D&D 4E The "We Can't Roleplay" in 4E Argument

[Retreater]

Rant:

Last night I ran a one-shot session in 4E with half of my group and a couple of friends I made at the FLGS during Encounters. This is primarily to introduce the two groups, to allow socializing time, and to test the 4E ruleset with a group of players accustomed to Pathfinder/3.5 edition.

After explaining to them that I wanted to run a short Chaos Scar adventure (which is essentially a dungeon crawl of 4 or so encounters) just to have a complete adventure in under four hours, I received the following complaint from one of the Pathfinder players (which i'm sure that many of you have already heard):

"4th edition has a great balanced combat system and is fun to play, but it doesn't give you opportunities to roleplay like Pathfinder does."

How can this be the fault of a gaming system? Sure, it may be the fault of the DM (me), the module design (intended as a dungeon crawl), or even the group. Why blame 4E as a killer of roleplaying, interaction, and problem solving?

I even added some roleplaying and story elements to the introduction of the adventure. No one seemed interested in interacting, so I moved on to the exploration and combat encounters.

Sorry. Just need to sound off here.

Retreater

 

[Destil]

Well, you see it's because in 4E if you want to talk to the noble you're hired by to up your fees you may just roll diplomacy, while in pathfin...

Oh, wait. It has a Diplomacy skill, too.

Yeah, I can actually buy this argument to some degree for earlier editions without social skills. But not pathfinder.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"4th edition has a great balanced combat system and is fun to play, but it doesn't give you opportunities to roleplay like Pathfinder does."

How can this be the fault of a gaming system?

While I don't exactly buy the argument, I understand its origins: 1) The rollout of the game that included backhanded swipes at certain kinds of roleplay by the game's designers and 2) 4Ed's structure is more combat-centric than the edition of D&D that immediately preceded it.

For the first, there are numerous little jabs taken at 3Ed by the ads and press releases from the early days of 4Ed's marketing campaign, often posted in Edition War threads. I won't post them myself. That ticked people off and that overall vibe led some to believe that it was not just poorly suited for the kinds of roleplay the designers dissed, but roleplay in general.

As to the second, look at the evolution of the 3.X system. There were plenty of skills, powers, PrCls and other mechanical things designed primarily for use outside of combat. In contrast, primarily non-combat elements in 4Ed are comparatively rarer.

Personally, I've played enough different RPGs to know that you can RP in virtually any game if you have the mindset to do so. (Heck, RP helps my poker game...) But those 2 elements combined in the minds of many to make 4Ed more of a TT wargame than an RPG.

 

[Dannager]

"You can't roleplay in 4e like you could in previous games!" is an indictment of the speaker, not 4e.

 

[BobTheNob]

Undoubtedly, 4e has a tighter structure for combat. Everything you can do is well defined, which (in combat terms) does take a little away from improvisation. Even terrain powers (recent concept) came under alot of fire for taking this effect even further.

But to me, combat isnt the "role play" space. Role playing is what happens when the swords arent swinging. Now 4e actually has a "looser" skill system than 3.5, with broader range skills (for instance, Athletics in place of swim/climb, Stealth in place of Move Silent/Hide) and a simplistic investment (trained vs not trained).

There are rules around the use of skills, but even then as a DM I threw most of it aside and role played the situations anyway (e.g. I didn't skill challenge interactions, I played them out with rolls at key points).

This is pretty much what I want it to
Combat = tightly Structured with interactive mechanics and a implicit reward system
Non Combat = Free Form with characters having skill ratings (and powers/feat) to back their intentions.

Mind you, others will have different takes. But to say 4e killed Role-playing...not by my definition of what Role-playing is. Its all what you make of it.

 

[MrGrenadine]

Of course 4e is conducive to RP, just as every other edition of D&D, including Pathfinder.


However, I think some people more familiar with 3.5 look at the combat powers system, see that characters choose their attacks from a preset list, (most of which cannot be used more than once), and assume there is a preset list of things characters can do outside of combat, too.

This is, of course, hooey, but for players with that preconceived notion, playing a few sessions with a good DM and players should make them see the (points of) light.

 

[Ryujin]

I have to wonder how many people, who whine about not being able to RP in 4e, prefer to make up characters (in any game) that have no interaction skills anyway?

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

This is a fairly common reaction.. at least in IME, due to supposition and false expectation on the part of the speaker.

If I read correctly, you ran a 4 hour playtest of a dungeon crawl... and the complaint is that 4e is too much like a dungeon crawl?

Duh! If you have run a session with a serious of non-combat skill challenges and showed off how effective the skill challenge system and page 42 can be.. I am sure someone would complain that 4e can't do combat!

Chaos Scar modules are nice but unprepared/learning gamers can take up to an hour to clear a single encounter.. meaning you didn't have much time for anything else.

I recommend encouraging the player to come back and expand on the Chaos Scar adventure and the world, having the heroes return home and work in the non-combat side of it.... and slow down the pace of the adventure and target only 1 encounter per 2 hours, leaving time to flesh out the rest of the world.
Also, definately get the 'do something cool' power card and ensure each player has it. To many players get target lock on thier character sheet and forget that it is a roleplaying game in which they can just make stuff up

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But to me, combat isnt the "role play" space.

But for others- myself included- RP can and should happen anywhere within the game.

And let me say that I have RPed in 4Ed combat. But even having done so, it didn't have quite the same feel as I got from doing likewise in other RPGs.

 

[Nagol]

Rant:

Last night I ran a one-shot session in 4E with half of my group and a couple of friends I made at the FLGS during Encounters. This is primarily to introduce the two groups, to allow socializing time, and to test the 4E ruleset with a group of players accustomed to Pathfinder/3.5 edition.

After explaining to them that I wanted to run a short Chaos Scar adventure (which is essentially a dungeon crawl of 4 or so encounters) just to have a complete adventure in under four hours, I received the following complaint from one of the Pathfinder players (which i'm sure that many of you have already heard):

"4th edition has a great balanced combat system and is fun to play, but it doesn't give you opportunities to roleplay like Pathfinder does."

How can this be the fault of a gaming system? Sure, it may be the fault of the DM (me), the module design (intended as a dungeon crawl), or even the group. Why blame 4E as a killer of roleplaying, interaction, and problem solving?

I even added some roleplaying and story elements to the introduction of the adventure. No one seemed interested in interacting, so I moved on to the exploration and combat encounters.

Sorry. Just need to sound off here.

Retreater

There is an observation that could be referred to here.

In 4e, a player (especially of a Martial character) acts more as an advocate for the character and as such the player is concentrating on "What would be cool to happen?" as opposed to "What would this character do in this situation?" when working with part of the power set.

*edit resumption*

By this I mean that some of the powers present narrative control to the player and present opportunities for the player to control the actions of those outside his character -- control the character does not possess. Other powers require (what I consider to be) very fiddly focus on the tactical map and a player can focus on this aspect of the game and lose sight of the characters actions and reactions to the situation.