4e "getting back to D&D's roots" how?

[Fifth Element]

Keeping in mind here that the "roots" I identify with are more 1e than OD&D.

Ah, there's the rub once again. We can't even agree on what D&D's roots represent, so how could we ever agree that 4E goes back to them?

 

[tankschmidt]

Speaking of elves, when are we going to get our elves who can become invisible at will back?

That's how they were in Chainmail, and that's about as close to D&D's roots as you can get.

True in Chainmail, not true in D&D. According to M&M, the only Chainmail abilities D&D elves receive are their combat bonuses vs. certain creatures. As far as invisibility goes, the common assumption is that Chainmail elves are wearing the elven cloaks described in M&T.

 

[Filcher]

Easy of play, on both sides of the screen.

Less focus on "How are my crops doing this season?" and more focus on "Point us towards the treasure and the princess!" <---- In my mind, this is both a strength and a weakness.

 

[Tigerbunny]

I think I can best illustrate why 4E feels more like "the D&D I played in 1984" to me than anything since with two negative examples.

3E lost me when DMing became an exercise in trying to out-rules-mastery my players in order to have anything like a challenge. The systematization of every aspect of play became a straitjacket for creativity and collaboration.

2E lost me when DMing became an exercise in leading your players by the nose through an elaborate setting full of niggling details - most of which the players might know better than you do, since they were all in mass-market novels. The "canon-ization" of every aspect of setting and flavor left PCs and DMs alike walking on guided tours through an art museum.

4E (at least so far) replicates the sense of "you can do anything at all" that I remember from the old days. Sure, there are lots of rules - but they pretty much only touch on the places I *like* having rules, and the flavor text is eminently separable from the numbers... plus, for the first time in a long time, both DM and players are explicitly encouraged to improvise, re-skin, and make it up as they go along... and actually given some useful tools for doing it.

So to me, 4E is most of the things I liked about 1E and before, plus a whole box full of useful new tools & toys.

Then again, I really don't recognize the flavor of "old school" gaming that the most vocal partisans of it advocate. That's sure not how we played in the 80s.

 

[Ourph]

They're all just mechanics. It still boils down to "I hit it really hard. In the face."

This is the best answer to the edition wars I have seen in a long time.

 

[Calico_Jack73]

I have to agree with all of the folks who say "Ease of Running".

 

[The Little Raven]

Both have an in-depth skill system in which success depends more on rolling a check rather than describing your character's action.

This is not true in 4e. You have to think of the way to use your skill to meet the challenge, not just say "I roll History to succeed." It explicitly spells this out in the Skills chapter of the PHB.

 

[cr0m]

Thanks folks, for a great thread. It sounds like most of you are DMing 4e, which I haven't done yet, so the moving parts I've been able to interact with are character creation and powers.

Character creation is a lot simpler than 3e ever was, especially once people got into multiclassing and other optimization tricks. I really like that I wanted my Dwarf Cleric to be able to Climb, Jump and otherwise get into trouble, and I was able to take a multiclass Ranger feat and get the character I wanted, at 1st level.

The powers... all I can say is, I have a hard time imagining what's happening when I hit someone in the face and my friend gets to make a saving throw.

Less focus on "How are my crops doing this season?"

Dude, what game have you been playing?!? I'm pretty sure there isn't any crop rotation mechanic in any edition.

 

[malraux]

Dude, what game have you been playing?!? I'm pretty sure there isn't any crop rotation mechanic in any edition.

Plant Growth certainly affects how your crops are doing.

 

[tankschmidt]

This is not true in 4e. You have to think of the way to use your skill to meet the challenge, not just say "I roll History to succeed." It explicitly spells this out in the Skills chapter of the PHB.

True, but even when you can describe your solution to the problem, you're still boned if you don't roll well enough. In OD&D, for example, you could describe how to avoid or disable a trap or lie to the king without rolling any dice.