things you dislike about 4E v.2

[EvilElitest]

{Scrubbed}

Generally, what do you not like about 4E? Please be as descriptive as possible.

Remember, you don't have to be totally anti 4E to post your complaints. I play 3E, and i can point out a massive number of absurdities and annoyances. Post minor complaints, major complaints, and moderate ones.


Now when the first thread was started, there was also a "What do you like about 4E" where nobody was allowed to post any criticism. I'll most likely make that thread tomorrow. here, while i'm not saying you shouldn't try to defend 4E, which is perfectly reasonable, don't provoke people or try to say that criticizing 4e is somehow wrong. Above all, this is a thread of criticism and for people to explain why they don't like aspect of 4E
anyways, have fun


My main complaint is absurd disappointment with WoTC. I don't think 4E really fails as a game, it is suited for playing in on manner. it fails as a new edition of of D&D. Ideally it would be a spin off game of D&D, you might say it would be great as an RPG supplement to the D&D minature games, because it does that well. However, it simply falls short in its massive simplicity as the 4th edition of D&D

from
EE

[Knaight]

I dislike how hit points and such are handled, with severe wounds and such not being handled very well. I also think that magic was balanced the wrong way, and lost a lot of versatility, where a spell failure mechanic, possibly with backfire, or just a more moderate daze/stun effect applied to the more interesting spells would have sufficed. I don't like the disconnect between mechanics and fluff, such as the constant special comments thrown in, where the low level PCs aren't even all that powerful. Its by no means a horrible game, but these are a few of its bigger flaws. That and the reduction of multiclassing causing the necessity to jump through hoops to create a lot of characters.

[Gavin Sage]

Providing for reference the list originally created by Oracle_Hunter (iirc) condensing the complaints about 4e into a seven major categories:

1) 4e is not D&D; it's a different d20 game
2) 4e doesn't have X race or class
3) 4e is unrealistic
4) 4e is too narrowly focused
5) 4e Epic isn't Epic
6) 4e Heroic isn't Gritty
7) 4e is oversimplified

I personally subscribe to all seven points particularly #4 and #1.

[EvilElitest]

that menu is extremely simplified however, it just touches the surface.
from
EE

[black dragoon]

I've been wary to put in my 2Cp but her it goes.
I believe 4E is trying to be something it is not primarily an MMORPG.*cough*Warcraft*cough* THey have turned magic into almost totally an offensive practice and have made even simple utility spells annoyances to deal with. I do admit that spellcasters were overpowered in 3.x yes but at the same time they provided a unique flavor by creating strange rather harmless effects or interesting roleplaying opportunities.
Monsters have become cardboard cutouts. I've found that in 3.x monsters were easy to design and customizing them to what you needed could be a fun time. It also seems more harried. due to a whole set of new classes that are monster specific. Personally I liked the fact that a goblin fighter was a FIGHTER! not some mook level three. alright that's it fir now lest a torrent of hellish flaming be loosed upon the threads.

[Gavin Sage]

that menu is extremely simplified however, it just touches the surface.
from
EE

Too true, each could make a several page term paper and the whole thing a doctoral thesis on psychologoy and gameplay.

4e has taught me how important the metagame aspect is to a rich roleplaying experience.

[monty]

I really don't like how similar they made the classes. I know they aren't identical; don't try to say I said that. But the mechanics are too similar. 3e had a complex physical combat system, it had a well-developed magic system, it had the ToB stuff, it had the ToM stuff, it had invocations...I could go on. 4e has powers. Complex mechanics seem to have been melted down to "I use <power>." Then, sometimes you have to wait before you can use it again. Maybe I'm just weird, liking the complexity of multiple combat systems.

Also, I don't like the way they balanced the classes. Again, maybe I'm just weird, but I liked the inherent superiority of the spellcasters. It just makes sense to me that something bound by physics would be weaker than something that isn't. And it gave me more options to do what I want. When I want to rape face, I can go Batman on everybody. When I just want to hit stuff, I can play a fighter, comfortable knowing that if I start messing up, the party wizard can save me.

[monty]

Too true, each could make a several page term paper and the whole thing a doctoral thesis on psychologoy and gameplay.

4e has taught me how important the metagame aspect is to a rich roleplaying experience.

I'm probably going to take psychology next semester. Now I have an idea for a paper!

[EvilElitest]

Too true, each could make a several page term paper and the whole thing a doctoral thesis on psychologoy and gameplay.

There is a difference between a sum up is flat out wrong. Also, the idea that people need to break the 4E complaints down into certain list standards rather than actually accepted the complaint at face value is always rather jaring

4e has taught me how important the metagame aspect is to a rich roleplaying experience.

So flat uninteresting monsters, races, classes and world is a sign of rich roleplaying game. Hmm, puts legend of five rings, FR, and in fact, most RPGs into perspective.
from
EE

[Gavin Sage]

So flat uninteresting monsters, races, classes and world is a sign of rich roleplaying game. Hmm, puts legend of five rings, FR, and in fact, most RPGs into perspective.
from
EE

You seemed to missed how by "taught" I was referring to learning much like watching an idiot stick a fork into an electrical socket and watching the results to learn to do better.

[EvilElitest]

You seemed to missed how by "taught" I was referring to learning much like watching an idiot stick a fork into an electrical socket and watching the results to learn to do better.

ah. So in the sense of looking at Dominic Deegan and being told "Yeah, don't do that" sort of thing. Sorry didn't catch your sarcaism
from
EE

[black dragoon]

Another burst of Rant!
I've gotta agree on making the combat simplified. 3.x had rulings on doing just about any combat maneuver in the book and if it didn't it would suggest what it'd be around for a challenge. from what I've heard of 4E it takes some serious tweaks to get the system to roll with you like that.
Also, the classes bother me as well. Magic feels like I simply throw a different flavored pudding at them depending on the spell and though I like the whole branching idea for true DND it doe not seem to fit. In D20 modern it worked because well you were the hero and depending on what you had for a major ability score it would determine what you became after you honed your skills for a few levels. In DND you picked life from day one. You were meant to hack apart , blow up, miracle whatever and challenge Destiny. Now you pick at the the start and have to listen to IT!?

[EvilElitest]

i have to agree with dragon in terms of the massive simplicity thats come about. It just takes away flavor
from
EE

[DMfromTheAbyss]

I think the backstory and fluff with the whole shadowfell and faewild went a bit far. Bad enough to have the cosmology lesson but they then integrated it into race abilities that are hard to explain without it.

Also the alignment simplification really raised more questions than it answered. It makes the great wheel look like an Z instead. Heck if they wanted simple just go with D&D oldschool and have lawful, neutral and chaotic and avoid moral questions altogeather, or good neutral and evil. Unaligned is just neutral without any guts anyway... what if I want a character who believes in balance but is willing to take sides... not easy to do anymore.

Despite these issues I have to say I actually like 4rth ed better than 3 and 3.5......

But I still play a 2nd ed game so there!

I just had to get that off my chest. Sorry for the rant.

[Fan]

i have to agree with dragon in terms of the massive simplicity thats come about. It just takes away flavor
from
EE

I side with you on this, also may I present My favorite reviewers opinion of 4th ed. And is that GITP forums on his comp in the background?

[Oracle_Hunter]

that menu is extremely simplified however, it just touches the surface.
from
EE

Y'know, if you want, you can just update the list with examples under each category.

Like so:

Spoiler

Show

1) 4e is not D&D; it's a different d20 game
- a) Magic system
- b) Power System
2) 4e doesn't have X race or class
- a) Gnomes
- b) Half-Orcs
- c) Bards
- d) Druids
3) 4e is unrealistic
- a) Healing Surges
- b) Skill Advancement
4) 4e is too narrowly focused
- a) No crafting skills
- b) Too combat focused
5) 4e Epic isn't Epic
- a) Magic is too weak/expensive
6) 4e Heroic isn't Gritty
- a) PCs have too much HP / heal too easily
- b) PCs can do too much at 1st level
- c) PCs are just better than NPCs
7) 4e is oversimplified
- a) Skill System
- b) Disassociated Rules

Just post it on every page, updated with the complaints from the previous page. Keep it spoilered, and it shouldn't screw up the formatting.

Enjoy!

[black dragoon]

Thank you EE!
that's means alot coming from one the Gitp notables!
Yeah, Continued rant.
Races: Let's see where to start. Tiefers. Poor poor Tiefers. Seriously Did they simply say screw this! we're changing the whole cosmos and making the tiefers auto-dammed! They had other playable races which were the same thing in many ways. The name escapes me They were in Fiendish Codex II...anyways and the eladrins! You turned celestials into Fay! lord what's next the t'nari and Baatezu are the same race and there's no Blood War?

[Thurbane]

Another problem I have is the way stats/mechanics are differentiated between PCs and everyone else. One of the features I really liked about 3E was the fact that everyone, from a raven to a beholder to a human rogue were all built on the same base mechanics of HD and ability scores. From my (admittedly very limited) understanding of 4E rules, they have taken a significant step backwards to pre-3E rules where monsters and NPCs used very different base mechanics to PCs.

[monty]

Another problem I have is the way stats/mechanics are differentiated between PCs and everyone else. One of the features I really liked about 3E was the fact that everyone, from a raven to a beholder to a human rogue were all built on the same base mechanics of HD and ability scores. From my (admittedly very limited) understanding of 4E rules, they have taken a significant step backwards to pre-3E rules where monsters and NPCs used very different base mechanics to PCs.

Oh yes, forgot about this. I think that PCs should be special because of their class levels, not because of some arbitrary rules of the universe that say they somehow work differently from everybody else.

[EvilElitest]

Y'know, if you want, you can just update the list with examples under each category.

Like so:

Spoiler

Show

1) 4e is not D&D; it's a different d20 game
- a) Magic system
- b) Power System
2) 4e doesn't have X race or class
- a) Gnomes
- b) Half-Orcs
- c) Bards
- d) Druids
3) 4e is unrealistic
- a) Healing Surges
- b) Skill Advancement
4) 4e is too narrowly focused
- a) No crafting skills
- b) Too combat focused
5) 4e Epic isn't Epic
- a) Magic is too weak/expensive
6) 4e Heroic isn't Gritty
- a) PCs have too much HP / heal too easily
- b) PCs can do too much at 1st level
- c) PCs are just better than NPCs
7) 4e is oversimplified
- a) Skill System
- b) Disassociated Rules

Just post it on every page, updated with the complaints from the previous page. Keep it spoilered, and it shouldn't screw up the formatting.

Enjoy!

no i don't think that is an actual accurate way to rate complaints. Its just ignoring the issue. The issue is that your simply grouping complaints, instead of addressing the complaints.


FF fanbody

This guy is interesting, i have to say he like the "everyday D&D man" through i've only seen this one review. He just seems is a normal guy talking. I think its nice to see his perspective and i certainly like what he says, but personally i prefer sort reviews of Yathzee

Don't get me wrong, i don't think he is a bad reviewer, he has god points, and he makes his point, he just doesn't have any style. Which is what he pretty much is, a normal guy making an option, more than a reivew. I will check out what he has to say

that being said, i like his cut and paste idea

Oh my god. A RPG Yahtzee would be amazing

Thank you EE!
that's means alot coming from one the Gitp notables!
Yeah, Continued rant.
Races: Let's see where to start. Tiefers. Poor poor Tiefers. Seriously Did they simply say screw this! we're changing the whole cosmos and making the tiefers auto-dammed! They had other playable races which were the same thing in many ways. The name escapes me They were in Fiendish Codex II...anyways and the eladrins! You turned celestials into Fay! lord what's next the t'nari and Baatezu are the same race and there's no Blood War?

NP. I have to say, you know what is weird. I'm so use to being a normal Gitp guy (i've only been here for two year) so i'm not use to being a a notable.

I generally agree with all you say (of course i'm basis because i predicted most of these a while ago)

from
EE

[Fan]

no i don't think that is an actual accurate way to rate complaints. Its just ignoring the issue. The issue is that your simply grouping complaints, instead of addressing the complaints.


FF fanbody

This guy is interesting, i have to say he like the "everyday D&D man" through i've only seen this one review. He just seems is a normal guy talking. I think its nice to see his perspective and i certainly like what he says, but personally i prefer sort reviews of Yathzee

Don't get me wrong, i don't think he is a bad reviewer, he has god points, and he makes his point, he just doesn't have any style. Which is what he pretty much is, a normal guy making an option, more than a reivew. I will check out what he has to say

Oh my god. A RPG Yahtzee would be amazing

from
EE

I tottaly agree with you there EE, although he did do a couple video game reviews so as with Final Fantasy 8, alone in the dark, and some HORRIBLE Sega Cd games like Mircosom. He is pretty much a well educated guy giving his opinion on a certain topic.

[Oracle_Hunter]

no i don't think that is an actual accurate way to rate complaints. Its just ignoring the issue. The issue is that your simply grouping complaints, instead of addressing the complaints.

Wait... what issues? Who's rating? And how should these issues be addressed - I thought this was a gripe thread?

If anything, this list helps focus the discontent people feel towards 4e; it should help them more clearly vocalize what they dislike about it.

[EvilElitest]

I tottaly agree with you there EE, although he did do a couple video game reviews so as with Final Fantasy 8, alone in the dark, and some HORRIBLE Sega Cd games like Mircosom. He is pretty much a well educated guy giving his opinion on a certain topic.

true. He is a very normal guy sort of reviewer. Personally, i don't think he is a great reviewer (lacks presentation) and he the best presenter (i don't take his word a lot) but he is a great normal guy and it is worth looking at what he says as the kinda "normal option" but i haven't check out his other reivews so maybe i'm being too bias

from
EE

[Jerthanis]

I dislike how deadly minions are, surrounding and swarming over the PCs and grinding away their hitpoints and granting combat advantage to each other and getting in the party's way. They seem like they should be easy to take out! They've got only one hit point, yet for some reason their reasonable defenses keep them from getting hit most of the time and it still takes a couple good swings to take one out, and in the meantime they're hacking away at your shins and opening you up for their allies. It seems so much like these guys just serve to show how awesome the PCs are by wading through monsters like they're nothing, but in actual play, these jerks will give you nightmares.

I also hate how little it's like MMOs. In most MMOs I've played, the Tank types have ranged taunt abilities to influence the AI to come over and attack them specifically, and the monster has no choice but to do so. I liked how the 3.5 Knight had this ability because it made it so much easier to play it like WoW. Also, MMOs that aren't City of Heroes tend to balance team content assuming fights are against a single powerful monster more often than not, that the heroes must utilize 'pulling' to fight properly, while 4th edition encounter design is all about the villains outnumbering the heroes at every turn. I liked how 3rd edition was much better for this MMO style 'one big bad' method of play. Also. in 4th edition, if you can't keep up with the monster, you can't stop it from doing anything, and even if you do manage to mark it, it can still throw attacks at other people if that's necessary. If you run over to the goblin archer to mark it, and your mage is at 3 HP, that goblin can easily just down that mage anyway if they can hit past the penalty you gave him.

I also dislike how at comparable levels you're so much weaker than in 3.5, contributing to an atmosphere that there are dreadful and horrible things out there that you're better off avoiding, while in 3.5, by the time you're level 5, you and your friends could gank things like Beholders and Mind Flayers fairly easily... otherworldly monsters that can make the soul of a strong man tremble... while in 4th edition you've got to wait almost to level 20 to have a chance! It makes you wonder how this dark, gritty world has been teetering on the brink for long enough that your characters can get strong enough to save it.

I DO actually dislike how few encounter powers you tend to get, and how there's really no recovery method at all until much later levels, and then it's in only a few very specific paragon paths and with only one epic destiny, and THEN only at 30th level. When you've got 2 encounter powers and 1 daily power, you're not choosing between the most useful tool in a toolbox, you're choosing whether the fight is dangerous enough for a daily, or if you can get by with only Encounters. When you absolutely NEED another use of the fighter power Come and Get It and nothing else will do, you're pretty much just up a creek.

[Orzel]

I'm upset that 4E didn't expand the usage of raw ability checks and break the Monster/PC barrier. By level 8 you can easily (and want to) have ability scores over 22. You can be stronger than a ogre, tougher than a troll, etc... and I still need magic to jump 20ft in the air without a running start.

[EvilElitest]

Hunter, i'm saying that i don't like those groups and i don't like those classifications, i find them undeeded, incorrect, and unnecessary. A good complaint doesn't need to be forced into a catagory,that demeans the option in quesiton and belittles the point. Now maybe we are not on the same page, so i aplogize if i come off as cross (my fire fox broke, so i'm in a bad mood and lacking spell check) but i think the very act of grouping complaints isn't needed and makes the options less valid
from
EE

[Shadowtraveler]

I hate how helpful and friendly the 4e DMG and MM are. It feels like they're designed to help you as the DM create encounters and loot with minimal fuss.

Where's all the tables with % rolls? Where's the thunder and doom of earlier editions? I want my players to know pain and misery, darnit!

[EvilElitest]

I hate how helpful and friendly the 4e DMG and MM are. It feels like they're designed to help you as the DM create encounters and loot with minimal fuss.

OYE. I didn't complain about 4E in the "What do you like about 4E" thread, don't be annoying snide in this one

In all honesty, the helpfulness in the three books is because they are so bloody simplistic, which is basically kick in the nads with a happy face
from
EE

[Oracle_Hunter]

Hunter, i'm saying that i don't like those groups and i don't like those classifications, i find them undeeded, incorrect, and unnecessary. A good complaint doesn't need to be forced into a catagory,that demeans the option in quesiton and belittles the point. Now maybe we are not on the same page, so i aplogize if i come off as cross (my fire fox broke, so i'm in a bad mood and lacking spell check) but i think the very act of grouping complaints isn't needed and makes the options less valid
from
EE

Grouping makes complaints less valid? If anything, it shows that many people find the same problems that you do - it's the Wisdom of Crowds, writ large. If you don't try to categorize these complaints, then it's just a long, jumbled list of things that annoy people. In a sense, such a list seems more trivial - like people are nitpicking instead of finding serious flaws they can agree on.

Anyhow, that's my view. If you don't like lists, you don't have to use them; but if you just don't like the list I came up with, make one yourself. Think of it like a petition - you don't ask people to scrawl on a piece of paper their personal beefs with an issue, you write a simple and concise statement of grievances and have people sign to show their agreement with that statement. I wouldn't say that petitions trivialize anyone's grievances, would you?

[EvilElitest]

Grouping makes complaints less valid? If anything, it shows that many people find the same problems that you do - it's the Wisdom of Crowds, writ large. If you don't try to categorize these complaints, then it's just a long, jumbled list of things that annoy people. In a sense, such a list seems more trivial - like people are nitpicking instead of finding serious flaws they can agree on.

Making list isn't less valid, however fitting all complaints into seven arbitrary and partially inaccurate articles does render them less valid.
If you want to list complaints feel free, however i don't like how those are used as the definition of 4E complaints because they don't cover everything
from
EE