical wargame that is 4.0 for the same reasons. Not because it can't be adapted to what I want, but because with my shelves full of 3.5 material, why should I bother? This is a fundamental question WotC needs to answer, because player/DMs like me form a large part of their customer base.
By the way, can somebody tell my why these boards are suddenly full of obnoxious fanboys who seem to think that civilised discussion consists of pushing the limits of the forum's code of conduct by trying to be offensive and insult poster's who have differing opinions to their own?
There are a few fan made versions of the druid out there you might look at for the interim.
I have been working an version myself, it's still a bit rough but I think it's getting there. For simplicity we are just going to make the animal companion a non combat pet.
My version: http://opensourcegaming.net/files/downloads/Druid.pdf