D&D General Why Editions Don't Matter

[Composer99]

Now that I've actually played 4e D&D, I really do have to say that it isn't much different in play to other WotC editions of D&D, especially in combat. Outside of combat, if you don't make much use of skill challenges, you'd also frankly be hard-pressed to see much distinction between 4e and 5e (save for the possibility of spellcasters using their slots on utility magic versus 4e rituals). Likewise, GMs and players alike can absolutely engage in whatever one happens to view as player or GM malpractice in 4e as in any other edition of the game.

So... frankly, the video seems like an exercise in hypocrisy. If it really was "all one D&D" to PDM, then there'd be no reason in particular to exclude 4e, save for a single snide reference.

I won't necessarily say I disagree with the idea of a continuity of D&D across the decades, but anyone willing to engage in hypocritical Edition-War-style rhetoric is the wrong person to promulgate such a notion.

 

[TwoSix]

That's why edition doesn't matter to him. PDM prefers a style where he'll end up ignoring most of the rules of any edition and make it up himself.

“Edition doesn’t matter as long as you play like me” isn’t a catchy YouTube title, though.

 

[TwoSix]

Pretty much. But referring to 4e as "Warcraft D&D" is blatant Edition Warring rhetoric.

The general problem is that the reference is meant as an insult but is actually a compliment. WoW is a very well-designed game, with constant iteration by a large team of professionals. It’s certainly more well-designed than any version of D&D. Being more like Warcraft was a net good for the game.

 

[Aldarc]

The general problem is that the reference is meant as an insult but is actually a compliment. WoW is a very well-designed game, with constant iteration by a large team of professionals. It’s certainly more well-designed than any version of D&D. Being more like Warcraft was a net good for the game.

IMO, if D&D 4e should be compared to a video game, it's way more like a JRPG (e.g., FF Tactics, Chronotrigger, Fire Emblem, etc.) or a turn-based CRPG like Divinity: Original Sin 1 and 2 than it is to Warcraft. Warcraft was just the hot cultural phenomenon at the time.

I do think that TTRPGs would benefit from taking lessons from video games and board games in terms of design, and I believe that there are some TTRPGs that are doing that. This is not to say that I think that TTRPGs should be board/video games. But video game designers are pretty cognizant in their design choices when it comes to things like the User Interface (UI), new player experience, tutorials, ability unlocks, horizontal/vertical progression, Skinner Boxes, etc.

I would like to see a TTRPG design character options like a MOBA, with your character getting a limited set of abilities: e.g., a Trait, 3 Standard Abilities, a choice of 2 Ultimate Abilities, with Loot being used to build your character beyond that. (To be clear, I don't want D&D to become a MOBA.)

 

[TwoSix]

IMO, if D&D 4e should be compared to a video game, it's way more like a JRPG (e.g., FF Tactics, Chronotrigger, Fire Emblem, etc.) or a turn-based CRPG like Divinity: Original Sin 1 and 2 than it is to Warcraft. Warcraft was just the hot cultural phenomenon at the time.

Agreed. If they were actually mimicking MMO combat, then encounter powers would have 3-round cooldowns, and at-wills would have a chance to "proc" to let you use a different encounter power.

Most people saw the correlation between "defender, striker, leader" and the classic "tank, DPS, healer" MMO trinity, but that was just 4e borrowing back and refining concepts MMOs had already borrowed from D&D.

I would like to see a TTRPG design character options like a MOBA, with your character getting a limited set of abilities: e.g., a Trait, 3 Standard Abilities, a choice of 2 Ultimate Abilities, with Loot being used to build your character beyond that. (To be clear, I don't want D&D to become a MOBA.)

You're preaching to the choir, my friend. I've been on a kick for games where the characters can be customized at the start, but grow diegetically through acquisition for a while. (And I've been digging into NSR games like Knave and Into the Odd and Troika as a consequence.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

IMO, if D&D 4e should be compared to a video game,

IT shouldn't.

No D&D should because it's a cheap appeal to D&D's weird one-sided beef with videogames. It's like how all those fake reddit 'nightmare players' posts always go out of their way to say the guy likes anime.

 

[pemerton]

Scene framing has never existed in any form of DnD.

You are basically saying that no version of DnD is playable.

I would say that 4e has pretty complete procedures of play. It doesn't use the phrase "scene framing", but it has instructions about what bits of the fiction to skip (eg the gate guards are mere colour) and how to resolve both combat encounters and non-combat encounters, and how to structure these in relation to the rest/recovery cycle, etc.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

This is why I take exception when when people say, "Maybe you wouldn't have so many problems if you played the game how it was intended". I have made house rules in every edition. The things that people claim make 5e better were present in other editions, like "rulings over rules." It just depended on the play-style of your group. Some groups play closer to the exact text than others.

It's also why I've always disliked Sage Advice: they give out 'rulings' that they don't even use at their own table but many players take it to be The Stone Tablets.

Play with the rules you like that fit the group dynamic. Mix and match rules from every edition and it will still work. I've done it.

 

[Mannahnin]

I don;t think he hates it as much as if the table sat down for 4e, he can't ignore 90% the rules.

PDM is a "If you roll 11 or higher you hit. Don't look at your sheet" DM. He says in the video that he wrote publish adventures in an edition he didn't even own. PDM doesn't really care about rules and playlow magic, gritty, grimdark games where characters are so low level you wont noticce how unbalanced everything is and you don't have enough stats to make meaningful choices.

He's not a bad guy nor DM. But if your preference is low level grimdark, system doesn't matter as everyone is incompetent and 2-3 hits to death no death save.

That's why he is no 4e fan. In 4e, the default is your PC being competent and the rules bolster this.

I don't think the underlined is accurately representative of PDM's style or opinion.

The characters are not incompetent. He advocates in other videos for characters to have skills appropriate to their backgrounds, and for that to be more free form. PCs in his style are indeed less powerful and operating with fewer safety nets, though antagonists are also correspondingly less powerful. Lower HP leading to shorter combats which get to crisis/decision points more quickly. This is a perfectly fun way to play for a lot of people. I really enjoy this style, though I'm a big 4E fan as well.

Pretty much. But referring to 4e as "Warcraft D&D" is blatant Edition Warring rhetoric.

Yeah, kind of. I really don't think he's worked up enough about it to be genuinely trying to annoy. I think he throws in little cracks like that as jokes which experienced players will take as such, and expects us 4E fans to roll our eyes, laugh along, or throw an angry comment in which will feed the YouTube algorithm but not hurt his feelings.

Which is fine, so long as you deliberately ignore the contextual meanings of words and phrases and then reinterpret what people say to fit a new meaning. Makes actual communication virtually impossible, but, sure, it does work.

No one has EVER compared an RPG to a boardgame and meant it in a positive sense. Nor any video game comparison. Unfortunately, people think that comparing 4e to a board game or a video game does anything more than simply say, "I don't like this game but, simply saying I don't like it isn't good enough, so I need to 'prove' that the game is an inferior game to a 'true' role playing game so I'll compare it to stuff that I know will piss people off".

It's basic edition war rhetoric at its finest.

I really don't think he means it hurtfully.

I think a big central point of the video is that folks take the differences between editions too seriously and put too much weight on them, which is a fundamentally anti-edition war stance.

I agree that some of his analysis is a little shallow, informed by his own preferred rules-light play style.

I note that he takes the criticism of the Pathfinder YouTuber, something like "I guess to Professor DM, if a game has Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Hit Points and Armor Class that makes it D&D" at face value, and says "Yep, that's pretty much exactly how I feel", praises the PF guy's channel and suggests people subscribe to it.

 

[Hussar]

I would say that 4e has pretty complete procedures of play. It doesn't use the phrase "scene framing", but it has instructions about what bits of the fiction to skip (eg the gate guards are mere colour) and how to resolve both combat encounters and non-combat encounters, and how to structure these in relation to the rest/recovery cycle, etc.

Heh. Speak of the devil.

There's pretty much zero difference between any edition of D&D though as far as framing goes. The DM is expected to make an adventure (dungeon, scenario, whatever) and the players then play through it. Heck, if that's all "scene framing" means, then it's pretty much the same throughout any edition. 4e isn't special in this regard at all, other than making some advice nods.

But, in the context of the post that I was replying to, that you quoted from, no, D&D doesn't have the kind of hard coded scene framing that he was talking about. I can start my 4e campaign in any scene I choose. That's pretty much the entire point of D&D - the freedom to create and the wide open nature of it. While there are games with very hard coded scene framing mechanics, that's just a stylistic choice. They are different games - typically much more focused ones at that.

But, the post I was replying to was claiming that scene framing did exist in ALL editions of D&D but not 5e. Which is just flat out false on the face of it.