The Pathfinder ninja is in playtest, but D&D4.5 and 4.0 still have no ninja.

There's a 4.5 now? Is there any chance it doesn't suck?


Note that I don't consider the lack of a ninja to have any relevance on sucking.

All signs point to no.

It is hard to tell if 4.5 sucks.

What I can glean is this: they introduced a new set of stuff. It has all the base classes in it. So you can be a fighter from the PHB, or you can be this new fighter. Both are fighters, but they do things rather differently.

The general opinion is that the new stuff is better: you always want to use it if you can.


Beyond that, I can't really say. The general way 4ed is handled (cooldowns) does not excite me. There is still broken stuff, but it is crazy shit, like combos that stun people or reset resources- emergent play issues, basically.

It is hard for me to grok what is broken and what is not, or even how play works out beyond when I mocked up some level 5s and had them punch stuff. I am profoundly unhappy with the game world their rules implies. I am displeased to a great extent by the way a persons power varies widely with how they are presented. For instance, a mission to stealth past a farmer and steal a carrot will be about as hard at 1st level as 30th, because the DC to sneak past a farmer goes up as you level.

As you level, your attack bonus goes up, and so does your AC, by the same amount. So a second level fighter will have the same odds of hitting a 2nd level wizard as he will at 28tu attacking a 28th level wizard.

Just very not impressed. If you have numbers, it is for the sake of modelling something. It is not for the sake of them getting bigger. If a fighter has a 75% chance to holist a rogue at all levels, fucking get rid of the levels.

Hit

Hit


Hit a rogue.


Fuck.

"POSTED FROM MY IPHONE STUCK IN A FUCKING AIRPORT"

It really is no longer a game when too much of the "broken stuff" gets "fixed".