Starting 4th edition.

[BIGMamaSloth]

Welp, this has been a long time coming. I started playing D&D 3.5 about 4 years ago, Now, 4th edition has always interested me, as it seemed to have more balance between classes and other interesting features. I've finally decided to just plunge right in to 4th edition. I think my friend owns a couple books, and some places run D&D encounters near me, but other than that, where can I start? Is there a system reference document? I literally have no concept of anything about how the rules work :smallredface: . Is it similar to 3.5 in any ways?

[Nu]

As far as the rules go, yes, there are a lot of similarities to 3.5 and other d20 systems in general. There are a great many subtle differences too. I think you'll find the more striking differences immediately upon creating a character.

There is no SRD, however (unfortunately). 4E is not free to get into. You can either purchase a DnD insider account from WotC and have instant access to all material, the character builder, and monster builder, or pick up/borrow the books and look through them. Those are the only real legal ways to break into the game.

[Akodo Makama]

Is it similar to 3.5 in any ways?
It has dungeons.
And Dragons.

There's no SRD for 4e. The best place for someone such as you to start is with the PHB.

The basic rule is: Roll a d20 and compare to a target number to see if you succeed, just like 3e. It's now used everywhere: Skills, attacks, magic. What used to be handles by 'saves' are now defenses (like AC). So you no longer 'make a reflex save to take half damage from the wizard' instead, the wizard 'attacks your reflex defense, but still does half damage if she misses'.

There's a new mechanic called "Saves". It's name is just an unhappy coincidence: They're not 3e saves. It just means 'roll double digits on a d20'.

4e is designed around a team, with classes having only one or two things they're good at. Multiclassing has been reduced to 2e levels: you might get one 'extra' class, two if you really work at it (unless you're a bard), and you'll generally loose effectiveness at your primary schtick to gain more options.

Don't get stuck on class names, look at class features. You don't have to be a Ranger to call yourself "Ranger Bob". Some of the classes had their primary roles switched between 3e and 4e. Many had their roles limited, many expanded.

4e doesn't try to simulate the world. The PC mechanics are a way of making the players (not characters) interaction with the world simple. NPCs and PCs don't play by the same rules. NPCs don't have classes, most don't have stats. Those that do have stats might have the stats change depending on the intended story role at that moment. NPC equipment doesn't directly affect their stats, they'll just be given equipment to explain the stats they already have.

Skill points are simplified. Either you're good at it (trained), or you're not. No need to put a single point in 'underwater basket weaving' for background purposes. They have actual Backgrounds to use for that. Fighters don't have to worry about their lack of intelligence limiting their skill options.

The skill list is simplified. Many lesser-used ones were combined (climbing/swimming/etc -> athletics). Knowledge(x) and Craft(x) are gone (see Backgrounds).

[tcrudisi]

Is it similar in any way? Absolutely! They both share the same name.

... That's it, though. Seriously, forget everything about 3.5 and realize this is a completely different game. (That's par for the course, as 2nd ed. was very different from 1st and 3rd was very different from 2nd.)

Personally, I dislike encounters. It's too short and too boring for my tastes. I do enjoy LFR and if there's a group running encounters, chances are good there's an LFR group there. A home group would be my top preference, however.

As for learning the rules? I'd start by borrowing your friends PHB. Yeah, some of the stuff will have been errata'ed, but that doesn't matter. It will give you a solid enough grasp of the rules.

There's no SRD for 4e. In fact, WotC wants you to pay for their insider account so that you can get access to their database and character builder. Granted, the character builder is freakin' sweet. But, there are alternatives. Alternatives which aren't legal, so I'm not mentioning anything else about it.

The easiest thing to do? I would show up to encounters (or LFR) 30 minutes early. Usually someone shows up early. Talk to them. Ask them to help you make a character. At the very least, they'll help you find someone who can help you. Many DM's carry around level 1 sheets on the off-chance a new player shows up. Yeah, it won't be your own character, but it's a good place to start. Obviously, ignore this if you create your own character.

Pro tip: don't start with the controller role or the Shaman. Just ... don't. The shaman's spirit companion is enough to make many seasoned D&D'ers weep and the controller is just complicated to do properly. The controller is very powerful, but often the players don't see the effects (but boy does the DM ever). I wouldn't recommend starting with one. For someone coming from 3/3.5, I actually recommend starting with a leader (healer) or defender (tank). Both introduced new mechanics which really showcase the awesomeness of 4e. Namely: healing someone doesn't take up your attack action and now the Fighter (or other defender) has a way to keep the monster in his face other than DM fiat. As far as I'm concerned, those are huge upgrades to the game.

Finally, if you can find it somewhere, look at page 42 of the DMG. Why? Because it tells you how to use Athletics and Acrobatics in combat. So many players think that they can only use their powers in combat and never really do any of the cool stunts. It's gotten really bad, in fact. An example: I used to DM a lot of LFR. There was this one kid (about 12) who always described what he was doing. He was loud and obnoxious, but I like hearing what characters are doing beyond, "I Twin Strike it." He was describing his character wall jumping, grabbing onto the bad guy and pulling him off the roof. The other players were like, "You can't do that!" Well, I interpreted page 42, made some slight modifications (lowered the damage and added a pull 1 effect) and voila! He had a good time, the other players were all, "You can do that?!", and it made the combat far more interesting. Obviously, the ability of page 42 hinges on the DM - but if you get one that knows the page well, many opportunities for the rule of awesome present themselves.

Finally - remember 4e is a different game. It's not 3rd ed. It's not. Period. Full stop. Expect everything to be different because most of it is. If it helps you, pretend the game is called "Awesome Dungeons and Hungry Hungry Dragons". Remember how frustrated you were when you were first learning 3.x and expect the same. Learning a new system is tough. I think 4e is a lot more "newbie" friendly, but it's still tough.

Good luck and have fun!

[Anxe]

I've also been thinking of switching from 3.5 to 4E. I think I'd read on here before that the HP of 4E monsters was too high and the damage of 4E monsters was too low. I'd also read a quick fix was to multiply damage by 1.33 and decrease monster HP by a third. Is this a good fix? Have people tried it both ways? Is it needed for the MM2 and MM3?

[WitchSlayer]

I've also been thinking of switching from 3.5 to 4E. I think I'd read on here before that the HP of 4E monsters was too high and the damage of 4E monsters was too low. I'd also read a quick fix was to multiply damage by 1.33 and decrease monster HP by a third. Is this a good fix? Have people tried it both ways? Is it needed for the MM2 and MM3?

Sorta kinda for the MM2, not for the MM3 nor for Monster Vault or Dark Sun monsters.

[Nu]

I've also been thinking of switching from 3.5 to 4E. I think I'd read on here before that the HP of 4E monsters was too high and the damage of 4E monsters was too low. I'd also read a quick fix was to multiply damage by 1.33 and decrease monster HP by a third. Is this a good fix? Have people tried it both ways? Is it needed for the MM2 and MM3?

Those were true in the past, but if you stick to the Monster Manual 3, Monster Vault, Dark Sun Campaign Setting, and any monster books from beyond that era you'll be fine.

Solo HP used to be too high in paragon and epic, but the formula for that changed so it's no longer true. Also, average PC damage has generally increased as power creep marches on.

In addition, monster damage is generally now brutal enough to keep pace with PCs, but if you're using monsters from the MM1, MM2, or other books published around the same time you're running a balance risk.

[The Reverend]

DarkSun monsters damage times 1.33!!!!


Weeps uncontrollable muttering about the cactus that killed his family.

[Emongnome777]

To summarize the monster hit points / damage story (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

MM1 and MM2 had monsters who's damage increased by 1 every 2 levels on average. MM3 and later had monsters who's damage increased by 1 every level (as it should've been from the start), so a quick "fix" to the first 2 books is to add 1/2 level to all the damage. The higher-level solos did see a drop in hit points, bit I think that's it. It should be noted that the monsters in general got improved abilities and such, not just higher damage. At least that's how it seemed to me, I may be wrong.

The "fix" that Anxe mentioned (4/3 x damage and 2/3 of hit points) doesn't really line up MM1 & 2 monsters to the newer design baseline. However, I've used this myself to speed up combats while causing the party to use up the same amount of resources. It seems to work well for what I want it to do.

[Lucy Land]

Those are the only real legal ways to break into the game.
There are of course illegal, though IMO better ways, for a new group to test-drive the game.

[Drglenn]

I've also been thinking of switching from 3.5 to 4E. I think I'd read on here before that the HP of 4E monsters was too high and the damage of 4E monsters was too low. I'd also read a quick fix was to multiply damage by 1.33 and decrease monster HP by a third. Is this a good fix? Have people tried it both ways? Is it needed for the MM2 and MM3?
MM3 maths on a business card (http://blogofholding.com/?p=512) (so you can update the pre-MM3 monsters or make your own, also: the online monster builder already has the damage math built in)

But yea, I'd definitely recommend getting ahold of at least the PHB and having a read

[Badgerish]

For legal samples:

The D&D website has the revamped version of H1 - Keep on the Shadowfell, along with some quickstart rules and pregen characters. Not a great adventure, but playable.

edit: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/TryDnD.aspx

[Nu]

To summarize the monster hit points / damage story (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

MM1 and MM2 had monsters who's damage increased by 1 every 2 levels on average. MM3 and later had monsters who's damage increased by 1 every level (as it should've been from the start), so a quick "fix" to the first 2 books is to add 1/2 level to all the damage. The higher-level solos did see a drop in hit points, bit I think that's it. It should be noted that the monsters in general got improved abilities and such, not just higher damage. At least that's how it seemed to me, I may be wrong.

The "fix" that Anxe mentioned (4/3 x damage and 2/3 of hit points) doesn't really line up MM1 & 2 monsters to the newer design baseline. However, I've used this myself to speed up combats while causing the party to use up the same amount of resources. It seems to work well for what I want it to do.

The original rules also included increasing the defenses of solos slightly, but this doesn't seem to be something that WotC does in its own monsters anymore.

Since MM2, WotC tends to avoid defensive bonuses that were present in some older monsters, as well as healing powers. This is a design shift that was less obvious but is aimed at keeping encounters short.

[Reluctance]

DMG II specifically called out dropping elite/solo defenses, as well as dropping solo HP and raising the number of minions that equate to a normal monster as you go up in tier. It wasn't until MM3 and beyond that they got a better handle on solo abilities, though.

[Wildefox]

Monster HP is always too high. Until I meet them. <cracks knuckles>

[Zaq]

My favorite way to describe the similarities between 3.5 and 4e is to say that one is A Link to the Past and one is Ocarina of Time. Both are a lot of fun, and there are a lot of similar names and superficial similarities, but when you get down to it, knowing how to play one doesn't automatically teach you how to play the other.

[spitflame341]

They're both D&D. They both have you roll a d20, add modifiers and compare to a DC. They both run off of your 6 primary stats. There both have skills to officiate RP scenarios. That being said, they do all of those things differently. I'm not going to get into that though.

I recommend starting with the essentials books, especially Heroes of the Fallen Lands - the rogue and fighter in that should be a pretty good transition between editions.

Encounters is decent to get your feet wet, as they only go from levels 1 to 3, but they can get old after a couple of seasons, and they are essentials only.

The Character builder on DDI is pretty good too, from a player perspective, as it gives you all of the options and lets you play around with building all different kinds of characters.

[Snowbody]

There is no SRD, however (unfortunately). 4E is not free to get into. You can either purchase a DnD insider account from WotC and have instant access to all material, the character builder, and monster builder, or pick up/borrow the books and look through them. Those are the only real legal ways to break into the game.

There is a bunch of content that Wizards released as promotional material for 4E before the PHB and DMG were published, and they specifically requested that it be distributed far and wide. One place that has collected it is http://dnd4.com/phb however a lot of the material has been modified (e.g. there's no such thing as "Confused" anymore)

[Dust]

There's two major complaints that new players will have with 4e. In time, both of these things will either stop bothering you, or they'll annoy you enough that you leave and go back to 3.5. I wanted to point them out here because I feel that, if you know about these nuances ahead of time, it'll be easier for you to do the former.

1) It feels like an MMORPG.
Well, yeah. You hear this one a lot, and there's arguments on both sides of the fence. The reason that it's such a commonly-used argument is that, since we don't have a lot of different types of games to refer to, this is the closest that can be easily defaulted-to. While some might argue it's closer to tabletop wargaming than other editions of 3.5 have been, it also shares a fair bit in common with what's currently SELLING, and for obvious reasons.

2) The classes, magic items, and feats feel underpowered or generic/homogenized.
This one sticks around. In the sake of balance, a lot of stuff doesn't have the same OOOOOH factor it might have had in 3.5. There's very few out-of-combat powers and utilities, and fewer ways to break the game by transforming it into a sandbox world for your character to play in. Later supplements help fix this, with 'rare' (see; better/cooler) magic items that really stand out, and build options in the ____ Power books/DDI/Dragon that help a character break away from the 'shift 1, deal 1[W] + stat damage, knock the target prone' style attacks that everyone and their mother uses from levels 1-30.

[Anxe]

Forgot I posted here. Thanks for the replies on that damage/HP stuff guys. I'll go with the 4/3 and 2/3 fix for the MM1 and MM2 once I start doing 4E.

[MeeposFire]

One important thing they changed for some solos is making them have extra turns by having them automatically go at initiative counts 20/10/5 so it gets three sets of turns (an example). This makes a solo more like multiple creatures but it is still actually one creature. It also makes them more dangerous and newer solos tend to have the ability to make additional saves at the start of their turns so that they are less likely to lose a turn.

One thing to keep in mind is that 4e is a lot like 1e in the details. In 1e you had to supply the details about your character and you would probably have n mechanics to represent it. For instance if you were a trained blacksmith in a 1e game there were no mechanics to show it. Thus it was a detail that you fleshed out and figured out how to use as a player and DM. 4e does this as well. While blacksmithing may not have any direct mechanical use it can be useful to a character and the DM and player can find uses for having that in their background (perhaps the player can have his character fix something in a skill challenge that others could not due to his skills).

Lastly 1e and 2e are about as different as 3e and 3.5. If done today 2e would never have been looked at or be treated as a separate edition. Really their are 4 concrete versions of D&D and one is debatable in how different it really is. The four are D&D (basic on up which is very similar to AD&D but diverges though I can see an argument to saying it really is part of the same basic idea just with different details especially at high levels), AD&D (1e and 2e), D&D 3e, and D&D 4e. Essentially everything else is a variant of that.

[Yakk]

Forgot I posted here. Thanks for the replies on that damage/HP stuff guys. I'll go with the 4/3 and 2/3 fix for the MM1 and MM2 once I start doing 4E.
Reducing MM1/MM2 monster HP is only required if players are under optimized.

MM3 monsters (barring level 11+ solos) have the same HP as a MM1/2 monster.

The reduction in HP from MM3 happens naturally because if you are using MM1 monsters, in order to challenge the party you'll be using more of them and higher level ones. If you use MM3 monsters, they'll be closer to the parties level and there will be fewer of them. And as HP goes up with level and with monster count...

[Kurald Galain]

One thing to keep in mind is that 4e is a lot like 1e in the details. In 1e you had to supply the details about your character and you would probably have n mechanics to represent it. For instance if you were a trained blacksmith in a 1e game there were no mechanics to show it.
That's not actually true. 1E has explicit rules for this, albeit optional ones, whereas 4E design considers that irrelevant.

As near as I can tell, the notion that 4E resembles 1E or 2E was suggested by WOTC's marketing department, and most long-term 1E/2E players disagree.


(perhaps the player can have his character fix something in a skill challenge that others could not due to his skills).
That's good DM'ing, but it does contradict 4E's SC rules.

[kieza]

Reducing MM1/MM2 monster HP is only required if players are under optimized.


I would assume that they aren't optimized, and see how it works. If you're just starting out, your players probably won't know the system well enough to optimize right off the bat, and in my experience, you rarely have a group of players without one person who doesn't optimize. So yeah, default with me for a new group is to reduce HP.

The general rule is monsters get X * (Level + 1) + Con score HP. X is 6 for artillery/lurkers, 8 for skirmishers/soldiers/controllers, 10 for brutes. I generally go with 4-5 for artillery/lurkers/controllers, 5-6 for skirmishers, 6 for soldiers, 8 for brutes. I also give them more damage, and it works.