D&D 4E Is there a "Cliffs Notes" summary of the entire 4E experience?

[TerraDave]

<My final thoughts on this, I promise>

I maintain a theory (and if there is proof to substantiate it, I'd love to see it) that 4e was released "half-baked". For whatever reason, it was rushed out the door without enough time to fix the issues it had. The core books alone suffered some of the worst problems, including (but not limited to)

...

Yep, thats why it was mentioned up thread.

I have been involved in some projects like this. You strike out, play around with something, stop, go another direction, tack back, tear down, rebuild....and then have to release something that can look surprisingly rough for everything that went into it. They clearly reached a point where they had to get something out there, and, on top of that, use it as a base for a wave of problematic initial material.

But it wasn't just this. It was not just one thing. (Maybe it was an underlying thing, like bad management, but not one thing with the game). If you read this thread, there are a lot of "one thing" replies, that are different things.

I will give an example not mentioned yet. Towards the end of 4E they added a collectible card component, so you could add essentially another layer of powers to your character. And any 4E fan knows that those characters needed yet more powers (either in terms of char build or on the char sheet), like piling some dirt on top of the mountain.

The never stopped until the edition did.

 

[Minigiant]

Yeah, I think that's a pretty good analogy. Add in the fact that while they were struggling to get their fusion menu right another restaurant opened up across the street with good old-fashioned comfort food that was very flavorful and not as avant garde.

Yeah. By the time 4E figured out the awesomeness of the Pepperoni Quesadilla and fixed their nacho pasta, the critics denounced the place and half their potential customers had already moved to the traditional place two blocks away.

Then the bank came and said "Where's our money?" And you know what alignment banks have.

 

[Dausuul]

My view of 4E is that it was a huge experiment, wherein a lot of new ideas and mechanics were tested. As with any experiment, some things succeeded, other things failed, and some failed but showed promise with further development.

The problem was that people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons, not be experimented on.

 

[Dungeoneer]

I don't think there is anyone who will argue the 2008 skill challenge rules were just ducky though.

When I first read about skill challenges I was like "What an incredible amount of potential this has!!! Now I just need to completely rework how they're doing it."

For many people in the 4e playing community, SCs got the wheels turning, not so much as a finished idea that was teh awesomes but more as a seed that seemed like it could become something amazing.

Rituals were similar, but there was less to build on. The idea that there are spells that are lots more powerful than normal spells but that can't be cast in combat is great. The execution though was... here are some spells? and they cost gold to cast?

Wasted.

 

[Dungeoneer]

I will give an example not mentioned yet. Towards the end of 4E they added a collectible card component, so you could add essentially another layer of powers to your character. And any 4E fan knows that those characters needed yet more powers (either in terms of char build or on the char sheet), like piling some dirt on top of the mountain.

The only thing that that was an example of was desperation...

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I will give an example not mentioned yet. Towards the end of 4E they added a collectible card component, so you could add essentially another layer of powers to your character. And any 4E fan knows that those characters needed yet more powers (either in terms of char build or on the char sheet), like piling some dirt on top of the mountain.

Oh jeez, I had completely forgotten about the fortune cards! There is a certain breed of gamer for whom there are never enough powers -- it's that breed who play casters in other editions! -- but yeah, I heard about the cards and went "Nope, not in my campaign."

My view of 4E is that it was a huge experiment, wherein a lot of new ideas and mechanics were tested. As with any experiment, some things succeeded, other things failed, and some failed but showed promise with further development.

The problem was that people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons, not be experimented on.

Eh, most gamers I've met are happy to do both. It's just the edition warriors who see a given edition as one or the other.

 

[billd91]

It would have been nice if it could have all been figured out right out of the gate, but I don't know if it would ever have been realistic. And even if it had, I question whether that's really what people's hang-ups were. When I hear people bashing 4e, it's never because the Paladin had a V-shaped stat distribution. It's because they don't like the concept of healing surges or fighters that have almost as many abilities as wizards or that the whole thing is too combat-focused. They don't like the very ideas that underpinned the system.

I don't know if 4e would have gotten a fair shake from those people even if all the i's had been dotted and t's had been crossed when the PHB was released.

This assumes that not liking the ideas underpinning the system was somehow being "unfair" to 4e.

 

[Chaltab]

This assumes that not liking the ideas underpinning the system was somehow being "unfair" to 4e.

It depends on what you mean. I've seen plenty of comments and posts in which people say "I haven't actually played it, but I heard..." followed by one or more variations of edition warring nonsense. That is quite unfair, no? I think if the launch itself had been handled better, fewer people would have been inclined to dismiss it so quickly.

When I hear 4E fans talk about thing they wish were better, your list covers it.
When I hear people who didn't like 4E talk about it, these are not keys issues.

This is also true. A lot of people took things that were more or less personal hangups, like AEDU power schedule and the belief that some Martial exploits were 'unrealistic' or 'basically magic', and repeated them as objective critiques. The Justin Alexander rants, the Old Schoolers who asserted that it was 'not really a role-playing' game because a thin distinction that makes more sense in their heads than it does in mine, or the GamersDen's assertion that the whole game is broken by mounted archery--there was a LOT of crap that got out there fast because 4E was the first edition to come out in the social media age.

 

[The Human Target]

It depends on what you mean. I've seen plenty of comments and posts in which people say "I haven't actually played it, but I heard..." followed by one or more variations of edition warring nonsense. That is quite unfair, no? I think if the launch itself had been handled better, fewer people would have been inclined to dismiss it so quickly.


This is also true. A lot of people took things that were more or less personal hangups, like AEDU power schedule and the belief that some Martial exploits were 'unrealistic' or 'basically magic', and repeated them as objective critiques. The Justin Alexander rants, the Old Schoolers who asserted that it was 'not really a role-playing' game because a thin distinction that makes more sense in their heads than it does in mine, or the GamersDen's assertion that the whole game is broken by mounted archery--there was a LOT of crap that got out there fast because 4E was the first edition to come out in the social media age.

Man, I hadn't read any frothing at the mouth long form 4e hate in a while.

Why do I google things I know will annoy me?

 

[Raith5]

My view of 4E is that it was a huge experiment, wherein a lot of new ideas and mechanics were tested. As with any experiment, some things succeeded, other things failed, and some failed but showed promise with further development.

The problem was that people wanted to play Dungeons and Dragons, not be experimented on.

175,000 people were allegedly happy to helped be experimented on with testing for DDN!

After 3.5e and playing D&D for almost 30 years I just wanted a new way to play D&D - I wanted to adventure but with new tools - so 4e hit the right spot for me. Even though I did feel experimented upon, because yeah the game was far from polished!

What I find interesting is how unwilling many folk who play D&D are willing to experiment with new gaming elements, I did not really realise until the rages of 4e that so many gamers with the same version of D&D for decades. After 5 years I need something new.