You don't play 4E, but what did they get RIGHT?

[Aus_Snow]

4e has nothing in it that wasn't already done by some RPG (or supplement) or other.

That said, I have listed 10(? - IIRC) things I thought were good about 4e. Could've been "improvements". Either way, there was a thread, a while back. I responded for a bit of fun, but I did in fact answer honestly as well.

It's not hard to see a few details that are pretty decent. Evidently, some amount of thought went into the game. The big picture, however - heh, in addition to all the other details - is where it fails utterly, IMO.

See the moderator note below, please.

 

[Fabio Andrea Rossi]

The one thing I liked much in 4E is the abundance of character classes available, most of them with individual quirks and game mechanics, more or less balanced.

While it's true that 4E is not the only game nor the only edition having so many classes, it is the one that does it better, imho.

Other than that, healing surges, SSSOD, consistent rules, powers for non casters.

This is amazing and I'd like to see this stay, the rest can go (I'm looking at you, Long Long Combat!).

BTW, anyone knows when we'll be allowed to start speculating on 5E ?

 

[Ariosto]

There is no saving throws made to avoid the effects of a spell, it was my die roll as a spell caster that makes things happen, not the DM rolling for the monster. That is more exciting to me as a player ...

There were occasions decades ago when I had the players make all the rolls. Not only were the monsters' "rolls to save" changed to players' "rolls to hit", but players rolled "saves" to see whether monsters hit them.

Marquee Press made a nifty little game called Legendary Lives, and another called Lost Souls, using that "players roll" principle throughout. White Wolf magazine gave the system a very positive review, as I recall.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

4e has nothing in it that wasn't already done by some RPG (or supplement) or other.

That said, I have listed 10(? - IIRC) things I thought were good about 4e. Could've been "improvements". Either way, there was a thread, a while back. I responded for a bit of fun, but I did in fact answer honestly as well.

It's not hard to see a few details that are pretty decent. Evidently, some amount of thought went into the game. The big picture, however - heh, in addition to all the other details - is where it fails utterly, IMO.

Was this post really neccesary?

In fact, any post in which you unironically go "heh" should be a post that isn't made.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Was this post really neccesary?

In fact, any post in which you unironically go "heh" should be a post that isn't made.

Was this post really necessary?

in fact, any post in which you do nothing but take issue with someone else's having posted, should not be made, but rather - more or less - directed towards a moderator via the "report post" function.


Oh wait. . .

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Was this post really necessary?

in fact, any post in which you do nothing but take issue with someone else's having posted, should not be made, but rather - more or less - directed towards a moderator via the "report post" function.


Oh wait. . .

So your answer is "No."

 

[Smoss]

SW Saga made me excited for 4e as I liked a lot of the changes in it and saw some serious potential. 4E did not live up to what *I* wanted. However, it did have some bits I promptly "appropriated" for my RPG system.

1) Removal of non-proficiency penalties and instead having proficiency bonuses. Yes it is just a change of math, but adding feels easier to people. I reconfigured a LOT of my RPG system to create my 2.5 edition of it by removing as many penalties as seemed logical and making it a bonus based system.

2) Minions. We all love the idea of the mooks to kill and most DMs (like me) HATE to keep track of mook hps, especially for weenies when the PCs roll low damage. I stole that and made EVERYTHING in my system take only one hit (And with taking certain techniques you gain the ability to take more hits - Something PCs and big bads do, but not the general populace or monsters).

And that was all I liked. Those concepts were nice. Some other concepts I could see why they were used (Healing surges and healthy starting hp) but I did not actually like them. Maybe for a different "feel" of a campaign. But I like my games gritty and to feel more realistic... At least as real as a game can be with dragons, magic, and stupid stupid goblins.

But that is just me...
---------------------------------------------------
Smoss
Doulairen

 

[Umbran]

At this point, whether the post was necessary, or rude, or whatever, has become secondary to the fact that the two of you are both getting kinda snotty publicly arguing arguing about it.

Both of you are now in violation of Wheaton's Rule. Fix that. Thanks.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Both of you are now in violation of Wheaton's Rule. Fix that. Thanks.

For those of you unable to access urbandictionary.com (language is NSFW), Wheaton's Rule reads: Don't Be A Dick.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I did have to look that one up.