• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 4E Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023

delericho

Legend
To know that now, supplemental products won't be made unless they are chock full of player options because "nobody buys DM books", only the most bare bones of settings will ever be given, and that nothing innovative will ever arise unless a certain percentage of every possible customer is on board with it, is just sad.
That's not true, though. Those things just won't come from WotC. But there's no shortage of people producing all those types of material, via DM's Guild, via the OGL/CC licenses, via DTRPG, and so on. The big problem is the sheer volume makes finding the good stuff much harder.

(Plus, deep dives into setting lore will necessarily now be a labour of love - almost nobody is going to make money on the first book for a new setting, and each subsequent book will make less, which means that it will be motivated by things other than money... if it happens at all.)

In some ways, the missing link is the path from startup into the industry - the new and innovative setting that gets bought and republished by WotC to give it much wider exposure, or the DM's Guild designer who is then hired by WotC themselves. (And yes, I'm aware there are a handful of counter-examples. But I'm not talking about a handful of people - I'm talking about a conveyor belt of talent.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Moderately off topic: but did anyone ever pull anything like a Pathfinder or an Old-School Essentials with Fourth Edition? A distilled/upgraded version? The basic ideas appeal to be, but it sounds like the whole line was... inconsistent and under-polished.
 

Oligopsony

Explorer
Moderately off topic: but did anyone ever pull anything like a Pathfinder or an Old-School Essentials with Fourth Edition? A distilled/upgraded version? The basic ideas appeal to be, but it sounds like the whole line was... inconsistent and under-polished.
There was been a number of attempts, with I think something relatively recent finally being completed (someone can chime in hopefully), but 4th had the problem of a much less permissive license than 3rd and much more crunch than older editions.
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
How, exactly, do they resemble the cooldowns? The MMO cooldowns that are ticking down mere seconds until they are ready to go again? Please be detailed.

And of course, the 4e encounter/daily cycle is still the same in 5e, they just renamed them to depend on short/long rest. Is 5e just an MMO? My god, DnD3 had at-wills, how far back does this go?

On this. One of the issues with discussing this particular topic is that people are emotionally invested in this.

For example, for people that truly love 4e, you will often hear the following two contradictory things:
A. 5e is terrible, because they discarded all the good things about 4e.
B. 5e just reused the 4e system, so if you like 5e, you really like 4e.

On the other hand, if someone didn't like 4e, they are often going to resort to language to describe a feeling it engendered in them; more often than not, because they lack the terminology to describe the feeling in very critical manner (and because they bounced off of it and will be talking to someone with a system mastery of 4e), this conversation will go nowhere.

This isn't uncommon. Think about keyboards that you might type on. You might have strong preferences for the keyboard- the key travel. The clickety clack that it provides. The spacing between individual keys. These preferences will be different between different people, but unless you are intimately familiar with these ideas, more often than not you will often resort to saying, "I just don't like that particular keyboard." But at least with keyboards these concepts have been studied and, for the most part, engineered.

A lot of creative fields don't have that same amount of thought behind them, and while there is a lot of critical analysis, there remains a maddeningly subjective component. One person's camp classic is another person's terrible film. Or, to bring it to the topic at hand, some people have a different level when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Why aren't the police responding to that shooting? Why do you hear the "pew pew pew" in space? Why is opening statement and closing argument in that three-week trial both less than three minutes? Etc. In other words, what works for some people, doesn't work for others.

Moving to the AEDU example, it's pretty simple. Let's concentrate on the "E". The issue a lot of D&D players had with the "E" (refresher- "E"ncounter) power system is that while it solved a problem that D&D has always had (the issue of "going nova" in combats) by making giving powers different cooldown periods (at will, per encounter, and daily) it make explicit and unavoidable that this was no longer interested in verisimilitude. For the first time, the game provided resources that would be regained not through the passage of time, but due to the needs of the fiction.

Now, there are many people that might say, "FINALLY!" But that isn't the same as a short rest. Which is, again, time-based. In addition, the different classes aren't balanced around a At Will/Short Rest/Long Rest/ system. For a lot of people, this is one of many example where the game, regardless of the good design, went too far and "felt wrong."

Is it that much weirder than, say, an ability that you can use "more times per day as you increase in level" (proficiency times per day)? I can't tell you. I can tell you that for a lot of people, it feels different.

It's similar to the many issues with hit points. There are people that grudgingly agree with the abstract nature of hit points. But if you make it too "in their face," (damage on a miss, or the proverbial high level character who just jumps from their house down a chasm to go to work because they have the hit points for it), they revolt. Because everyone has a different tolerance level, and one person's "great design" is another person's "too far."
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Supporter
That's not true, though. Those things just won't come from WotC. But there's no shortage of people producing all those types of material, via DM's Guild, via the OGL/CC licenses, via DTRPG, and so on. The big problem is the sheer volume makes finding the good stuff much harder.

(Plus, deep dives into setting lore will necessarily now be a labour of love - almost nobody is going to make money on the first book for a new setting, and each subsequent book will make less, which means that it will be motivated by things other than money... if it happens at all.)

In some ways, the missing link is the path from startup into the industry - the new and innovative setting that gets bought and republished by WotC to give it much wider exposure, or the DM's Guild designer who is then hired by WotC themselves. (And yes, I'm aware there are a handful of counter-examples. But I'm not talking about a handful of people - I'm talking about a conveyor belt of talent.)
I admit to being a prude who turns up his nose at a lot of 3PP content for two reasons; one, I'm a veteran of the d20 era, where everyone and their cousin was cranking out a sourcebook, many of dubious quality (not that WotC didn't have some whoppers themselves...). And two, I'm used to DM's who, for whatever reason, consider 3PP to be the Devil, but will grudgingly accept (and gripe about) "official" products.
 

Voadam

Legend
I played Warcraft for an afternoon at a friend's house but I have never played WoW.

I can't imagine that the WoW cool downs are like the AEDU system. Are any of the cool down periods slow enough that it is once per fight only? Once per day so not even once per fight?

I can imagine that the monster recharge system (roll a d6 each round and on a X-6 it recharges) is similar, but AEDU seems an odd connection. D&D had always had at will attacks and daily spells. So magical at wills, and encounter and daily powers for everyone, are the real 4e changes, with encounter powers being the biggest change.

Can anyone familiar with WoW tell me how their cool down periods worked? Was it based on a group mana pool so no magic at all for a bit depending on the strength of the power used? Was it a separate cool down pool for each power so you could use all of your "encounter" cool down powers each fight? Were there options of at will powers to do in between cool downs?
 


On this. One of the issues with discussing this particular topic is that people are emotionally invested in this.

For example, for people that truly love 4e, you will often hear the following two contradictory things:
A. 5e is terrible, because they discarded all the good things about 4e.
B. 5e just reused the 4e system, so if you like 5e, you really like 4e.

On the other hand, if someone didn't like 4e, they are often going to resort to language to describe a feeling it engendered in them; more often than not, because they lack the terminology to describe the feeling in very critical manner (and because they bounced off of it and will be talking to someone with a system mastery of 4e), this conversation will go nowhere.

This isn't uncommon. Think about keyboards that you might type on. You might have strong preferences for the keyboard- the key travel. The clickety clack that it provides. The spacing between individual keys. These preferences will be different between different people, but unless you are intimately familiar with these ideas, more often than not you will often resort to saying, "I just don't like that particular keyboard." But at least with keyboards these concepts have been studied and, for the most part, engineered.

A lot of creative fields don't have that same amount of thought behind them, and while there is a lot of critical analysis, there remains a maddeningly subjective component. One person's camp classic is another person's terrible film. Or, to bring it to the topic at hand, some people have a different level when it comes to suspension of disbelief. Why aren't the police responding to that shooting? Why do you hear the "pew pew pew" in space? Why is opening statement and closing argument in that three-week trial both less than three minutes? Etc. In other words, what works for some people, doesn't work for others.

Moving to the AEDU example, it's pretty simple. Let's concentrate on the "E". The issue a lot of D&D players had with the "E" (refresher- "E"ncounter) power system is that while it solved a problem that D&D has always had (the issue of "going nova" in combats) by making giving powers different cooldown periods (at will, per encounter, and daily) it make explicit and unavoidable that this was no longer interested in verisimilitude. For the first time, the game provided resources that would be regained not through the passage of time, but due to the needs of the fiction.

Now, there are many people that might say, "FINALLY!" But that isn't the same as a short rest. Which is, again, time-based. In addition, the different classes aren't balanced around a At Will/Short Rest/Long Rest/ system. For a lot of people, this is one of many example where the game, regardless of the good design, went too far and "felt wrong."

Is it that much weirder than, say, an ability that you can use "more times per day as you increase in level" (proficiency times per day)? I can't tell you. I can tell you that for a lot of people, it feels different.

It's similar to the many issues with hit points. There are people that grudgingly agree with the abstract nature of hit points. But if you make it too "in their face," (damage on a miss, or the proverbial high level character who just jumps from their house down a chasm to go to work because they have the hit points for it), they revolt. Because everyone has a different tolerance level, and one person's "great design" is another person's "too far."
Very well put. On the subject of recruiting WoW players. When 4e first launched I bought the starter set and rounded up my friends to play it. The WoW player had never played before but he commented on some similarities and thoroughly enjoyed it. My other friends were indifferent, some had played past editions, none were hardcore gamers. I couldn't really get into 4e but I did like some of the stuff it offered. We tried again when Essentials launched, we had fun but it just didn't stick. In fairness I tried PF with the same group and it didn't really stick either. PF/3.5 was just too complicated for the causal friends.

Edit to add: the most frustrating thing I experienced with trying 4e was most of the players just spammed their basic attacks. They didn't care they had encounter/daily powers. It was odd.
 

darjr

I crit!
I posted this on Mastodon, in case anyone wanting to get 4e and give it a try.

@cynical13 Monster math was fixed by MM3 and the monster vault. So get those. The gamma world box sets and books, inmho, were probably the very best iteration in that rules system. And the monsters and tech are compatible, even has mm3 monster math! The essentials line is controversial but some folk did love it. Finally get DarkSun if you can. @Alphastream can send you a fantastic set of adventures if you email him. I’m not kidding, the DS 4e stuff is amazing.
https://chirp.enworld.org/@darjr/110865481292856701
 

Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Edit to add: the most frustrating thing I experienced with trying 4e was most of the players just spammed their basic attacks. They didn't care they had encounter/daily powers. It was odd.

I don't think it's that strange, TBH.

One of the strengths of D&D is that you can play it with a table that has a lot of ... shall we say ... varying abilities and interests. I have, quite literally, ran games with groups, and had a player say out loud to the table weeks after we started, "Um, what is this 'second wind' on my character sheet?"

While there are certainly players that will get frustrated with other players that don't have the same depth of knowledge, it is also true that when you need to wrangle together a group to play, D&D (especially versions like 5e) is relatively forgiving in terms of disparate levels of knowledge and enthusiasm.
 

Remove ads

Top