Dragon Con: A Sight of the Schism in action

[BryonD]

My point is simply this - it's really hard to know who does/doesn't like 4e until they've actually played it,

True, but it does cut both ways. There are plenty of examples of people who played 4E for a while and decided it wasn't getting the job done as well.

and a good game (in whatever edition) is always more fun than a bad one, no matter what system you're using.

True, period.

 

[vagabundo]

I haven't been keeping up with the thread, but just wanted to chime in on my experience with the "schism" at WWD&DGD on Saturday.

I was there all day and spoke to about ten people that had come in to see what was going on. They were a mix of 3e and 4e players, but interestingly all the 3e players said that their opinion of 4e had improved after playing it. More than one used the word "enthused" .

My point is simply this - it's really hard to know who does/doesn't like 4e until they've actually played it, and a good game (in whatever edition) is always more fun than a bad one, no matter what system you're using. Happily, I was in a good game.

Looks like in Brighton, UK, the schism isn't really an issue.

It definitely plays better that it first reads.

Now that I've DM'd for a year or so I will sit down and read through a few pages of pure crunch and enjoy it, I can imagine how these power will play out in the game. When I first read the PHB my eyes crossed.

It plays very well and I really enjoy my prep now.

 

[N0Man]

I only had 4E come up in conversation with a stranger one time, and there was definitely some negativity.

The thing that really got under my skin was that he obviously knew next to nothing about the game, hadn't played it, but constantly was bashing it with phrases that were straight from the 4E cliche criticism handbooks, many of which aren't even true.

"They tried to copy WoW."
"Every class is the same."
"It's totally dumbed down."

I never claimed 4E was the best version, or the only valid version, or any other such nonsense. However, I did refute his claims and gave him specific examples of why he was wrong on his generalizations.

He claimed that, "for example... the ranger plays exactly like that other class... I can't remember which, but you know what I'm talking about, right?"

My answer was, "I'm not sure exactly, since afterall not even every Ranger plays just alike. Are you talking about the type of ranger that is the dual wielding specialist, which is uncommon in itself in 4E, or the type of ranger that is specializing in bows, or the type of ranger that has a beast companion? Or are you referring to some other class that frequently does damage to 2 targets at will that I'm not thinking of? Even the Ranger isn't exactly the same as the Ranger?"

I went on to point out that I had 2 Wizards in my notebook, that not only played different from other classes, but other controllers, and even quite different from eachother! One specialized in lots of powers that had a theme of nature and weather, multi-classed into a divine class, and the other was a wizard (for the cheesegrinder) which had a crazy melee wizard build with tons of weird gimmicks.

 

[NMcCoy]

"They tried to copy WoW."
"Every class is the same."
"It's totally dumbed down."

Not as good as the one I had to deal with, "Wizards are totally overpowered now, they can cast Fireball all day." I patiently replied that no, you can cast Fireball once per day, period, and it doesn't even scale with level anymore, it just does a flat 3d6. They simply scowled at me and replied "Well, there's still ways to make it scale..."

(This was well before Arcane Power was out, and Wizard was widely considered to be the weakest of the classes. I don't know if they were mistaking something else for 4e, or simply venting incoherent "they changed it now it sucks" frustration based on misunderstood rumors.)

 

[Imban]

before Arcane Power was out, and Wizard was widely considered to be the weakest of the classes.

Um, wow. Both at that person who was I guess thinking of something completely different, and this, because Orb Wizards were crazy even from the start, and got crazier in every way with Adventurer's Vault. "You're stunned (save ends)... except Orb of Imposition, Phrenic Crown, and Orb of (Impenetrable Escape/Mental Dominion/Ultimate Imposition). Not even Jesus could save from that."

 

[Henry]

Um, wow. Both at that person who was I guess thinking of something completely different, and this, because Orb Wizards were crazy even from the start, and got crazier in every way with Adventurer's Vault. "You're stunned (save ends)... except Orb of Imposition, Phrenic Crown, and Orb of (Impenetrable Escape/Mental Dominion/Ultimate Imposition). Not even Jesus could save from that."

Funny thing is, most players missed the whole "orb" and "status effects" angle of the wizard, because they were used to wizards being the "save or die" and "direct damage" class. One player in my group back home mainly has a dislike of 4E because the character of the wizard has changed in this manner. He turned his nose at the orb stuff because he couldn't clear a room with a fireball anymore - me introducing him to minions did help a little bit, but it still gave him a dislike because wizards being a "minion killer" is to him a bit like being the best football player in a backwater town - it's nothing special.

 

[Mercule]

I have a player a bit like Henry's. He's always been a wizard fan and was very frustrated for a while because he didn't get to white knight when the party was screwed. He's since adapted to the role of killing minions and weakening everyone else and does quite well. I think he'd still be happier with a sorcerer and he feels 4e redefined the wizard a bit similar to how I feel about the TWF ranger (I don't think that word means what you think it means). But, he acknowledges that it can be a fun role.

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

Just as WotC put fertilizer for an edition war with the "bullet to the head" and "not fun" cracks (among others),

They actually said that?

 

[Shemeska]

They actually said that?

"Bullet to the head" yes, multiple times in one of the podcasts.

 

[Imban]

Funny thing is, most players missed the whole "orb" and "status effects" angle of the wizard, because they were used to wizards being the "save or die" and "direct damage" class.

Well, orb + status effects basically is "save or die", which is why that's a bit confusing. I agree that if you picked up the 4e wizard expecting to play a blaster, you'd end up mighty depressed, though.