Updated and Lovin’ It
Well another month and another rules update from WotC for 4E. Now before I go on I’d like to point out that this update significantly affected my highest level character, a level 10 Str Cleric who just (ie in the last month) took Healing Implement at level 10 and has no Cha mod (currently hits 12 Cha at 11th). The character had an at-will go from providing a little healing to no healing turning it into a basic attack. This same character of course saw its other At-Will significantly affected by the last update as well, when Righteous Brand got its well deserved fix. I’ve been caught by a couple of other changes as well – I only get to play DnD at the local Living Forgotten Realms (LFR) events, so I do need to follow the rules.
Ok so now we have some idea of my situation I can safely say that I’m quite happy to see the monthly updates at the moment. Yes I hope that 4E 2.0 aka DnD Essentials later this year largely brings an end to them, but as long as the rate of rules production continues as is I would rather have monthly updates than long-lasting issues.
Here is the crux of it, in a home game if I had a player using my cleric build I would let the changes to Healer’s Lore and Healer’s Implement slide. The character isn’t a healing powerhouse and so my game isn’t badly affected. In contrast I’ve seen reports of clerics reducing combat to a farce due to the sheer weight of non-surge healing (18Wis/Cha Pacifist Cleric + Healer’s Implement, with Astral Seal and a magic item that boosts healing can easily be causing a surge value of healing for free every round!). So if I was confronted with this as a DM I would be pleased with the changes and would be talking to an affected player about what to do with his character and the changes. As a person who DMs LFR I’m even happier to see these changes – the above sorts of builds took already generally moderately challenging at best mods and made them a cake walk. I’m glad the changes happened because of what it means for LFR authors trying to create a challenge and so on.
The truth is I am more dissuaded from DnD due to the flood of new material into the game. I have more trouble keeping up with the books than I do the errata. Errata is free, books cost money I cannot spare at the moment. If it wasn’t for DDI I would likely have dumped 4e by now, or established a “no new books” rule late last year cutting PHB3 and MP2 from campaign access. But monthly errata doesn’t bother me anywhere near as much as known problems not getting fixed.
So I say bring it on.
If the fix doesn’t affect my own games currently I can adopt it no hassles.
If the fix affects one of the PCs in my own games I can assess:
- Is the character causing a problem as it is now or not?
- Will the change if implemented immediately adversely affect the character for limited effect on the game?
Once I’ve assessed the value of the change I can adopt it or house rule to stay the way it was before the change. It’s a pretty simple thing.
If the fix only affects things from behind the DM screen (monsters etc) I can adopt it no hassles.
I would rather have the game working better overall, both for me personally in my games and as a whole.