[Those who like 4ed] What has been lost?

[Mercurius]

Weem and Dausuul, I think what you are talking about in terms of mystery/suspension of disbelief has to do with a cultural shift, specifically with regards to a kind of sense of entitlement that is more prevalent now than it was, say, twenty years ago. In terms of RPGs I think the key is bringing back DM Fiat as the default mode of play, the "One Rule to rule them all", so to speak.

I don't think this has as much to do with any specific edition as the time that the edition(s) came out. And yes, I see this as happening largely around the time 3ed came on the scene, almost a decade ago. Coupled with the rules density of that edition it was a ripe context for rules lawyering, player-vs-DM, and a bunch of other garbage that I personally can't stand--as a DM or player. To me any RPG is based upon a kind of unspoken contract between the GM and the players: that the players will trust the GM, that the GM is the "god" of the game, and that he or she will hold one operative as primary above all others: the enjoyment of all. That contract is absolutely necessary for a game to run smoothly--and enjoyably.

(INTERLUDE: The culture of entitlement, I would postulate, is at least partially the spawn of the postmodern movement, in particular the Politically Correct virus of the early-to-mid 90s that the RPG populace seems, to this day, so dreadfully infected with. It is not my intention to discuss the pros and cons of postmodernism, for there are both, but to hypothesize that the negative fallout of postmodernism created a climate in which "all views are equal" and "everything is subjective"--except, of course, the tenets of postmodernism! This led to a disempowerment of authority figures, including teachers and GMs. To put it another way, postmodernism couldn't differentiate between healthy and pathological (oppressive) hierarchies and therefore trashed them all. So blame Derrida for the loss of DM Fiat! )

I have been thinking of something similar but more along they cast the ritual but not completly and essentily create a charged item that they can use later. Still I am not sure I would want a single round casting time though.

I actual had a very similar idea a year or so ago but forgot! Thanks for reminding me. They could be called "Ritual Stones" and, as you said, hold the "charge" of the ritual until the owner of the stone releases it. A ritual caster could charge up a bunch of stones during an extended rest.

 

[Connorsrpg]

The fear of death.

Way back when...every character we created approached every encounter like it could be our last. A hit could kill and we loved that. (We always had crit rules too though I spose).

Same with low level monsters. Even kobolds, etc. Players now know they will last roughly three hits no matter what. (Barring minions of course - but an orc minion is therefore not much different to a kobold minion, etc).

Anyway, we ALWAYS play where death can result any time. (Crits do x2 dam instead of max; we have d100 chart for extra effects; crit fumbles; and you do not start each day on full hps).

I understand not for all - but we actually like the idea any weapon being slung at you can kill you...not, "I know I can last at least 7 of these sword strikes", etc.

 

[Wormwood]

1. The ability to *easily* toss in an improvised combat encounter for a quick 15-minute diversion.

2. Some weird yet awesomely flavorful magic items/effects.

 

[delericho]

...The question is based upon the idea that 4ed is the latest link in a positive developmental chain from OD&D up...

The thing is, in many ways 4e is not another link in the chain, but is quite deliberately a 're-envisioning' or 'reboot' of the game. (cf "Battlestar Galactica"). As such, they have quite deliberately thrown out the vast majority of the accumulated lore of the setting - the Great Wheel is gone, the Blood War meaningless, the Forgotten Realms have been changed almost beyond recognition.

This is not the D&D I started with 20 years ago, and deliberately so. Quite aside from whether this is a good thing or a bad thing, or whether 4e is a good game or a bad game, it is a loss I feel very keenly.

Second on my list would be the loss of anything that isn't tied directly to the "game" part of D&D. 4e is extremely detailed in terms of powers and feats and options... in combat. It is almost completely devoid of anything that doesn't relate to combat, even moreso than 3e (which in turn was less well supported than 2nd Edition). It seems PCs go and fight Goblins, and then they go and fight Giants, and then they go and fight Demons... but they don't build kingdoms, or establish temples, or research new and powerful spells, or...

Third would be the loss of 'Good monsters'. The Unicorn is now unaligned, as are many of the metallic dragons. Sure, where is the utility of monsters that the PCs don't fight? Still, it is something that has been lost.

I also miss both the low and high level play experiences from older editions. In stretching out the 'sweet spot' they have removed both those formative levels that I generally really enjoyed, and also those high level experiences to which groups could at least aspire (even if the reality was never all it promised).

 

[Davachido]

I've never run into this, although that may be because my players know I only run custom-built monsters. It has it if I say it has it.

I do a similar thing though only with the 'boss' monsters they usually have wide and varying abilities that do stuff that the rules don't usually follow, including some auto-hit attacks with a special effect, most of the other encounters I run are reskinned things from the MM2 or DDI stuff with slightly altered abilities.

What I miss from previous eds, crazy wondrous items, they never did much but they were sure as hell funny to fool about with for some wacky ideas by the PCs. Like using a bag of tricks and summon a brown bear to charge a leviathon on the other end of a large boat. Admittedly they have brought some back to the table just not enough yet.

 

[Barcode]

I miss the evocative prose. One of the reasons that you have so many people that hate 4e even though they have never played it is that the books are just soooo dry. I think that is also one of the sources of the "4e is about combat not roleplaying" misapprehension. The books aren't written in a way that makes the reader dream about playing.

Now, I'm not saying that's bad - it does make them easier to refer to, which is their ultimate purpose, but it's a thing I miss.

 

[Nebulous]

The one place in 4E where the Mystery is really dead for me is magic items. 4E magic items are crap and the game economy is beyond ludicrous. More and more I'm looking to the DMG2 option of scrapping them entirely.

Yeah, magic items in 4e truly, truly suck. They wanted powers to take the limelight, and well, that's what has happened. So far in my campaign i've integrated a homemade Bag of Tricks, reintroduced the old Deck of Many Things, added several new magic items with charges, coventant items that level up with players and a few other quirks to bring some more old-school flavor to 4e. But not having that stuff integrated into the core can be problematic too as the players have a tendency to consider anything outside the character builder as non-existent. Or harder to remember that they actually own it.

And the whole daily magic item thing just doesn't make sense outside of a pure balance reason.

But i do like 4e quite a bit, regardless of the stuff that pisses me off. Oddly though, i don't remember complaining as much about 1st, 2nd or 3rd edition. Maybe i didn't have much to compare it to.

 

[wedgeski]

I miss the greater variety in skills from the 3ed-era, that's about it. Oh, and in agreement with others, the CB is certainly a wonderful tool, but it does tend to build a fence around the game that is difficult to break down.

 

[cmrscorpio]

I miss the ability to take a new book and read it from cover to cover.

...

I like 4e. I like 3e. Heck, I like all the e's. I still pull non-4e books from my shelf if I feel like sitting down and reading something entertaining to spark my creativity.

DS

Seconded

I hate the fact that the setting books are written in such a clinical, detached manner. I miss the Wanderer's Journal from Dark Sun, Volo's Guides to the Realms, the vernacular in Planescape products, etc.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Those other games have problems of their own. I like 4E better, but that doesn't mean there aren't things I'd like to see return.

Then more power to ya.

The question though... was what has been "lost" in 4E. Which implies that you are making a direct connection between the parts of each edition of D&D, and that bits are being left behind.

I don't do that. I play 4E as its own game. I don't compare it to my previous games of 3E or 2E or 1E or red box Basic. Those were their own games... my current campaigns are their own games. And the campaigns of 7th Sea, Shadowrun, Star Wars, Star Trek, Feng Shui, and Riddle Of Steel I've played in are their own games as well.

I don't care about rules and aspects of 3E that aren't currently in 4E the same exact way I don't care about rules of D&D that don't appear in Shadowrun. They're different games. And I play them as such.