D&D 4E Should I play 4e?

ad_hoc · Jun 5, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
So? Something being "not the biggest" doesn't mean *random person* won't like it. I mean by your argument we oughtnt to teach anyone any game other than 5E, since all RPGs are less popular than 5E!

I didn't say it is an absolute.

I said it is something to think about.

New players are less likely to like it so you may not be able to get a group going.

It's a factor.

Joshua Randall · Jun 5, 2019

New players are less likely to be familiar with not-5e, which may or may not mean they are less likely to enjoy it.

I consider it my sacred duty to expose my "give me D&D or give me death!" friends to as many hippie indie games as possible. As well as random strangers at conventions. And guess what? Some of them end up liking those games.

Tony Vargas · Jun 5, 2019

Joshua Randall said:
New players are less likely to be familiar with not-5e, which may or may not mean they are less likely to enjoy it.

I consider it my sacred duty to expose my "give me D&D or give me death!" friends to as many hippie indie games as possible. As well as random strangers at conventions. And guess what? Some of them end up liking those games.

5e is half-way through a 'typical' 10 year edition cycle, and has ridden a surge of interest in TT gaming and 80s nostalgia to a full-fledged come-back. Doubtless, more people have tried 5e in the last 5 years than ever tried 4e in the few years it was in print, and presumably more than tried it's rival PF, or even all of 3.x/PF.

So, yeah, there's been a freshening up of the player base, and 5e is setting a new watermark for what D&D is. It just happens to be really close to the watermark of what D&D was, set 20-30 years ago.

Charlaquin said:
No surprise, GNS was always just edition covert ops.

GNS was a product of prior RPG hostilities, waged on UseNet in the 90s, ROLE v ROLL. Bad Rules make Good Games. Three-fold Theory. All went into the Forge and came out GNS. Pretentious unintuitive jargon, weaponized for the edition wars. The Forge even had to deprecate GNS and substitute more elaborate jargon that was yet even more arcane, because people had started to attach meaning to the GNS terms - and it is not for the common people to understand such rarefied matters, no, nor even be able to speak of them.

ad_hoc · Jun 5, 2019

Joshua Randall said:
New players are less likely to be familiar with not-5e, which may or may not mean they are less likely to enjoy it.

I consider it my sacred duty to expose my "give me D&D or give me death!" friends to as many hippie indie games as possible. As well as random strangers at conventions. And guess what? Some of them end up liking those games.

We have the numbers though.

We know that 4e was not popular.

I didn't say that some people wouldn't like it. Just fewer people will like playing 4e than 5e. That is a factor to consider. It's okay to be okay with it too.

Immortal Sun · Jun 6, 2019

ad_hoc said:
We have the numbers though.

We know that 4e was not popular.

I didn't say that some people wouldn't like it. Just fewer people will like playing 4e than 5e. That is a factor to consider. It's okay to be okay with it too.

Hold up there bubba. 4e was perhaps not as popular as 3.5, but it was still popular. It didn't drop D&D off the charts or turn it into an unknown game.

Something being "not as popular as this other thing" does not translate to something being "not popular".

HJFudge · Jun 6, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
Hold up there bubba. 4e was perhaps not as popular as 3.5, but it was still popular. It didn't drop D&D off the charts or turn it into an unknown game.

Something being "not as popular as this other thing" does not translate to something being "not popular".

Edgar Allen Poe's work wasnt popular either, back in his day. Moby Dick was roundly panned by the literary community at a time.

And the books popular then? No one has heard of them today. Just food for thought!

Greg K · Jun 6, 2019

I liked several things about D&D 4e. However, when I look at it, the following always crosses my mind:
1. I don't like Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies so I know that I will never run or play those levels.
2. Things that I want are spread out across too many books and Dragon Magazine
3. Too many specific names on feats and powers (e.g. the deity named feats). Trying to rename feats and powers or changing power descriptions to fit my campaign setting is going to be a reference nightmare for my players.
4. When I look at the power system, I think to myself, "Hero System does powers better so why not just use Fantasy Hero 4e or 5e?" (which is why I laughed when [MENTION=6563]Azzy[/MENTION] told [MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] that he would not like Hero System).

However, to the OP, if it looks interesting to you, give it a try.

SovietDM · Jun 6, 2019

I don't know if it's your spot of tea, but you should try it, mate.

Tony Vargas · Jun 6, 2019

Greg K said:
I liked several things about D&D 4e. However, when I look at it, the following always crosses my mind:
1. I don't like Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies so I know that I will never run or play those levels.

Technically, they were optional. I always wondered why...

3. Too many specific names on feats and powers (e.g. the deity named feats)

Overt IP-establishment everywhere.

One nephariuos conspiracy theory had it that 4e was meant to "kill" the OGL.

4. When I look at the power system, I think to myself, "Hero System does powers better so why not just use Fantasy Hero 4e or 5e?" (which is why I laughed when [MENTION=6563]Azzy[/MENTION] told [MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] that he would not like Hero System).

4e power design did feel like they were working with some kind of simple, not quite elegant system behind the curtain, that, if they'd just published it, might be been 20 pages, and players wouldn't have needed thousands of powers,just made their own.

And we know how well that worked for Hero.