D&D 3E/3.5 Does 4e sound more D&Dish to you than 3e did?

[Amphimir Míriel]

I miss the "lots of mooks" days

But they hadn't said that at the time I posted what you quoted.

As for flat-footed, there is no longer a flat-footed AC (thank god), you now gain a combat advantage (+2 to hit and a chance to sneak attack if you have it?) against flat-footed opponents.

I also love that you now target Ref defence instead of Touch AC.

Sorry, didn't notice the posting date...

But yes, you are right, I really like these changes.

Now, back to the point of the thread... I was re-reading the Fafhrd and Grey Mouser books by Fritz Lieber and I was feeling how these books (along with lots of others) helped shape the original D&D concept...

And I also realized that most of the adventures from these books cannot be successfully modeled by 3.5 D20!

Why? most combats in those books involve the two heroes fighting against overwhelming numbers of low-level mooks... As previously stated here and elsewhere, in 3.5 this approach either means the mooks are not a challenge at all or they are an almost guaranteed TPK.

Now, don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things that third edition fixed (too numerous to count here), but I really miss the days of "oh no! 15 orcs!"

I want to have my cake and eat it too. They have been suggesting that 4E will deliver.

Very true... I am also hopeful that both types of challenges will be there for us.

 

[Baby Samurai]

I am also hopeful that both types of challenges will be there for us.

They will – you can have a challenging encounter fighting 1 dragon, or 30 drow mooks.

 

[Talassa]

Well, it doesn't sound like 3E-D&D to me. But it evokes the feeling, I had, when I got in touch with D&D the first time: A new game, full of interesting rules and evocative story, that make me daydreaming. It's like getting D&D the first time again!

Cheers, LT.

Yes.

In that sense It feels more D&D. And it feels less 3e.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Speakin of Plane Sailing: How long did you know about the Astral Sea, Plane Sailing? Your avatar is made for 4th edition!

Arrrh me hearties!, my reach is long and I am in touch with the zeitgeist of RPG development. Arrrh!

just have to remember where I put it...

 

[Celebrim]

Dr. Awkward: I find your responce to be internally contridictory, which I suppose is a natural result of wanting to have your cake and eat it to.

On the one hand you admit that 1e fights were easy and you want to recapture that feel, yet you say that you also want them to be challenging. How can they be both? Either they are challenging or they are not.

I don't think we every really had 'good old days' where an encounter with 15 orcs was challenging beyond the levels that they are challenging now. As I said, and you agreed, in 1e - pretty much as soon as your front line could afford plate mail - mooks could be faced by the dozen because of thier low chances to hit and low average damage (no strength bonuses). In all my time playing 1e, I don't think I can ever recall losing a PC to be overwhelmed by mooks, nor do I ever recall killing a PC with hordes of mooks except those that were 1st level.

I do recall being underwhelmed by encounters with 15 trolls or 20 minotaurs, or similarly 1st edition style fights, in the sense that we were never really threatened. I'm not at all sure that many 3rd edition monsters don't make more credible threats over a wider range of levels than they did in 1st edition.

I'm not sure your memory here is trust worthy. A 1st edition 10th level fighter could face about 200 orcs by himself. Has anything really changed, except that in 1st edition playing the fighter at age 12 we might have tolerated and been excited by this fight more than we would today? How many rounds of hewing down weak foes do you really find exciting? Many 1st edition monsters arguably stop being signficant foes much earlier than thier 3rd edition translations because of thier lack of attribute scores. I remember fighting things more like 30 bugbears or 50 beserkers or 100 bandits in 1st edition than 15 orcs, and really did I enjoy this because I was really challenged or because I objectively probably wasn't?

I think what you really remember is something quite different. First, once you got into the sweet spot if your DM didn't just dump treasure on you to force you to level, the rate of advancement slowed signficantly. More threats stayed reasonable for longer because the rate that you leveled up slowed down and because most threats weren't signficant so they were all basically engageable for a long period of play (if not a long mechanical period). Second, I think you remember not being fully conversant with the math of the game. The rules were safely tucked away in the DM's section of the game, and even if you'd glanced at them you didn't necessarily know them. So you didn't know that the 15 orcs would probably inflict less than 15 points of damage on the whole party before you cut them down. You weren't keeping track of that. You were emersed in the scene. Thirdly, I think you remember being a kid, and tolerating long periods of static combat and and dice rolling and slaying orcs who only rarely landed a blow far more than you would now.

They have been suggesting that 4E will deliver.

How? How do you think that it will really deliver? Is it really going to cause you to forget your 20+ years of experience? Is it really going to make monsters weaker so that you can face bigger hordes of them AND make them individually tougher so that they've got a chance of cracking your defences at the same time?

 

[Scribble]

Does 4e sound more D&Dish to you than 3e did?

It's perhaps a strange question, but there are a few things that I'm hearing about that are getting me really excited. You know, real Sense of Wonder time. (Feywild - stupid name, but awesome concept).

And some of those things are pushing buttons and going, "Hey - that's what D&D is all about!"

I understand what you mean. I don't know if it "sounds more like D&D," though.
I got the same feelings when 3e was new as well. It's a sense that new things are happening. Fun things, interesting things, creative things.

It reminded me of the first time I opened a D&D book and thought... Whoa... what is THAT??? And couldn't stop thinking of a ton of new adventures and stories...

3e lost it for me, however, with the endless releases of the same things in different clothes. (More feats, spells, PRCs, etc...)

Why I tended to buy 3rd party stuff most of the time. It had new ideas and concepts.

4e is doing that same thing for me. The new ideas are getting my creative juices (eww) flowing, and making me think "whoa... what is THAT???" all over again.

I'm just hoping they can keep it up and don't once again fall prey to the grab a thing and stretch it philosophy...

 

[BluSponge]

Does 4e sound more D&Dish to you than 3e did?

Nope. No more than Savage Worlds, anyway. Or True20. Or Unisystem. The only thing about 4e that sounds D&Dish to me is the title. It may be a fantastic game, but D&D it just ain't. :\

Tom

 

[MerricB]

BTW, there was a definite reason I chose "D&Dish" and not "D&D" in the question.

Look at oD&D, AD&D and BECM D&D. I think the only way to describe all of them is "D&Dish".

Cheers!

 

[Xaaon]

I do not need new crunch to make the fluff exiting.
Sense of wonder for me is derived from new and original ideas.
Are Orcs boring you? Well then redefine them. Give them some new abilities. Make them neutral or good or whatever.

Like Orcs in Eberron are GREAT! A warrior race that helped save Eberron, and continues to maintain the gates against Madness...Orc Druids and Orc Paladins! Absolutely amazing, one of the best aspects of Eberron is the blurred alignment system.

 

[Xaaon]

Arrrh me hearties!, my reach is long and I am in touch with the zeitgeist of RPG development. Arrrh!

just have to remember where I put it...

Ummmm, not like the astral sea is a new concept really, anyone remember that little Spelljammer bit in 2nd edition?