Falling off the 4ed bandwagon

[renau1g]

What about cannons? Those are pretty much a staple of a lot of games I run (pirate-y themed ones)

 

[Raven Crowking]

Everyone's checklist is different. And it is such a colossal waste of time to try to focus on one particular box and act as though it shouldn't be on someone else's list -- or that it is the entirety of someone else's list.

Or that it is even on someone else's list.

Well said.

 

[celloshane]

I disagree.

That's excellent as differing viewpoints are vital to lively debate. Since debate is often useful for shaping informed opinions I must now ask, do you have a rebuttal?

As for the OP, I've been frustrated with 4e's fit for my gaming style for some time now. There are many features of 4e I like, while others are very off-putting. It's like putting on a pair of pants and finding that one measurement is perfect but the other is way off. You want to keep the pants because they're in style, but you know someone's going to have to do some major tailoring before you can wear them.

I'm not ready to give up on houseruling 4e yet. I've got a couple ideas, but I haven't gotten very far on writing them down and codifying them into actual rules yet. It's been mentioned before but it bears repeating: A 4e version of Unearthed Arcana (3e style) would probably help a lot. All in all it's very frustrating, both 3.x and 4e need a significant amount of modification (that I don't really have time for) but I'm not knowledgeable enough about other systems to know if I should be looking at another one. (Well not counting PF, TB, and a little RQ, all of which have some elements I like). Anyway, like Merc I'm still examining my options and trying to decide which is best for me.

 

[firesnakearies]

Every opinion on a game is best thought of as a checklist. 3e will check a greater number boxes of priorities for some players, 4e for others. These boxes might be things like "this game reminds me of my favorite gaming days in my youth" or "my wife loves this edition and I don't like sleeping on the couch". Everyone's checklist is different. And it is such a colossal waste of time to try to focus on one particular box and act as though it shouldn't be on someone else's list -- or that it is the entirety of someone else's list.

This is very well said, and rings true to me.


$

 

[Zustiur]

I fall in the category (if there is such a thing) of slowly pulling myself onto the bandwagon.
I didn't like the sound of 4E when I heard about it pre-release. I didn't like the way the book of nine swords (I think that was the book) classes worked.
I got the 4E books and immediately hated the system. BUT as my only regular gaming group was switching to 4E I made sure I gave it a go.

At first all the things I hated really got in the way, and I toyed with the idea of leaving the group. Then we reached a suitable point where I could swap out my character for a new one, and take better advantage of the intra-party role-playing. This made a tenfold difference to my enjoyment.

Over a year later and I definitely look forward to each session (monthly), and I'm even getting ideas of how I'd run a 4E game myself.
BUT most if not all of my original gripes are still present. What I'm realizing is that to me, 4E is a separate game. I love playing it, but to me it doesn't capture the D&D feeling. RPG? Sure. Fantasy? Sure. D&D, no not really.

There are just too many 'sacred cows' of D&D missing from 4E from my perspective. However, the more I read threads like this one, the more I'm convinced 4E isn't the problem. The group/DM/campaign is the problem.

I could enjoy 4E a lot more if minor things were changed but as yet the only houserules we seem to have are to do with action points.

One thing I'd really really like to try, is to forget about which power's a character knows. Each character would be able to use any power from their class.
I'm not sure how this would fit together exactly, but I'm thinking along the lines of - you still follow the #'s for how many you can use per encounter, per day etc. But you can choose from any of your available powers at the start of that period.
i.e. at the start of the day you pick your daily powers.
After each short rest you pick your encounter powers.
Each round you pick whatever at-will you feel like using.

What I suggest is discussing your complaints with the players. If they're all happy with things exactly as they are, I don't advise changing anything. If they are fed up with some of the same things, then see what suggestions they can come up with.

But mainly, one thing I think you may be struggling with (and one of my personal gripes) is that powers dictate how players think. I have these powers therefore that's all I can do. Try taking their at will powers away for an encounter and saying "You know what kinds of things at wills can do, so just say I'm going to do this or that to get this or the other benefit, and we'll work it out from there." Use the famous p.42 to adjudicate.

After they've done that for one encounter they should be more open minded about trying interesting tactics instead of always using the same powers.

 

[SSquirrel]

IMO, the reason no game does exactly what I want it to is because I want mutually exclusive things, only all at once. I want the speed and flexibility of rules-light, but I want the tinkering and system mastery of rules-heavy. I want heavy RP, but I also want tons of die-rolling action. I want the constant danger of immediate death, but I want PCs to be robust. I want exotic classes and races, but I also want traditional swords & horses fantasy. I want magic swords, lightsabers, The Computer, vampire slayers, rat-catchers, giant robots, and mi-go.

See except for the speed and flexibility requirement, you can accomplish all that playing RIFTS heh. I hesitate to recommend the Palladium system to anyone tho. I love the world story, but ye gods is the system awful

 

[weem]

Every opinion on a game is best thought of as a checklist. 3e will check a greater number boxes of priorities for some players, 4e for others. These boxes might be things like "this game reminds me of my favorite gaming days in my youth" or "my wife loves this edition and I don't like sleeping on the couch". Everyone's checklist is different. And it is such a colossal waste of time to try to focus on one particular box and act as though it shouldn't be on someone else's list -- or that it is the entirety of someone else's list.

Yes indeed - this is a great way of framing the issue, I dig it.

 

[Mark]

Every opinion on a game is best thought of as a checklist. 3e will check a greater number boxes of priorities for some players, 4e for others. These boxes might be things like "this game reminds me of my favorite gaming days in my youth" or "my wife loves this edition and I don't like sleeping on the couch". Everyone's checklist is different. And it is such a colossal waste of time to try to focus on one particular box and act as though it shouldn't be on someone else's list -- or that it is the entirety of someone else's list.

The question is sometimes not a matter of which boxes are checked but whether or not some games even have certain boxes available for checking.

 

[ggroy]

I could enjoy 4E a lot more if minor things were changed but as yet the only houserules we seem to have are to do with action points.

One thing I'd really really like to try, is to forget about which power's a character knows. Each character would be able to use any power from their class.

I've allowed any encounter and any daily powers to be used in combat, without choosing in advance which ones. It makes things easier.

Another house rule I've used is that for the cost of two action points, an additional encounter power can be used again in the same combat encounter (after all the encounter powers have already been used up).

 

[Engilbrand]

Why would they need to spend multiple Action Points to use another Encounter Power? You can do that anyway.