Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition - Revision history

imported>Administrator: 650 revisions imported

2023-06-21T03:25:56Z

650 revisions imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 03:25, 21 June 2023
(No difference)

imported>Administrator: 1 revision imported

2023-06-18T23:33:09Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:33, 18 June 2023
(No difference)

89.186.118.205: /* Beyond 4chan */

2023-05-30T13:04:54Z

Beyond 4chan

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:04, 30 May 2023
Line 429:		Line 429:

	It's also said to be too bloated, this is usually followed up by the amount of powers a PC gets, ignoring that a) 4e slowly paced your power progression throughout Heroic, and b) you are actually supposed to trade out your lowest leveled powers for stronger ones as you gain levels. A 30th level character has a grand total of '''17'''* powers; 2 At-Wills, 4 Encounters, 4 Dailies, 7 Utilities, and this is literally just a single Utility power more than a 20th level character, who themselves has just +1 Encounter, Daily and Utility power over a 10th level character. Anyone remotely familiar with the [[Wizard]] or [[Cleric]] spells per day total since at least [[Advanced Dungeons & Dragons]] would laugh at calling this a "bloated" store of powers. Even in 5e, spellcasters still tend to get more spells than this, at least if they're full casters.		It's also said to be too bloated, this is usually followed up by the amount of powers a PC gets, ignoring that a) 4e slowly paced your power progression throughout Heroic, and b) you are actually supposed to trade out your lowest leveled powers for stronger ones as you gain levels. A 30th level character has a grand total of '''17'''* powers; 2 At-Wills, 4 Encounters, 4 Dailies, 7 Utilities, and this is literally just a single Utility power more than a 20th level character, who themselves has just +1 Encounter, Daily and Utility power over a 10th level character. Anyone remotely familiar with the [[Wizard]] or [[Cleric]] spells per day total since at least [[Advanced Dungeons & Dragons]] would laugh at calling this a "bloated" store of powers. Even in 5e, spellcasters still tend to get more spells than this, at least if they're full casters.
	* Okay, a [[Player's Handbook]] [[human]] or [[half-elf]] gets a bonus At-Will or Encounter power respectively, and a [[Wizard]] doubles their ~~Encounter,~~ Daily and Utility pools via their Spellbook feature (but can still only use the same 4/4/7 powers-per-day as any other class), but still, the point remains that it's a pretty small pool of powers.		* Okay, a [[Player's Handbook]] [[human]] or [[half-elf]] gets a bonus At-Will or Encounter power respectively, and a [[Wizard]] doubles their Daily and Utility pools via their Spellbook feature (but can still only use the same 4/4/7 powers-per-day as any other class), but still, the point remains that it's a pretty small pool of powers.

	This is accelerated by shit like semi-famous D&D Animator Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because [[FAIL\|"They were experienced with other D&D Editions"]] and then throwing a fucking [[Umber Hulk]] and several elite monsters (elites being equal to 2 monsters of the same level) at them all while claiming he was doing the game "by the book."		This is accelerated by shit like semi-famous D&D Animator Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because [[FAIL\|"They were experienced with other D&D Editions"]] and then throwing a fucking [[Umber Hulk]] and several elite monsters (elites being equal to 2 monsters of the same level) at them all while claiming he was doing the game "by the book."

45.132.226.10: /* Alignment */

2023-01-17T19:59:35Z

Alignment

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:59, 17 January 2023
Line 90:		Line 90:
	Second, and much more controversially, the design team stripped out more than half of the existing alignments, collapsing together "chaotic and neutral good" into just "good," "lawful and neutral evil" into just "evil," and all three neutral alignments into "unaligned." Their arguments for these were, essentially, that the existing alignment system promoted debate and hurt feelings, and that a certain stratum of player saw these alignments as straitjackets restricting characterization rather than tools through which to understand it. And it hearkened back to the very olden days, when alignment was a spectrum instead of a grid, thus: Law - Good - Neutral - Evil - Chaos.		Second, and much more controversially, the design team stripped out more than half of the existing alignments, collapsing together "chaotic and neutral good" into just "good," "lawful and neutral evil" into just "evil," and all three neutral alignments into "unaligned." Their arguments for these were, essentially, that the existing alignment system promoted debate and hurt feelings, and that a certain stratum of player saw these alignments as straitjackets restricting characterization rather than tools through which to understand it. And it hearkened back to the very olden days, when alignment was a spectrum instead of a grid, thus: Law - Good - Neutral - Evil - Chaos.

	It should be added here that there was ''some'' justification for doing this, although it was done rather poorly. Chaotic good was always a slippery alignment to get right (you usually wound up with somebody who was much more chaotic than good, or much more good than chaotic) so collapsing it together with neutral good into a unified alignment of "cares about doing the right thing without necessarily following the rules slavishly" helps ease the problem, and if you're removing that, why not go for the poorly defined line between lawful evil and neutral evil as well, since both similarly often seemed to end up in the same pot of "evil, but has some personal rules about it"? Lawful good and chaotic evil, on the other hand, both had their own very well defined identities completely separate from generic "good" and "evil"; lawful good had specific definitions of what "good" was, which the other "good" alignments did not, while ordinary evil does evil for self-interest rather than pleasure, as chaotic evil supposedly did. On top of that it can charitably be seen as a return to the original Alignments before they ~~were~~ expanded into a system in AD&D back in the days were Gygax had the PC's be on the side of law and order against the evil chaos of monsters		It should be added here that there was ''some'' justification for doing this, although it was done rather poorly. Chaotic good was always a slippery alignment to get right (you usually wound up with somebody who was much more chaotic than good, or much more good than chaotic) so collapsing it together with neutral good into a unified alignment of "cares about doing the right thing without necessarily following the rules slavishly" helps ease the problem, and if you're removing that, why not go for the poorly defined line between lawful evil and neutral evil as well, since both similarly often seemed to end up in the same pot of "evil, but has some personal rules about it"? Lawful good and chaotic evil, on the other hand, both had their own very well defined identities completely separate from generic "good" and "evil"; lawful good had specific definitions of what "good" was, which the other "good" alignments did not, while ordinary evil does evil for self-interest rather than pleasure, as chaotic evil supposedly did. On top of that it can charitably be seen as a return to the original Alignments before they where expanded into a system in AD&D back in the days were Gygax had the PC's be on the side of law and order against the evil chaos of monsters

	Everything might have worked better if they left in the lawful neutral and chaotic neutral alignments as "lawful" and "chaotic" (both of which had much firmer identities than neutral good and neutral evil). But, there was a complication: "chaotic neutral" is one of the most famous problematic sacred cows in the alignment system, infamous for being abused by the same sort of "LULSORANDUMB" players who give [[Malkavian]]s a bad name, treated as "carte blanche" to do whatever the fuck the player wanted without actually writing "evil" on their character sheet, or otherwise used to enable anti-social, anti-group behavior behind alignment as a shield. Indeed, many suspect that this whole process was initially kicked off by a desire to remove "chaotic neutral" from the alignment system altogether for exactly this reason.		Everything might have worked better if they left in the lawful neutral and chaotic neutral alignments as "lawful" and "chaotic" (both of which had much firmer identities than neutral good and neutral evil). But, there was a complication: "chaotic neutral" is one of the most famous problematic sacred cows in the alignment system, infamous for being abused by the same sort of "LULSORANDUMB" players who give [[Malkavian]]s a bad name, treated as "carte blanche" to do whatever the fuck the player wanted without actually writing "evil" on their character sheet, or otherwise used to enable anti-social, anti-group behavior behind alignment as a shield. Indeed, many suspect that this whole process was initially kicked off by a desire to remove "chaotic neutral" from the alignment system altogether for exactly this reason.

1d4chan>Slipmcripfist: /* External Links */ added archive links

2023-01-12T05:34:02Z

External Links: added archive links

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:34, 12 January 2023
Line 448:		Line 448:
	=External Links=		=External Links=
	*[http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome Official Site]		*[http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome Official Site]
	*[http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateMar2010.pdf March 2010 Errata], 88 pages, for the 15 official rulebooks and setting books so far.		*[https://web.archive.org/web/20100307163947/http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateMar2010.pdf March 2010 Errata], 88 pages, for the 15 official rulebooks and setting books so far.
	*[http://www.wizards.com/~~Dnd~~/~~Article~~.~~aspx?x=dnd/updates~~ Latest Errata], May 2010, 36 pages.		*[https://web.archive.org/web/20100601094104/http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/UpdateMay2010.pdf Latest Errata], May 2010, 36 pages.
	*[https://web.archive.org/web/20110902104428/http://community.wizards.com/charop/wiki/Broken The Book of Broken (archive link because Wizards hates things you aren't buying right this instant)], 4e character optimization, exploits and haxx like "Flensing Weapon + Intimidate = instant win"		*[https://web.archive.org/web/20110902104428/http://community.wizards.com/charop/wiki/Broken The Book of Broken (archive link because Wizards hates things you aren't buying right this instant)], 4e character optimization, exploits and haxx like "Flensing Weapon + Intimidate = instant win"
	** [http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?472893-4E-Character-Optimization-WOTC-rescue-Handbook-Guide An alternative link] for CharOp guides, usually the most up-to-date ones.		** [http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?472893-4E-Character-Optimization-WOTC-rescue-Handbook-Guide An alternative link] for CharOp guides, usually the most up-to-date ones.
	[[Category:Dungeons & Dragons]][[Category:Roleplaying]]		[[Category:Dungeons & Dragons]][[Category:Roleplaying]]

75.157.196.137: /* Alignment */

2022-03-04T22:57:57Z

Alignment

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:57, 4 March 2022
Line 90:		Line 90:
	Second, and much more controversially, the design team stripped out more than half of the existing alignments, collapsing together "chaotic and neutral good" into just "good," "lawful and neutral evil" into just "evil," and all three neutral alignments into "unaligned." Their arguments for these were, essentially, that the existing alignment system promoted debate and hurt feelings, and that a certain stratum of player saw these alignments as straitjackets restricting characterization rather than tools through which to understand it. And it hearkened back to the very olden days, when alignment was a spectrum instead of a grid, thus: Law - Good - Neutral - Evil - Chaos.		Second, and much more controversially, the design team stripped out more than half of the existing alignments, collapsing together "chaotic and neutral good" into just "good," "lawful and neutral evil" into just "evil," and all three neutral alignments into "unaligned." Their arguments for these were, essentially, that the existing alignment system promoted debate and hurt feelings, and that a certain stratum of player saw these alignments as straitjackets restricting characterization rather than tools through which to understand it. And it hearkened back to the very olden days, when alignment was a spectrum instead of a grid, thus: Law - Good - Neutral - Evil - Chaos.

	It should be added here that there was ''some'' justification for doing this, although it was done rather poorly. Chaotic good was always a slippery alignment to get right (you usually wound up with somebody who was much more chaotic than good, or much more good than chaotic) so collapsing it together with neutral good into a unified alignment of "cares about doing the right thing without necessarily following the rules slavishly" helps ease the problem, and if you're removing that, why not go for the poorly defined line between lawful evil and neutral evil as well, since both similarly often seemed to end up in the same pot of "evil, but has some personal rules about it"? Lawful good and chaotic evil, on the other hand, both had their own very well defined identities completely separate from generic "good" and "evil"; lawful good had specific definitions of what "good" was, which the other "good" alignments did not, while ordinary evil does evil for self-interest rather than pleasure, as chaotic evil supposedly did.		It should be added here that there was ''some'' justification for doing this, although it was done rather poorly. Chaotic good was always a slippery alignment to get right (you usually wound up with somebody who was much more chaotic than good, or much more good than chaotic) so collapsing it together with neutral good into a unified alignment of "cares about doing the right thing without necessarily following the rules slavishly" helps ease the problem, and if you're removing that, why not go for the poorly defined line between lawful evil and neutral evil as well, since both similarly often seemed to end up in the same pot of "evil, but has some personal rules about it"? Lawful good and chaotic evil, on the other hand, both had their own very well defined identities completely separate from generic "good" and "evil"; lawful good had specific definitions of what "good" was, which the other "good" alignments did not, while ordinary evil does evil for self-interest rather than pleasure, as chaotic evil supposedly did. On top of that it can charitably be seen as a return to the original Alignments before they were expanded into a system in AD&D back in the days were Gygax had the PC's be on the side of law and order against the evil chaos of monsters

	Everything might have worked better if they left in the lawful neutral and chaotic neutral alignments as "lawful" and "chaotic" (both of which had much firmer identities than neutral good and neutral evil). But, there was a complication: "chaotic neutral" is one of the most famous problematic sacred cows in the alignment system, infamous for being abused by the same sort of "LULSORANDUMB" players who give [[Malkavian]]s a bad name, treated as "carte blanche" to do whatever the fuck the player wanted without actually writing "evil" on their character sheet, or otherwise used to enable anti-social, anti-group behavior behind alignment as a shield. Indeed, many suspect that this whole process was initially kicked off by a desire to remove "chaotic neutral" from the alignment system altogether for exactly this reason.		Everything might have worked better if they left in the lawful neutral and chaotic neutral alignments as "lawful" and "chaotic" (both of which had much firmer identities than neutral good and neutral evil). But, there was a complication: "chaotic neutral" is one of the most famous problematic sacred cows in the alignment system, infamous for being abused by the same sort of "LULSORANDUMB" players who give [[Malkavian]]s a bad name, treated as "carte blanche" to do whatever the fuck the player wanted without actually writing "evil" on their character sheet, or otherwise used to enable anti-social, anti-group behavior behind alignment as a shield. Indeed, many suspect that this whole process was initially kicked off by a desire to remove "chaotic neutral" from the alignment system altogether for exactly this reason.

2600:1700:9756:490:5472:A1A3:9306:A738: /* D&D 4e on /tg/ */

2021-08-19T04:43:32Z

D&D 4e on /tg/

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:43, 19 August 2021
Line 411:		Line 411:

	==D&D 4e on /tg/==		==D&D 4e on /tg/==
	[[Image:ST4E.jpg‎ \|thumb\|right\|/tg/ ~~reacts~~ to 4e.]]		[[Image:ST4E.jpg‎ \|thumb\|right\|The "shit Twinkie", /tg/'s most famous reaction to 4e.]]
	Since its announcement 4e has been a source of controversy and trolling on /tg/. Its supporters consider it to have made D&D simple and fun. Its critics have numerous objections to the system and setting, often referring to it as 'shit twinkie' (with the implication that they had been expecting a certain type of D&D goodness and sorely disappointed by what was actually delivered). More cogent arguments against 4th Edition by people tend to decry 4th over some of its perceived issues (character homogenization, signed-in-blood role enforcement, etc).		Since its announcement 4e has been a source of controversy and trolling on /tg/. Its supporters consider it to have made D&D simple and fun. Its critics have numerous objections to the system and setting, often referring to it as 'shit twinkie' (with the implication that they had been expecting a certain type of D&D goodness and sorely disappointed by what was actually delivered). More cogent arguments against 4th Edition by people tend to decry 4th over some of its perceived issues (character homogenization, signed-in-blood role enforcement, etc).

2601:602:C900:68F8:758F:2815:A271:27B8: /* Beyond 4chan */

2020-11-27T09:53:53Z

Beyond 4chan

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:53, 27 November 2020
Line 431:		Line 431:
	* Okay, a [[Player's Handbook]] [[human]] or [[half-elf]] gets a bonus At-Will or Encounter power respectively, and a [[Wizard]] doubles their Encounter, Daily and Utility pools via their Spellbook feature (but can still only use the same 4/4/7 powers-per-day as any other class), but still, the point remains that it's a pretty small pool of powers.		* Okay, a [[Player's Handbook]] [[human]] or [[half-elf]] gets a bonus At-Will or Encounter power respectively, and a [[Wizard]] doubles their Encounter, Daily and Utility pools via their Spellbook feature (but can still only use the same 4/4/7 powers-per-day as any other class), but still, the point remains that it's a pretty small pool of powers.

	This is accelerated by shit like semi-famous D&D Animator Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because [[FAIL\|"They were experienced with other D&D Editions"]] and then throwing a fucking [[Umber Hulk]] at them.		This is accelerated by shit like semi-famous D&D Animator Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because [[FAIL\|"They were experienced with other D&D Editions"]] and then throwing a fucking [[Umber Hulk]] and several elite monsters (elites being equal to 2 monsters of the same level) at them all while claiming he was doing the game "by the book."

	=See also=		=See also=

1d4chan>QuietBrowser at 04:11, 27 November 2020

2020-11-27T04:11:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:11, 27 November 2020
Line 65:		Line 65:

	Two examples of this from the first PHB are the "Iron Warrior" power for [[Fighter]]s and the "Death Ward" power for [[Paladin]]s - both are Defenders, but the latter has a dash of Leader in it, reflecting the traditional access to low-level [[cleric]] spells. "Iron Warrior" can be used once per day; the Fighter regains healing surge value (1/4th maximum HP, rounded down) Hit Points, plus a further 2d6 + Constitution modifier hit points, and gets to make a saving throw against a "save ends" type effect laid on them. It's flavored as the Fighter being just too tough and stubborn to die, despite the beating they've taken - which is playing on the Fighter's general "action hero" flavor that it has in 4e. "Death Ward", in comparison, can be used once per day on a dying companion; the Paladin burns a healing surge, but their companion regains 1/2 their maximum HP, plus bonus HP equal to the paladin's Charisma modifier. It's flavored as... well, a variant on the old Paladin ability to Lay on Hands. Both powers are Daily types - they can't be used again until the character completes a 6 hour rest. And neither is accessible until you reach level 16. Hardly the "at-will healing" that many anti-4e trolls will claim all classes have; but, it still means that all classes - just to varying degrees - have access to their own, "magical", healing. Not to mention that, even if that is played off as "it's not on all the time forever" (which is fair enough - it isn't), it's both still something that can be considered a problem (if a limited one), and also - if playing off of the "different classes use their healing surges for different things" - it goes ''right back'' to to all classes being spellcasters, as it then just becomes another word/function for "mana" or "power points". Now, all classes have "healing surges" that they can use for "special abilities", or; all classes have "mana" that they can use to "cast spells".		Two examples of this from the first PHB are the "Iron Warrior" power for [[Fighter]]s and the "Death Ward" power for [[Paladin]]s - both are Defenders, but the latter has a dash of Leader in it, reflecting the traditional access to low-level [[cleric]] spells. "Iron Warrior" can be used once per day; the Fighter regains healing surge value (1/4th maximum HP, rounded down) Hit Points, plus a further 2d6 + Constitution modifier hit points, and gets to make a saving throw against a "save ends" type effect laid on them. It's flavored as the Fighter being just too tough and stubborn to die, despite the beating they've taken - which is playing on the Fighter's general "action hero" flavor that it has in 4e. "Death Ward", in comparison, can be used once per day on a dying companion; the Paladin burns a healing surge, but their companion regains 1/2 their maximum HP, plus bonus HP equal to the paladin's Charisma modifier. It's flavored as... well, a variant on the old Paladin ability to Lay on Hands. Both powers are Daily types - they can't be used again until the character completes a 6 hour rest. And neither is accessible until you reach level 16. Hardly the "at-will healing" that many anti-4e trolls will claim all classes have; but, it still means that all classes - just to varying degrees - have access to their own, "magical", healing. Not to mention that, even if that is played off as "it's not on all the time forever" (which is fair enough - it isn't), it's both still something that can be considered a problem (if a limited one), and also - if playing off of the "different classes use their healing surges for different things" - it goes ''right back'' to to all classes being spellcasters, as it then just becomes another word/function for "mana" or "power points". Now, all classes have "healing surges" that they can use for "special abilities", or; all classes have "mana" that they can use to "cast spells".

			But this argument will probably never die, because it's an easy target to attack for anybody who doesn't like 4th edition. Even '''Art & Arcana''', a licensed WotC product covering the history of D&D up until 5th edition and providing samples of art from across its lifespan opens its chapter on 4th edition by describing elements of its design as being "influenced by MMOs".

	===Roles===		===Roles===
Line 424:		Line 426:

	===Beyond 4chan===		===Beyond 4chan===
	4e has been growing a rather peculiar reputation in mainstream D&D culture, one of misunderstanding and hate filled bile, a few rumors have been spread about 4e among the [[Critical Role]] fans that make up a fair part of the Mainstream fandom, which have spread elsewhere, rumors like; "4e was so mechanically complex (THAC0 called, it wants its place as the most misunderstood D&D mechanic back) because they were also making a virtual tabletop to go along with it, but it never saw the light of day so we got stuck with a math heavy game never actually intended to be played with regular dice (The part about the virtual tabletop is true, but I can't find any sources to back up the claim as a whole). ~~Its~~ also said to be too bloated, this is usually followed up by the amount of powers a PC gets, ignoring that 4e slowly paced your power progression throughout Heroic.		4e has been growing a rather peculiar reputation in mainstream D&D culture, one of misunderstanding and hate filled bile, a few rumors have been spread about 4e among the [[Critical Role]] fans that make up a fair part of the Mainstream fandom, which have spread elsewhere, rumors like; "4e was so mechanically complex (THAC0 called, it wants its place as the most misunderstood D&D mechanic back) because they were also making a virtual tabletop to go along with it, but it never saw the light of day so we got stuck with a math heavy game never actually intended to be played with regular dice (The part about the virtual tabletop is true, but I can't find any sources to back up the claim as a whole).
	This is accelerated by shit like semi famous D&D Animator ~~[[FAIL\|~~Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because "They were experienced with other D&D Editions" and then throwing a fucking Umber Hulk at them.]]
			It's also said to be too bloated, this is usually followed up by the amount of powers a PC gets, ignoring that a) 4e slowly paced your power progression throughout Heroic, and b) you are actually supposed to trade out your lowest leveled powers for stronger ones as you gain levels. A 30th level character has a grand total of '''17'''* powers; 2 At-Wills, 4 Encounters, 4 Dailies, 7 Utilities, and this is literally just a single Utility power more than a 20th level character, who themselves has just +1 Encounter, Daily and Utility power over a 10th level character. Anyone remotely familiar with the [[Wizard]] or [[Cleric]] spells per day total since at least [[Advanced Dungeons & Dragons]] would laugh at calling this a "bloated" store of powers. Even in 5e, spellcasters still tend to get more spells than this, at least if they're full casters.
			* Okay, a [[Player's Handbook]] [[human]] or [[half-elf]] gets a bonus At-Will or Encounter power respectively, and a [[Wizard]] doubles their Encounter, Daily and Utility pools via their Spellbook feature (but can still only use the same 4/4/7 powers-per-day as any other class), but still, the point remains that it's a pretty small pool of powers.

			This is accelerated by shit like semi-famous D&D Animator Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because [[FAIL\|"They were experienced with other D&D Editions"]] and then throwing a fucking [[Umber Hulk]] at them.

	=See also=		=See also=

1d4chan>Phantom in the Distant Seas: /* D&D 4e on /tg/ */ I felt this was important enough to add.

2020-11-27T02:46:27Z

D&D 4e on /tg/: I felt this was important enough to add.

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:46, 27 November 2020
Line 422:		Line 422:

	Of course, spending more energy on hating on another game's flaws than promoting its own virtues was arguably the original sin of 4e marketing, so... here we go again...		Of course, spending more energy on hating on another game's flaws than promoting its own virtues was arguably the original sin of 4e marketing, so... here we go again...

			===Beyond 4chan===
			4e has been growing a rather peculiar reputation in mainstream D&D culture, one of misunderstanding and hate filled bile, a few rumors have been spread about 4e among the [[Critical Role]] fans that make up a fair part of the Mainstream fandom, which have spread elsewhere, rumors like; "4e was so mechanically complex (THAC0 called, it wants its place as the most misunderstood D&D mechanic back) because they were also making a virtual tabletop to go along with it, but it never saw the light of day so we got stuck with a math heavy game never actually intended to be played with regular dice (The part about the virtual tabletop is true, but I can't find any sources to back up the claim as a whole). Its also said to be too bloated, this is usually followed up by the amount of powers a PC gets, ignoring that 4e slowly paced your power progression throughout Heroic.
			This is accelerated by shit like semi famous D&D Animator [[FAIL\|Puffin Forest giving a bunch of 4e Noobs level '''8''' characters because "They were experienced with other D&D Editions" and then throwing a fucking Umber Hulk at them.]]

	=See also=		=See also=