Convincing 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition

[Steely_Dan]

The point is to say that people with square pegs get a square hole and people with round pegs get a round hole; i.e. people get a game that fits them.

I agree, the stuffing of D&D into something it's not is unneeded (amongst other things).

 

[pemerton]

Whereas some have posted that rpg players are essentially incompetent to play rpgs and should simply read a book and do exactly what is in it without using their own judgment.

Just out of curiosity, who posted that?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Just out of curiosity, who posted that?

I'm overstating it to make the point clear, but not by much:

But, yeah, I completely trust a good game designer over any random DM's judgement.

The designers of the game are much more likely to have thought about and developed a rule that fits the intended aim and tenor of the ruleset than I am. If they have done their job well the rules they have produced will mesh together to create a seamless whole. If that coherent, focussed game is not what I want, then I would much rather select another rule set that fits closer to the focus that I want to promote in play than start fiddling piecemeal with a set of rules designed (I hope) to work together in the vain assumption that I can design on the fly something more coherent than a team of professional designers have been able to produce in several months of work.

Such an assumption seems to me insanely arrogant.

 

[Pickles JG]

There's also some "unfun" mechanics that are necessary for the game to function:

- character death, or the severe threat thereof
- loss of character wealth, possessions, and-or reputation (or threat of)
- dice rolling for anything on nights when the dice just are not going your way
- limits on what each individual character can do, said limits being set by its level and class

I do not think any of these are necessary but the first two certainly enhance the game (I have been playing Arcanis recently whcih does not really have death except by super random wound effects & it feels like the worst of both worlds).
The last point pretty much defines D&D but I am not sure how it is unfun & I do not understand the dice rolling point.

And then each group will find their own mechanics that aren't much fun but have to be done. Ours, for example, is treasury division. Sorting out the treasury* after any adventure of substance is usually good for a whole session of bookkeeping plus a bunch of emails and homework in between. We've tried faster-and-looser division methods in the past but every time it seems one or two PCs benefit greatly and the rest get screwed; so we always end up reverting to dividing it evenly down to the last c.p.

* - includes actual treasury division, item evaluation and field-testing, item claiming, level-up training, shopping in town, commissioning items, spell research, etc. etc.
Lan-"so just give me all of it"-efan

I just do not do this stuff any more & can't imagine playing a game again where I was expected to waste playtime doing sums, & I like sums. If its not fun why do it? We just get paid for jobs now mostly or find all the treasure in one big pile.

It was one of the low points of the 5e playtesing I did when the DM started trying assess what proportion of the list price we would get for each item individually.

 

[Lanefan]

I just do not do this stuff any more & can't imagine playing a game again where I was expected to waste playtime doing sums, & I like sums. If its not fun why do it? We just get paid for jobs now mostly or find all the treasure in one big pile.

OK, so when you find said one big pile - magic items, non-magical valuables, coins; a dragon hoard, let's say - how do you divide it up among the party?

And is it fair?

Lan-"the root alignment of every D&D character ever played is NG - Neutral Greedy"-efan

 

[Pickles JG]

OK, so when you find said one big pile - magic items, non-magical valuables, coins; a dragon hoard, let's say - how do you divide it up among the party?

And is it fair?

Lan-"the root alignment of every D&D character ever played is NG - Neutral Greedy"-efan

"You find 500 gp in goods & coin each & that magic item of level 7 or less that you always wanted. Plus a fragment of the crown of Grabzul a minor artefact"

Yeah it's not really satisfactory for the magic items. I have not found a happy balance between feeling my character was simply a list of magic items chosen by my DM & the totally demagicified items as cyberenhancement 3e+/computer RPG model.


Picoiner of new adjectivekles

 

[Hussar]

Out of curiousity, wasn't the original Rule 0 basically a means by which DM's could move forward from stalemates? It's been a really long time, but, as I recall, Rule 0 in AD&D basically said that whenever conflicts of interpretation arose, the DM has final say.

I think that that definition has been broadened considerably since then to encompass the idea that the DM can and should change rules whenever he or she feels compelled to do so. And I really don't think the game has been improved by that. Far too many DM's have simply changed rules, whether rightly or wrongly (and we all have made mistakes) and when challenged on the point, gesture in the direction of Rule 0 and say, "The DM is always right! The books say so!"

I really think that this pyramidal style of gaming has been one of the biggest mistakes in game design ever. By setting up this top down management style over the game, and either implicitly or explicitly saying that one player is "always right" we've made for so many poor games and poor game sessions. Can a DM fix any problem? Sure. That's probably true. Should a DM step in and fix a problem? That's a question I'm not really sure has been addressed in any significant depth in the game.

Lost Soul, a few pages back, talked about having sections of the DMG devoted to resolving conflicts at the table between the DM and the players. I think that's probably some of the best advice you can ever have in a DMG.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I really think that this pyramidal style of gaming has been one of the biggest mistakes in game design ever.

I have to respectfully disagree; I think that it's a good step, and that's coming from someone who loves incredibly codified systems that cover as much as possible so as to empower to player ("the book says I can do this" and therefore I can reliably build a character with that in mind).

It's just a different style of play, though. It's a terrible step for some groups; it's a good step for mine. Just a play style thing. As always, play what you like

 

[Pour]

How do they convince 4th Edition players to consider 5th Edition? Take a group of 4e players with different backgrounds, different preferences, different experiences, and have a conversation. So This.

Gotta say, Mike Krahulik was my hero in this. There wasn't any facade. He touched on a lot of legitimate points a 4ther would make, from asking what the difference between the encounter chains and skill challenges we create now are compared to this idea of an adventuring day, Mearl's example of throw away combats versus minions, even 'Why do I have to buy this when I could do everything I wanted to do with 4e'. After being asked what he wished 4e had, Mike basically said Epic support hehe.

Actually, I don't know if I'm more convinced to try 5e or not, but this did get me to listen to a podcast. And I plan to listen next week. So I guess I am more engaged in 5e discussion, which is a start.

 

[Hussar]

I have to respectfully disagree; I think that it's a good step, and that's coming from someone who loves incredibly codified systems that cover as much as possible so as to empower to player ("the book says I can do this" and therefore I can reliably build a character with that in mind).

It's just a different style of play, though. It's a terrible step for some groups; it's a good step for mine. Just a play style thing. As always, play what you like

Don't you find a contradiction there though? If you like systems that codify elements so as to empower the player, how do you rationalize having a DM/GM who can, at any point in time, invalidate any rule?