Disappointed in 4e

[Delta]

I love how people who've never played the game talk about the various merits and flaws.

Love it.

Please Dragonwrite, do go on.

I'm at least as bemused by people who bought all the books prior to doing research to see whether they liked the game or not. That completely perplexes me.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I'm at least as bemused by people who bought all the books prior to doing research to see whether they liked the game or not. That completely perplexes me.

This is a good point.

It's a shame that such people couldn't find a group and sit in and play a few sessions with friends who already have the books.

My friends and I started 4e not with the core rules, but with the introductory module. A wise investment for anyone who wants to toe dip as a group. I hear that the new introductory boxed set is an even better value.

Another important point is that all the reading in the world does not equal playing. Games Play != Reading.

 

[Nikosandros]

In the years since then I have managed to track down most of the books I sold back then, but that one action taught me the importance of holding on to all of my books up until the point where I've read them and come to the conclusion that I'll never have any use for them at all

I've never sold a single RPG item, even those that I'm unlikely to ever use.

 

[Remathilis]

When Wizards first announced 4e, I was really excited. I thought it would be really cool. So, a few months before it came out, I went out and sold all my 3.x books to Half Price Books. When I finally got the books...they were OK. I have played a campaign for 4 months and we have agreed...3e is better.

Firstly, you are entitled to your opinion. Barring the stupid move of selling your 3.X materials off (never sell an edition of D&D off until your 2 years into the next; word of advice).

That said, I kinda agree with you. 4e strikes me as a combination of good ideas and play fixes, I think few if anyone stopped to look and see what the complete package would look like. Subtle nods to nostalgia aside, there are plenty of things that appear to be good fixes in isolation, but when mixed in the whole package come off as blah.

1) The extreme cookie-cutterness of the characters.

This comes from the powers (which I'll address below) and the fact powers are only allowed to do so many things. The classes themselves don't feel cookie cutter compared to each other (a fighter does play different than a wizard, unified mechanic aside) but power/resolution system coupled with (As the OP said) more tightly enforced roles (which is good for character generation, but limiting in play).

2) The extreme tendency for 'balance' and 'fun'. The whole "economy of actions" is stupid and annoying.

Going to disagree with you here: while 4e's economy of actions might be very limited, the laize-faire market of 3e was overwhelming for exactly the reasons you list: summoners, necromancers, animal companions, and other "sidekick" characters. The problem became common at higher-levels that the summoned creatures took as long (if not longer) to resolve than the player who summoned them. This was do the monsters having full-attacks and complicated SLA's in their own right, making each summon a mini-PC, and slowing game down immensely for someone who'se combat round consisted of a.) casting a spell (or more than one with quicken) and resolving b.) having a summon full-attack (2-3 attacks/rd) a foe and c.) resolving any actions your familiar/animal companion/homunculus/mount/whatever might be doing.

Compared to a non-spellcasters "full attack and go back to sleep" round, spellcaster/summoners were a nightmare.

3)The powers. I thought "Hey, everyone gets cool powers" was a good goal...until I read what our good friends at WoTC came up with.

Here is the root of my problem. Most of the powers are simply "hit: damage + effect" system. Arcane powers are "damage + negative status ailment", divine powers are "damage + allies get benefit" and martial is "higher damage + maybe an ailment, buff, or move". There is some blur, but there are few powers that don't fit the "damage + something" system.

I know WotC wanted everyone to feel the rush of attacking (and not wasting rounds solely on buffing or healing) but more effects that didn't fit the "damage + effect" structure would have seemed more...complete.

4) The hit point spike.

While I do not lament first-round "anti-combats" that seemed less than cinematic, the HP spike does lead to slower, drawn out combats that before would have been simple. Good for bigger battles, but after a while, they get repetitive.

5) The wizard nerf.

Wizards needed something of a nerf, they got the whole enchilada. Most of their spells do far too little damage; and the loss of spells in summoning, enchantment, and necromancy makes them feel very "blaster" and not much else. Where are the polymorph effects (not the broken spell polymorph, but the "level 1: turn into an orc" effects?) Where are the "summon skeletal warrior to fight for you for 5 min" effects? Where are the "dominate a foe to take your blows for you like a succubus does" effects? Where are the "make your foes flee from your fearful illusion" effects?

Oh, right. Arcane power. Or PHB2. Or beyond.

6) Rituals.

I love the concept, but some of those rituals aren't worth the gp. The combination of cost and reduction of power has made many not worth it, and the limited list so far has been less than inspiring. Like the OP, I'd hoped the summons, animations, and other "high cost in XP/GP" spells were here. Sadly, many are just gone (wish/anyspell powers, atonement).

7) Lack of Verisimilitude. Some things, frankly, don't make sense.

This doesn't bother me anymore like it should. While the 3.X part of my mind asked "well, what ritual DOES a wizard use to make a skeleton or a shield guardian?" I don't mind that knowledge being verboten to players. It stresses a "good vs. evil" theme stronger as the bad-guys have forbidden lore no PC should possess.

(It does make evil PCs, or those who seek that knowledge, come up the poorer. Esp. true of evil divine PCs)

That said, I don't stress out about the existence of minions, or where golems come from.

-----

If I can add my own "I hate this" to the pile; the treatment of some classic literary monsters has been abysmal. Specifically, I speak of lycanthropes that no longer spread the curse, raksasha's who take damage from swords and spells like any other monster (and don't fear a blessed bolt anymore) and vampires who don't fear the sun (though to be fair, Dracula didn't either) but it could easily extend to the loss of DR/SR as a tool to force specific tactics or special weaknesses. This, of course, was a result of PCs whose powers are limited in nature and it was designed to no longer punish PCs in specific fights (like spellcasters vs. golems or rogues vs. undead) but it does darken the sky when vampires, golems and raksashas are just another bundle of hp and special powers...

 

[Darrin Drader]

I've never sold a single RPG item, even those that I'm unlikely to ever use.

I rarely do, but there are some that I have deemed were just taking up space, so I found something to do with them. There are certain settings that I just have no interest in, or feel that I could do better with myself, there are some rules supplements where I didn't like the direction the rules went, and other books that looked cool when I bought them but ended up being fairly uninspiring. Some examples of some books I deemed that I could live without: the adventure modules for the Avatar Trilogy, the 3.0 splats, and Sheoloth: City of the Drow. Generally though, I would rather store books than get rid of them completely.

 

[Imban]

Another important point is that all the reading in the world does not equal playing. Games Play != Reading.

This totally perplexes me. I mean, if I had a dollar for every time I read something in a RPG, thought it was terrible, then ended up liking it... well, I'd still be penniless.

For me, play can bring out problems with a text that aren't visible on a casual read, and acts as a much quicker way to gather basic data about a system than theory, but in my experience "reads bad plays good" doesn't exist unless you're bad at reading. The canonical example (in fact, I believe the introduction of that term to the D&D canon) of Mystic Theurge and the common example of Warlock fully bear this out. It's just that saying Warlock "reads bad" doesn't involve accepting blame, while blaming yourself for reading it and crying "14400 USES PER DAY!!!" does.

"Reads good plays bad" sure exists, though, and is the main thing I'd be looking for in playtesting.

EDIT: Whoops. It occurred to me after I posted that "reads bad plays good" certainly exists, when the way something is presented is crappy such that it obfuscates the good design underneath. That's not 4e, though, that's mostly old and crappily-written books.

 

[CardinalXimenes]

Wizards needed something of a nerf, they got the whole enchilada. Most of their spells do far too little damage; and the loss of spells in summoning, enchantment, and necromancy makes them feel very "blaster" and not much else. Where are the polymorph effects (not the broken spell polymorph, but the "level 1: turn into an orc" effects?) Where are the "summon skeletal warrior to fight for you for 5 min" effects? Where are the "dominate a foe to take your blows for you like a succubus does" effects? Where are the "make your foes flee from your fearful illusion" effects?

I have to take exception to this. If I drop a Scorching Burst with my 1st level wizard and catch two monsters in the radius, I'm doing potentially 2d6+8 damage, which compares very respectably with a dual bastard-sword ranger Twin Striking. Put three monsters inside the burst, and my damage potential with at-wills blows away any other class. Wizards do plenty of damage, they just don't do it all to one monster.

With regard to your other examples....

1) Want to appear to be an orc? Put on a hood, use Prestidigitation to make a few coloring changes, Ghost Sound to mimic an orc's voice, and then _roll Bluff_. Spells that serve as zero-effort problem solvers are no longer thick on the ground. Some people insist that prior editions provided the clever wizard player with endless opportunities for cunning usage of his spells to overcome challenges. This belief makes little room for the idiot wizard's player, who could also succeed just by using the spells exactly as they were written. Magic should not be the optimal solution to every problem, and 3.x was a particularly grievous offender in making this the case.

2) Want to summon a skeleton to fight for you for five minutes? All right- undead bones erupt from the earth beneath your foes to rend them to pieces, the spectral arms impervious to the flailing of their victims. Just use the power block for Cloud of Daggers and refluff. You don't even have to change the damage type if you apply a little creativity- maybe Scorching Burst is a brief gate to Hell through which you drag the burning spirits of the damned to claw at your enemies. Or you want your servant to move things and manipulate objects for you? Mage Hand is your at-will cantrip.

3) Dominate your foes? That's not what a wizard does. Check in when the psion turns up; I'm sure he'll have something along these lines. Magic goodness has been parceled out now, and just as the psion is not likely to have at-will mini-fireballs to throw around, neither does the wizard get fine-tuned mental control of other people. This is a drastic break from former editions. They gave the wizard "all magic" as his baliwick, and then produced subclasses that could be as good as the wizard in their specialty and inferior in just about every other way. Look at the poor 1e Illusionist- he doesn't even _get_ 8th or 9th level spells.

4) Make your foes flee from your fearful illusion? See above.

I liked wizards a lot in earlier editions, and I tended to play more of them than any other class. In part, this was because martial characters were so enormously tedious in combat. In another part, it was because magical characters were so good outside of combat. Despite this, I have to agree that wizards desperately needed the nerfbat, and I've got no regrets that WotC applied it in 4e. The wizard is, in general, more limited, weaker-powered, and less capable than in 3.x. And this is a Good Thing to me.

 

[CardinalXimenes]

For me, play can bring out problems with a text that aren't visible on a casual read, and acts as a much quicker way to gather basic data about a system than theory, but in my experience "reads bad plays good" doesn't exist unless you're bad at reading.

I think you are being far too charitable towards human nature in presuming that the default state for reading games is a coolly disinterested observation of the material with a full understanding of all the ramifications of what is said. You don't have to be "bad at reading" to not fully comprehend the consequences of a Push 1 power on grid-based combat with a presumed 5 hostile enemies per fight and 4 other players with their own sets of abilities. If a single person could do it, designers wouldn't need playtesting. They'd just need to not be "bad at reading" their own writing.

 

[ExploderWizard]

3) Dominate your foes? That's not what a wizard does.

Oh really? Check out the 4E Confusion spell.

The only thing confusing about the spell is why its called confusion. Mental damage and a short duration mind control is what you get. The duration makes it impossible to use the controlled creature for anything useful except...............you guessed it, inflicting more damage.

 

[CardinalXimenes]

Oh really? Check out the 4E Confusion spell.

The only thing confusing about the spell is why its called confusion. Mental damage and a short duration mind control is what you get. The duration makes it impossible to use the controlled creature for anything useful except...............you guessed it, inflicting more damage.

I'm using Dominate in the 3.x sense, and that's simply outside the wizard's baliwick. Confusion is just one of those little-taste-of-it spells that wizards get, just as I expect other wizard types will get splashes of elemental damage shtick.