Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Review
Posted on May 30, 2008 by GRIM
Available at Amazon.com
Introduction
Unlike most RPG gamers in existence I didn’t come to roleplaying via D&D. My path to gaming ran something like:
Avid Reader > The Hobbit > Fighting Fantasy > The Lord of the Rings > MERP.
Very much in at the deep end and I didn’t run into D&D at all as a player or a GM until I was 13, four or five years into my gaming career. When I did play it the relative lack of sophistication and over simplistic constriction on what I could do as a character made me pronounce it ‘stupid’, the final straw being when I managed to sneak up on a sleeping dragon and the rules couldn’t cope with me STABBING IT IN THE EYE before it could wake up.
Aside from a bit of dabbling in 2nd Edition (Dark Sun, great setting, still didn’t like the rules) and in computer game versions of D&D (Torment and Balder’s Gate) that was pretty much my limit so far as it came to D&D, fantasy appealed (Dragon Warriors, WFRP and others) but D&D didn’t because I didn’t really buy into its sacred cows so much.
3rd Edition though, and the OGL that went with it, dragged me back into D&D. Now I could engage with it on a design level and the open nature meant not only could I ‘fix’ it, but I could trade those fixes and ideas with others and get remuneration for it. Which was great! d20 had pretences at being a generic system, but it really wasn’t, it got shoehorned into every possible setting and genre under the sun, even when it didn’t fit and eventually the d20 bubble burst. and things settled down again.
What we were left with, though, was a rambling and over-bloated beast of a game with masses of WOTC and third party supplements sprawling in all directions, a behemoth filled with munchkinism and twinkish combination exploits so foul that even RIFTS players would turn their nose up at them.
Now we’re on to 4th Edition and I’ve been deliberately staying out of the gossip around it as best I can to come at the books fresh. I won my copies from Dungeon Magazine for the ‘best adventure I never wrote’ which should be published sometime before June 6th, but since I had books coming for free I didn’t see any harm in getting a sneak peak at what would be coming in the post. As such some of these comments are provisional and may be revised when I get to see actual, physical copies.
Going into this I’m coming from two directions, as both a consumer and a producer. As a consumer does 4th Edition deliver the type of game that I want to play? Does it compel and interest me? As a producer I’m looking at it and trying to anticipate where the market might go, what products might emerge, how the system might be customised and altered (if at all) and where problems might arise.
Overview
Reading through the books 4th Edition feels, to me, very much like an introductory game in a way that 3rd Edition wasn’t. The look, the feel, the language all seem, to me, to be angled towards bringing in new players. This is a really good thing, obviously, but I think that the targetting of the MMO market – which seems to be the aim – is a miscalculation. TTRPGs can’t beat MMOs at their own game, D&D aping MMORPGs is a bit like having your dad go through a midlife crisis, dying his hair, driving a porsche and trying to pass himself off as ‘Emo’. It’s a little embarrassing and not what he’s really good at. I think it may have been more productive to go after the areas where TTRPGs still excel over CRPGs and MMORPGs but hey, nobody listens to me.
I’ll wait to pass judgement on the D&D Insider computer platform but my gut instinct is that this is a miscalculation as well, charging the same amount as a typical MMO subscription for what amounts to a static graphical chess set that doesn’t even take care of some of the rolls etc for you and a few other bits and pieces that they are yet to prove they can deliver seems ludicrous to me, if it’s a choice between their WoW subscription and their D&D Insider subscription people aren’t going to go for D&DI in my opinion. If it were five or perhaps ten dollars a month I can see people subbing to it on the side but this, to me, seems overpriced.
Artwork
The three books seem to be going against the grain in terms of where graphic design has been heading in RPG books since the 90s. While the level of production is professional and the artwork standard good overall there’s very little ‘feel’ to the pages. No faux-parchment effect or little notebook conceits, very little ornamentation. It is very clean, very clear, quite minimalistic. On the one hand this makes the books much easier on the eye and a lot more readable, on the other hand it makes them feel rather clinical, perhaps not coincidentally like a computer game manual.
The artwork is fairly good throughout, though there are some disappointing pieces that have a washed out look and what appears to be CGI derived imagery that doesn’t really fit. While the overall art is good it lacks cohesion. Love it or loathe it 3rd Edition had a consistent look to it ‘dungeonpunk’ while 4th Edition is a bit all over the place. The strongest theme to come through is one, again, of computer-gamey feel, a sort of pseudo-anime, pseudo-Warhammer/WoW effort of massive shoulder pads and even larger weapons. Otherwise the rest of the art seems a bit all over the place, technically good but a little schizophrenic.
Writing
The writing is fairly clear throughout but a problem I noticed was that things were introduced before they were defined so, for example, if you were reading off the power descriptions they might have a formula. 2 x [Q] + Snarf, but you don’t find out what the Q stands for or what a Snarf is until page two-hundred and twelve. On a first read through this lead to a sense of bewilderment and frustration, unable to understand quite what I was reading – and this for someone who has several systems all but memorised.
Another flaw I felt existed in the writing was that there was no attempt, not even a weak one really, to reconcile the rules with reality, or even game reality. Things work as they do because the rules say that they do and that’s pretty much it. As someone who values immersion while roleplaying I can’t help but feel that this will detract from that experience, and that’s not the only place it occurs. Throughout the game characters aren’t really treated as characters so much as playing pieces, arrays of powers and abilities rather than personalities. The roles are described, again, in MMO terms so you end up not so much creating the persona of Corvin Ravenfeather the half-elf rogue but rather your ‘Assasination/Damage specced Rogue’. While there are paragraphs here and there that encourage roleplaying the overall feel is more like a character card for playing Descent than an actual character role to get into.
The DMs guide is a triumph though, at least in writing. There’s great advice in there on player types and typical troubleshooting and it’s helpful without being patronising, something that occasionally shines through in the Player’s Guide. I particularly liked the boxed out hints and tips, which are very human comments from the developers that give you more of an insight and connection to the game than much else that’s present.
There’s no real setting to speak of, as such and while much is familiar much is also different, different gods for example and different races, but this comes more under discussion of the rules.
Rules
Over all I think the rules are an improvement and a clarification from third edition and they have been streamlined and simplified, at the basic level, by a great deal. I can see this speeding up play and making things much easier for the GM in particular – prepping monsters and encounters is now much faster, but all of this simplicity comes at a cost of depth. Where D&D was more like a bag of lego bricks before – a little crude but you could put it together any way you liked, now it’s more like a plastic model. The pieces go together certain ways and you’re told how it should be. Everything is channelled, quantified, laid out as to how it ‘should’ be and while you can fiddle around a bit you’re really only making cosmetic changes.
There is a massively heavy emphasis on miniatures and battlemats, though different parts of the book swing between saying their optional and implying that they’re essential. While one could easily enough convert the distances and areas back to feet rather than squares it is a pain in the arse to do so and a pain that they’re so heavily pushing the minis. I hate using minis and battlemats unless I’m war or skirmish gaming, I feel it detracts massively from the RP but I can see where the business decision comes in here, clearly the figures make the big bucks so anything that encourages their use has to be ‘good’. I disagree but then money talks in these instances.
Another thing that has effectively been lost is the capability to multiclass freely and easily. Now you spend feats to gain qualities from other classes but you are still pretty much stuck in your role and using these multiclass feats is ‘weak sauce’ compared to previous methods of doing so. While you can customise within your role and build to a couple of different specifications this felt stifling to my creativity when I was trying to create a character I really liked, especially at first level. Multiclassing was always an ad hoc solution to the problem of character customisation but it was still better than the solution being presented so on that score I’m not a happy bunny.
The role enforcement problem is made worse by the new skill system. You no longer have varying skill levels, you either have a skill or you don’t and that only gives you a +5 bonus within the area of that skill, this means a great deal more emphasis is weighed upon Ability scores and, even more importantly, level. Level rules everything now, giving bonuses across the board and the rewards for levelling are much greater than in 3rd Edition as well, what feels like excessive Ability score increases and a wealth of new powers.
I found the choices for races in the new book peculiar, to excise character types people like and are used to for the Dragonkin, Eladrin (Elves 2.0) and tieflings (but no Aasimar) seems a peculiar choice to me. The exotic and interesting is no longer exotic and interesting if it’s the default. It would have made more sense, to me, to retain the Half Orc, Gnome and to have the Warforged in there and to put these new ones in a follow up Player’s Guide – but then maybe that’s the point to put familiar classes and races in additional player’s guides to help them sell, if so that’s a touch cynical but perhaps good business sense.
In classes we lose the Sorcerer – the change in magic rules means the spontaneous caster is no longer needed as much (though a magic user with more lower power At Will/Encounter spells would simulate it quite well) but we gain the Warlord – a leader type – and the Warlock, a pact-based magic user. Again these feel like odd choices to me, better suited to expansion books than to the core book, I assume the Warlock is there to appeal to the MMO crowd but the Warlord I can’t particularly place, other than they perhaps wanted another ‘buffing’ class.
Feats are reduced in importance compared to the class specific powers and capabilities and many are, additionally, streamed by class themselves. In some ways this helps remove a problem of ‘feat bloat’ but on the other hand we now have many, many, many more categories which can bloat independently, all the different tiers of abilities and abilities relating to the Paragon and Epic levels of play (11+ and 21+).
Another metagame intrusion is the idea of ‘respeccing’ (sorry, retraining) allowing you to replace older, weaker powers with more powerful versions as you advance, effectively rewriting your character’s history and allowing you – if you’re careful – to maximise your potential every level by playing the system, playing the game rather than playing your character.
One ray of sunshine amongst all the metagaming and immersion breaking is the expanded concept of skill based encounters. These are now more of a creative chess game somewhat akin to the process of making an extended challenge in HeroQuest. Characters get to RP creatively and use their skills creatively to solve extended problems such as, say, tracking enemies through a forest or seducing a noble’s daughter. I like the idea as presented and see lots of RP opportunities from it but it also made me feel that in inexperienced groups the skill rolling would replace the RP and the natural back and forth of play.
Long term I can see problems with the approach that WOTC have taken in 4th Edition. While the game has been stripped back and rebooted and while the 3rd party market has calmed down there are now many more things that could suffer game bloat, rather than classes, prestige classes and feats we now have classes, paragon classes, epic destinies, at will powers, encounter powers, daily powers and multi-level equipment which means 4th Edition could end up sprawling out of control twice as fast as third edition did. The other problem is that even though the system is streamlined and simplified there are not twice as many complications, modifiers, exceptions and so forth which in their own way will slow everything right back down again.
Upsides
* Clean, crisp, readable.
* Honest effort to reach new gamers.
* Forward thinking approach to support.
Downsides
* Misguided attempt to engage MMO players.
* Returns to the relative constriction of Basic/2nd Edition
* Miniatures emphasis overwhelming.
Score
Style: 4 (Good but falls short of what’s expected of the industry leader)
Substance: 3 (All rules and no inspiration makes Jack a dull boy)
Overall: 3.5
Final Verdict
My score would suggest that I rate 4th Edition as slightly higher than average. This may not be revealing my views sufficiently. The Substance score is low (average) because these corebooks do not contain anything in the way of setting information or content past some discussion of dungeons and ruins. These three books represent a game engine and advice and little more. I am almost certain that the new limited three book setting productions will be excellent and that they will provide the substance that the corebooks lack.
In my opinion 4th Edition does deal with many of the flaws from third edition, but it also embraces others – such as metagaming and optimisation. This can be dealt with by a good GM but I have to assess the books from a position of relative neutrality, as such I can’t assume every group has a brilliant GM or non-abusive players.
While I have deep reservations about D&D Insider I hope it succeeds and while I have even deeper reservations about trying to beat the MMOs at their own game I do wish D&D 4th Edition and Wizards the very best of luck with it, especially in roping in new gamers. I hope to be writing for 4th Edition – it does make that job a lot easier – and Postmortem Studios will definitely be supporting it.
Review by James ‘Grim’ Desborough
Related posts:
- New Edition of Dungeons & Dragons RPG
- Dungeons & Dragons: Heroes of Neverwinter on Facebook
- New Dungeons & Dragons Board Game: Conquest of Nerath!
- Dungeons & Dragons: Daggerdale is now available!
- Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Release
Tags | d20, dark-fantasy, dungeons & dragons, wotc
Good review, thanks for posting it. Bottom line: you mentioned you’d write for the 4th edition, and support it, but would you play it?
Reply
I can see myself playing it but that’s also a function of D&Ds popularity and relative ease to find games for.
Reply
J.B. Mannon Reply:
August 20th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
What people need to understand about D&D is that it has always tried to be an RPG but it’s never quite made it. The rules of D&D are not ment to support RP it is ment to support combat and tactical challenges and I think 3.5 did that ok but 4 has realy focused that goal. Any RP that happens in D&D is purely free form in most cases. If you want a system that handles RP you should try a RPG, not D&D. D&D is a great game and you can RP while you are playing it but they are truly two seperate activities. Enjoy D&D for what it is and what you can get out of it but don’t hate on it becouse it is not what you want it to be.
Reply
John Reply:
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:23 am
You are misinformed. D&D created the concept of a role-playing game. Me and all my friends got are start on D&D. The rules had many problems in previous editions, but the fun never came so much from the rules as much as it was story-telling with us and many many others im sure. So that is my biggest complaint with 4th edition. Yes the rules my be great for combat but I feel like im playing “Hero Quest.”
Reply
J.B. Mannon Reply:
January 14th, 2010 at 4:25 pm
D&D helped to create the idea of what roleplaying could be but it has never been a roleplaying game itself. The basic idea for D&D is a personalized war game where instead of moving armies you moved individuals. For many players context was needed to explain why they are fighting which was the true genisis of the concept of roleplaying. Roleplaying grew out of a lack in the rules of D&D not from the rules that were present.
A pretty well balanced and fair review of 4E. I also think an overall 3 – 3.5 rating seems appropriate. I guess the question each gamer will have to answer for themselves is whether the improvements they’ve made versus the 3e game are of more value than the new problems they’ve created? Some of the new problems are likely to be show stoppers for me.
Reply
Nice review!
Just a minor nitpick: “the final straw being when I managed to sneak up on a sleeping dragon and the rules couldn’t cope with me STABBING IT IN THE EYE before it could wake up.”
The rules were pretty explicit when it came to sneaking up on dragons (which was impossible) and stabbing things in their sleep (which led to an automatic death, no wuss like a Coup de Grace like in 3.X). I think either your DM sucked or you both just didn’t know the rules.
Reply
Worth mention, I think, that a lot of your perceived “negatives” are just the opposite in my gaming group.
I have a group of about 6 players (male and female, ages 25-35), all casual. Half (or so) have played WoW, but having played RPGs for a few years, and all of us lead pretty hectic dayjob schedules.
For all of us, the idea of playing an RPG with MMORPG elements (and an electable avoidance of some of the traditional role-playing tropes) is a great thing. Moreso — we all love the idea of using miniatures … as many of the more casual players prefer to actually *see* where everything is in relation to each other, rather than having to keep it all straight in their heads.
There is also (allegedly) a huge improvement to the magic and thief classes, to make them useful for the entire day, and not just until they can re-memorize spells or find a trap.
All in all, the promise of 4.0 has brought the entire group back to the RPG table (literally) after years of not playing. None of which is to say your opinions are wrong (how could they be?), but that your score might be misleading — for my group, all the things that brought your score down are the very things that would raise the score very, very high.
Reply
Good review, and a solid synoposis from my end. Though your review reads more like an overall score of 2 to 3, the 3.5 feels like its there to not ruffle to many feathers.
They certainly made a new game with 4e. During my first read I felt more insulted as it seemed directed at 8 year olds who had no previous interest in role playing games.
Reply
Thanks for the review. I’ve been waxing and waning about whether to buy it…I really wanted to like it, but when I discovered you can’t improve skills (as you point out, you’re either trained or untrained), that tipped me over the edge…hmm, actually, held me back from the edge. I won’t be buying it.
So, if I may ask, why don’t you use a system like GURPS?
Reply
A good balanced review. And far kinder than I was.
There’s was a bunch of stuff in 3.5 that was broken that needed fixing. But this didn’t fix it. It basically took all the previous versions out the back and shot it in the head.
I greatly enjoyed converting old material to 3.5 and running players through it. It’s changed so much now that my heart won’t be in it. Magic Users are nothing more than a pale imitation of what they were. Normal people aren’t represented (or representable since normal people skills don’t exist in the game). The healing surges seems akin to hitting the ‘drink potion’ button in Baldur’s Gate for PS2.
I get that D&D needs to be marketed to a new generation. But the average age of a D&D player is like their mid 30′s. The ones that grew up with the game. By appealing to newbies who were weaned on CCGs and MMOs and having rules akin to something in those systems they lose people like me.
I spent my $150. But that’s it. I doubt I will want to progress to 4th ed because it blows chunks.
I might give Pathfinder a go instead.
Reply
James,
What an excellent review. I’ll a long time D&D player and nearly all your points of 4e were bang on.
I’ll disagree with minis/battlemaps since 3e needed them just as much. Nothing has changed.
I will add something which you didn’t mention – content. Due to its layout and larger font-size, inclusion of magic items in the PHB, even with the rules simplifications, 4e has about 20%-25% less content than 3e. There is simply less in 4e. Spells, skills, magical items, etc. are reduced by often orders of magnitude. There are only four potions in 4e, for example.
While I share your fears about D&DI, I’m not sure WotC actually intends it to compete against MMORPGs. One of the biggest issues with gaining new players is that you can’t just buy the book and play. You need to find a gaming group and preferably someone who knows how to play. Not everyone is socially attempt at making new friends, and for young people going to some stranger’s house is a non-starter. If you consider D&DI as more of an RPGA-like space… and easy way to meet folks, learn the game, join games, etc. before going off and forming your own game. You also have those in more remote areas, those with regular gamers who move due to work or school, etc. It is likely easier to fund/set-up than the RPGA and can reach more folks.
Reply
Great review! It’s so hard to find reviewers that maintain an objective or unbiased view of the subject.
Having played TTRPGs for over 10 years, here are a few of my personal thoughts:
-Magic and spells are very sadly represented. Why does magic always have to be flashy and over-the-top? Why can’t I make a Necromancer who can raise armies of undead?
-I think this point says it all..
“Another flaw I felt existed in the writing was that there was no attempt, not even a weak one really, to reconcile the rules with reality, or even game reality. Things work as they do because the rules say that they do and that’s pretty much it.”
If you can’t justify why a Half-Elf should have +2 Constitution (when neither Elves or Humans get bonus CON), what’s the point?
DnD 4e is akin to Magic the card game, not a Role Playing game.
Reply
I bought the KotS preview and ran the initial combat with my group before our usual 3.5 game. We were less kind in our rating of the game. A collective 4 out of 10.
I think you were spot-on with a lot of your criticisms. The 2e and MMO feel to it, the mono-dimensional PC builds (with nearly static HPs!), the childish dumbing-down of the rules, the complete and utter disconnect between the rules mechanics and any semblence of reality. I think 4e is just plain stupid. Healing surges especially get under my skin as an example of the new stupid/childish paradigm WotC had created.
I won’t waste my money on the core rulebooks. The lack of multi-classing alone is a deal breaker for me. As an experienced DM, I can keep the munchkin builders under control, thereby eliminating the most broken aspect of 3rd ed. Banning WotCs more blatant attempts at deliberately breaking 3.x (e.g.: Frenzied Berserker, Thrallherd, Hulking Hurler) from my game has been adequate for bringing a fun, reasonably balanced game to the table twice every week.
Let the kiddies play with their PCs-on-rollerblades in their video game world, I’ll keep my paperback-novel world intact and running for years to come.
I’d like to qualify my remarks by saying that I was a hard-core 2nd ed. fan who would never switch…that is, until I picked up a copy of 3e. I was sold on the system in under an hour. I can’t say the same for 4e.
Reply
John Reply:
September 2nd, 2008 at 6:45 am
Thank you, im not the only person who is utterly turned off by 4th edition. I think WotC is making a big mistake with the direction of the game. It one thing to make the rules more coherent and fixing noticeable problems, its another to dumb down the rules to have a “Hero Quest” feel to the game. Wait 6 months when 4.5 edition comes out. D&D will have gone full circle, reverting back to a full table top war game, like war-hammer
Reply
Just to start, I am a fan of WoW and of 3.5 DnD. That being said, before it was even released I was worried about 4thE due to the rumors about focus on miniatures. The only thing my group will use is a small white board and that’s only for general directions such as, you are here and you can see people here and here. Most of the time we don’t even really keep it to a very good scale.
I did not know that skills were made to be either trained or untrained. That extremely disappoints me. I would often choose a few skills that I truly cared about and one or two that I would do everything possible to get more powerful. I remember one character of mine could bluff his way out of many situations and had a few powerful knowladge based skills, but any of the physicals he would typically fall flat on his face.
The lack of openness if my greatest concern. The way my friends and I play is typically not with any quest or anything but rather building a bunch of characters and being set upon the world that the DM creates. That is the same reason I prefer WoW to the other MMOs I’ve played. I took a long time to get to 60, pre expansion, because I spent so much time messing around with the different areas. I loved the freedom of movement and that’s why I ended up loving 3.5. Since it was all in ones head so long as it was reasonable we played so that basically anything that was reasonable was fair game, and there were rules, or at least parts of rules, that could be applied. If they have taken out some of the sandbox ability in 4thE then I believe they have made a huge mistake.
Reply
I just bought the rulebook and it absolutly sucks,Its just like a stupid video game now and takes out all the custamization and role playing. and what the fuck they cut so many classes. No barbarians!I love barbaraians!
Reply
As with several of the above posters, I’d have to say that I am severely disappointed in 4th ed. Really, when it comes down to it, I like 4th ed, I really do. I love that they simplified combat math, unified the monster creation system, killed challenge ratings, added per-encounter and at-will powers, and generally made the game faster and easier to play.
HOWEVER, this all pales in comparison to my gripes. Multiclassing is dead, skills are overly-simplified, per-day magic is all but gone, healing surges? Really WoTC, what are you guys doing?? I paid your salaries for years, and this is how you treat us Old Guards? With an MMO-like system for 8-year-olds?
I’m fine with easier combat, really, I am. But when it comes as the only thing in the system, the core focus, I’m bothered. I wanted 4th ed to be a system that brought us easier combat, and a heavier focus on character building and creation. I wanted it to be a system that catered to the Old Guard, not the MMO crowd. Who paid for 4th edition? Not the MMO kids, I’ll tell you that much.
Sorry Wizards, but you get a 4/10 from this old fan. I’d have taken 1st edition over this one.
Reply
I had the books about a week and a half to two weeks, DMed one session and made up a few characters. This game is not D&D. Wizards of the Coast has made something but it is Shameful to put the D&D name on it. I wouldn’t even give it more than a 2 or 3 at most out of 10 and that is just because I liked a few of the races and I liked Rituals oh and I also liked the shorter skill list. Other than that this game is garbage. I took back my Monster Manual and DMs guide today and my PHB goes back this Weekend because I bought it at a different store. My focus now is on Paizo’s Pathfinder stuff and the upcoming Pathfinder RPG. I think from the looks of the way things are going Wizards has slapped the older generation of gamers square in the face and has done themselves possibly irreparable harm in doing so. If you want real D&D Check out Pathfinder.
Charles
Reply
Thank you for you review.
I got the books today and was really exited for the new combat rules and new release in general. As a hardcore player, we sustained our group now for 9 years and I played for over 20 years TTRPG. Similar to another poster, I also enjoy WOW a lot. I cannot express how disappointed I am from this release. The rules are for me a way to simulate reality in a fantasy setting. These rules are even more unrealistic then WOW. During a full rest period you got all your HP’s back? You heal yourself several times per day by focussing?
And every class, nearly every feature has an effect on combat. I never really liked the adventure settings as they were mostly encounters and my players got really bored playing those. Now that a class has almost only combat abilities, the whole adventure will consist of one encounter after another. And the action points are the worst imo. They force the chars to run from one encounter to another without taking their time, so they can have another action point.
I tried to take perhaps a rule or two out of this edition to make it work with the 3.5 rules, but I can’t take anything else then the skill challenges. And all the older books I have, all the monster manuals, expansions, are now good for the trash?
Basically it comes down to this: The old 3.5 system is out and won’t be updated with any new settings, compendium, etc. The new 4.0 is a combat-oriented MMORPG bad knock off that I just can’t play with my group (I just honestly can’t). So, there’s the dilemma, I can stay on the old system and just play on without anything new coming from WotC. But this was exactly, why I changed from Rolemaster to D&D.
Perhaps looking for a new system will be the only thing for me to do…
I’m seriously pissed and I think many others are as well. After scanning through a few forums, moste of them look like normal WOW forums with best builds and specs. Only a couple of dedicated roleplayers like here show, what really happened with this game.
I will send the books back as well.
Cheers,
Thi
Reply
Pen and paper cannot fight MMO 3D graphics
DNDI subscription cannot out lure MMO
I dont want a system that is almost minature unavoidable,
Combat is not 90% of an RPG
This is not DnD
This is WotC the Strategy game Version 1,0
and as soon as the first book is out i bet my actually buying the books (as opposed to reading someone elses) that the power creep will return but a power leap with
new classes
new powers
new feats
new paragon paths
new epic destinies
it will be all the insane upstatting of the Complete X series all over again
Congratulations WotC i now have all the books i want and might clean up a few 3.5 books before they are gone but by and large im done with you,
Reply
First off, I would like to say I have been playing D&D since 1978 and have played all editions. D&D was for me a way of expanding my imagination. I read The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings and I used to imagine that me and my friends were in the world of Middle Earth. What better way to expand this than by creating our own world using the tools created by TSR. 1st edition was an awesome beginning.
TSR realized that they needed to make a deeper game and so came out with 2nd edition. This provided a better backdrop and way more material than I could possibly read. I played 2nd edition D&D for many years and thoroughly enjoyed the Forgotten Realms and my own created worlds. Then 3rd edition was announced and I was very skeptical. I typically collect the books as well as play them and I wasn’t too excited about paying for every release a 2nd time (1st edition didn’t really release as many sourcebooks). I bought the main books and really liked how deep the game had become and how many choices were provided to the players. The DM created the world (with the help of excellent source material) and players could create an untold variety of characters, more so with each new release. The DM could pick and choose the rules that were used in the campaign.
Well, 4th edition has arrived and the variety in my opinion is greatly reduced. Characters are now just different flavors of the same soda. I try to understand why it was done and can only conclude that it was done to support a game that could be played with other players online. This required that extreme balance be created between character types with less chance for confusion. Everything in the game has been simplified to the point that I will no longer feel as attached to my character. It used to mean something when our character died because they were unique and a lot of work went into making them great. They were also very different that the other characters around the table. Sad to see this aspect has been diminished.
I haven’t seen anyone mention the huge change to alignment in the above and I will use this as an example of what I do not like about the new addition. The Neutral alignment is gone as are Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil. Without Lawful Evil, where can Darth Vader turn? Chaotic Evil gone? What happens to all the planes? Alignment was an area of brilliance in the game and was another way to completely customize your character. By simplifying this formula, it can be seen how the game is catering to those who don’t have the patience to learn a rich and complex system.
What do I know though? I thought the Nintendo Wii would bomb and it has been a huge success. I didn’t think video game players would want to stand and play their games. This might be true for me and many other players but obviously there were enough new players to make the Wii a huge success. This leads to my final point…the D&D game needed a new edition to bring in a new set of players. I understand that a company must stay in business by coming out with new ideas. Some ideas will be good for me and some ideas will be bad. I am no longer the target market. This is fine with me because I won’t have to go out and purchase the new books and can continue playing with the past editions. I can continue to create interesting characters and adventure with them in a unique and exciting world built by the Dungeon Master. At least I have a choice on whether I will take the 4th edition or leave it. For now, I regrettably must leave it.
Reply
I have just read through the PHB 4.0 and I must say: Luckily I borrowed it from a friend, because I won’t buy it.
Having played more than 15 years (AD&D, D&D 3.0 and 3.5) I must say, I am really, really disappointed. Your review was quite good, although I would have been more drastic and not rate it better than 2 out of 5.
The MMO-style balancing spoils the flavour of the game. I think I will stay with 3.5 and balance out the few mistakes it has with house rules …
Max
Reply
Completely agree with the review (and more with the more vicious of the commenters out here): 4e blows.
The overall system has been neutered (healing surges? 5 alignments?) the classes have become less distinct… overall, the offered a shallow game to reach a newer, shallow audience.
I regret paying what I did for the books, and hope too many other vets won’t discard their 3e stuff quite yet.
Reply
Why whinge?
I would if I were playing a MMO or an RPG, where the game rules are unchangeable. It stinks of elitism and optimisation behaviour to disparage this edition because it’s trying to make itself more accessible.
If you’re intelligent and sophisticated, surely it’s not hard to exploit the good side of the game and ignore/remove/alter the “sellout” bits.
My brothers and I have just started playing D&D for the first time, and just looking at a book-by-book comparison we find 4E more accessible…more FUN.
We’re avid fantasy fans, and we’re slowly putting in our house rules (like reinserting the old alignment system, toying with less healing surges)…and this is only our second week of playing.
Can’t wait for the settings, because Winterhaven is getting old.
Reply
Oh, and we didn’t buy the minis (my dear god, what was WoTC thinking?). My youngest brother is 7 and is having mucho fun putting together lego maps and minifigs for our characters and NPCs. In their spare time, the younger ones are metagaming and making our game world a playground, much to the amusement of us older guys.
We’re thinking of putting together a more mature campaign, with less focus on combat; I hope that inventive use of skill challenges and good imagination will make it pretty interesting.
Of course, I admit I lack the experience of the crusty old timers here, but yeah, I’m liking it so far. It’s not *realistic*, but I’m not playing a fantasy game for that.
Reply
There is a lot of 4ed hate going on here that, to me at least, is stemming from ignorance and you’re typical “it’s a new edition so it must be bad!” mentality. I’ve been playing DnD since the first release of 2end edition and this latest edition has been one of the most enjoyable ones that I’ve tried.
My first counter-argument for you nay-sayers out there is that, for people who are so convinced that 4ed sucks, very few of your have done little more than read the rules. How can you judge the merits and flaws of a game without actually, you know, PLAYING the game first? To use the tired cliche, it’s like judging a book by it’s cover. As I mentioned above, this just smacks of typical Old Guard (il)logic by saying “It’s a system I’m not use to, therefore it must suck!” I saw it when White Wolf rebooted their system and I’m seeing it again with DnD.
And I laughed when people keep harping on “it’s all game mechanics and no roleplaying!” Any of the previous incarnations of this game could be reduced to nothing more than stats. The latter part of the quote all depends on how much your players and the DM bring to it. I say if you need to rely on the rules of a RPG in order to roleplay, you’re doing it wrong. If anything the simplification of the skills has helped the players focuse on the actual roleplaying aspect of the game rather than worrying whether or not their characters have the proper skills. The books may be light on “fluff”, but anyone with an iota of creativity can easily fill in the gaps so to speak and produce a fun campaign. Remember when these games were about fun? Some of you “serious” roleplayers seem to think that in order to be “serious”, the game has to be more akin to a chore.
I find the power system to be one of the most refreashing aspects of the genre as now everyone can provide a role in combat and actually participate instead of having the fighter/paladin/barbarian do most of the combat. Is there no sympathy for the poor 1st level Mage who casts his single spell and then hides in the corner, hoping that the angry kobold with the pointed stick doesn’t take him out of commission? Yes the classes are more narrowed than before, but it forces the party to actually work as a team and I can’t see how this is a bad thing.
I find that alot of people are complaining about the nerfing of multi-classes (a somewhat valid argument) and then in the same breath complaining about how “unrealistic” 4ed is. Ok, fluff wise, a class is suppose to be a profession that the PC has spent a better part of his/her life training to become. So how is someone becoming a fighter/mage/rogue/monk/cleric/ninja realistic? If each of those classes are suppose to take years of training, how can someone just pick them up because they feel like it? If anything the idea that, at best, someone who is a fighter can only pick up aspects of another class sounds more realistic. Honestly, the whining over the multi-class changes sounds like a bunch of power-gamers who are upset that they can’t make their uber-builds anymore.
Now I will admit that the reliance on minis is a little annoying, but it’s not like WotC is going to kill your family if you don’t buy them. You only need the minis for combat really and even then you don’t need minis, just something to represent the characters. You can do it with coins, poker chips, or whatever.
Finally, and this is where the Old Guard really starts to hate me, WotC owes you NOTHING. There, I said it. I wish people would drop this juvenile idea that a business somehow owes them something simply because they bought their past products. The bottom line is that WotC is a business and in order for it to continue making products it needs to make money. If you aren’t going to buy their new products because you dont’ like them, WotC doesn’t care. It’ll sell them to people that are actually interested. They aren’t “bad” or “evil” for doing so, they are looking out for themselves. There’s no logical reaosn why they should cater to a small hardcore group of players at the expense of possibly bringing in a larger group of new ones. It’s economic suicide. Most of you have already bought all of the 3ed books that you’re ever going to get and while I’m sure their thankful, that doesn’t mean you’re somehow more special than the newbie who is just getting into the hobby. Their a business, business is about making money, welcome to the adult world of economics.
When all is said and done these games are suppose to be about getting together and having fun. If you actually sat down, tried to play the game, and didn’t find it fun, then fine. Go back to playing 3ed. But don’t just read the books and then give some sort of elitist BS about how the game isn’t a RPG anymore just because it runs on a system you havn’t bothered to try. Basing a game simply on the mechanics is just that, basing it on numbers withoug actually trying to roleplay with them first. Don’t try to pass yourself off as somehow more privliged than the newbies simply because the company is rebooting the system to appeal to a new generation while leaving you players that refuse to change in the dust. WotC isn’t holding a gun to your head and forcing you to change, it’s just giving you a choice of either sticking with what you got or trying something new.
Well this rant went much longer than I anticipated. I just can’t stand uninformed opinions I guess. It’s what I get for checking on an internet forum.
Reply
Well thought out review.
You make a good point about the design of the game that I think many gamers miss. The new D&D seems to have been written not for us oldheads (I’ve been playing for almost 20 years now) but for a new batch of gamers. These folks don’t come from table top games but from video games. The actual gaming in a video rpg or an mmo is about optimization over role-playing (I understand that hardcore WoW folks really get into their characters, but much of the actual gameplay is about optimizing). The new rules reflect this. From a purely marketing standpoint this makes perfect sense. I feel no presure to buy the new books since I already own the earlier editions. I won’t be buying the new game. New folks will be buying the game. While I initially felt left behind by WotC, I still have my old TSR books. I’m bummed that 4E doesn’t look like the game I want, but I already have that game. WotC can court their new market if they want. Like you said, there are already far too many 3E books for me to ever use them all, anyway.
Reply
I’m a long-time player and game master — I’ve played the 1980s versions (Basic D&D), I’ve played the AD&D version, and when 3rd Ed came around, I jumped on that too. The progression from Basic D&D to 3rd Ed was pretty good.
However, the constant revisioning that went on after 3rd Ed made me very suspicious.
The changes in going to 4th Ed blows my mind. It is awful.
I think sales for 3rd Ed might actually pick up, now that 4th Ed has spelled its own doom.
Reply
… just read what others posted. I thought one of them merited a reply
Dear Geoff –
I appreciate what you said. Yes, people should definitely try playing the game first.
We did. More than a few times. I have a pretty solid game group, and we luckily have access to the “library” of a store that is centered around games. Part of our “job” as regular store customers is to try out the games being sold. In return for our opinions, advice, and regular visits, the game store owner lets us use his premises for our meetings. We’ve “tested” many games — miniatures, roleplaying, boardgames, card games, etc. In many ways, the store managed to steer away from the short-lived fad games, and profited by educating the buyers with good games.
In terms of D&D … Yes, the group had a pretty heavy investment in 3rd Ed. And that’s part of the reason why we were all extremely eager to find out if 4th Ed was a worthy “upgrade”.
It was not. 4th Ed failed for us.
I think part of the problem is that the changes were at the very “foundation” of the game. And perhaps it is an “old gamer” bias. Perhaps I enjoy being able to play the old Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms campaigns, and the new system simply doesn’t seem to allow these campaigns to fit.
So, in the case of this group of “old gamers”, we’re going to stick with 3rd Ed. Heck, we stuck with 2nd Ed (AD&D) for years before it was finally given a worthy upgrade. We can easily stick with 3rd Ed until the next gaming wizard ousts the 4th Ed version …
… and for we know, 5th Ed may come in a couple of years.
Reply
Man, I’m only 16 and I feel like an old shoe. I played 3e and 3.5, and thought they were great. I was hoping that 4e would be more of a 3.6e, but it turns out that it’s just a silly little game, and just doesn’t have the feel that 3e and 3.5 had. I’m not saying that they were perfect, but I think they were going in the right direction. In my opinion, 4e is a big step backwards, with it’s foot landing on a big pile of dung.
Reply
An acquaintance of mine linked me to this post.
I think it sums up my feelings too.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=13243450&postcount=559
Reply
Geoff,
I agree with you allot. I got into 2nd Edition DnD for the first time while deployed to Iraq by a friend, as it was an excellent way of passing the time in a very boring enviroment. Around that time 3.5 was being released, and I was allready hooked so I bought the books and loved them. But my group was very reluctant to switch to 3.5 because they were stuck in their old ways and didn’t like change.
The biggest argument was “Why fix what wasn’t broken” but finally they came through and weve been playing 3.5 ever sense. The biggest problem we faced with 3.5 was the rule, rules, rules.
We constantly got in arguments over rules, and had to thumb through books to find anwsers and even then most the time it was open to debate, this slowed the game, detracted from roleplaying and turned the game into a near unplayable state. This only got worse with all the supplements and additional rules, classes, prestige classes, ect.
I just bought the 4th edition today and though I havent read it all I have got the major concepts, some of it is hard to wrap my head around, but I do have an open mind which I think is what this edition requires of it’s players. I do see this edition bringing my group back to life, no more rule debates and help us focus more on what really matters, the world, the campaign, the story, the characters and the roleplaying.
Nuff said, if you want to be close minded then by all means do, but if you lack so much imagination that you need a book to explain every little detail for you then maybe you should stick with 3rd edition. Heck just wondering why tieflings get a +2 charisma modifier is enough to get my creative juices flowing and hash out some character perks and traits for my tiefling rouge. Maybe it’s because their more a force of personality than of beauty, maybe I should play them as the sly tounged, witty type.
All I know is imagination is key. And empty spaces and unanwsered questions are the things that imagination feeds on.
Reply
From what I learned from 4 years of playing Magic the Gathering is never trust the WOtC! Heh. They are clearly money oriented in the way that hurst the game. Countless expansions additional sets and so on. I remeber that I had to litteraly bang one of my players on the head to tell him, no, I as a DM do NOT allow each and every accesory book. “Yeah but it says here that each druid gets spell from ALL the books”. I bet it does. From my point of view I’m happy with wizards finally ending the production of 3.5 books, now I can gather them and slowly pick up the parts that I like.
Now about 4E. I’ve read a couple of reviews and listed through the books and I can say it comes down to the type of player you are. D&D was the most battled focused of the RPGs with precise rules of combat (and long and needlesly complex). For the players that like hack and slach 4E is the way to go. Yes I like that they simplified things and balanced the levels. Wow, wotc doing sometnig balanced… (Do not fear, you’ll get the huge amount of additions, accesories, etc. anyway). But I agree that the whole motivation behind 4E is market oriented towards computer gamers. I have a feeling as if looking at Portal when it came out(MtG’s beginner version). About classes and races, well it’s market logic “One small race is enough, more elves are always cool, with the LOTR movies and so on, and dragons”,… well. About the classes, I really don’t miss the sorcerer (why have another wizard? Warlock is much more interesting), and of course druids and monks will come back in the following books. The problem is what the 4E does for older players. Not much. What I and some of my coleages like was the vast array of non-combat activities that 3.5 provided. I believe Wizards miscalculated situation (they might repair it with further books) but the thing is that 4E focuses on specific type of the player. For comparisson: MTG is totally market oriented but it did acknowleged different types of players and put something for everybody: a new theme so it has a story, add some huge creatures for noobs, some obscure rares to fuel some not yet exisiting combo deck and some cards to enhance theme decks. The part of 3,5 that I liked was the noncombat part particulary skills (cha and int based) and I liked classes and prestige classes primary for their roleplaying potential, not so much their combat might. 3.5 had appeal for both the roleplayers and hack’n'n slashers. 4E is for the latter. It’s funny though how the wotc doesn’t really realise it has a diverese audience. It was evindent in some of their web articles, how they allways try to push the game toward their ideal way of playing – combat oriented with a bit of roleplaying, but not too much, cuse it’s FUN. The same with constant focus on the group leader – the concept behind warlord class in 4E is really narrowminded. Hey, I was playing a (3.5) character buffed on CHA and CHA skills, leadership feat and all, and did I lead the group? They wouldn’t let me in a million years, cause mostly no one leads the group. They made a mistake of beginner DM, you don’t make people play the way you want to play, rather you give them space and options that allow them to play the way they want to. I got no problem with the system that supports tactical combat, but I it doesn’t support roleplay, I won’t play (No, I really don’t think simpificated combat is enough to say that 4E supports roleplaying. Of course it does help, or it would, if there would be something to help with.)
Reply
PROPOSAL FOR INCLUDING 4E POWERS IN 3E OR EARLIER RULES.
——————————————————–
I have a proposal that would allow you TO include various 4e type combat actions or powers in your D&D (1-3e) game plays. That is if you like 4e combat options but you don’t want to migrate to 4e. Note that this is only a proposal which requires a lot of development, tweakings, and play testings on your part.
The proposal is based on the idea that (combat) actions or powers require certain costs to be paid before they can be executed. This is exactly like playing a card in “Magic the Gathering”, where a specific card requires certain costs in the number of white, green, blue, red and black mana. There are three types of costs or utility scores in my proposal, and I named them Speed, Reaction, and Guard scores. These scores can be spent to execute various combat actions which include swinging a sword to do extra damage, shooting a bow to cripple your target, or casting a spell with styles.
How to calculate utility scores? The formula is as follows:
Speed = Creature Size Index – Attack Mode Index + Primary Ability Modifier* + BAB
Reaction = Creature Size Index – Armor Size Index + DEX Mod + BAB
Guard = Attack Mode Index + Armor Size Index – 2xCreature Size Index + WIS Mod + BAB
*Primary Ability Modifier = STR Mod if you are using melee weapons.
= DEX Mod if you are using finessed weapons or ranged weapons.
= INt if you are casting INT based spells.
= CHA if you are casting CHA based spells.
= WIS if you are casting WIS based spells.
BAB = Base attack bonus. Note that BAB is dependent on the classes and levels of your character.
The indexes are defined as follows:
—-Attack Mode–
Character Weapon Spell Armor Index
Size Size Size Size
——————————————-
Tiny Tiny Cantrips None 0
Small Small Lvl 1-3 Light 1
Medium Medium Lvl 4-6 Medium 2
Large Large Lvl 7-9 Heavy 3
Note: -If you are using an offhand weapon, add the index of the offhand weapon to your attack mode index.
-If you are using a shield, add the index of the shield to your armor size index. Small=1, Medium=2, Tower=3.
-Arcane casters are assumed to have a free hand in casting spells.
-These utilities scores are renewed per round, but powers or combat actions can be developed to cripple or augment these scores.
Analysis up to this point:
Note that the ranges of utility score for a Level 1 human fighter using 1 weapon is:
Speed = 4-7
Reaction = 4-7
Guard = 1-7
As the character increase in levels, these utility score become less dependent on character size, weapon size, and armor size. This is because experience tend to round out the rough edges.
Note that with this rule, you can relax the rule preventing small humanoids from using large weapons, as well as the rule that penalize arcane casters for using armors and shields.
At this point, combats actions or powers can be developed. This is also where my proposal ends and your role begins. However I will start off with some suggestions to start things off:
———-Costs———
Combat actions Classification Speed Reaction Guard Description
—————————————————————————————————————–
Basic attack General 4 4 4 Grants for 1 basic attack.
Reckless attack+1 General 0 0 1 Grants +1 damage -1 AC on basic attack.
Cautious attack+1 General 1 1 0 Grants -1 damage +1 AC on basic attack.
Power Attack+1 Fighter Classes 1 1 1 Grants +1 damage on basic attack.
Knock Down Fighter Classes 2 1 1 Knock target prone on basic attack.
Quicken spell+1 Casting Classes 2 1 0 Reduce speed factor* by 1.
*Note that this proposal introduces the idea of speed factor in casting a spell. The speed factor of a spell = number of rounds required to cast the spell = level of the spell. For example, Magic missile has a speed factor of 1 while Wail of the Banshee has the speed factor of 9. Note that the need to memorize spell per slot per day is no longer required as wizards are considered to be able to cast all spells in their spell books. However wizards still have to go through the trouble of scribing spells into their spell books. Note also that with this rule, magic missiles and other 1st levels spells become “At Will” spells. Also high level wizards are nerfed because it required a lot of time to cast high level spells that can be interrupted. Fighters are needed more than ever to protect their wizards from getting interupted.
Well that’s all from me. I hope enthusiasts will take this and develop a full set of rules for others to use. I am curious to see what can be developed.
Reply
@20 We certainly have different perspectives about the alignment rules. I didn’t think 4e went far enough in removing them.
@33 I think 3.5e and 4e can be mixed too, but I think it’s easier to treat 4e as if it were the Epic Level Handbook. Once a character hits 20th level in 3.5e, then start letting them progress through 4e just as if they were multiclassing in 3.5e. They become 3.5e characters with the 4e classes/powers added onto them.
Reply
I agree with Lax the WOTC don’t owe anyone anything except for their shareholders. They are a business and a good business has to decided who will form their future market. The old guard gamers or the new generation who grew up with MMORPGS or slick Hollywood marketing?
I’m not a fan of 4th ed. But then again, that’s because it does not appeal to me. It may (and will) to appeal to someone else. That does not make it a bad game for everyone. Its just a bad game for me. There are those who are saying that 4th ed is roll playing as opposed to role playing. Are you trying to say that there are no roll players with 3rd ed? Come on people, let’s be real. Power gaming and munchkinism was exactly dead before 4th ed came out.
Decided whether the game is great for you and your group. But I think its really unfair to condemn any who disagrees with you. For me and my group, we are going back to 3rd ed (despite my constant bitching about the armour system). I know others who have happily converted to the new game. I’m happy for them. At the end of the day, we are all here to have fun with the game.
Reply
I didn’t get a chance to read all of the above posts but I did want to put my 2 cents in here. I’ve been playing for 20+ years. Started with 1st Edition and Basic D&D, played 2nd Edition and 3-3.5 along with several other RPG’s.
First off, and maybe I’ve been lucky, none of the groups I’ve played with have needed more then the most basic info from books to get good role-playing out of our sessions. If fact I believe things to that effect in an RPG would hinder my groups more then help. Most of the characters in our campaigns start with a background/history and we work backwards from there. Like I said I may be lucky in the respect, but the only time I use information like that is for NPC’s to assist in giving them unique personalities.
Secondly, me and my group have played three sessions of 4e over the past few weeks. We didn’t use miniatures, instead I have a 2′ x 3′ cork board ($15), varying colored push pins [PC's/NPC's] ($5), varying colored long pins [Monsters]($5) and some custom sized graph-paper (from officedepot.com). A cheap alternative to miniatures and battle maps. Which worked fine for us because we just need to keep track of where people are, we already know what everyone looks like. This group has been together for 4 years or so. I have DMed 95% of the sessions we’ve run and I’ve never seen the players more excited. We don’t get to play as often as we like over the last year because of travel distance. But after our 1st session playing 4e half the group started looking for more regular games in their immediate area. So I guess my point here is, if I ever manage to get to it, that 4e is fun. We had a blast, despite MMO type classes, limited skill lists, and all of the other criticisms I’ve read throughout the web. We as longtime 30-something players are extremely excited about this new edition and I for one can’t wait to play again.
Bottom line is that no RPG is for everyone. So it’s a pretty sweet deal that there are so many to choose from.
Reply
The concept of the D&D world is actually quite a dark reality. When the knowledge that zombie hordes and vile orcs are REAL in one’s world, I would believe a person may change their mind about how they conduct themselves daily. I for one would not continue trying to teach myself how to become more diplomatic, or how to be a better bluffer. Hell no – I would want to know how to get my hands on a bastard sword and know how to swing that thing, or to learn a magic that can blast apart mindless creatures bent on ripping me from limb to limb. I also would only care about loot and finding exotic items insomuch that they could help me survive my next do-or-die encounter. I would be way too depressed to know that monsters really exist to want wordly goods just to say that I have something valuable. That being said, I have not played 4th ed, but played AD&D and 2nd ed. back in the day, and recently 3.5. I am going out right now to pick up 4th ed. From reading the reviews on this site, and many others, if you play the darker side of D&D, and roleplay it as such, the new rules should allow for playing a good, tactical, survival combat RPG. Oops, was that too “video game” for the naysayers?
Reply
I’m not happy about the new forth edition. I was really just hoping for one new book that would simplify the rules to keep the game moving, not a whole new line of replacements. Constant new editions that make all my old books obsolete is a poor marketing ploy. I hear that Call of Cthulhu has maintained the same basic rules since the inception of the game. Each new edition of Cthulhu just presents updates and corrections, so as to make all old source material still valid. I love the D20 open gaming license, there are tons of companies putting out useful source books to fit anyones interest, so if you don’t like the new 4th edition, there is still an impossible to collect amount of source books out there to keep you busy. Hopefully, D&D will come out with a new edition 10 years down the road that brings all the D&D people together. I do wish people would leave the personal attacks out of their posts.
Reply
Decades of gaming and plenty of them playing D&D. I like many wanted to like 4th edition and I did some of it. But missing races,classes,skill changes,class power setup have me scratching my head. Cleaning up the mechanics and effects are awesome but the rest I just don’t get? Who play tested this the WoW beta gamers? I’ve lost several decade long players trying to switch to 4th they say nope too MMO for me no thanks. So do I continue to buy more books and shove them down the throat of whats left of my long standing group…umm no.
Reply
You couldnt stab a dragon in the eye while it slept? You were playing 2nd edition wrong me thinks.
Reply
I’ve played and DMed for about 20 odd years now, and I’ve never really been a diehard D&D fan. My shelf has about twenty different systems and publishing companies. However I always seem to get drawn back to it, either because that’s what the local group is playing, or because I get a nifty setting idea that only seems to work in the D&D settings.
Mostly what I look for in an enjoyable game product is the ability to sit down and play the game with the minimum amount of changes neccessary. For example, I played the second edition White Wolf books (Vampire the Maquerade) for years because I could just open the books and start playing. There was no rule changes I wanted to make.
I was hoping that 4ed would fall into that catagory of perfect product, but was sadly dissapointed. I think that one of the things I was most dissapointed about was that they had so much promise with the ideas that they had, but seem to have run overboard instead of the light touches that were neccessary. For example, I love the idea that a first level mage has more than just a couple of spells for the day. But where did all the FUN spells go? Almost every spell is a different way to roast someone. No longer is the mage someone that can get you out of a tight spot with Spiderclimb, or cause tears-in-the-eyes laughter with a well laid Grease spell.
I like the idea of the basic fighter types being able to do more damage with their weapons at higher levels without having to have magic swords coming out of their yingyang. But having EVERY swing of the sword be special manuver this or special manuver that is too much. And what’s with the idea of healing one person by hitting another?
As for layout, I liked the artwork alot, but it didn’t make up for the fact that the character class chapter lasted 150 difficult to work through pages. Adventuring and combat together lasted 50, not leaving much for the explanation of how to work within the world beyond the next round of combat.
I’ve played with lots of groups that insisted on minis and grid maps in 2ed and 3ed, so I don’t think this will cause as much strife for others, but I LIKE using just my imagination and quick layouts on a scrap piece of paper. No other RPG that I have played (and that’s a lot) have required or even reccomended minis, trusting their audience to be able to have some imagination. Yes, 4ed can be changed to use feet instead of squares, but doing that every single time is a pain in the ass. The fact that in order to play the game you have to by three books, minis, and battle maps is a money grab in the worst way. Name any one other RPG that requires you to spend well over $100 for just the ‘basic’ stuff.
Yes, I could play this game, yes I could change it until it suited me, but I have too many other things to do. If this game was put out by any other publishing company, by any other name, how many would have bought it? Not I, it would have gone back on the shelf.
I heard a rumour that Wizards of the Coast was owned by Hasbro now. Is it really any surprise then that D&D is becoming a board game?
Reply
Yes, WotC doesn’t owe the old guard anything, and we don’t have to buy 4ed. Yes, WotC has to look at their future market, but how much of their material has been bought buy the old gamers rather than the new when they changed editions before?
Most people that I have talked to that play WoW have no interest in playing TTRPGs. They are quite happy sitting in front of their computers. Exceptions must be made to that starement obviously, but most people that do both games did both before WoW came out.
I think that you’ll find that the vast majority of people that bought 3ed stuff had bought 2ed stuff before that. Unfortunatly I think that chain is going to be broken.
Reply
Did I miss something? Are wizards allowed to use armour now? Because the only defensive spell they get doesn’t come until second level, is once per encounter, and only lasts one round. WTF?
Reply
Wizards of the Coast have really porked their base gamers with this one. I got a sense of what 4e was gonna be like from the Saga Starwars stuff. But the Star Wars game has been great so far but I attribute that to the best group of gamers and most inventive GM ive ever had the pleasure to game with. I still prefer the d6 version.
Any how my point being, I empathize with all the immersion break comments and want to offer some “unexpected” aid. Hot Chicks: The Role Playing Game. Google it and check out some reviews. A couple of my buddies have put together over the years and as they like to say it’s a game “not for mature gamers, just for older ones”.
Reply
First thing first, I have been playing D&D for the better part of the last ten years. I’ve played 2nd ed, 3rd ed, 3.5 and now finally 4th. I have played White Wolf’s old World of Darkness and the New World of Darkness and Call of Chtuthlu.
My basic opinion of 4th ed D&D is this, Don’t compare it to the old edition. If you try to do that you’ll annoy yourself. 4th ed. is a combat focused system. Everything in the game is more devoted to keeping combat managable abd flowing quickly. Their I believe the game succeeds very well. None of the classes are nearly as breakable as they were at low levels in 3rd ed. If you like Hack n’ slash this system you may like. Healing surges cut out the need for clerics and Wizards can just keep casting spell after spell, counter after encounter.
However, I must state this… If you are a serious Role player i.e. you like the acting aspect and hate Power Gaming, you will not like this system. The characters have little skill outside their class and adventure skills. What would happen if they ever had to retire after too many battles? People get old or sick. Multiclassing got shot which really screws with character evolution. One example was were a fighter lost his sword arm in a fight and later became a wizard. If you like thinking about characters changing as the grow then this system will disappoint you far worse than the story changes they did in New World of Darkness by White Wolf.
That being said, I will play both 3.5 and 4 ed. However, if I had a choice, personally, I’d stick with 3.5 just because I prefer roleplay over combat. Hence the reason why I play white wolf over D&D.
Reply
That’s a fair review.
Baldur’s Gate (a great game) is an example at how D&D desperately needed a mana system (or equivalent) for magic users. Casters were mostly ranged sling wielders with occasional spells.
I approve of the new rules. Real-time MMORPGs did a great job at improving the core mechanics of pen-and-paper RPGs, just as pen-and-paper RPGs layed the groundwork for MMORPGs.
Reply
I’m just posting here to mention that I’m currently participating in a 4E campaign as a teifling warlord, and I have to say that it’s not awkward at all. The warlord is quite simply a “Leader” character, with the ability to maneuver allies around the field to give a better advantage to the whole party.
There have been some rule disputes, where things aren’t written clearly or crucial information is missing, but in general we’ve been having a good bit of fun.
Multiclassing is not only possible, it’s actually encouraged. It’s possible to trade your paragon path for multiclassing.
I agree that it is set like an MMO, with emphasis on role, such as Tank, Striker, Healer, Spellcaster and so on, but with a diverse team, you can see what really shines with the interaction between characters.
I will say that my only prior experience with DnD was a short campaign in 2nd edition which ended in Total Party Wipeout. Playing that, I felt confused by some of the rules, and the fact that certain classes felt almost useless at low levels. If nothing else, 4E makes DnD newcomer-friendly.
I highly suggest you get a group together and play a game of this, so you can see some of the dynamics that shape this game beyond just the rules.
Reply
Solid review.
4th edition was my first encounter with DnD. I have only run 4 or 5 sessions thus far, but every single time I have been able to effectively incorporate minis, battlegrids, and out of combat encounters into the gatherings. This is all for completely new players too. I haven’t read 3.5E, but one of my other friends who was interested in playing had a few different books. Whereas the 4th edition is a textbook, the 3.5E is a library of tomes! I am personally glad that I don’t have to memorize 50 different skills for the PC rogue. I just ask the player what they want to do, and then I tell them what skill check to make. Simple. I would like to think this is why I am enjoying DnD so much, is that it isn’t as segregated due to complete and utter commitment towards the world of the books. It is a world you get to create, and that is why I enjoy roleplaying. I would hate to have to correct every little thing that a PC did. I’d like to think that 4th edition is making the shift from the DM more as a referee to the DM more as a storyteller.
Reply
This review expresses, almost exactly, how I feel about the 4th Edition rules. As a long time supporter of Dungeons and Dragons, I really want them to succeed, but these new rules strip the game of all creativity, turn my players into leet power gamers, and for all their attempts at it, provide little distinction between classes. My wizard often rolls better at nature checks than my ranger, and why is it that the cleric in my campaign does the most damage? Riddle me this, how can someone go from unconscious, on the verge of death, to eyes fluttering open and at full health again…. After playing 4th Edition for as long as it’s been on the shelves, I’m going back to 3.5 until they release a 4.5, or until I find a supplemental pen and paper game. This pains me because D&D is what Magic the Gathering is to fantasy card games and Warhammer is to wargames. I want it to succeed, but I don’t know how much more horses trampling giants and “smiting heals” I can take.
Reply
Ok been playing 4th for 6-7 months about once a week. Characters are on the verge of paragon. The review hits a lot of the thoughts I have had about the game. After playing all this time I can say I have given the system a fair shake.
I also have a lot of Iron Crown Enterprise gaming experience as Rolemaster is such a great game. Also done a lot of Palladium and other systems. We also play warhammer and a lot of table top board games like game of thrones arkham horror etc. So I can say that after gaming for 25 years I can safely evaluate games.
I like the game. Yeah I said it. But here is the problem, my game group did the same thing with Mordheim in fact I would argue you could put a better game forward just using the more heavy rules for skirmish that mordheim has than a D&D game. There is the same amount of info for Roleplaying in Mordheim as D&D 4th. Ok that might be a bit over the top, but it is close to accurate. Level up a few new abilities more hits etc. But very little for roleplaying. It is fun in the same way that a tabletop boardgame like Arkham is. Or talisman for that matter. It is almost only a tactical game at this point, It can be fun, but that doesn’t excuse it from being an RPG. When people say it isn’t a true RPG they are right and wrong. Correct in that it never has been a very great roleplaying game without the gamers trying to make it so(unlike rolemaster or gurps)but wrong in that it was the standard at one point. When asked what an RPG is usually people say “do you know what dungeons and dragons is?” Then people clue in.
But really it is nothing more than going to games-workshop for the afternoon in the 4th edition of the game. I like the game for how it plays, very good tactical game, but it is not roleplaying. People say you have to use your imagination, great but I can play the game of Life and it tells me more about roleplaying than D&D 4th does.
With the new supplements the game is more enjoyable. The core 3 books leaves it pretty barren. But this is also a problem with Rolemaster so I will let it slide. But the shear cost of the books at 40 a piece is an awful lot for so much whitespace and huge fonts. Like the article states, it will work from a publishers point of view in the same way throwing a movie together using an old TV show name will naturally bring in clients. But if transformer had been called Go-Bots do you think it would have done as well? Is it a great movie or just a great franchise. That is the question Dungeon and Dragon gamers must ask themselves.
Reply
I’m with the other oldtimers here. After a dozen long play sessions and rising to 8th level, I can safely say that 4e is a tactical fantasy simulation — D&D Minis with a veneer of RP laid on top. If you want to RP, there is little support within the game system itself. It’s like you’re playing two games … the free-form non-combat RP game, then you switch into anime/cinematic tactical combat D&D …
Case in point: I am playing a cleric of Melora, whom I envisioned as an adventuresome sailor type, worshipping the sea goddess and wielding a longspear. In order for me to get the proper feel, I’ve had to request houserules to retool the Prayers to give them more of a nature/sea flavor (doing lightning damage instead of radiant, etc.). In 3.x, I could customize my cleric with domains and feats. In 4e, there is just one cleric feat (channel divinity) and every cleric is essentially a Pelor cleric unless you houserule it. And combat? Since I didn’t min-max at the start (he began with a 16 Str and Wis), I have a devil of a time hitting with any of my Prayers, since all the monsters have absurdly high defenses and hit points. And don’t get me started on how every other player can essentially replace me by taking one multiclass feat …
We can all agree that 3.x suffered from splatbook bloat, but the basic system was sound. It worked, whether you like a combat game or a RP game. As long as the DM exercised control over feats and prestige classes, it was manageable. About the only beef I had with 3.x was the challenge of running high level encounters with a zillion different spell effects going on and fighters taking four swings per round. If I were Paizo, I’d make Pathfinder simply 3.5 with some kind of streamlining for high levels.
My DM and most of our gaming group is sold on 4e, so I’m along for the ride. I just wish we could go back.
Reply
Just a few thoughts here about 4th.
I’ve been playing rpg’s for nearly 25 years now, which in the end, doesn’t really mean a damn thing. When 4th edition first came out, my gut instinct said “It’s not D&D, it’s just combat, it’s a boardgame.” Then it hit me, WoTC brought D&D back to it’s roots.
D&D is a game where you pretty much follow it’s namesake. There are dungeons you romp around in and if you’re good enough, kill some dragons. If you role played during play, you were doing great. The old books never had too much on how to role play either, not that we managed to bother reading in those books anyway:-) That’s it, that’s dungeons and dragons at its core. It’s what they released the most adventures for. I don’t care it it’s a tomb, a dungeon or your parading around in some evil lords home, you’re doing dungeon hacks.
Later supplements and the like started to expand on this. They began to take D&D out of the dungeon and they tried to encompass all the different fantasy elements that people wanted. Some worked, some didn’t. TSR kept banging out dungeon crawls.
I think that lots of gamers started to think of D&D as the all-encompassing fantasy rpg. I can understand that. It was by far the most popular and had elves, halflings, dwarves, magic…. pretty much all those things that people would think of when you thought of fantasy. TSR did what any company that found itself sitting on a cash cow would do, they capitalized on it. They expanded it, increased it’s breadth and scope. At it’s heart though, it was a game that was still just a dungeon crawl, just got new paint and add ons every now and then. It’s like ford realized that the Taurus could be the everything car and came out with 1,000′s of different body styles. They can change out the motor, change the body, give you all the options you would ever want, but at the end of the day, it’s still just a Ford Taurus.
Now I’m not using that analogy to say that D&D couldn’t handle all that other jazz they tacked onto it over the years. For thousands of players, I’m sure that it did. For those who found out it didn’t work, they just went to rpg systems that were dedicated to the rpg experience they were looking for.
4th edition, from what I’ve been reading, is just the ultimate dungeon crawl experience. It looks like they took out all the other extraneous things and made it into a lean, mean dungeon hacking machine. I find that strangely appealing and I’m looking forward to getting my hands on the book. You can still role play to your hearts content and don’t need many rule, if any, to do that.
Reply