Wormwood
Adventurer
So very true!
4e has taken my group of 5 players and turned 4 into new, enthusiastic DMs.
No other game---ever---has done the same.
I've experienced D&D4
- Thread starter Bullgrit
- Start date
- Status
4e has taken my group of 5 players and turned 4 into new, enthusiastic DMs.
No other game---ever---has done the same.
I find it very sad that people think that playing one session of a game reveals to them the true nature of the game.
But it's harder when you go in with preconceptions. There might be this belief that you weren't going to pass judgement on it, but you did.
"I thought the new edition was supposed to make the game easier and smoother, especially when running combat. But what it really did was make combat more complicated and longer."
See? Preconception, which actually leads to a wrong characterisation of the game. What makes this preconception worse is that it manages to exist despite lots of threads on EN World talking about the length and complexity of combat in 4e. (Low-level 4e combat takes longer than equivalent combats in 3e. High-level combat takes less time. There is debate about where the crossover is.).
This isn't to say that several more sessions will make you, Bullgrit, suddenly like 4e. It might give you a better appreciate for aspects of the game. (And, from my personal experience, the game moves from being "good" to being "exceptional" when Paragon levels are hit, but you can't start at Paragon because you don't know the game well enough to play it at that level - sadly, you're likely never to experience them.)
However, I urge you to compare your first game of 4e to one of my very early games of AD&D... where I played a 1st level magic-user with the single spell of shocking grasp.
But it's harder when you go in with preconceptions. There might be this belief that you weren't going to pass judgement on it, but you did.
"I thought the new edition was supposed to make the game easier and smoother, especially when running combat. But what it really did was make combat more complicated and longer."
See? Preconception, which actually leads to a wrong characterisation of the game. What makes this preconception worse is that it manages to exist despite lots of threads on EN World talking about the length and complexity of combat in 4e. (Low-level 4e combat takes longer than equivalent combats in 3e. High-level combat takes less time. There is debate about where the crossover is.).
This isn't to say that several more sessions will make you, Bullgrit, suddenly like 4e. It might give you a better appreciate for aspects of the game. (And, from my personal experience, the game moves from being "good" to being "exceptional" when Paragon levels are hit, but you can't start at Paragon because you don't know the game well enough to play it at that level - sadly, you're likely never to experience them.)
However, I urge you to compare your first game of 4e to one of my very early games of AD&D... where I played a 1st level magic-user with the single spell of shocking grasp.
It bothered me a little at first, but I eventually came to the conclusion that *everyone* having multiple things they can do starting out at level 1 and wizards having more to do at level 1 than previously made up for quite a bit.
Sometimes I did miss the big wizard list (it was fun to have that many options), but it often slowed the game down to a crawl, and could suck if it was someone else you had to wait on.
I would like to see everyone get more utility powers available (especially non-combat, and especially wizards). Something *slightly* more accessible than rituals, slightly more than the current system, but less than 3E.
unan oranis
First Post
sorry bullgrit, your opinion is *wrong*.
HA!
Seriously though, your main "problem" with 4e seems to be way out of proportion with what I would consider legitimate issues (that you bring up in the same well written piece, btw).
One of the comments on your blog says it all; referring to a "what if" scenario where you stumbled across the 4e phb with all instances of the text "dungeons and dragons" snipped out - lets just say I fell out of my chair laughing.
You must recognize that to reach such a conclusion as yours or his you have to be more than extremely familiar with all the grooves and notches of previous editions mathematics - you have to be an absolute purist about the games structure, to such a degree as to be potentially blind to common perception.
Case in point, even those most familiar to you had a different reaction than you anticipated with the bdnd experiment, eh?
Yes it's a different flavor, and yes you might not like that flavor, but that doesn't mean it ain't ice cream.
As for the other issues, they've been discussed to death here - obviously some have problems where others don't.
Perhaps you will also discover persistent grind as an issue for example, whereas for whatever reason some people never do.
I would recommend reserving judgment until you get the swing of things.
ps. you coy dawg, trying not to stir the pot, lol... wink wink nudge nudge (and how exactly are people going to respond to your post without referring at all to the subject?)
HA!
Seriously though, your main "problem" with 4e seems to be way out of proportion with what I would consider legitimate issues (that you bring up in the same well written piece, btw).
One of the comments on your blog says it all; referring to a "what if" scenario where you stumbled across the 4e phb with all instances of the text "dungeons and dragons" snipped out - lets just say I fell out of my chair laughing.
You must recognize that to reach such a conclusion as yours or his you have to be more than extremely familiar with all the grooves and notches of previous editions mathematics - you have to be an absolute purist about the games structure, to such a degree as to be potentially blind to common perception.
Case in point, even those most familiar to you had a different reaction than you anticipated with the bdnd experiment, eh?
Yes it's a different flavor, and yes you might not like that flavor, but that doesn't mean it ain't ice cream.
As for the other issues, they've been discussed to death here - obviously some have problems where others don't.
Perhaps you will also discover persistent grind as an issue for example, whereas for whatever reason some people never do.
I would recommend reserving judgment until you get the swing of things.
ps. you coy dawg, trying not to stir the pot, lol... wink wink nudge nudge (and how exactly are people going to respond to your post without referring at all to the subject?)
Last edited:
Klaus
First Post
Couple of thoughts on your blog post:
Complexity: Yes, your warlord tiefling had a lot of powers... because warlords (and other leaders) are more complex classes. Strikers, otoh, are easier. Specially Archer Rangers and Sorcerers.
Weird Races: WotC will be releasing a set of "D&D Essentials" to lure in new players. One rulebook will have only Humans, Dwarves, Elves, Eladrin and Halflings as PCs. Another book will offer the less-common Dragonborn, Tieflings, Half-Elves, Drow and Half-Orcs.
Lots of HP: Think of it this way: a PC can take about 3-4 hits before he gets Bloodied, and then 3-4 hits before falling. He has the ability to recover from 2-3 hits once per round, and a leader can let them recover more. And monsters take an average of 5 hits before falling (unless it's a minion, then he takes 1 and drop). That's not far from the traditional HP, and tends not to change over a character's career.
Complexity: Yes, your warlord tiefling had a lot of powers... because warlords (and other leaders) are more complex classes. Strikers, otoh, are easier. Specially Archer Rangers and Sorcerers.
Weird Races: WotC will be releasing a set of "D&D Essentials" to lure in new players. One rulebook will have only Humans, Dwarves, Elves, Eladrin and Halflings as PCs. Another book will offer the less-common Dragonborn, Tieflings, Half-Elves, Drow and Half-Orcs.
Lots of HP: Think of it this way: a PC can take about 3-4 hits before he gets Bloodied, and then 3-4 hits before falling. He has the ability to recover from 2-3 hits once per round, and a leader can let them recover more. And monsters take an average of 5 hits before falling (unless it's a minion, then he takes 1 and drop). That's not far from the traditional HP, and tends not to change over a character's career.
As a followup to this, I do enjoy that characters of different types (fighters etc.) now have more options.
On the other hand, it would be nice to have some kind of gradient of simple to complex classes so that newcomers have an easy introduction and advanced players still feel they have freedom.
A
amerigoV
Guest
Much of our perception of the world is based on first impressions. The cover of a book, a movie trailer, a careless comment when you first meet someone. They all have lasting ramifications. And those impressions are shaped by our enviroment (D&D recreated its own expectations through the years). Its up to the designers to make the first impression a good one (I'm not saying 4e failed at this, but it mattered for the OP).
Dude! Shoulda taken Sleep!
Mark Chance
Boingy! Boingy!
Perhaps it was preconception at work, but the point still stands: Bullgrit (and a lot of other people) don't want D&D with combat that is more complicated and takes longer to resolve. I know I don't. If I wanted that in a fantasy game, I'd dust off my goblin horde and play WFB.
unan oranis
First Post
Your missing bullgrit's point entirely; allow me to explain (correct me if I'm wrong bullgrit).
-----------------------------------------------
All previous editions of dnd work like this:
A 1st level pc can take about 1 hit before dieing. This hit will be preceded by little to no warning, with little to no chance of mitigating the circumstances that caused this hit to occur. (see bullgrits bdnd experiment for a play by play of this happening over and over again - a very entertaining read actually).
If a character survives the arbitrary gauntlet over the course of 5-10 weekends, the game "begins" for that character in so much as they can now enjoy some insurance and command over their own destiny.
Incorporating the not so uncommon house-rule of higher hp at first level, or just starting at 5th, is such a deviation from the tradition of dnd that it (comment withheld at bullgrit's request).
Never mind that all previous editions of dnd have incorporated popular house-rules of the older editions.
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the main divide is that the vast majority of people are turned off by getting arbitrarily nuked after spending a lot of time making a character - whereas the rest of us quite enjoy it.
For the record, I would be thrilled to play a bdnd/odnd game and get slaughtered - although I'd like to think I've got what it takes to "make it".
Dude! Shoulda taken Sleep!
Would have loved to. Unfortunately, our DM was playing by the rules... which state that initially, magic-users get *random* spells. (AD&D 1e DMG, page 39)
Initial impressions are important, but once you get to moderate and high complexity games (which is true of most versions of D&D), it's very hard to give an experience that properly reflects how the game will play once you know it.
Cheers!
- Status
Similar Threads
