D&D 4E Am I crazy? I've just gotten a hankering to play 4e again...

[Coroc]

Imho 4e seems to have a very linear mathematical coherent approach to the game mechanics, making it optimal for e.g. computer games, CR/encounter guides, quick inventing new classes w/o much consideration about balance.
Disadvantage from what i heard and read - i never played it other than with the neverwinter MMORPG so i a min no way expert on this - is that it seems to be very timeconsuming to use for PnP, and battle maps are mandatory.
It is maybe to much of an approach, to recruit generation WoW into the original.
I also think conversion of older edition material might be in no way that easy with 4e as it partially is in 5e.
But to whomever it appeals, have fun with it - no edition war.

 

[Anoth]

Imho 4e seems to have a very linear mathematical coherent approach to the game mechanics, making it optimal for e.g. computer games, CR/encounter guides, quick inventing new classes w/o much consideration about balance.
Disadvantage from what i heard and read - i never played it other than with the neverwinter MMORPG so i a min no way expert on this - is that it seems to be very timeconsuming to use for PnP, and battle maps are mandatory.
It is maybe to much of an approach, to recruit generation WoW into the original.
I also think conversion of older edition material might be in no way that easy with 4e as it partially is in 5e.
But to whomever it appeals, have fun with it - no edition war.

Not a fan of 4E. But agree. I can’t believe they didn’t make video games for this system. I think they would have turned out quite well.

 

[Coroc]

Not a fan of 4E. But agree. I can’t believe they didn’t make video games for this system. I think they would have turned out quite well.

Well neverwinter online still free to play afaik is based on 4e. Yo ucan register via steam or directly and try it out. Of course like with all computer games which are not round based you have to compromise versus the pen and papaer edition.
But trust me 4e principles are absolutely recognizable in the game.

 

[Tony Vargas]

i never played it other than with the neverwinter MMORPG so I am in no way expert on this

In that, you are clearly correct.

I also think conversion of older edition material might be in no way that easy with 4e as it partially is in 5e.

I decided to adapt a representative (mostly first) 1st-level module of each past edition to 5e, for use in intro games at cons. For the classic eds, it went very smoothly - at 1st level, hardly requiring conversion at all - with 3.5, had modest issues more stemming from the organization of an AP vs a low-level module, and with 4e & Essentials it was something of a challenge to convert to 5e.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[pemerton]

I found converting (maybe "converting") other material to 4e fairly straightforward. Read the stuff from the other system; decide what the encounters/situations are; and then either run a skill challenge or use entries from one of the 4e MMs.

This is taking advantage of the fact that (i) good ideas are good ideas whatever system they're expressed in, and (ii) once you have a good idea, 4e makes it very easy to implement mechanically.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I found converting (maybe "converting") other material to 4e fairly straightforward. Read the stuff from the other system; decide what the encounters/situations are; and then either run a skill challenge or use entries from one of the 4e MMs.

Sure, that works fine - it's how I ran Temple of the Frog using Essentials c2011 - but it's nearly the same effort as throwing together new challenges (admittedly not a difficult exercise, but the kind of exercise using a module is meant to avoid).

My impression, when people speak of 'converting' between eds of an RPG, is that they mean a set of formulas, you plug the stats from one ed in, get the stats of another, out.
For instance, if I run a low-level, 1e module, just inverting the AC in an abbreviated stat block usually gives a useable result for 5e.

This is taking advantage of the fact that (i) good ideas are good ideas whatever system they're expressed in, and (ii) once you have a good idea, 4e makes it very easy to implement mechanically.

What about bad ideas?

 

[pemerton]

Sure, that works fine - it's how I ran Temple of the Frog using Essentials c2011 - but it's nearly the same effort as throwing together new challenges (admittedly not a difficult exercise, but the kind of exercise using a module is meant to avoid).

For me, at least, ideas - and associated stuff like maps, names, backstory, etc - rather than stat blocks are what I look to modules/scenarios to help out with.

4e got me used to just lifting stat blocks out of a book and using them, and it's now how I tend to approach all my RPGing. (Not exclusively, but primarily.)

My impression, when people speak of 'converting' between eds of an RPG, is that they mean a set of formulas, you plug the stats from one ed in, get the stats of another, out.

That's why I put "converting" in inverted commas!

 

[Tony Vargas]

4e got me used to just lifting stat blocks out of a book and using them, and it's now how I tend to approach all my RPGing. (Not exclusively, but primarily.)

I suspect that's long been a pretty common way of doing things, just lift the stats and go. Classic D&D, even official modules, played the __ is equivalent to ___ card a lot, too.

 

[Panda-s1]

4e is the game I ran the most, but didn't play as much myself. even though now I don't appreciate some parts of it, I did enjoy it for what it was and still would rather play it over 3.5. actually I'd play AD&D over 3.5, so...

I'm still not over backlash that happened 12 years ago though, and it didn't help that I worked at a game store at the time. thankfully the owner was cool with 4e, as were a few other noteworthy patrons, but it's pretty disheartening to see a bunch of 30+ year olds act like they're 12 over a game they don't have to play. also still not over some of the arguments, like is it really like World of Warcraft? really? I didn't play MMO's at the time so it was easy to dismiss this. I do play one MMO now, so I kinda get it, but it's still an incredibly different experience and I still find this argument dumb. also hated the argument that 4e wasn't good for roleplaying, like why do you need "mechanics" for better roleplaying?

okay I don't want to go into a full on rant, just know that if you want to play 4e again, that's awesome. hell I bought all the Essentials books, but never got to play with them so I'm almost tempted to do the same lol


(sidenote: very tangentially related, but was anyone else super excited for Pathfinder when they first released the Alpha only to be disappointed very quickly? for a hot minute it looked like my go to alternative if I decided I didn't like 4e, but I was immediately turned off by things like the sudden backlash and subsequent caving in about on/off skills because it was "too much like 4e", geez.)