Some thoughts on 4e getting long in the tooth.

[Herobizkit]

I'm going to chime in and add that our group doesn't have ANY books. We use the CB and Compendium exclusively for our gaming needs... except for the Keep on the Shadowfell and its snazzy little reference guide (which I have to assume has been errata'd to death).

We were introduced to 4e using pre-gens, then invested in the CB to make our own characters once the pre-gens hit level two.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I have to disagree. The model adopted for 4E releases, at least initially, was a conscious effort to make later incarnations of the core 3 as important as the initial ones, by simply taking away things that were part of core D&D experience for as long as I can remember, such as druids, bards, frost giants and metallic dragons. You could convert a core-only 2E edition campaign almost directly to 3E, while the same is not true of 4E.

But that has absolutely nothing to do with my point and what I was referencing. wingandsword said that it was virtually impossible to gain an entry into 4E right now because there were just too many books required to start playing... unlike 3E and earlier when you could just use the first 3 books. My point was that you can still just use the first three core books and start playing. No further books or DDI needed.

The fact that you can't import an earlier campaign directly into 4E with the first 3 books because some options appear later, has nothing to do with that. Your point is truthful, but means nothing to my discussion.

 

[wingsandsword]

You can play 4E just as easily with the 'Core 3' as you could with any previous edition. There is no more expectation to use all the books as there was any time previous. Since you apparently have never learned how to play 4E, you might not have realized this fact. However, it is still true.

You are correct that I don't play 4e. The reasons for that are not relevant (I'm trying to sidestep any Edition War issues). I was trying to present the viewpoint of a non-4e playing D&D player looking at 4e at this point. Between different, apparently incompatible versions of 4e such as the PHB and Essentials being sold alongside each other and the large amount of splatbooks, and the apparent need (or so I hear it often said on these very boards) for a DDI subscription, the "barriers to entry" seem a lot taller than they were when I first got into D&D in 1998 and everybody I knew was playing AD&D 2e and all I needed to buy was the "Core 3" books.

I keep reading how it's so difficult or near-impossible to create characters without DDI because there is so much "crunch" to keep track of. Before DDI and 4e, that wasn't an option because very, very few games used every single book.

In my 1e experience, characters were straight out of the PHB . . .and maybe Unearthed Arcana. 1e lasted ~11 years from the release of the PHB to the release of 2e.

In my 2e experience, characters were made with the PHB and maybe a relevant campaign setting book or splatbook. 2e lasted around 11 years from the release of 2e to the release of 3e.

In my 3.x experience, characters were made with the PHB, and maybe a couple of splatbooks or campaign books. I only saw talk of using "every" book in CharOp/MinMax contexts. 3.x lasted as a "current" edition from August 2000 until June 2008, that's a shade less than 8 years.

I have no 4e experience, but I keep seeing talk about how characters are made with every book and how you need DDI to keep it all straight, and this isn't in a CharOp context, it's in regular gaming talk. 4e has been current from June 2008 and ~3.5 years later I'm seeing talk about waiting for 5e to reset everything again.

 

[delericho]

I think this might be a common perception though. Whether an accurate perception or not it seems to be a hurdle that at least some of the potential audience needs to cross.

Indeed.

To be fair, while it is possible to play 4e with just the "Core 3", 4e is the first edition of the game where I wouldn't be happy playing "Core Rules Only". I would want at least access to the PHB2, and probably the appropriate "X Power" book for my class.

This is great if you know you are going to be vested in the game. I don't see people that are just starting to want to play a pen and paper game being very comfortable with signing up for a DDI sub to get started.

Which is a little funny. A set of the "Core 3" has an RRP of $105 (although apparently Amazon has it for $69). A one-month sub to DDI is, what, $15. It strikes me that, assuming you're joining an existing group, the best way in may well be a one-month sub to try out the game and build an initial character, followed by a longer sub once you're happy.

Or, of course, just borrow books from other people in the group.

(I think there is very definitely an issue in introducing the game to brand new players, or those who have tried Encounters but now want to set up their own group. These should be the ideal targets for the Red Box... but my opinion of the Red Box is less than flattering, to be polite. But that's probably a whole other conversation than the topic at hand here.)

 

[IronWolf]

Which is a little funny. A set of the "Core 3" has an RRP of $105 (although apparently Amazon has it for $69). A one-month sub to DDI is, what, $15. It strikes me that, assuming you're joining an existing group, the best way in may well be a one-month sub to try out the game and build an initial character, followed by a longer sub once you're happy.

I agree. The price for entry is certainly higher if you go with the physical product. I am just not sure DDI alone is really an entry point to someone new to the game.

Now if it were me, someone that has been playing RPGs and was looking to get into a 4e game, DDI may work out great. As I likely have a rough idea of the general play and mainly need to gen up a character and make sure I have something playable. The $15 entry point is nice and gets me running with an existing group pretty quickly.

Does it work well for someone new to the game that might not have a group to join into right away? I know DDI has the rule compendium for rule lookups, but how does it work for someone that is looking to simply read the rules as one would in a book to get an idea for how the game plays? Is it suitable for that use or mainly good for a lookup tool?

 

[delericho]

I agree. The price for entry is certainly higher if you go with the physical product. I am just not sure DDI alone is really an entry point to someone new to the game.

Now if it were me, someone that has been playing RPGs and was looking to get into a 4e game, DDI may work out great. As I likely have a rough idea of the general play and mainly need to gen up a character and make sure I have something playable. The $15 entry point is nice and gets me running with an existing group pretty quickly.

Does it work well for someone new to the game that might not have a group to join into right away?

I think that's the crux of it. For a new player joining an existing group, the best entry is probably "no product at all" - just have them borrow some books for a short while, then maybe invest in DDI or invest in their own books. But, honestly, I don't think that's a problem - if they're joining an existing group then the other players should be able to help them get started.

For a new player starting up independently, there genuinely is a problem. DDI really isn't the way to go for such a person. But, in truth, neither is the "Core 3", and the Essentials equivalent really isn't great either - too expensive, too much reading, plus there really is a confusion over the 'best' entry route. (Plus, if you ask in the store, you'll probably get as many different answers as there are gamers present.)

For such players, the answer should be "Red Box". Shame about the quality of said Red Box. That said, I don't think they need a new edition to fix that - simply redoing the Red Box would seem to be a simpler solution.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

My point was that you can still just use the first three core books and start playing.

And I still believe this is only partially true. I agree they're complete and independent as core rulebooks, but I can understand the general feeling that goes toward the idea that this specific D&D incarnation cannot deliver the core D&D experience with the three core books only, and by now we all know things were made this way on purpose, so you can say WotC failed in their effort to make PHB II and MM II almost as important to play as the original ones, but they surely tried.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Re: DDI & sources- the DDI lists the source of each element as you're picking it. So if you had DDI but wanted a PHB1-3 + Campaign setting book, it would be easy enough to set that stricture out and expect your players to abide by it.

Re: costs of entry- books cost more than DDI in the short run, but more in the long run. So, DDI has lower costs of entry, but higher costs of staying.

 

[Mercurius]

I once thought as you did. I was particularly annoyed by the comments that "Gnomes don't really have a niche", which was definitely untrue (trickster).

But...

The truth is that when 4e was released with the Dragonborn and Tiefling in place, the world didn't end. It was easy for groups to just ignore them if they didn't want them, and DMs always had the power to ban them. And WotC very quickly moved to support the 'missing' races, so that wasn't an enormous issue.

I agree and this is what I did - I just ignored Dragonborn and Tieflings and didn't include them in my campaign setting (although eventually let one member of our group play a Dragonborn that came from outside the major region of the setting). But you cannot deny that including them upset many people, even if only mildly irked more tolerant folks like myself. Gamers are a moody lot and take offense at the smallest things (I'm sure some will take offense at me saying so!). I am not saying that WotC should do their utmost to not offend anyone, but that the should at least try to "basically" please their core fan-base and not try to fish to far, at least in the initial game package.

The Dragonborn and Tiefling are popular - more popular than either the Gnome or the Half-orc were. They are interesting races, each with their own character, and they genuinely do bring something to the game. (The same would be true of the Warforged and the Shardmind, IMO.)

Maybe so, but in the core rulebook? Again, I'm not saying that they shouldn't be included in the game but that the first PHB should be focused on classic tropes with maybe one race and class that is away from that.

If I were doing a 5e PHB, I would definitely drop the Eladrin and the Half-elf from the list of races. I can certainly see an argument for restoring the Gnome and Half-orc in their place. But, yeah, I think the Shardmind and the Warforged just have a stronger claim at this time.

I'll take that and raise you one. If I were doing the 5E PHB, I'd only include the core races - Human, Elf, Dwarf, Halfing, Gnome and maybe one "exotic" race - and then offer sub-races on DDI and compile them in later splat books. Then, in the 5E version of Character Builder, have an option for just playing the core game--the first PHB--or adding in later resources, races, classes, feats, etc.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I have no 4e experience, but I keep seeing talk about how characters are made with every book and how you need DDI to keep it all straight, and this isn't in a CharOp context, it's in regular gaming talk. 4e has been current from June 2008 and ~3.5 years later I'm seeing talk about waiting for 5e to reset everything again.

And had the Character Builder existed for 1E, 2E and 3E, with every single informational tidbit from every single supplement gathered together in one place, you'd have the exact same thing. But to think that because such a thing as the Character Builder exists that it somehow makes the product worse is just ludicrous. That's like saying that having a multiplex movie theater where they show 15 different movies is worse than five separate theaters in 5 different towns showing three movies apiece, because its just 'too hard to choose' which movie to see with all those options at the multiplex.

Maybe you weren't paying attention back then... but the talk on these very ENWorld forums during the heyday of 3/3.5E about all the different builds (ridiculous or otherwise) of how to make characters with every single supplement was just as over the top as it is now. 4E was in no way the beginning of game option bloat, and to believe otherwise is to not have experienced or remember history.