Why did you quit playing 4e

[Evilusion]

Please do not turn this into a flame war.

I'm just trying to get some opinions.

Ok my group and I have played 4e for 6 month. We figured we would give the game a run through. After last session we all just kinda went, blah not for us.

1. Game is to bland.
2. Not enough options for characters(Yes I know more books are coming out)
3. Balance is fine. 4e went way to far though, every class looks the same to me.


Thanks all

Evilusion


Sorry change options to opinions. Sorry wrote that and forgot to check it.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

So what precisely do you want in terms of options?

 

[Darrin Drader]

The first time I played it, I had fun. It reminded me somewhat of Descent.

The second time I played it, the powers were getting repetitive. It reminded me of an MMO, where I like the powers concept because of the ease of play. Since I'm not clicking a mouse when I'm playing tabletop, I don't need that particular mechanic to do cool stuff in combat. I also noticed that combats were really starting to drag.

The third time I played it, I was getting annoyed with powers, and my players were having a great deal less fun than we had with 3rd edition and True20. They also didn't like their limited class and race choices.

Finally, the books were not meant to be read. With 3E, part of the fun is sitting down and reading the thing while figuring out what you might want to add to your character.

I was initially looking forward to 4E, but it took very little time for that to be replaced with disappointment.

 

[Jasperak]

If it counts, I played in KOTS FTL.

My immediate problems where constant tracking of status effects and marking; using rainbow colored sets of poker chips and the like seem too much like those war games with chits from 20 years ago. Like others have said previously, the battles were not particularly fun once they entered grind territory. I cannot stand the Wizard nerf! I like the minion idea in theory but not in practice. I don't like the hit point kickers given both to players and monsters.

Once I read the PH (most of it except the powers after 4th-level or so) I was uninspired by what I saw. The general style did not match what I have come to expect from my gaming. It seemed to want to have its own default setting but couldn't come out and create one. The races had some history and there were generic gods but nothing to really tie everything together into a cohesive world. But 4e seems to me to want to model a very specific type of world (extreme high fantasy) and game play that after consideration I want no part of.

Whereas OD&D, BD&D, 1e and 2e could model: the European Dark Ages, the European Middle Ages and the Early Renaissance, the icelandic sagas, Beowulf, and The Songs of Roland. 4e to me seems more to model over-the-top high fantasy, steampunk, and CGI-action flicks like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or 300.

I'm not knocking it but when you would have to throw out 2/3 (# out of my backside) to have the same feeling as any of the early epics and stories I mentioned, then it may not be a good system to model the fantasy I prefer. "Just don't use what you don't like" is not a good answer to me. And just to head off the dogs I'm not a big fan of 3e either and definitely not 3.5e.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

All due respect Darrin, you have posted before about your issues with 4e and why you stopped playing it. However the OP mentions that he want options.

I would like to know what he means by that. Does he was alternative rules to 4e or reccomendation regarding pathfinder or what.

Each and every one that dislikes 4e posting why (yet again) they don't like 4e followed closely by others qestioning their reasons and so forth is a pointless excersise. We have had a lot of that and it generates a lot of fire and smoke and little else of value.

 

[Retreater]

We played 4E for about 2 months. We had two different DMs run us through Keep on the Shadowfell, an RPGA DM run us through a Living Realms adventure, and another RPGA DM run us through a 10th level tournament adventure. I would say our experience was pretty much as all-inclusive as one could get without playing with the actual designers at WotC.

My personal turnoffs from the system are...

Potential solutions are in blue text.

1) Basically there are 4 characters: defenders, strikers, controllers, and leaders. There are two flavors of each. Other than that, you end up making the same character again and again. I was getting bored with character creation by the time I made my third character.

New books will come out to give more options for character creation. DMs can create new character classes. Players can make their characters unique through role playing.

2) The combats dragged on forever / gameplay was boring.

I heard that if you decrease each enemy's hit points by half and don't use solo monsters you can speed up combats.

3) After you use a daily or encounter power, every subsequent round feels the same.

The DM can make things more interesting tactically by changing the battlefield or changing the tactics of the monsters. Players can attempt to grapple or use other combat manuevers.

4) It is a tactical skirmish game. The game breaks down if you try to apply the rules in non-combat situations.

As long as you're okay with the limitations of the system this shouldn't be a problem for you.

5) The board game feel doesn't suit me. I cannot see scheduling 4 hour blocks weekly to play Monopoly. Yet, 4E has the same level of depth.

Again, the answer is same as #4.

6) I don't like the way the product is designed with installment plans of the Core Rulebooks. (Unless WotC plans to reprint the rules each time, things are going to get confusing for retailers, distributors, and new gamers.)

Then I realized, I don't have to buy everything.

7) We were already familiar with 3.5, already owned the books, and we seemed to like it better than 4E.

So we decided to stick with 3.5. If you don't already own 3.5 and you can't find used copies of the book (or don't want to get the information free online through the SRD), then 4E might be the game for you.

8) No one around here likes 4E, so you couldn't find gamers to join a group of 4E anyway.

Once (if) the online tabletop is ready, a 4E might be able to find a group online.

Retreater

 

[Agamon]

Because of the holidays. Though we're beginning again tonight.

 

[RFisher]

I quit because the group was more interested in starting a new Marvel Super Heroes game than in continuing to try 4e. ^_^

My first impressions were:

1. I wanted to trade most of my wizard’s attack powers for utility powers or rituals.

2. Playing a wizard felt too much like playing a fighter.

3. Playing a fighter felt too much like playing a wizard.

4. I think a lot of players with less attention to details than I will miss a lot of the fiddly bits. Actually, I don’t generally give a lot of attention to details, but when trying a new system, I tend to triple check everything. Too often I felt like I was finding I’d still missed something on the third check.

There is some sentiment among the group (including myself) for giving 4e another try and more time. I’m not sure how strong it is, though.

 

[Monkey Boy]

The combats felt the same with powers spammed. The Warlock's schtick of eyebite, blast got particularly tiresome. I know about page (48?) in the DMG but players tend to get tunnel vision and fall back on their powers. Personally I think too much praise is heaped on that page and it really doesn't solve anything.

Combats took to long. This was aparent in the first two sessions and put some players noses out of joint. 'Goblins with 20+ HP? Outrageous!!' I addressed this in later sessions but those games fell into the trap of player power spamming.

After 15 sessions 3/4 of the 2 groups I play/DM with lost interest. We found it hard to schedule a game due to this disinterest. Some of the players played begrudgingly and when they didn't take to it they became hard to schedule game time with. Even though they're gamers they preferred no game than 4e. We put the 2 campaigns on hold. The longer the groups didn't game the more my interest in DMing 4e ebbed til I figured I'd run games they will make time for. At the moment we are enjoying 1920's Call of Cthulhu, Dark Heresy and 1e.

 

[delericho]

1) Too many fiddly little status effects in combat. Too much to keep track of.

2) Too much emphasis on the tactical mini-game, at a time when my group were already trying to get away from this.

3) Grinding combats.

And the big one:

4) The feel of the game is dramatically different, and not in a way we prefer.