PDA

View Full Version : Differences



Psychosis
2010-04-26, 07:38 PM
Ok, so a friend invited me to a 4th ed (he used the phrase 4.1) campaign. Thing is, I've never so much as touched 4th. I said I'd give it a shot, but now I'm curious.

Exactly how different are the two? Is this practically a whole new game, or are the differences somewhat minute? Anything I should seriously keep in mind to adapt better?

TheYoungKing
2010-04-26, 07:40 PM
It is completely different. Almost incomprehensible.

Throw out half of what you know about 3.5 and try to go in with a mind blank.

The Rabbler
2010-04-26, 07:50 PM
baisically, they took all of D&D, made it more like a video game, then printed what they had. They rebalanced everything to the point where it's VERY hard to make anything tier 3 or higher (at least in my opinion)(by 3.x tier system).

if you've used the ToB, classes are most like that. each class gets different "maneuvers" (some labeled at-will, some per-encounter, and some daily/weekly etc.) these "maneuvers" replace all spells and powers (and some combat options) of just about every single class that exists.

and they completely messed up the math behind movement, but that's just a geeky nitpick.

QuantumSteve
2010-04-26, 08:16 PM
Building a character is a whole new ball game in 4th. Don't try to come in with a 3.5 min/max mindset. (Not that 4th can't be min/maxed, it's just min/maxed different).
The upshot is, you don't have to min/max like you did in 3rd. Barring making a wizard with a 10 int, it's really hard to make a useless character. The downside is that each class excels at exactly one thing. A fighter is good at wearing heavy armor and hitting things with big weapons (as they should be), but if you have an "alternate concept" it's very hard to reconcile.

As for the gameplay itself, it's actually quite similar, all the class abilities are replaced with x/day "powers" These powers work just like you'd expect in 3.5. In my (very limited) experience, 4e lends itself to "Tactical Miniature Combat" even more so than 3.5, but that depends more on your DM than anything else.

lsfreak
2010-04-26, 08:21 PM
You are learning a new game that happens to have a similar title and similar overall theme as the game you know, but most of the things are different. It'll be easier going in if you treat it like that, rather than something similar to 3.5. Like if you were used to Halo3 and decided to learn Ghost Recon1, or upgraded from Warcraft: Orcs and Humans to Warcraft3. There is a recognizable core of similarities, but enough of the details, and some of the core mechanics, are different enough that you'll nee to learn them.

Ubercaledor
2010-04-26, 09:15 PM
IMHO, 4e has a shallower learning curve for players, but a steeper one for DMs, or am I just imagining?

senrath
2010-04-26, 09:19 PM
I dunno, I found it easier to DM a 4e game than a 3.5 one. That might just be me, though.

sambo.
2010-04-26, 09:23 PM
hmm.

sounds like going from 3.5ed to 4ed would be like going from 2ed to 3ed or from 1ed to 2ed.

i didn't play a lot of 2ed, i basically went from 1ed to 3.5ed. and THAT needed a LOT of relearning.

Eldariel
2010-04-26, 09:30 PM
hmm.

sounds like going from 3.5ed to 4ed would be like going from 2ed to 3ed or from 1ed to 2ed.

i didn't play a lot of 2ed, i basically went from 1ed to 3.5ed. and THAT needed a LOT of relearning.

In my experience, it's even more than that; broad lines of class archetypes and such remained the same from AD&D 2nd ed to 3e (though power fluctuated, magic was reinvented, weapons were "simplified", rules were consolidated [less "optionals"] and skill+feat systems were invented along with consolidated monster+character system, and multiclassing was totally changed along with racial class caps removed), but the change from 3e to 4e felt like a whole different set of basic assumptions; the completely changed class system is probably what makes the difference for me.

3e classes still felt broadly the same as AD&D 2e classes (and indeed, 1e classes), but 4e classes have a bit different feel. Basically everything uses the same mechanics underneath the fluff, and classes have clear roles (though that's really just a throwback to Basic-era; 3.X was the odd one out in that most classes had a huge range of roles they could play from melee Wizards to controller Fighters - power not withstanding). But...yeah, the overall difficulty of the change should really be no greater or smaller. The change in the feel was though, at least to me. But the scale of the mechanical change is about the same, though in different parts (e.g. skills and feats got carried over from 3e though changed along the way, so there are some similarities).

Kurald Galain
2010-04-27, 04:00 AM
Exactly how different are the two? Is this practically a whole new game, or are the differences somewhat minute? Anything I should seriously keep in mind to adapt better?

I believe it is easiest if you consider it a whole new game. Many common assumptions about 3E do not hold true in 4E, and vice versa.

Regarding adaptation, what you should bear in mind is that certain concepts may fit in a different class than you're expecting. For instance, using the PHB only, if you want a two-weapon wielding fighter, that's certainly possible: only you'll have to use the "ranger" class rather than the "fighter" class. So don't get hung up on the notion that your "fighting" character must have the fighter class, just pick whatever class fits your concept best, and call yourself a warrior in-character.

Delta
2010-04-27, 04:15 AM
IMHO, 4e has a shallower learning curve for players, but a steeper one for DMs, or am I just imagining?

IMHO most definitely not. 4e is hugely easier to DM for me than 3.5 could ever be.

Kurald Galain
2010-04-27, 04:35 AM
IMHO, 4e has a shallower learning curve for players, but a steeper one for DMs, or am I just imagining?

Rather, the opposite: 3E is much easier to learn for players (as long as they're not starting with e.g. a druid) because you can just give them a character and have them tell you what they want to do; 4E requires that the beginning player familiarize himself with a dozen power cards, and make a decision which one to use each combat turn. This can be quite baffling to a novice gamer.

ThunderCat
2010-04-27, 05:29 AM
Sometimes having played 3E is an advantage, sometimes it's not. There are some mistakes that seem more common with 3E players (such as saving throws and con score to hp), but hopefully, your DM can inform you of these.

And I'll echo Kurald Galain, it's a very common (though not entirely logical) mindset for 3E players to choose their class based on the name, and then try to make it do what they want with it afterwards. In 4E, a ranged paladin is better made by going ranger and taking the cleric multiclass feat, a nimble dex-based fighter is better off as a rogue, and a sorcerer is a better blaster wizard than the wizard class (though you can go genasi to circumvent it).

ghost_warlock
2010-04-27, 06:23 AM
There are a few things that you'll recognize and a few things that'll be completely new to you. Here's a "quick" primer highlighting the major similarities and differences between 3.5 and 4e.

The ability scores have remained Str, Con, Dex, Int, Wis, & Cha. Stat ranges are now, typically, from 8 to 18 as almost everyone uses a point-buy method that bottoms out at 8 (like the point-buy method in the 3.5 DMG) and character races do not give penalties to ability scores. Typically, a PC race will give +2 to two different stats, although humans give +2 to one stat of the player's choice, and the newer races tend to give +2 to a set stat and another +2 to the player's choice between two other stats (+2 to Int and +2 to Wis or Cha, for example).

Skills and feats are still around. The skill list is very much shorter, however, and you'll notice there's no crafting skills, nor skills dealing with a character's possible no-adventuring occupation. These things have been left to the DM to adjudicate. As for feats, they're typically on about the power-level and versatility of Improved Toughness or Weapon Focus (don't expect to see anything like Arcane Thesis or Shock Trooper). Still, you get a lot more of them and the ones that provide a small numerical boon to a specific thing tend to scale. For instance, one of the better feats to take (especially if your primarily ability score(s) aren't quite as high as you'd like) is Weapon Expertise, which provides a +1 bonus to hit, but scales up at 11th and 21st level to +2 and +3, respectively.

Familiar spells are still around, such as magic missile. However, like Tome of Battle, characters of all classes have 'spells.' Collectively, they're all called powers, but different power sources have more specific names for the powers of classes belonging to that power source. For instance, fighters, rangers, rogues, and another class or two belong to the Martial power source, and their powers are dubbed 'exploits.' Try not get too hung up on power sources, but think of them as a general theme for characters belonging to that power source. Your nature-based classes, such as druid and barbarian, along with shaman and a new class called the warden, are considered the Primal power source. Arcane is our friends the wizard, sorcerer, warlock, and bard. Etc. (Note that, although the ranger was something of a 'nature boy' class in 3.5, WotC has tossed it in with the martial power source because, at the end of the day, it's mostly about weapon techniques I guess - though with the proper splat you can still get an animal companion).

Aside from skills, just about everything your character can do will come down to his selection of powers. Want to cast Evard's Black Tentacles? There's a(n) app power for that. :smalltongue: As others have said, powers are divided into three main categories based on how often they can be used - at-will, encounter, and daily. Encounter powers can be used as many times per day as you like, but only once every 5 min or so (hence, once per encounter as it'll be rare to come across a skirmish that lasts more than a minute or two at the most). At-will and daily should be fairly intuitive; you can spam at-wills if you like whereas daily powers are typically rationed and used only in an emergency or for when you want to roll a lot of damage dice. :smallwink: For reference, magic missile is an at-will, burning hands is an encounter, and sleep is a daily. Of course, most powers can only be used on your character's turn, although their's also a number that can be used on other people's turn (typically in response to your character being attacked).

The other main way powers are categorized is between attack an utility. Again, this should be fairly intuitive - attack powers are for smacking around foes and utility powers are typically defensive or do something weird such as add a short-term bonus to skills or do something else not directly related to combat. Most characters start with few-to-no utility powers but everyone picks one up at 2nd level. Perhaps this would be a good time to mention that powers have all been associated with a level, similar to spell level in 3.x, except that in 4e a power's level is identical to the level at which that power can be learned. For instance, 3rd-level spells in 4e are learned by 3rd-level wizards (not 5th-level wizards like in 3.x).

Because of the whole everyone uses powers thing, warriors (martial characters) don't have to worry about sacrificing their damage to move around the battlefield - typically everyone makes just one attack on their turn, using a power, rather than higher level warriors attacking multiple times and losing out on that if they had to move where as spellcasters can stay planted in one spot the whole fight and remain just as effective. As a result, in 4e, everyone tends to be much more mobile. Aside from your standard 'move X squares as a move action,' there are virtually countless powers that push, pull, or slide people around the battlefield - into or out of spaces threatened by foes, into hazards, over cliffs, etc. As such, movement tends to be more tactically important. Like the 3.5 scout, some classes even have built-in features that benefit them when they stay mobile, such as the warlock class which gains concealment whenever the character move more than 3 spaces.

Another huge feature is the download-able character builder WotC produced and maintains on a monthly basis, adding new content and fixing bugs. If you have access to it, I strongly recommend you use it to make your character as it'll certainly speed up the process of making a character. :smallsmile:

Kurald Galain
2010-04-27, 07:06 AM
One caveat for migrating: while many 4E powers and feats have the same name and flavor text as spells/feats/maneuvers/whatever from 3E, they do not necessarily do the same. In fact they generally work quite different.

For instance, in 3E (and 2E and 1E), Magic Missile is a multi-target spell that always hits. In 4E, it is a single-target spell that uses a regular to-hit roll. Likewise, in earlier editions, Disintegrate is a spell that deals massive damage, and reduces its target to dust if it hits zero HP. In 4E, disintegrate deals substantially less damage, does a bit more damage on subsequent turns, and cannot reduce people to dust. There are plenty other examples.

Delta
2010-04-27, 07:11 AM
My advice in short: Don't assume anything you know to be the same way in 4e, just because you knew it that way in 3.5. We've had a lot of problems like this in our first couple sessions (people expecting undead to be immune to critical hits, for example)

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-27, 07:13 AM
The way i look at is 4th ed is its own system. I don't want to start any thing but i can't look at it as dnd. If i don't look at it as dnd its a great system in its own.

Ubercaledor
2010-04-27, 07:53 AM
Rather, the opposite: 3E is much easier to learn for players (as long as they're not starting with e.g. a druid) because you can just give them a character and have them tell you what they want to do; 4E requires that the beginning player familiarize himself with a dozen power cards, and make a decision which one to use each combat turn. This can be quite baffling to a novice gamer.

Ahhh... maybe that was my problem

Delta
2010-04-27, 08:15 AM
That's indeed a problem. In short, in 4e, it's gotten a lot easier to play characters which have been very complicated in 3.5 (full casters...), while at the same time, those players who liked playing "simple" characters like melee fighters in 3.5 will need to get used to things like different powers and so on.

For the DM, on the other hand, 4e is a really simple game to run, I don't think anyone can deny that.

Person_Man
2010-04-27, 09:22 AM
First, go look at pg 29 of the 4E PHB. That's where the Character Advancement table is. You will notice that every class gets the same exact number of powers. And that at any given point in their progression, you get a relatively small number of powers. You get 2 At-Wills, 2-4 Encounter Powers, 2-4 Daily Powers, and 0-7 Utility Powers.

Now turn to the list of powers for any character class. You will notice that there are a HUGE number of powers for each class, and that are very duplicative. Most deal X[Weapon] damage + attribute + a minor effect. For the most part, they scale very poorly. So as you gain levels, you trade out low level Powers for higher level Powers.

Then turn to the Feat section. You will notice most feats don't add new abilities or options, they add minor bonuses. In 3.5 feats like these were avoided like the plague. But in 4E, this is pretty much your only option, and certain feats are considered "mandatory (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=138063)" if you don't want to suck.

Combat consists of using your 2-4 Encounter powers, followed by using your 2 At-Will Powers (if you are winning) or your 2-4 Daily Powers (if you are losing). Because of this, combat can get very repetitive if you play a long running campaign. This is resolved somewhat by the fact that characters level up often. So after every 2-4 combats you generally gain and/or swap up to a new a Power.

So in summary, 4E is an elaborate board game. You have fewer options, but they are more strait forward. Combat moves faster. Most of the balance issues have been fixed. Instant death and Save or Lose is gone. And as always, there's nothing preventing you from having an excellent roleplaying experience as well. (Though there is less crunch that directly supports it). It's fun (which is the point of a game, IMO). But other then robbing the names and window dressing, it's nothing like the previous editions of D&D.

However, I am looking forward to 5th edition, which I assume will come out in the year 2016ish.