Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vutpakdi

D&D 4th Edition... Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

Why play a human, elf, dwarf, or halfling when you can play an extraplanar creature that can teleport 50 ft. once per round? (reference 1st post in this thread) Your average munchkin/power gamer is going to latch onto that like a starving squirrel on the last peanut on Earth. Those who choose to play the extraplanars (and making them base races was not a good idea, IMHO) will totally own those who play the other races.

 

To answer another question, a serious role player is one who chooses to play a human, dwarf, elf, or halfling rather than a broken extraplanar, for starters.

 

Just to set the facts straight, Fey Step is 25 ft (5 squares), and once per encounter (not per round). And IMNSHO, Bonus at Will power, Dwarven Resilience, Elven Accuracy, and Second Chance (respectively for humans, dwarves, elves, and halflings), are no less powerful than the Eladrin's Fey Step.

But that's not right! Half the races have to be obviously weaker than the others, for the true role-players to choose!

 

Ishil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why play a human, elf, dwarf, or halfling when you can play an extraplanar creature that can teleport 50 ft. once per round? (reference 1st post in this thread) Your average munchkin/power gamer is going to latch onto that like a starving squirrel on the last peanut on Earth. Those who choose to play the extraplanars (and making them base races was not a good idea, IMHO) will totally own those who play the other races.

 

To answer another question, a serious role player is one who chooses to play a human, dwarf, elf, or halfling rather than a broken extraplanar, for starters.

 

Just to set the facts straight, Fey Step is 25 ft (5 squares), and once per encounter (not per round). And IMNSHO, Bonus at Will power, Dwarven Resilience, Elven Accuracy, and Second Chance (respectively for humans, dwarves, elves, and halflings), are no less powerful than the Eladrin's Fey Step.

But that's not right! Half the races have to be obviously weaker than the others, for the true role-players to choose!

 

Ishil

 

Truth! How am I to know which races and classes to stay away from so I'm not accused of being a powergamer/munchkin?!?!? :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant by retraining was the description of it found on page 28 of the PHB:

"Every time you gain a level, you can retrain your character: change one feat, power, or skill selection you made previously."

 

IMO, This is a powergamer's wet dream. He finds a new exploit, and to make better use of it he can change his abilities to better use the exploit without having to reroll his character or wait until he gets whatever level it takes to get another choice, like in 3.5. As a GM, I'd put severe limits on being able to do this, and never at a whim. Players better give me a good justification for any such changes. At levels 11 and 21 when the power levels change, I wouldn't have as much of an issue with "retraining", but not EVERY level. Characters are not computers that can be reprogrammed at will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to this " retraining " thing. Is this something that the player simply declares upon raising a level and it happens? If so I would think that a clever house rule might eb to require that the character spend 1 d whatever days or weeks " retraining " under a kind of master of some such. That way the player has got to go out of their way to retrain and think very carefully about it, AND cannot do it mid adventure.

 

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*shrug* retraining makes a lot of sense for the tactical combat aspect of the game.

 

If you're playing at the deadly, competitive monster-crunching end of any game, finding out you made a lousy ability choice and you're stuck with it is frustrating and fun-killing. It forces optimisers (in an optimising group you understand, not spoilers messing with someone's immersive or dramatic game) to plan out advancement 30 levels in advance and hope they understood the interaction of probability, party, and situation correctly. There's no room to learn, backtrack and rebranch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're playing at the deadly, competitive monster-crunching end of any game, finding out you made a lousy ability choice and you're stuck with it is frustrating and fun-killing.

 

If I had known Underwater Basketweaving wouldnt have been a great career move I might have picked something else up in college, but as it stands I have still wasted those 4 years & cant retrain myself, I can however learn more stuff...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read a bit of this thread, but not all. Sorry if this has been posted...

 

To me, D&D 4e is a great game. It's not an excellent role-playing game by any means, but it's still a heck of a lot of fun for what it is. It's the perfect "intro to role-playing" that D&D 3e stopped being. The 4e rules are purely gamist. I think any attempts to make them realistic or otherwise limit them in any way are destined to be met with failure and dissapointment. 4e is about smashing up monsters and having fun combats. I'm good with that. One of the issues D&D has always had is that combat is boring to some degree. You lock into melee and swing until someone is dead. The new rules make the battlefield far more dynamic, with models moving other people, lending bonuses to one another for being near, etc. The combats flow far faster and smoother and you end up getting way more actions in a combat even though the combat might take as long to play, as least everyone is staying involved.

 

All I know is that if I had 4e when I was twelve I'd of been ecstatic. About the time I hit 14 I decided that role-playing was cooler than smashing monsters, but now I'm ok with smashing monsters again. Sometimes it's fun to just have a good 'level up characters and kill things for loot' time of it. I wouldn't make 4e my game of choice for any extended campaign or anything, but it's still fun. If you want to have a great RPG play some Savage Worlds. If you want to play "D&D", play D&D. D&D has always been the "Dungeon Stomp, Munchkin" game, now it's better at what it's always done well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Each (MMORPGs and PnP RPGs) has also drawn from the other as long as both have existed.

 

I don't agree with that at all. Do you have any evidence to back that statement up?

a direct mirror of D&D.

 

initially developed with D&D.

 

It took D&D to limit a

 

acknowledged drawing from D&D.

 

official D&D supplement books devoted

 

It seems to me that MMORPGs have drawn from D&D, but not so much the other way around, which was what I was getting at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My friends and I have been wondering if the recent death of Gary Gygax somehow "enabled" this radical departure/complate abandonment of D&D as we know it.

 

No, it started with 3rd edition, plus this is the first full edition since Hasbro took over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so we're a few seesions into the Keep on the Shadowfell module, and so far, I'm enjoying myself.

 

I am a very casual gamer - I game so I can hang out with my friends, not so I can pretend to be an elf or a wizard (that's just a bonus).

It takes me a while to learn the rules, and I tend to forget the things my characters can do (i.e. as a fighter in 3.5, I forgot about 'power attack' for the first few levels, then I forgot about leap attack once I got that feat ... :unsure: ).

I like to be able to just sit down and play, and joke around and have fun.

 

Anyways, we've only got 3 players in our game, and that's really not enough to run the module as-is, so we looked at it, and some of us decided to take on a second character to even things out a little.

When we started, I grabbed the pre-gen wizard, because I had never played a wizard before, and it was simple enough. When I decided to take on the second character, I chose a cleric - which one of the other players made for me, as I don't have any of the books yet - and again, it was really quite easy to slip into it, and run both during an encounter.

I don't think I would have ever considered taking a second character while playing 3.5.

 

As for the role playing aspect that so many people have been commenting on, in our last session, my fiancee had to miss it for work, so it was just myself and the other guy. The first 2 hours of the session was nothing but role-playing, and we had to make a decent number of skill checks to get the information we wanted out of the people we were talking to. (specifically bluff, diplomacy, insight, and streetwise. We also had to roll history and arcana at least once each, to make sense of the information we were getting)

It was actually the first GOOD role-playing I've had in a while - but a lot of that came down to the two of us players and the GM being surprisingly good at giving NPCs personality, and reacting to what we were trying to do.

So, there is room to role play, and there are the skill checks in place, so long as the DM chooses to use them.

 

The fights also seem a lot more dynamic than in the past. There's just a lot more movement across the table due to the different abilities.

 

 

I went into 4th wanting it to fail and be the dumbest thing ever, only because I have a spiteful streak in me, and everyone at my FLGS was so hyped and sure it would be the best thing ever. (I thought it would be really funny if they all recieved their pre-ordered books and absolutely hated it :devil: though, some of them were just being plain silly: "we'll never have rules arguments again, because 4e is just so awesome!")

I've only been in a few sessions so far, but I picked it up much more quickly than 3.5, and I'm having more fun than in the last few games of 3.5 I've been in. (and, there haven't been any rules arguments yet ... :rolleyes: )

So, it's good for me.

Edited by Chastity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I haven't played but I do have the books and have done plenty of reading.

 

I really like it. I think it is an improvement over 3 / 3.5. All the arguments have been said - just throwing my hat out there in the 'I am playing, and don't want to turn back' ring.

 

Except retraining. If and when I DM this, it will not be allowed until you hit 11th and 21st level. Other than that, there is no need for it. As far as I can tell, it is the only thing about the rules I do not like.

 

And on a side note, the BX out here in the Middle East has gotten the 3 pack in, and they are on sale out here in the middle of the friggin desert. My group all has a copy now.

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I meant by retraining was the description of it found on page 28 of the PHB:

"Every time you gain a level, you can retrain your character: change one feat, power, or skill selection you made previously."

 

IMO, This is a powergamer's wet dream. He finds a new exploit, and to make better use of it he can change his abilities to better use the exploit without having to reroll his character or wait until he gets whatever level it takes to get another choice, like in 3.5. As a GM, I'd put severe limits on being able to do this, and never at a whim. Players better give me a good justification for any such changes. At levels 11 and 21 when the power levels change, I wouldn't have as much of an issue with "retraining", but not EVERY level. Characters are not computers that can be reprogrammed at will.

 

This isn't a powergamer's wet dream - any competent munchkin will plan his character out from 1-30, or at least that's what all the ones I know did.

 

What this will really help is new players, who make suboptimal choices when they start playing, and then want to change things as they figure out what's going on. This happened to me in my first game of 3.5, and I'm really excited that it won't be as much of an issue with introducing new folks to 4e.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I meant by retraining was the description of it found on page 28 of the PHB:

"Every time you gain a level, you can retrain your character: change one feat, power, or skill selection you made previously."

 

IMO, This is a powergamer's wet dream. He finds a new exploit, and to make better use of it he can change his abilities to better use the exploit without having to reroll his character or wait until he gets whatever level it takes to get another choice, like in 3.5. As a GM, I'd put severe limits on being able to do this, and never at a whim. Players better give me a good justification for any such changes. At levels 11 and 21 when the power levels change, I wouldn't have as much of an issue with "retraining", but not EVERY level. Characters are not computers that can be reprogrammed at will.

 

This isn't a powergamer's wet dream - any competent munchkin will plan his character out from 1-30, or at least that's what all the ones I know did.

 

What this will really help is new players, who make suboptimal choices when they start playing, and then want to change things as they figure out what's going on. This happened to me in my first game of 3.5, and I'm really excited that it won't be as much of an issue with introducing new folks to 4e.

I really see this as a generational difference. When I look at all the people I've played with over the years, it's the older ones who would frown on this and not like it. I, like many of the older gamers I've played with, am willing to accept poor choices in my PCs makeup as part of his character - flaws and all. But I've witnessed many younger gamers who feel trapped and resentful by their own poor choices when they can't change them. But that kind of goes off-topic, I may discuss that in another thread.

 

I'm really beginning to see that this, and many other things about 4e are designed to "standardize" the D&D experience, particularly for the Living campaigns. In a small home campaign, retraining isn't needed in the rules, because a good GM will allow a player to correct an obviously bad character design choice in some fashion despite the rules, while keeping powergamers in check by using them. A Living campaign doesn't have that luxury - in order to give everyone a fair and equal experience, they have to stick to the rules as written. So it makes sense to add re-training to the rules, for that reason.

 

The question I do have about all of these things is whether the typical 4e home campaign will end up with more or less house rules than a 3/3.5 one does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Every time you gain a level, you can retrain your character: change one feat, power, or skill selection you made previously."

 

Yecch. This will certainly appeal do the "do whatever you want without consequences crowd". Next: complete control over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...