D&D 4th Edition - Part 3

I’m sure that not everything new in 4th edition will come across smelling like roses. They’ve got a lot more options now but some of the elements are such a strong departure from the game that many of us have played for the past few years now, that it’s going to be very hard to get used to.

They have taken (currently unknown but suggested upon) steps to decrease the number of magic items in the game. Whatever. There will be nerds out there who will heap treasure upon their party regardless of what the books says. But even with the decrease in magic items, the magic is still very much there.

I'll give you an example right from one of the sample characters:

"A translucent golden shield forms in front of a nearby ally as you attack with your weapon."

This is a new Paladin Attack called Shielding Smite. This is a 1st level ability. So we've gone from 3.5 where Paladins weren't really magical until a few levels in (one could argue that they had to earn their powers from their gods) to 'anime video game graphic' power!
Don't get me completely wrong here. I like that the Paladin can do cool things and I like that even at 1st level they can do cool things. I'm a big fan of the characters being heroes. But let's not kid ourselves here, 1st level warrior types forming translucent golden shields around other people is pretty over the top. Before it's concievable that a Paladin might have to explain their good intention to a group of townsfolk. Nope...not any more. "See...I can produce a translucent golden shield. I'm a freakin' Paladin. Can't argue with that now, can you?!"
Again, this isn't bad. But it's a big departure from the D&D of the past. It's very modern and very video game. Is that a bad thing? At the end of the day, I will say no. Because despite it being over the top, it does mean that the Paladin (and all classes) will have various ways to contribute to every combat situation without running out of spells, or being too weak to hurt the enemy, or taking an 'Aid Action'.

So what else is weird (to get used to).

Well another huge departure will be the number of times you can use certain actions/spells. There is now At-Will, Encounter and Daily actions/spells.
At-Will means you can use it once per round. Many special attacks (Fighter, Paladin, Ranger) are At-Will actions. Great, so they can use them once per round. Very nice. But forget about them, because lo and behold the Wizard...aka the low level party gimp, finally, after 20 years of gaming, gets Magic Missile At-Will. In 10 years time when we old timers crack jokes about how our 1st level wizard cast magic missile and then told the party, 'come see me in 24 hours if you want another display of my arcane might.", young nerds will look at us like we are George-Lucas crazy.
At-Will Magic Missile (and other spells) allows the Wizard to throw as many 2d4 damage attacks as Ryu/Ken could launch Fireballs. Will this make your Wizard not suck at 1st level? Well...I dunno yet. But finally they can blast away for the length of the fight. This folks, is the end of an era. Seriously.
Encounter actions/spells means once per encounter you can pull off this move. I like it. It's artificial but I like it a lot. Artificial tends to happen for game balance and I'm all for that.
Daily means that once per...well...c'mon...it's once per day. Again...artificial when the fighter can only use his x3 damage attack once per day but great for game balance, so it'll get a thumbs up from me.
Oh...but wait...this is still D&D. And D&D needs exceptions. So on the sample characters the cleric's Healing Prayer is Encounter based, meaning he should only be able to use it once per Encounter. Except that there is an exception that he can use it 2 times per Encounter. I suspect that there will be a lot of these Encounter exceptions.

There is one problem with how At-Will actions and Basic attacks work. Intuitive is a word that you'll hear a lot here, presuming you weren't entirely bored and/or forgot that I even have a blog. Some rules are Intuitive, meaning: when you visualize the action you see how well the rule allows you to re-create that action in the game. Now I read the word: Basic attacks and, like most people, assume that you will use basic attacks for the bulk of combat and your other 'kewl' attacks when is appropriate. Nope. Not really. Your Basic attacks are so boring that they've even advised you not to use them. Wha-? You are expected/supposed to use your At-Will attacks all the time. Thus the point of the Basic attack is...well...I guess their example is for Opportunity attacks. (Did I just mean Attacks of Opporunity? No. They are Opportunity attacks now...for some reason.)

I get why you have basic attacks and At-Will attacks (which are also called Exploits, by the way). A basic attack is needed to help define what your Exploits will do. All an Exploit is, at the end of the day is your basic attack with a special effect tacked onto it. So the Fighter's Cleave Exploit allows him to make 'a basic attack' and ALSO inflict 3 points of damage on an adjacent foe. So I get it. They needed some baseline from which all your Exploits will work with. But to have the suggestion to never use your basic attacks...that is what I call not-Intuitive.

I already hear the conversation in my head:
Cindiloohoo: "I make an attack. I use my sword. It's...a basic attack."
Me: "No, no...use an Exploit. They are much better."
Cindiloohoo: "But...I have a basic attack on my sheet right here."
Me: "But on the other sheet you have Exploits. Seriously, they are cooler. And you can use them all the time."
Cindiloohoo: "But...but...why??"
Me: "Ummm...cuz...umm...just do what I say."