4E Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition - Page 54
  1. #531
    Pathfinder subscriber COPPER SUBSCRIBER
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)

    billd91's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Verona, WI
    Read 3 Reviews
    I Defended The Walls!

    Block billd91

    Quote Originally Posted by Obryn View Post

    How's it even productive there? It's still a pretty worthless statement - one of the ridiculous categorization games that RPGers just eat up for some reason. Where do you go from there? Figure out why you think that way, figure out what elements of 4e have somehow convinced you that it's not an RPG and go from there.

    How is it productive? You just answered your own question. Because it gets you to the discussion why it feels that way and how to fix it for the next edition.

    There are a lot of people out there who will talk in impressions without easily elaborating on what they mean. They ought not to be summarily dismissed. They probably outnumber those of us participating on these message boards.

  2. #532
    Quote Originally Posted by JamesonCourage View Post
    I'd posit that those posts are saying that 4e offers little else outside of tactical minis combat (a really light skill system, for example).
    I think this relates back to @Crazy Jerome's comments about illusionism upthread.

    It seems to me that some people think that there is more "depth" or "weightiness" in a game which has intricate build rules that very highly regulate whether a PC has a +6 or a+8 bonus next to their intricately distinguished skill descriptors, even though the gamet has no action resolution mechanics for those skills, other than "achieve a certain number of successes as specified by the GM, against a range of DCs specified by the GM."

    I appreciate the importance of colour in PC build - that is a big part of the attraction of the PC build rules in a game like Rolemaster. But I think action resolution rules are pretty important as well - otherwise that colour is just rough-and-ready guidelines for GM-arbitrated free-forming.

    When it comes to social interaction, 4e relies more heavily on the GM and players, rather than the build mechanics, to provide the colour (although a lot of colour options are spelled out in race and class descriptions, sidebars in the "power" books, etc), but provides much more robust action resolution techniques, than 3E does.

    In that respect it is more like a "modern" RPG such as HeroWars/Quest than a "traditional" RPG like RQ or RM or HERO.

    My own impression is that many of those who say that 4e is not an RPG are not familiar with the games that are obvious influences upon its design.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lanefan View Post
    I'm not sure there can be, without to some considerable extent taking RP control of the PCs away from the players and handing it to the dice...ditto for NPCs and the DM. I don't think that'll fly very far.

    It can also be argued that in social conflict there is no such thing as precise victory conditions.
    There are a lot of good working models out there.

    In 4e combat victory conditions are described in abstract mechanical terms - reduce the enemy from N to 0 hp. (There are other alternatives, like surrender, but 0 hp is the default.)

    What 0 hp means in the game - dead, or disabled in some other fashion - is left a bit more flexible.

    In 4e social victory conditions are also described in abstract mechanical terms - achieve N successes before 3 failures. What N successes means in the game is left flexible - the players and GM are expected to outline the stakes of the conflict at the start of the interaction (as per the skill challenge rules in the DMG) but these stakes can evolve over the course of resolution (and are likely too, in a high-complexity skill challenge).

    This sort of resolution no more takes control away from the player than does the combat rules that says "If you're at 0 hp you can't narrate your guy as running around all over the place smiting his enemies." That is, it establishes parameters within the fiction, within the scope of which the players is free to narrate what his/her PC is doing.

  3. #533
    Quote Originally Posted by pemerton View Post
    I think this relates back to @Crazy Jerome's comments about illusionism upthread.


    My own impression is that many of those who say that 4e is not an RPG are not familiar with the games that are obvious influences upon its design.
    Okay... I guess I missed where someone said that "combat is the opposite of roleplaying" or where you inferred that from. I get your post, but I think that your initial statement doesn't represent it well at all. Just my take, I guess. As always, play what you like

  4. #534
    Magsman (Lvl 14)

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Read 2 Reviews

    Block Herschel

    Quote Originally Posted by ForeverSlayer View Post
    Bottom line is this.

    If 4th edition was such a success then we wouldn't be playtesting 5th edition.
    Bottom line is this: If 3E had been decent it wouldn't have been re-written so quickly and then still need to be replaced by 4E.

    Funny how your own "logic" paints your preferences in an even harsher light than the bunk you're trolling.

  5. #535
    Bottom line is this.

    The 3.0 books were literally pulled from the shelves in 2003, 3 years after launch.

    3.5 stopped getting new 3.5 specific sourcebooks in 2007 - 4 years after launch. And was pulled from the shelves in 2008. Playtesting of 4e started in IIRC 2006.

    4e is possibly stopping getting new 4e specific sourcebooks in 2012 - 4 years after launch. It might continue into 2013. Either way it significantly outlasted 3.0 and has lasted as long as 3.5 has. Therefore if you don't consider 4e a succes because we are playtesting 5e, you must count 3.0 as a miserable failure and 3.5 as a failure on exactly the same metric.

  6. #536
    Quote Originally Posted by ForeverSlayer View Post
    Bottom line is this. (sic) If 4th edition was such a success then we wouldn't be playtesting 5th edition.
    Absolutely not true. Sales of core books and updated source material for new rules are the fuel for creating new editions, not the success of the current edition.

  7. #537
    As exciting as the "was 4e a failure" topic is, i think we all know it has been driven into the ground multiple time and again on Enworld (largely by those of us posting on this thread). In the interest of keeping the discussion on subject maybe opening up the 4e failure discussion elsewhere would be a good idea.

  8. #538
    Lama (Lvl 13)

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    NJ, USA
    Read 0 Reviews

    Block Pour

    Why buy into this designer-fed need for reunification at all? What's the point of this great reconciliation beyond selling books? I mean do any of us still reading this thread even want to come together? Do the camps actually want to belong to the same community again? I don't...

    And what does a new edition really get any of us that we don't already have? I really can't grasp the appeal of modularity to imitate what we've already purchased, at additional costs to the 5e core. I might be able to understand if there was actual new approaches to the game, something beyond our editions' capabilities, but that's not what we're getting, is it?

    Can they really distill D&D into a pure form all of us can embrace- or is it the added flavors and complexities, save vs. death, Vancian magic, powers, imbalance, balance, chain mail bikinis, succubus as a demon, succubus as a devil- that create the D&D experience. I think I'm posing its our preferences, our vehement differences, our details, that make the game, not any sort of pure D&D truth. D&D is lightning in a bottle, and it doesn't strike twice for any of us, and frankly why should it?

    I say love, hate, and rage. It's your game. You're always right. They're always wrong. Scavenge what you like from the edition carcases and build your walls higher with the bones. It's always been a game for cannibals.

  9. #539
    Grandmaster of Flowers (Lvl 18)

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Read 0 Reviews

    Block Minigiant

    Urrr... well...

    Back on topic...

    I like 4E because it is very DM Neutral

    I like the fact that I can make the character I want (outside of straight bans) without hoping the DM breaks rules in my favor.

    Dwarf Wizard? Fine no problem.
    Halfling Paladin and not suck? Fine.
    Human fighter and not beg for better items than the wizard and cleric? Cool.

    Sure the DM can have the villager hate me and chase me as they hate both goblins and sorcerers. I can accept that. It's his world to control.

    But I don't have to beg him for help and house rules (or make him feel like he has to make them) because goblins have a -2 Cha penalty and all around stick as a race.

  10. #540
    Mod Squad
    Time Agent (Lvl 24)

    Umbran's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Boston, MA
    Read 0 Reviews

    Block Umbran

    Quote Originally Posted by ForeverSlayer View Post
    Bottom line is this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Herschel View Post
    Bottom line is this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Neonchameleon View Post
    Bottom line is this.

    Bottom line is actually this: I told folks to stop with the edition warring upthread. Some of you didn't listen, and will be booted from this thread.

    Anyone else? We can step up to vacations from the site, if need be

+ Log in or register to post
Page 54 of 93 FirstFirst ... 4444546474849505152535455565758596061626364 ... LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Similar Threads

  1. The Bastardization of the Game: Edition Purity versus Edition Innovation
    By Jack7 in forum Roleplaying Games General Discussion
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: Sunday, 12th July, 2009, 04:42 AM
  2. How Important is Magic to Dungeons and Dragons? - Third Edition vs Fourth Edition
    By Hexmage-EN in forum Roleplaying Games General Discussion
    Replies: 965
    Last Post: Wednesday, 13th May, 2009, 12:59 PM
  3. 6 players, 5 hours, 4th edition
    By Rodrigo Istalindir in forum Older D&D Editions (4E, 3.x, 2E, 1E, OD&D), D&D Variants, and OSR Gaming
    Replies: 182
    Last Post: Wednesday, 5th March, 2008, 01:49 PM
  4. The Best & Worst of 3rd Edition: SINGLE BEST Product of 3rd edition (poll closed)
    By TerraDave in forum Roleplaying Games General Discussion
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: Saturday, 16th February, 2008, 01:57 AM
  5. Any AD&D 1st Edition players here?
    By Ermanaric in forum Roleplaying Games General Discussion
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: Monday, 30th September, 2002, 03:10 AM

Posting Permissions

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