4E Barbarian and Druid

[Fyrestryke]

Originally Posted by InzeladunMaster

I won't even consider 4th edition until I see the official druid, and even then the edition is likely to be nothing more than a curiosity on my shelf.

I would like to hear your thoughts on these...

Playtest Barbarian (from Wizards):

http://www.wizards.com/files/368_Playtest_Barbarian.pdf

From Goodman Games...4E Druid Preview:

http://www.goodman-games.com/downloa...id-Preview.pdf

[BobProbst]

It's tough to completely get them without the larger context of the 4e system.

I am still eager to try out a 4e session or two if there's anyone willing to run it. I don't feel like I have the time to learn the rules well enough to run a campaign on my own.

[Fyrestryke]

Me and John were talking about this the other day. If we get one going, we'll make sure everyone gets an invite if only to try it out. We've got plenty of books I think.

[BobProbst]

Me and John were talking about this the other day. If we get one going, we'll make sure everyone gets an invite if only to try it out. We've got plenty of books I think.

[Fyrestryke]

hehe. That's what I get for seeing a typo after I hit submit.

[thormagni]

Yeah, I picked up the three core books. I haven't really full digested them. But I would like to try the system out some day. I'm really feeling pretty disengaged with this version of D&D. I remember being excited about 3e and 3.5e. For 4e, I still remain blah. I never really understood the folks who insisted on staying with 1e or 2e, since 3e was such an obviously superior system (to me, at least.) Maybe this is the way they felt

[Grimhelm]

I think that the feeling comes largely from the fact that we have experienced three different versions of the game and have seen the improvements. Beyond some balance issues, 3.0/3.5 is still a good system. I doubt that 4E really offers anything outstanding by way of creating a better system. At some point most of the bugs of any system will be resolved in newer versions. At some point, however, the totality of problems with a system will never fully be resolved. I think 3.5 cleared up enough of the problems of earlier systmes that anything that follows will be rather reinventing the wheel. I would posit this is where we are with the D&D systems.

[InzeladunMaster]

Part of my problem with it (other than the lack of a druid and barbarian) is simply that the books are hard to read - the mass of colors and font types makes it a nightmare to read. The layout is confusing to the eye - at least it is to me. That alone makes learning it difficult.

Also, too much is left undefined (or hard to find the definition) and other things are... just strange.

Example of the latter: The medusa entry (page 186-187) describes a "Medusa Shroud of Zehir." WTF? What is a "shroud of Zehir"? How does a medusa become one? Why does the level 10 medusa archer have 212 hp, but the level 18 medusa shroud of Zehir have only 172 hp?

(as an aside, in AD&D, the medusa had 6 HD. In AD&D 2nd Edition, the medusa had 6 HD. In 3E, the medusa had 6 HD (33 hp average). Now the basic medusa has 212 hit points?)

So many of the monster entries have those kinds of strange names without giving the names any context (the Eladrin entry is chock full of this). I find it frustrating.

[BobProbst]

Originally Posted by InzeladunMaster

Part of my problem with it (other than the lack of a druid and barbarian) is simply that the books are hard to read - the mass of colors and font types makes it a nightmare to read. The layout is confusing to the eye - at least it is to me. That alone makes learning it difficult.

I agree completely -- the layout and flow of the rules might be useful for someone who is experienced with the system but for someone learning it, there are references to concepts that aren't explained until later in the book. Bad job!

[InzeladunMaster]

I was looking at 4E again today. There are some things I like. For example, take the Wizard. I like the use of implements and how they were added to the rules. It was a nice touch.

But, I hate the whole idea of "healing surges." It sounds like a video game mechanic, not something one would find in a story. Imagine if Conan decided to active a "healing surge" in one of Howard's stories. For me, that throws away verisimilitude.

As a nit pick, but drawing on Thormagni's comment above on how distant the rules leave him: Compare the artwork of the wizard on page 156 to the artwork on page 42 of the 1E Player's Handbook. Probably a less capable artist drew the latter, but it is SO evocative of story and atmosphere - something the 4E painting completely lacks. Perhaps it is technically more competent, but it really lacks any soul, atmosphere, or story. Sure the book is glowing (yawn), and the quill is floating (yawn again), and his hair is flowing as though wind is surging out of the book, but... somehow the bald guy with weird ears clawing at a non-glowing ancient tome with a quasit on his shoulder captures me.