Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 1 of 9 123456789 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 241
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Post My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Hello I just Wanted to write my own opinion on DnD4e. Just Beforehand I would like to say, if you do not like what I say then be sure to tell me, I find one of the worst reasons not to state an opinion is if you dont like it then dont say anything. Thats just wrong: If i receive a product that I do not not like (DnD4e) then dont I have the right to say my piont of view? Why do you have the right to say you like the product?

    First Some Positive Qualities

    Anyway I would like to say 4e is a fun edition. And in fact my first RPG I ever played and the the game introduced me to Roleplaying in general was 4e. I bought all the handbooks up until primal power. The system is very well balanced it is alot of fun and.... The art is Much better than 3es books (Even though it recycled the best images from it)

    Now I do not HATE or dislike people who play 4e. It was your choice and you like the game more than I do. What I find unacceptable is people who outright deny 4es mistakes and scream about its superiority. Its YOUR Belief not mine. In fact This is MY thoughts on 4e so it doesnt effect you. I just hope to possibly get some awareness on the issue of people popping up on my blog to yell
    "4e is better"
    "Look seriously I just dont like 4e"
    "Then you havnt played it enought!"
    "A year and a half and I purchased all the books until primal power"

    Anyway Although I do find the rules quite stiff and the powers same to such a point that it doesnt matter, and all classes extremly similar (Except for the sorcerer who has the damage output of a striker and control properties of a Controler) and pigeonholed. And of course I will hear "But in 3e you also had: A Cleric, Wizard, Fighter, Rouge," well yes but at the same time the choices you made effected things on a much higher level, if you chose sorcerer Vs Wizard you where choosing Utility Vs Offence (The Rituals are only a feat away). But Thats still more of a personal preference than an actual point.

    The only points I can say are

    A: The multiclassing is poor. You have to exchange both feats and Spells for WEAKER abilities! What a ripoff. But you might also say: "But the 3e Multiclassing system was broken!" Well that depended on your gm. Your gm should have said NO I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO MULTICLASS INTO A PALADIN/ Cleric/ Rouge/ Mega Ultra broken class.

    And Second The Limited amount of roleplaying. You can argue that there is roleplaying in everything but exactly. You can find an excuse for anything. You shouldnt have to find excuses for stuff like Poison Damage, And Psychic damage (Replacing Constitution damage and Wisdom damage respectivly). How Does a Moral boost heal my poison damage? Or how does it heal Psychic trauma? Or what about the BS Power system for marial powers. I can only launch 3 arrows at a time at highest lv? What kind of a wimp is this?
    And I understand you can say Well the moral boost helps you forget about the poison. But we shouldn't have to make excuses. I like the game but I prefer a more Simulation feel rather than war game feel so yeah. dont hate the game. Its Ok. If you dont like anything about my post contact me and I will change it.
    Last edited by SpekterofDavid; 2010-08-26 at 05:21 PM.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2008

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by SpekterofDavid View Post
    Your gm should have said NO I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO MULTICLASS INTO A PALADIN/ Cleric/ Rouge/ Mega Ultra broken class.
    What did I just read.

    To be serious, multiclassing was a deliberate design thing. D&D4 is big on protecting class boundaries and absolutely not letting anyone have anything of anyone else's except grudgingly. You just have to get used to that.

    I'm not really sure what to say about the "roleplaying" point. D&D4 has no less particular capacity for roleplaying in the sense of writing and acting a character than any other system, but the power system, simplified effects, and protection of class bounds means there's less ability to back up personality with real abilities if that happens to be your thing. There are some versimilitude bugs though.



    Spoiler
    Show

    <Flickerdart> So theoretically the master vampire can control three bonused dire weasels, who in turn each control five sub-weasels
    <Flickerdart> The sub-weasels can each control two other sub-weasels
    <Flickerdart> It's like a pyramid scheme, except the payoff is bleeding to death!

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Caphi View Post
    What did I just read.

    but the power system, simplified effects, and protection of class bounds means there's less ability to back up personality with real abilities if that happens to be your thing. There are some versimilitude bugs though.
    Was me acting stupid

    But seriosly what you wrote was Just what I was trying to say.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by SpekterofDavid View Post
    ...?
    Was this a drunk post?
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Jack Zander's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Oakdale, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    {Scrubbed}
    Last edited by averagejoe; 2010-08-27 at 01:10 AM.
    Avatar generously created by ukuleleninja

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Eldan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Well, don't take this the wrong way, but...
    a lot of your points make it seem like you didn't really understand earlier editions either. The multiclassing example you posted, as an example, would be utterly crippled and weak in most cases. And a sorcerer really doesn't have more offence than a wizard, in most cases.

    Now, to the roleplaying point: yes, there are points (and I'm a 3rd edition player), where justification becomes strange. But 3rd edition has just as many, if you just read the rules as written. Just go over to the "most favourite stupid error" thread, it's full of nonsense in the rules, not just obvious editing errors.
    "Après la vie - le mort, après le mort, la vie de noveau.
    Après le monde - le gris; après le gris - le monde de nouveau.
    "

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    oxybe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    And Second The Limited amount of roleplaying. You can argue that there is roleplaying in everything but exactly. You can find an excuse for anything. You shouldnt have to find excuses for stuff like Poison Damage, And Psychic damage (Replacing Constitution damage and Wisdom damage respectivly). How Does a Moral boost heal my poison damage? Or how does it heal Psychic trauma? Or what about the BS Power system for marial powers. I can only launch 3 arrows at a time at highest lv? What kind of a wimp is this?
    And I understand you can say Well the moral boost helps you forget about the poison. But we shouldn't have to make excuses. I like the game but I prefer a more Simulation feel rather than war game feel so yeah. dont hate the game. Its Ok. If you dont like anything about my post contact me and I will change it.
    4th ed is not 3rd ed. it never claimed to be and actively said "i'm not 3rd ed".

    4th ed tries to simulate a pulp-action feel rather then give a set of world-building rules:

    -a common trope is a solider wounded by the explosion and his commanding officer tells him to tough it out. solider musters up the courage, knowing he'll feel it in the morning. that right there is the warlord in action.
    -martial powers are the special techniques you see heros in novels & movies pull off. does it make sense you can only use it once a day or encounter? not anymore sense that a barbarian can only get "really angry" X amount of times a day in 3.5. it's a conceit of the genre & tropes the game tries to emulate and it's nice for someone other then casters to get nice things.
    -poison damage/pyschic damage. HP is plot armor... always has been, always will be and rather then having to potentially track various cascading effects by tracking damage done in different ways (HP damage, stat damage, subdual damage, level drain, ect...), 4th ed uses HP as a measure of "can you keep going on? yes/no". it also uses various conditions like slowed, weakened, stunned to emulate these things. what could be a Con poison in 3.5 might deal some Poison damage and leave you weakened for an encounter in 4th ed.
    -multiple attacks are covered by powers rather then a flat extra attacks every few levels. in 3.5 does that last attack in your 17/12/7/2 really matter other then "hope i roll high"?

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    XiaoTie's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    And Second The Limited amount of roleplaying. You can argue that there is roleplaying in everything but exactly. You can find an excuse for anything. You shouldnt have to find excuses for stuff like Poison Damage, And Psychic damage (Replacing Constitution damage and Wisdom damage respectivly)
    But you might also say: "But the 3e Multiclassing system was broken!" Well that depended on your gm. Your gm should have said NO I WILL NOT ALLOW YOU TO MULTICLASS INTO A PALADIN/ Cleric/ Rouge/ Mega Ultra broken class.
    Cocaine is a hell of a drug

    PS.:I like 3.5 as much as I like 4e
    Last edited by XiaoTie; 2010-08-26 at 06:17 PM.
    Spoiler
    Show

    Much lulz avatar made by Fayt, and Echowind made the, awesome, always angry William. And the awesome thelizard made the not-right-in-the-head Argile


    Giantitp (Unofficial) IRC. Join now !

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    {Scrubbed}
    Last edited by averagejoe; 2010-08-27 at 01:01 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by oxybe View Post
    4th ed is not 3rd ed. it never claimed to be and actively said "i'm not 3rd ed".

    4th ed tries to simulate a pulp-action feel rather then give a set of world-building rules:

    -a common trope is a solider wounded by the explosion and his commanding officer tells him to tough it out. solider musters up the courage, knowing he'll feel it in the morning. that right there is the warlord in action.
    -martial powers are the special techniques you see heros in novels & movies pull off. does it make sense you can only use it once a day or encounter? not anymore sense that a barbarian can only get "really angry" X amount of times a day in 3.5. it's a conceit of the genre & tropes the game tries to emulate and it's nice for someone other then casters to get nice things.
    -poison damage/pyschic damage. HP is plot armor... always has been, always will be and rather then having to potentially track various cascading effects by tracking damage done in different ways (HP damage, stat damage, subdual damage, level drain, ect...), 4th ed uses HP as a measure of "can you keep going on? yes/no". it also uses various conditions like slowed, weakened, stunned to emulate these things. what could be a Con poison in 3.5 might deal some Poison damage and leave you weakened for an encounter in 4th ed.
    -multiple attacks are covered by powers rather then a flat extra attacks every few levels. in 3.5 does that last attack in your 17/12/7/2 really matter other then "hope i roll high"?
    True every word said about 3e is true, its nonsensical, can easily be ruined. But that by no reason justifies 4e.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Greenish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Finland

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    I think the point of the first post is "Stop telling me to like 4e."
    Quotes:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Claudius Maximus View Post
    Also fixed the money issue by sacrificing a goat.
    Quote Originally Posted by subject42 View Post
    This board needs a "you're technically right but I still want to crawl into the fetal position and cry" emoticon.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yukitsu View Post
    I define [optimization] as "the process by which one attains a build meeting all mechanical and characterization goals set out by the creator prior to its creation."
    Praise for avatar may be directed to Derjuin.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by XiaoTie View Post
    Cocaine is a hell of a drug

    PS.:I like 3.5 as much as I like 4e
    True but I was talking about the role playing sense not the mechanical. But both editions have their fare share of problems.

    Oh and Keep on loving them. ITS YOUR DECISION NOT MINE! Have fun
    Last edited by SpekterofDavid; 2010-08-26 at 06:32 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    oxybe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    on multiclassing:

    multi-classing in D&D has always sucked. mainly because multi-classing, IMO, goes against the very definition of classes.

    in 2nd ed you either multi-classed (a demihuman only option, where they split their XP among 2+ classes that leveled unevenly) or dual-classed (the human option, where you leveled up in class A, then dropped it for B, and you could not use class A's features until you reached the same level in class B. or something). this had the problem of an elf warrior1/theif1/mage1 being front-loaded with the abilities of all 3 classes. leveled up REALLY slowly however.

    3rd ed went a bit too far though... with many classes being front-loaded with their special abilities, and trying to emulate the freedom of a classless system allowed PCs to grab 2-3 levels of front-loaded classes for very little drawbacks. this usually only applied to martial types as BAB from different classes stacked with one another, while mixing 2 different casters didn't really help either.

    4th ed multi-classing comes in 2 flavors: multi-classing which allows you to dabble in another class at the cost of a feat, and hybrid classes which are very reminiscent of 2nd ed multiclassing except less of an overall hassle (you only get some of each class's abilities and you don't need to track 2-3 different XP charts which solved the gist of the issues).

    truthfully? i would have preferred no multi-classing at all. pick your class/archetype and reflavor.

    True every word said about 3e is true, its nonsensical, can easily be ruined. But that by no reason justifies 4e.
    what do you mean "justifies 4th ed"? 4th ed is justified by the fact that it does what it sets out to do quite well, which is give us a ruleset to act a backdrop for pulp-action fantasy. does it try to be a world simulator? no. but i never really looked at D&D for help creating a world... the rules in all editions are pretty non-sensical if you try to scrutinize them.
    Last edited by oxybe; 2010-08-26 at 06:39 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Copenhagen, DK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    The justification is, that the 4e designers knew all of these things were basically non-sensical anyway, so instead of making an even more complicated system that took these things into a "realistic account", they went the other way and used these facts to their advantage as a basic design strategy.

    I see why some may not like this, but (as the OP acknowledges) that does not make 4e a bad game system - it accomplishes what it has set out to do pretty well.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by oxybe View Post
    on multiclassing:

    multi-classing in D&D has always sucked. mainly because multi-classing, IMO, goes against the very definition of classes.

    in 2nd ed you either multi-classed (a demihuman only option, where they split their XP among 2+ classes that leveled unevenly) or dual-classed (the human option, where you leveled up in class A, then dropped it for B, and you could not use class A's features until you reached the same level in class B. or something). this had the problem of an elf warrior1/theif1/mage1 being front-loaded with the abilities of all 3 classes. leveled up REALLY slowly however.

    3rd ed went a bit too far though... with many classes being front-loaded with their special abilities, and trying to emulate the freedom of a classless system allowed PCs to grab 2-3 levels of front-loaded classes for very little drawbacks. this usually only applied to martial types as BAB from different classes stacked with one another, while mixing 2 different casters didn't really help either.

    4th ed multi-classing comes in 2 flavors: multi-classing which allows you to dabble in another class at the cost of a feat, and hybrid classes which are very reminiscent of 2nd ed multiclassing except less of an overall hassle (you only get some of each class's abilities and you don't need to track 2-3 different XP charts which solved the gist of the issues).

    truthfully? i would have preferred no multi-classing at all. pick your class/archetype and reflavor.
    This is especialy true in pathfinder where you get benifits for sticking until lv 20.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    dsmiles's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In the T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenish View Post
    I think the point of the first post is "Stop telling me to like 4e."
    I think so, too.
    But, conversely, I do like 4e, and it's that pulp-action-novel feel that does it for me. I think the powers system works well in a quasi-steampunk setting (which is what I am writing - a Dark Horror/Steampunk setting).
    To each his/her own, though. I know people that are begging me to finish my campaign setting so they can try 4e (because I'll never run the 'generic' setting, and I don't have the 4e Realms books for them to try). I also know people who want me back in their 3.5 game (which I won't do, because I'm dedicated to 4e now, for the above reason).
    If you don't like 4e, don't like it. If you like 4e, like it. I like my gaming to be exactly that...mine. So if the point of the first post is, "Stop telling me to like 4e." I can completely agree with that (as long as people stop telling me to like 3.x ).

    EDIT: @oxybe: HOLY CRAP, Batman! Another person who knows what a demihuman is!
    Last edited by dsmiles; 2010-08-26 at 06:38 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Doctor
    People assume that time is a strict progression of cause-to-effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
    Awesomesauce Doctor WhOotS-atar by Ceika!

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by dsmiles View Post
    .
    If you don't like 4e, don't like it. If you like 4e, like it. I like my gaming to be exactly that...mine. So if the point of the first post is, "Stop telling me to like 4e." I can completely agree with that (as long as people stop telling me to like 3.x ).
    Like Shadowrun Fool. Its Totaly tex Betah then dnd cause that s ucks Yah. Its likw erobot elvefs and stuff

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lord Raziere's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by RebelRogue View Post
    The justification is, that the 4e designers knew all of these things were basically non-sensical anyway, so instead of making an even more complicated system that took these things into a "realistic account", they went the other way and used these facts to their advantage as a basic design strategy.

    I see why some may not like this, but (as the OP acknowledges) that does not make 4e a bad game system - it accomplishes what it has set out to do pretty well.
    well if I want to play a medieval hero where magic and dragons is involved, why would I want realism? I want to play the guy that slays the dragon, if it was more realistic I'd get crushed and destroyed by the dragon and that is not being a dragonslayer, that is just stupidity. ergo, why want realism when it will get in the way of slaying the dragon?
    My Fan Fiction:
    To Catch A Mew
    A Kalos based pokemon fan fic. Now up to Chapter 25! I'm also on discord as "raziere".



  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Not that I ascribe to the scurrilous suggestion earlier that alcohol was involved in the construction of the OP, but as I am also slightly post-evening-out right now, I think I shall respond in kind.

    Spoiler
    Show
    You're right of course, it's every bit as valid that you should be free to voice your concerns as we should be to disagree with you. Nice to see that recongised so entirely.

    And you are, in a sense, right. When played a certain way DnD 4e can be a tiny bit overly specific. It has rigid structure built into it, that if followed to religiously can hurt the overal fun of the game. All RPG's must struggle with and avoid such things, of course, but that doesn't reduce the truth of my previous statement.

    I find the best way to run D&D 4e is to not worry overly much about D&D 4e. Feel absolutely free, empowered, or even encouraged to crack that sucka open and do what you and your group feel is best with it. There was even a Dev-Blog at one point that actively begged the reader to make the most awesomely broken and fun Artifacts and Items that occured to us, because where their hands were tied by needing to adhere to fair rules and keep things on a decent level, that doesn't mean that we should feel any such need or pressure.

    And I don't even think that's a plus point for 4e. I have come to the decision that the concept described above, of feeling liberated from the printed word when it doesn't dance according to your own whims, is the one true way to approach all RPG's.

    I also would like to add that the community in my region is happiest when they get a balanced diet of contrasting systems. DnD has it's place and it's focus, and WoD has a different emphasis and purpose.
    By getting a mixture and a variety of experiences, all such games are enriched. The fact that we just finished a changeling campaign makes the planar-hopping D&D paragon campaign I'm valiantly trying to run feel all the more fresh.

    If you retain the ability to have fun with 4e, to appreciate it for what it is, then we could ask for nothing more, because there will always be a time and a place for such games, and by remaining open to them you enrich your own life. But you should feel free to prefer other games, because the market is full of fascinating, awesome games that deal with both similar and vastly different things.

    Anyway, ranting aside (the downside of awesome sessions of Star Wars Saga played in a small pub is that awesome + award winning cider tends to equal over-enthusiasm), I'll address your two points too;

    Firstly - Multi-classing, or more accurately the mixture of concepts.
    At first, it was indeed quite limited. I agree entirely that in comparison to the carte-blanche approach of the previous edition, it was a bit lackluster. They had their reasons, but the end result was exclusive moreso than inclusive.

    The situation as it stands, however, is that between multiclassing and hybrid classing you have some very powerful tools for mixing classes with. You can acheive through careful building a wide range of unusual concepts, though it does help to focus on what you want to acheive first, and worry about what specific classes and mechanisms you have access to secondly.

    For example, a Wizard - Fighter hybrid could work. It totally could, but if what you really want is a sword weilding, up-close spellcaster, you really should just relax and play a swordmage. If you want a Wizard who just happens to use a sword, you optionally have things like the arcane impliment proficiency feat (to net military swords as an impliment). It's very important to keep an eye on what you actually want to do, and not get too focused on the details that you lose the whole.

    Secondly I could quite honestly argue that the lack of overly prescriptive or regulatory rules is infact a liberating influence, encouraging much more open and genuine roleplaying. I could point out that my most influencial character, a terribly statted Drow Warlord / Swordsage rolled a skill check once every level perhaps and an attack every couple. But it's really beside the point. You CAN roleplay in any system, if you enjoy it. The most important thing is the type of game you feel comfortable with, and if it's a more encompassing, simulatory experience that you crave from your tabletop entertainment, it is entirely natural that you would feel less comfortable Roleplaying 4e than, say, Gurps, Traveller, or 3.5 even.

    (TL;DR) The important thing is to understand what you want, and why you want it.

    And don't worry too much about whether eejots like myself on the internet agree with your preferences, as long as your group is having fun.
    Last edited by Tiki Snakes; 2010-08-26 at 06:42 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kaervaslol's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    There is a lot of things to not like about 4th edition, but those that you pointed out are not (at least from my experience) the really important ones.

    4ED introduced the paradigm of the really linear adventure. The game is obssessed with balance in all its forms.

    Adventures should be linear and controlled. All challenges should offer a fair ammount of err.. challenge, but pose no real threat. The "encounter" mechanic as it core is basically a linear corridor with rooms where **** happens. Character are expected to have certain magical items at certain levels, and as the DM you are heavily encouraged to give them what they "need". This is so heavily engrained in the system that there is actually a rule that gives the characters bonuses if you are playing a low magic campaign.

    For the sake of balance the power mechanic was adopted, so that under the hood all classes function the same way.

    Of course 3.XED has it share of problems. It kept the sandbox feel of the old editions but introduced extreme customization, to the point that stat blocks became huge and unmaneagable. It eliminated the mechanism that kept classes balanced by unifying the XP tables and allowing open multiclassing.

    It's more like apples and oranges really. I don't care for any of the two, even though I have played both of them (bad gaming is better than no gaming ).

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    dsmiles's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In the T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by SpekterofDavid View Post
    Like Shadowrun Fool. Its Totaly tex Betah then dnd cause that s ucks Yah. Its likw erobot elvefs and stuff
    Sorry, you're a little behind the times, there. I've liked Shadowrun since the late 80's.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Doctor
    People assume that time is a strict progression of cause-to-effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
    Awesomesauce Doctor WhOotS-atar by Ceika!

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiki Snakes View Post
    Not that I ascribe to the scurrilous suggestion earlier that alcohol was involved in the construction of the OP, but as I am also slightly post-evening-out right now, I think I shall respond in kind.

    Spoiler
    Show
    You're right of course, it's every bit as valid that you should be free to voice your concerns as we should be to disagree with you. Nice to see that recongised so entirely.

    And you are, in a sense, right. When played a certain way DnD 4e can be a tiny bit overly specific. It has rigid structure built into it, that if followed to religiously can hurt the overal fun of the game. All RPG's must struggle with and avoid such things, of course, but that doesn't reduce the truth of my previous statement.

    I find the best way to run D&D 4e is to not worry overly much about D&D 4e. Feel absolutely free, empowered, or even encouraged to crack that sucka open and do what you and your group feel is best with it. There was even a Dev-Blog at one point that actively begged the reader to make the most awesomely broken and fun Artifacts and Items that occured to us, because where their hands were tied by needing to adhere to fair rules and keep things on a decent level, that doesn't mean that we should feel any such need or pressure.

    And I don't even think that's a plus point for 4e. I have come to the decision that the concept described above, of feeling liberated from the printed word when it doesn't dance according to your own whims, is the one true way to approach all RPG's.

    I also would like to add that the community in my region is happiest when they get a balanced diet of contrasting systems. DnD has it's place and it's focus, and WoD has a different emphasis and purpose.
    By getting a mixture and a variety of experiences, all such games are enriched. The fact that we just finished a changeling campaign makes the planar-hopping D&D paragon campaign I'm valiantly trying to run feel all the more fresh.

    If you retain the ability to have fun with 4e, to appreciate it for what it is, then we could ask for nothing more, because there will always be a time and a place for such games, and by remaining open to them you enrich your own life. But you should feel free to prefer other games, because the market is full of fascinating, awesome games that deal with both similar and vastly different things.

    Anyway, ranting aside (the downside of awesome sessions of Star Wars Saga played in a small pub is that awesome + award winning cider tends to equal over-enthusiasm), I'll address your two points too;

    Firstly - Multi-classing, or more accurately the mixture of concepts.
    At first, it was indeed quite limited. I agree entirely that in comparison to the carte-blanche approach of the previous edition, it was a bit lackluster. They had their reasons, but the end result was exclusive moreso than inclusive.

    The situation as it stands, however, is that between multiclassing and hybrid classing you have some very powerful tools for mixing classes with. You can acheive through careful building a wide range of unusual concepts, though it does help to focus on what you want to acheive first, and worry about what specific classes and mechanisms you have access to secondly.

    For example, a Wizard - Fighter hybrid could work. It totally could, but if what you really want is a sword weilding, up-close spellcaster, you really should just relax and play a swordmage. If you want a Wizard who just happens to use a sword, you optionally have things like the arcane impliment proficiency feat (to net military swords as an impliment). It's very important to keep an eye on what you actually want to do, and not get too focused on the details that you lose the whole.

    Secondly I could quite honestly argue that the lack of overly prescriptive or regulatory rules is infact a liberating influence, encouraging much more open and genuine roleplaying. I could point out that my most influencial character, a terribly statted Drow Warlord / Swordsage rolled a skill check once every level perhaps and an attack every couple. But it's really beside the point. You CAN roleplay in any system, if you enjoy it. The most important thing is the type of game you feel comfortable with, and if it's a more encompassing, simulatory experience that you crave from your tabletop entertainment, it is entirely natural that you would feel less comfortable Roleplaying 4e than, say, Gurps, Traveller, or 3.5 even.

    (TL;DR) The important thing is to understand what you want, and why you want it.

    And don't worry too much about whether eejots like myself on the internet agree with your preferences, as long as your group is having fun.
    Thanks anyway.

    Just Those dam lv2 and 3 internet trolls keep pissing me off. Its just so hard not to get infected by it, just answer once and before long your a troll yourself

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ukriane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by dsmiles View Post
    Sorry, you're a little behind the times, there. I've liked Shadowrun since the late 80's.
    Yeah. I like it too only I play 4th edition because it was the only one i could get my hands on.

    Anyway Im glad that this forum is so highly regulated that there was no trolling here. =)
    Last edited by SpekterofDavid; 2010-08-26 at 06:54 PM.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    dsmiles's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    In the T.A.R.D.I.S.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    There is a lot of things to not like about 4th edition, but those that you pointed out are not (at least from my experience) the really important ones.

    4ED introduced the paradigm of the really linear adventure. The game is obssessed with balance in all its forms.
    I like the balance of classes. It makes the party of all wizards less common.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    Adventures should be linear and controlled. All challenges should offer a fair ammount of err.. challenge, but pose no real threat. The "encounter" mechanic as it core is basically a linear corridor with rooms where **** happens. Character are expected to have certain magical items at certain levels, and as the DM you are heavily encouraged to give them what they "need". This is so heavily engrained in the system that there is actually a rule that gives the characters bonuses if you are playing a low magic campaign.
    I must have missed that part, but then again, my players expect lower magic, due to the higher tech level. They also expect high mortality rates, and less rezzing for some strange reason CTHULHU.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    For the sake of balance the power mechanic was adopted, so that under the hood all classes function the same way.

    Of course 3.XED has it share of problems. It kept the sandbox feel of the old editions but introduced extreme customization, to the point that stat blocks became huge and unmaneagable. It eliminated the mechanism that kept classes balanced by unifying the XP tables and allowing open multiclassing.
    Agreed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    It's more like apples and oranges really. I don't care for any of the two, even though I have played both of them (bad gaming is better than no gaming ).
    True dat, yo!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Doctor
    People assume that time is a strict progression of cause-to-effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... time-y wimey... stuff.
    Awesomesauce Doctor WhOotS-atar by Ceika!

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Don't worry about it. A Few more levels and the level 2 and 3 trolls attack bonus will be so far behind your defences, they'll only hit on a natural 20.

    Also, may want to edit that second post, copy and paste it into the first one and delete the second (via edit, again). The folks hereabouts have opinions on 'double posting'.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    oxybe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    2nd ed AD&D veteran here. i've been playing ridiculous BS like wild-fighting, dual weilding, dart throwing, elvish warrior/mages for years now.

    D&D has only had a passing relationship with "realism" and is best served with "verisimilitude" which even then breaks when scrutinized.

    you need to apply the MST3K mantra when playing RPGs and let yourself get immersed in just how ridiculous the situation is when you realize your psionic robot is fighting the wolfman on top of a magic train for possession of the Golden MacGuffin while aided by your velociraptor riding, boomerang throwing, midget berserker and being shot after by dwarves on an airship.

    or how the magical elven princess is fighting a tentacle poop-monster with rainbows while riding a unicorn.

    or how the half-orc bandito is shooting lasers from his steampunk-renessance pistol at the demon lady while inside an Escher painting.

    D&D is weird like that. it comes with the territory.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Troll in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    4ED introduced the paradigm of the really linear adventure. The game is obssessed with balance in all its forms.
    It's clear that LFR is a major focus of 4e. And to do something like LFR, you need balanced rules that aren't too abusable, as RAW is the only thing that you can count on.

    Not saying that that's a good/bad/indifferent thing, just why I think they do it.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Kaervaslol's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    It's clear that LFR is a major focus of 4e. And to do something like LFR, you need balanced rules that aren't too abusable, as RAW is the only thing that you can count on.

    Not saying that that's a good/bad/indifferent thing, just why I think they do it.
    I don't know what LFR means, please explain :p

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
    It's clear that LFR is a major focus of 4e. And to do something like LFR, you need balanced rules that aren't too abusable, as RAW is the only thing that you can count on.

    Not saying that that's a good/bad/indifferent thing, just why I think they do it.
    My own opinion is that the idea of focusing on LFR even to some degree brings a bit more scrutiny to the whole affair. I doubt MTG would be nearly so rigorously balanced and designed if there weren't such a tournament focused market.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    oxybe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2009

    Default Re: My thoughts on 4e...THIS IS NOT HOW IT LOOKS LIKE!

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaervaslol View Post
    It's more like apples and oranges really. I don't care for any of the two, even though I have played both of them (bad gaming is better than no gaming ).
    i would contest the opposite. i only have 24 hours a day and 7 days a week to work with so i only have so much time for fun to be had. if i can have a more enjoyable 4 hours of gaming via DragonQuest 9 on my DS then a bad game of D&D, then DQ9 it is.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •