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

[Nagol]

As a player I too prefer to stay in actor stance. And because of this, and for all the reasons you list, 4e is to me vastly superior to any other edition of D&D.



More like "Why didn't you trip him?"
"I didn't see an opportunity."

Of course, I saw an opportunity. Every round, the character makes a choice of manoeuvre with trip being one of those choices. Every round, the character has to choose whether to use today's trip or not. You may want to believe the character doesn't know that he will only get one attempt and that attempt only comes when the opponent gives him a specific opening, but that's not how the game engine works and its not the mechanism I need to put to the decision process.

The rest of your comment is to me metagaming and indicates that you are already out of actor stance. The OODA loop should be adhered to while gaming - and all options present all the time defeats the point of this.

Why yes, yes it is. And I don't like it.

Try "That was impressive! I didn't think you had it in you!"
"Like just about all professional athletes and unlike some people I know about pacing myself. I am not, unlike most anti-immersive fighters an untiring robot who always performs at exactly the same level regardless of whether we are fighting goblins or a dragon. I have adrenaline, emotions, a sense of timing, and the ability to pull out all the stops."

Really? You saw me pull the same stunt every major battle for the last 10 adventures! Have more faith!

To me this is straining at gnats while swallowing camels. The elephant in the room is Hit Points. Hit points where you can be whittled down to one and have no mechanical effect at all and it takes no longer to recover than a professional athlete after a race.

It's a choice between The Last Action Hero and an utterly incoherent system that suddenly changes from a Hollywood Action Movie when you are above 0hp to ... something else once you cross that threshold.

I find a consistent world, as 4e presents, makes maintaining actor stance vastly easier.

Your mileage varies. I don't find the world any more consistent -- it is less. It's not like healing surges actually fix anything that's wrong with hp. Previous editions at least had supplementary rules around about reducing character effectiveness once revived from dying.

To me the ability to refuse is just common sense.

OK.

Fiddly positional combat is a feature of D&D. 4e's is less fiddly than 3e's - and far less fiddly than either 2e's fireballs-by-volume or 1e's distances measured in inches. Theatre of the Mind works great in systems built for it like Fate and 13A. But the battlemap is the only way I can maintain actor stance without analysis paralysis and games of 20 questions in any form of D&D.

And when you add in the fact that 4E is the one version of D&D where you very rarely have to look up rules (something that shatters actor stance because it means you don't understand the world) then 4E absolutely crushes all previous editions for me for actor stance.

<snip>

Your mileage varies greatly. I've run and played other editions as full TotM for decades -- 3.X was harder than 1-2e, but quite possible.

 

[BryonD]

Remember, the first salvos of the edition war were fired by h4ters like the Alexandrian before they'd had a chance to play the game, let alone figure out that the various ways we were accustomed to compensating for D&D's perennial issues were no longer all required.

In other words: "he started it?" I don't see how this helps or is even reasonable as a contribution. Both sides can claim the other started it. After all, h4ters had to have something to h4te.

Well, it has happened with every other edition of D&D. They have fairly long runs, and new material for old editions was not generally forthcoming (due to little things like trademarks and copyright law), so even serious hold-outs would have little choice but to buy material for the old game and adapt it, and might well find it easier to just start playing the new one, instead. Especially as the new game has generally been better than the old, with each rev-roll, anyway.

Again 4E sold like gangbusters. It had a starting chance that pretty much any other game would kill for. And over time 4E was losing fans that started out liking it.

All things being equal it is an unreasonable leap of faith to presume that some magic event would have made the game popular. And all things are not equal. The evidence points to the contrary.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Of course, I saw an opportunity. Every round, the character makes a choice of manoeuvre with trip being one of those choices.

In which case your OODA loop was longer than it needed to be.

Every round, the character has to choose whether to use today's trip or not.

Pretty crummy daily. Every round your character might possibly have to decide whether to go balls to the wall and use Villain's Menace, focussing all their attention on utterly destroying their foe. Like I say, athletes, unlike pre-4E fighters pace themselves.

Why yes, yes it is. And I don't like it.

You don't like that the OODA loop is how people actually think? Or you don't like that designing round it means you emphatically don't have all your options?

Really? You saw me pull the same stunt every major battle for the last 10 adventures! Have more faith!

Four of them you missed, two of them the situation was very different, and two of those battles were on the same day as another two. And I heard about one of the others, but if you remember, I was unconscious at the time. So no I didn't.

Your mileage varies. I don't find the world any more consistent -- it is less. It's not like healing surges actually fix anything that's wrong with hp. Previous editions at least had supplementary rules around about reducing character effectiveness once revived from dying.

Really? From dying or from dead? Because I don't remember these rules.

And healing surges make hit points consistent.

Your mileage varies greatly. I've run and played other editions as full TotM for decades -- 3.X was harder than 1-2e, but quite possible.

And my gears grind because the information I need just is not being presented. 3.5 is explicitly as grid based as 4E - 4E just uses it better.

 

[Manbearcat]

In other words: "he started it?" I don't see how this helps or is even reasonable as a contribution. Both sides can claim the other started it. After all, h4ters had to have something to h4te.

I see where you're probably wanting to go with this (maybe a Gandhi "an eye for an eye and soon the whole world is blind" sort of deal) but you really need to rethink the above. It has all sorts of serious extrapolation issues.

And regardless of the tribalism from both sides in 4e. Can anyone seriously contend that the intensity and proportion of the vitriol was uniform? Is that a contention that you're seriously making? The "Cliff Notes" summary of the entire 4e experience cannot remotely be encapsulated by a both sides equivalence of proactive ire, rancor and hand-ringing. I don't know precisely where/when "the shot heard 'round the world" was, but the edition warring that spewed forth from it wasn't even remotely "he said, she said."

 

[BryonD]

I see where you're probably wanting to go with this (maybe a Gandhi "an eye for an eye and soon the whole world is blind" sort of deal) but you really need to rethink the above. It has all sorts of serious extrapolation issues.

And regardless of the tribalism from both sides in 4e. Can anyone seriously contend that the intensity and proportion of the vitriol was uniform? Is that a contention that you're seriously making? The "Cliff Notes" summary of the entire 4e experience cannot remotely be encapsulated by a both sides equivalence of proactive ire, rancor and hand-ringing. I don't know precisely where/when "the shot heard 'round the world" was, but the edition warring that spewed forth from it wasn't even remotely "he said, she said."

I disagree.

 

[Nagol]

In which case your OODA loop was longer than it needed to be.

Let's be clear. So far as I can see, OODA is not and has never been part of D&D. At no point has the game system ever even tried to emulate or pretend to emulate it.

Pretty crummy daily. Every round your character might possibly have to decide whether to go balls to the wall and use Villain's Menace, focussing all their attention on utterly destroying their foe. Like I say, athletes, unlike pre-4E fighters pace themselves.

*roll eyes*. I was asked what I don't like about 4e. With misgivings, I replied in good faith. An what do I get? Someone telling my my experiences are incorrect, I'm doing it wrong (OODA loop really? Really? Where is the frigging input for it? What's the frigging feedback?). And now criticising my arbitrary character design choice for a game I don't even play.

You don't like that the OODA loop is how people actually think? Or you don't like that designing round it means you emphatically don't have all your options?

In 4e you do emphatically have all your options -- at least untl you use it for this encounter/day. It's not the OODA loop. It is nothing like the OODA loop. The closest I can recall ever coming to OODA is Hero Games playing a martial arts campaign. There at least there were openings, OCV and DCV changed dynamically as manoeuvres were used, levels reassigned to offense, defence, and damage, etc. D&D in general does not has never has had anything resembling this in the game engine. Older editions were very up-front about it. The rounds were a minute long.

<snip>

Really? From dying or from dead? Because I don't remember these rules.

Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a coma far 1-6 turns. Thereafter, he or she must rest for a full week, minimum. He or she will be incapable of any activity other than that necessary to move slowly to a place of rest and eat and sleep when there. The character cannot attack, defend, cast spells, use magic devices, carry burdens, run, study, research, or do anything else. This is true even if cure spells and/or healing potions are given to him or her, although if a heal spell is bestowed the prohibition no longer applies.

Additionally, if you had prepared spells, you lost them all.

And healing surges make hit points consistent.

LOL, your mileage varies a lot.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Let's be clear. So far as I can see, OODA is not and has never been part of D&D. At no point has the game system ever even tried to emulate or pretend to emulate it.

You are talking about actor stance. And what people actually do and think.

*roll eyes*. I was asked what I don't like about 4e. With misgivings, I replied in good faith. An what do I get? Someone telling my my experiences are incorrect, I'm doing it wrong (OODA loop really? Really? Where is the frigging input for it? What's the frigging feedback?). And now criticising my arbitrary character design choice for a game I don't even play.

If that was good faith, I'd hate to see what bad faith looks like. "My daily power lets me trip people" is about as true to the system as for 3.X "My second level spell gives me SUPREME COSMIC POWER AND LETS ME REVERSE GRAVITY!!!"

What's the input for the OODA Loop? Are you immersed and seeing the tactical situation and the fictional positioning or aren't you?

In 4e you do emphatically have all your options -- at least untl you use it for this encounter/day. It's not the OODA loop.

It's a mix of the OODA loop and pacing. (The 3.5 Crusader is a better OODA Loop - the 4E one is simply better than anything else on offer). In focussing on the OODA loop I notice you are entirely ignoring the point that athletes pace themselves.

Older editions were very up-front about it. The rounds were a minute long.

And this used to utterly crush my immersion and any attempt at actor stance.

DMG p81

Huh. I hadn't realised that that was one of the changes made to the 2E default. You learn something every day, and thanks.

To me this is a huge state change between 1hp (peachy keen, can do anything) and 0hp (in real trouble).

LOL, your mileage varies a lot.

Yup.

 

[Nagol]

You are talking about actor stance. And what people actually do and think.



If that was good faith, I'd hate to see what bad faith looks like. "My daily power lets me trip people" is about as true to the system as for 3.X "My second level spell gives me SUPREME COSMIC POWER AND LETS ME REVERSE GRAVITY!!!"

Fine replace the word "trip" with the word "immobilize". I broke out the actual book a found a real daily power for Fighters (Dizzying Blow). Is that better?

What's the input for the OODA Loop? Are you immersed and seeing the tactical situation and the fictional positioning or aren't you?

The fictional positioning has very little to do with what choices the character has. The rules surrounding those choices don't enter the game world. As the player I must consider the rule restrictions at least as much as I consider the situation.

It's a mix of the OODA loop and pacing. (The 3.5 Crusader is a better OODA Loop - the 4E one is simply better than anything else on offer). In focussing on the OODA loop I notice you are entirely ignoring the point that athletes pace themselves.

Athletes pace themselves, sure. But not because they know they'll only get one chance to try X across the day in events that have no knowledge transfer between opponents and rests in-between. Especially since the characters don't actually get tired and remain at full functionality whenever they are conscious. Those considerations are entirely outside the game world.

<snip>

To me this is a huge state change between 1hp (peachy keen, can do anything) and 0hp (in real trouble).

Absolutely. Falling below 0 meant serious unforgiving injury. Unaided, the character will die -- you do not stabilise on your own. The rules continue by suggesting cosmetic/maiming injuries if the character falls below -6.

 

[Nagol]

<snip>

Huh. I hadn't realised that that was one of the changes made to the 2E default. You learn something every day, and thanks.

To me this is a huge state change between 1hp (peachy keen, can do anything) and 0hp (in real trouble).

Even 2e had falling to zero hp being a real problem. That book is buried even deeper than my 4e books.

At 0 hp or below, the character will bleed 1 hp / round. If his wounds are bound, he doesn't get any worse, but doesn't wake up. Cure spells can only bring the character to a maximum of 1 hp and he can't be healed further for one full day short of a Heal spell. Prepared spells are lost and the character cannot fight, must rest often, etc.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Even 2e had falling to zero hp being a real problem. That book is buried even deeper than my 4e books.

2E had falling to 0 hp by default being death. 3.X on the other hand had IIRC no penalties for falling below 0hp.

At 0 hp or below, the character will bleed 1 hp / round. If his wounds are bound, he doesn't get any worse, but doesn't wake up. Cure spells can only bring the character to a maximum of 1 hp and he can't be healed further for one full day short of a Heal spell. Prepared spells are lost and the character cannot fight, must rest often, etc.

That second part was cut from 3.0. So why are you blaming 4e?