-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
You don't like the new edition? Tell me about it!
- Thread starter Turanil
- Start date
Wicht
Hero
Eldragon said:
Just prior to the announcment by Paizo that they were sticking with the OGL and 3e ruleset, it seemed to me that every complaint I made about 4e was met by 4e fans telling me they didn't understand why I couldn't just houserule it.
Like rolling hp, then figure out your own charts.
Like alignment, houserule it back in.
Dislike Tieflings and Dragonborn as core races, then houserule them out.
Don't like tall halflings, house rule them at a shorter stature.
Think 200 year old elves dying of old age is dumb, houserule it.
On and on it went until it struck me that any game where I had to ignore every single piece of fluff and change a good portion of the crunch simply was not worth it.
Last edited:
Sure, sure – but the whole picture is, you have to do this over and over again, and not just when the PCs take damage, frequently when the monsters do too, and there's a lot more trading shots in the new edition; and yes, you sort of have to go through those hoops in previous editions, but it's easier to fall back on a "you hit, you miss" base. I think.Kid Charlemagne said:
I'm not talking about inability to come up with an explanation in this instance or that one – I'm talking about the narrative strain that develops when you have to do that sort of thing repeatedly.
SweeneyTodd
First Post
Imp said:
That's a good point. I typically let players describe the results of their actions (I trust 'em to stick to things that "fit" the rule results); that would take some of the heavy lifting off your hands.
I always felt having to describe the whole imagined world *and* the results of every action was kinda exhausting, in any system, so maybe I'm just lazy.
Thunderfoot
Hero
Ok, here we go...Just read through my PHB and I have a few 'objections':
Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies - Thank You for forcing "PrC"s on me. Until this time I have tried to stay as far away from those pieces of flop as possible, now I find out that my campaign must stop at 10th level so I don't have to deal with this.... (of course that last part is hyperbole, but I enjoy that).
The absence of random anything. HPs, Ability Scores (of course that is optional), damage (for the most part).
The monetary system - who invented it and what were you thinking? platinum as a 100 gold, astral gems??? WTF! Bring back electrum if you need another monetary value (at least it has some sort of precedence in the game's history)
Magic items in the PHB and a purchase chart - There have never been Wal-Magics in my game and now I have to fight the rules to prove it... (thanks a ton).
The Deity specific feats. While I understand the need to try and get people to play the PoL system, frankly its unimaginative and bland. On this note, it is also harder to customize without breaking rules or at least putting in a ton of work...
The alignment system - if you wanted to keep alignment, you should have kept the whole thing or scrapped the whole thing if it didn't work. The new alignment system is kind of like a donut spare for a car - it's too small, its ineffective and looks funny when you use it.
Teiflings and dragonborn - why are these races standard again?
All that said, the system is innovative and has a few really cool gems. The absence of Vancian magic is a positive step and the powers list, though a little contrived makes sense within the context of the game. I can't see trying to run this 'out of the box' like the designers intend, there is just too much dross to be cut away before it resembles something other than a computer role playing game, and if I wanted to play one of those, I would, I would have preferred a focus on role-playing instead of roll-playing, but the hobby has been drifting away from that for a while now.
(I'll add other objections as I go through my other books)
Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies - Thank You for forcing "PrC"s on me. Until this time I have tried to stay as far away from those pieces of flop as possible, now I find out that my campaign must stop at 10th level so I don't have to deal with this.... (of course that last part is hyperbole, but I enjoy that).
The absence of random anything. HPs, Ability Scores (of course that is optional), damage (for the most part).
The monetary system - who invented it and what were you thinking? platinum as a 100 gold, astral gems??? WTF! Bring back electrum if you need another monetary value (at least it has some sort of precedence in the game's history)
Magic items in the PHB and a purchase chart - There have never been Wal-Magics in my game and now I have to fight the rules to prove it... (thanks a ton).
The Deity specific feats. While I understand the need to try and get people to play the PoL system, frankly its unimaginative and bland. On this note, it is also harder to customize without breaking rules or at least putting in a ton of work...
The alignment system - if you wanted to keep alignment, you should have kept the whole thing or scrapped the whole thing if it didn't work. The new alignment system is kind of like a donut spare for a car - it's too small, its ineffective and looks funny when you use it.
Teiflings and dragonborn - why are these races standard again?
All that said, the system is innovative and has a few really cool gems. The absence of Vancian magic is a positive step and the powers list, though a little contrived makes sense within the context of the game. I can't see trying to run this 'out of the box' like the designers intend, there is just too much dross to be cut away before it resembles something other than a computer role playing game, and if I wanted to play one of those, I would, I would have preferred a focus on role-playing instead of roll-playing, but the hobby has been drifting away from that for a while now.
(I'll add other objections as I go through my other books)
Emirikol
Adventurer
"Oh, how 4e will disappoint you." ~ Al Franken
We played. 5 hours straight. I DMed. I didn't like it. 3 players liked it, 3 disliked it. One said he'd never play that crap again.
Here are my gut feelings and experiences:
1. Characters are all munchkins who can never die (unless they get CtG on the ground or the DM). I managed to kill 3 characters only by targeting singles by kobolds who would die just to kill a character.
2. WTF is the point of feats now that they've been replaced with epic level abilities?
3. It wasn't fun to run a game where they could just as well be playing a video game.
4. It's a pain for the DM because there are TOO DANG MANY DINKY MODIFIERS to pile on monsters, pc's
5. There's no "beginner level" for the game. It goes right to epic.
6. It's even more magic item heavy-dependent than 3.5 was
7. You don't know if anything's broken yet because it starts out COMPLETELY OUT OF HAND.
8. Wizards are annoyingly powerful at first level, moreso than all the other classes
9. I think there are meaningless levels of complexity to this game if this is how it's going to be done. What's the point of skills, 4 AC's (including saves), and feats again? Why are they there if it's become simply a D&D miniatures wargame? It fails at being anythign other than D&D mini's. The role-playing aspect feels VERY ABSENT. In comparison, never for a moment, even with constant fighting going on in 3.5 did it feel like it WASN'T a role-playing game..now...no, it doesnt' feel like a fun role playign game. If I wanted to play (or worse RUN) a computer game, I'd play a computer game. Is it not fun as a computer game on a tabletop? That's what I'm saying.
10. I think it's going to be an inferior way to play a campaign. You start out with massive amounts of powers and go where? To REALLY massive amounts of powers. That sort of thing isn't conducive to campaigns.
What did I like?
1. PC's have more options for at least the first encounter
2. The artwork is really ugly (I like ugly artwork) and kind of looks like computer generated on top of a scribble job someone did on a mac. It's not as ugly as Planescape (I thought PS and the 1e DMG had the ugliest artwork prior to DT's stuff..and hence definately wins the ugly award).
3. I hate to say it, but I'm glad it was hacked and pirated because I'm going to be a lot more choosy about what I buy in the future and chances are there will be a lot more critical reviews out there (unlike 3.5E, where you had mean-spirited-fanboys coming out of the woodwork to defend meaningless issues on clearly inferior products like someone was questioning their patriotism or something).
4. I like that the encounters are cleanly laid out (from a DM standpoint). The adventures have clearly evolved (most likely through the RPGA's pioneering of scenario formatting and DM feedback).
5. I like that the d4 is still used sometimes.
6. I like that it can be played on MAPTOOLS.
One of my players' reviews was thus:
As for my review of 4e, I'm teetering on the fence. It's...different. The differences in the rules I can overcome, but I'm not quite sure what to do with this "marking" thing. And it was cool to see a 1st level mage a force to be reckoned with. But, at the same time, 4e has a video game feel that I'm not too keen on. For instance, if the mage really wanted to, he could've leveled an entire forest with his at-will powers and so could a warlock. Instead of healing someone through bandages and perhaps a little divine energy, people are healed by a bright sheen of light that cascades from the sky. Warriors no longer trade blows, but instead trade video game moves as if I was swirling around an arcade joystick to pull off some crazy stunt. Example: my dwarf's "Reaping Strike" could've been taken from E. Honda's "Thousand Palm Strike" from Street Fighter II.
While the powers are neat and add a little flavor to the game--and I'm excited what sort of powers a character will be able to perform at higher levels--the use of the powers, and there extreme prevalence, loses the nit and grit and rough (very rough) historical feel that I like and have replaced it with pixelated in-your-face fantasy.
But, you know, it was only the first game. So...maybe it just takes a little time to get used to."
..
We played. 5 hours straight. I DMed. I didn't like it. 3 players liked it, 3 disliked it. One said he'd never play that crap again.
Here are my gut feelings and experiences:
1. Characters are all munchkins who can never die (unless they get CtG on the ground or the DM). I managed to kill 3 characters only by targeting singles by kobolds who would die just to kill a character.
2. WTF is the point of feats now that they've been replaced with epic level abilities?
3. It wasn't fun to run a game where they could just as well be playing a video game.
4. It's a pain for the DM because there are TOO DANG MANY DINKY MODIFIERS to pile on monsters, pc's
5. There's no "beginner level" for the game. It goes right to epic.
6. It's even more magic item heavy-dependent than 3.5 was
7. You don't know if anything's broken yet because it starts out COMPLETELY OUT OF HAND.
8. Wizards are annoyingly powerful at first level, moreso than all the other classes
9. I think there are meaningless levels of complexity to this game if this is how it's going to be done. What's the point of skills, 4 AC's (including saves), and feats again? Why are they there if it's become simply a D&D miniatures wargame? It fails at being anythign other than D&D mini's. The role-playing aspect feels VERY ABSENT. In comparison, never for a moment, even with constant fighting going on in 3.5 did it feel like it WASN'T a role-playing game..now...no, it doesnt' feel like a fun role playign game. If I wanted to play (or worse RUN) a computer game, I'd play a computer game. Is it not fun as a computer game on a tabletop? That's what I'm saying.
10. I think it's going to be an inferior way to play a campaign. You start out with massive amounts of powers and go where? To REALLY massive amounts of powers. That sort of thing isn't conducive to campaigns.
What did I like?
1. PC's have more options for at least the first encounter
2. The artwork is really ugly (I like ugly artwork) and kind of looks like computer generated on top of a scribble job someone did on a mac. It's not as ugly as Planescape (I thought PS and the 1e DMG had the ugliest artwork prior to DT's stuff..and hence definately wins the ugly award).
3. I hate to say it, but I'm glad it was hacked and pirated because I'm going to be a lot more choosy about what I buy in the future and chances are there will be a lot more critical reviews out there (unlike 3.5E, where you had mean-spirited-fanboys coming out of the woodwork to defend meaningless issues on clearly inferior products like someone was questioning their patriotism or something).
4. I like that the encounters are cleanly laid out (from a DM standpoint). The adventures have clearly evolved (most likely through the RPGA's pioneering of scenario formatting and DM feedback).
5. I like that the d4 is still used sometimes.
6. I like that it can be played on MAPTOOLS.
One of my players' reviews was thus:
As for my review of 4e, I'm teetering on the fence. It's...different. The differences in the rules I can overcome, but I'm not quite sure what to do with this "marking" thing. And it was cool to see a 1st level mage a force to be reckoned with. But, at the same time, 4e has a video game feel that I'm not too keen on. For instance, if the mage really wanted to, he could've leveled an entire forest with his at-will powers and so could a warlock. Instead of healing someone through bandages and perhaps a little divine energy, people are healed by a bright sheen of light that cascades from the sky. Warriors no longer trade blows, but instead trade video game moves as if I was swirling around an arcade joystick to pull off some crazy stunt. Example: my dwarf's "Reaping Strike" could've been taken from E. Honda's "Thousand Palm Strike" from Street Fighter II.
While the powers are neat and add a little flavor to the game--and I'm excited what sort of powers a character will be able to perform at higher levels--the use of the powers, and there extreme prevalence, loses the nit and grit and rough (very rough) historical feel that I like and have replaced it with pixelated in-your-face fantasy.
But, you know, it was only the first game. So...maybe it just takes a little time to get used to."
..
Thunderfoot
Hero
DMG - Overall this book is a gem!
A few things however that look out of place:
Diseases with levels is ridiculous, disease is a danger of unfortunate actions, whether through ignorance or stupidity. Also the fact that no disease is fatal is a little unbelievable.
Poisons - no fatal poisons is about as likely as a mouse with an allergy to cheese.
Traps and hazards - I don't know who thought to break these two up but you deserve a raise and a long vacation. Hazards are what most people think of as traps. However, the trap section states that traps damage, harry or impede - this is false - traps are meant to kill, period. Otherwise its a waste of resources. So again, a trap that cannot kill is out of place.
The idea that all games are taking place in the PoL is evident but can be ignored for the most part (although the crap about treasure including Astral diamonds as a form of currency in the heavenly and Astral realms made me gag.) As someone who has never liked the concept of Planscape, trying to 'force' that aspect as a core concept is appalling to me.
Magic parcels are an interesting concept but I have this feeling that it will lead to Monty Haul very quickly. (I will have to play test to confirm of course, but a level + 5 magic item as a 1st level parcel just seems wrong.)
XP makes much more sense in its explanation this time around, even though the system is virtually unchanged, the fact that they give you the formula instead of the end result allows for a better scaling than guesstimating. (especially since I have 12 players)
After my complaint of putting the magic items in the PHB, I'm glad to see that artifacts are handled exclusively as the purview of the DM still.
Minions are going to be a problem, I can just feel it, great idea, but I am unsure of the concept of one-shot bad-guy that isn't just a peon. 1/4 XP is a good idea, but I think at hight levels that may still be too much. (Again, playtesting will tell the tale.)
The Monster Manual works well inside the scope of the rules, so I will say this is the strongest of the three books. (But then again, how hard is it to make a book with stats and figures?)
A few things however that look out of place:
Diseases with levels is ridiculous, disease is a danger of unfortunate actions, whether through ignorance or stupidity. Also the fact that no disease is fatal is a little unbelievable.
Poisons - no fatal poisons is about as likely as a mouse with an allergy to cheese.
Traps and hazards - I don't know who thought to break these two up but you deserve a raise and a long vacation. Hazards are what most people think of as traps. However, the trap section states that traps damage, harry or impede - this is false - traps are meant to kill, period. Otherwise its a waste of resources. So again, a trap that cannot kill is out of place.
The idea that all games are taking place in the PoL is evident but can be ignored for the most part (although the crap about treasure including Astral diamonds as a form of currency in the heavenly and Astral realms made me gag.) As someone who has never liked the concept of Planscape, trying to 'force' that aspect as a core concept is appalling to me.
Magic parcels are an interesting concept but I have this feeling that it will lead to Monty Haul very quickly. (I will have to play test to confirm of course, but a level + 5 magic item as a 1st level parcel just seems wrong.)
XP makes much more sense in its explanation this time around, even though the system is virtually unchanged, the fact that they give you the formula instead of the end result allows for a better scaling than guesstimating. (especially since I have 12 players)
After my complaint of putting the magic items in the PHB, I'm glad to see that artifacts are handled exclusively as the purview of the DM still.
Minions are going to be a problem, I can just feel it, great idea, but I am unsure of the concept of one-shot bad-guy that isn't just a peon. 1/4 XP is a good idea, but I think at hight levels that may still be too much. (Again, playtesting will tell the tale.)
The Monster Manual works well inside the scope of the rules, so I will say this is the strongest of the three books. (But then again, how hard is it to make a book with stats and figures?)
Wisdom Penalty
First Post
The thing I hate about 4E is that there's not more information - they could and should have tripled the length of the powers, feats, etc. lists. I don't care how big the book got.
I also dislike the political correctness of mixing gender pronouns. Stupid.
Otherwise than the political correctness thing, 4E is the child of 1E.
And 1E was, by far and away, my favorite edition of D&D. Until now.
Wis
I also dislike the political correctness of mixing gender pronouns. Stupid.
Otherwise than the political correctness thing, 4E is the child of 1E.
And 1E was, by far and away, my favorite edition of D&D. Until now.
Wis
thedungeondelver
Adventurer
I find it interesting that a great deal of the complaints about 4e leveled here are the same ones that a lot of us fans of older editions had about 3e. In fact, I'd say the vast majority are the same. Combat is too clunky. PCs are now nigh-invulnerable superheroes. Magic is too different. Monsters are just bundles of stats. It feels like a video game. Too much arbitrary change.
I don't mock; it's just that it's very interesting. I've got this weird sense of deja vu, I guess.
With that said, those are all my arguments about 4e. That, plus it is effectively not D&D any more. Not for me. And I'd still like an explanation why Greyhawk was swept under the rug. I mean, seriously.
Henry
Autoexreginated
Y'know, there are other threads on this forum, and if the topic isn't to your liking, there's no sense in coming in to deliver personal insults. I'm not saying to stop posting in this thread, but if it's nowhere near topic, I'm going to ask you to stop.Mourn said:
This goes for anyone else, too.
Similar Threads
