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

[Zardnaar]

A little late to the thread, but pretty interesting. I think the 4E is WoW Meme gets such a work out because of cultural aspects more than mechanical ones. A lot has to do with when 4E launched and what was happening at the time culturally. It was the first time a new edition launched in the age of social media. The memes were instant and widely shared. No longer were just the hardcore players writing into magazines or lurking internet forums. Folks were tossing these out on Facebook and everybody with a passing interest was participating. This lead to a lot of false hoods and insults getting a lot more acceptance and trade than otherwise would have in other eras.

That leads me to D&D and video games. There is a sizable sentiment in the TTRPG community that video games are clearly inferior experiences. Often, disparaged as brain rot and too confining. Video games had long been only a minor threat because folks would play them mostly by themselves. Since seen as a minor threat, the 3E meme of "just like Diablo" didnt really have the legs the "4E is WoW" did. WoW wasnt just popular like Diablo, it was revolutionary. Folks could play this massive game online at any time with loads of people. Suddenly, this was a threat to RPG tables everywhere. I recall many a lament that their players dont show up anymore because they would rather be raiding in WoW. The sentiment grew that video games where now destroying TTRPGs.

So, I think you can see where this is going. Saying 4E is WoW is like the yo mama so fat insult of TTRPGs. Folks who dislike the game can drop a simple drive by insult. Folks who do like the game are not only defending it, but fighting back against a cultural sentiment. The battle isnt really about the mechanics and design, its about whether 4E is a "true" TTRPG or not for many. 4E really just a victim of its time. I mean, folks talk about 3E all the time and can do so on its merits and barely ever is "its Diablo" gets mentioned. 5E was spared because it was deigned openly, with a playtest and polled the public. Folks walked the process together with WotC. Which, WotC was not a great steward in 4E either which I believe really hurt 4E further. Anyways, I think the above explains why the battle liens are drawn to this day around 4E on this particular subject.

Mostly saying 4E was l8ke WoW essentially meant it gad recharging encounter powers and they didn't like the power system.

Of course it got nitpicked to death but what tgey meant was they hated it doesn't matter why or who's technically right.

End of the day they're not buying the game.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Reminds me of the revelation that the difficulty of CRs was shifted at the last minute before publication of 5E. That what's defined as a "Medium" encounter in the DMG was called an "Easy" encounter in the playtest. Everything got shifted over one column at the last second, seemingly without further playtesting.


There's a definite design tension here between what's most playable and usable for reference at the table and what's helpful and gives the DM ideas for scenario design and non-combat use of different monsters and NPCs.

Micah and others have said that they really found the longer 2E and 3E write-ups useful in terms of defining how these monsters could interact with the world, not merely how they fight the PCs. And I'll agree, so did I. Your example of the Marileth creating zombies is a great one. That's genuinely helpful for worldbuilding and scenario design.

But on the other hand 3E statblocks and the design of making them follow the same rules as PCs as far as skill points and feats and everything got insanely unwieldy and long. They were the antithesis of useful at the table. 4E statblocks were an incredible, blessed relief after them, even though I missed some of that longer detail and those noncombat abilities when brainstorming and writing scenarios.

It might be an impossible task to find the perfect middle ground, because different DMs want and need different things.

For me, the middle ground is TSR editions and OSR games based on them. Simpler stat blocks, but more lore.

 

[TwoSix]

If by "general dislike" you mean "my own personal opinion that isn't widely shared" then I believe it. However I'm playtesting 13th Age 2nd edition and those type of mechanics are still in there strong, the exact opposite than if there had been a "general unlike" for the mechanic where they'd be replacing it.

Personally, I like the odd/even mechanic just fine. But I've seen a lot of vitriol over the mechanic over the years on various 13th Age sites.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm not sure if this is tangential, but it's a long-standing question I've had- why is it that, in 5e, spellcaster opponents, in addition to having way more hit points than any PC spellcaster, generally have the ability to cast very high level spells. For example, the CR 12 Archmage has 18d8 Hit Dice, but casts 9th level spells.

In the last session of the game I was playing, we had to fight a trio of undead Warlocks, and the DM asked me if I was going to Counterspell an upcast-to-5th-level Shatter. Being 6th level, that meant using up one of my top level spell slots with a 50% chance of success (DC 15 Int check, I have an 18, so 11 or better roll).

I took my chances with the damage, but far from the first time, I had to ask why enemy spellcasters are so strong in 5e!

It's always been like that. Eg level 8 characters in 1E BBEG is a level 18 lich.

Such spellcasters don't usually have the best spells and die in 2-4 rounds.

in 5E CR 13 people think it's for level 13 PC'S but by the rules they can turn up around level 7 or 8.

The only scary 5E monsters are spellcaster or similar abilities eg CR 10 critters with 3 8d6 attacks a round. Boatloads of damage in a round or two then die.

 

[overgeeked]

For me, the middle ground is TSR editions and OSR games based on them. Simpler stat blocks, but more lore.

I’m of two minds in that. For immersive world sim, nothing beats TSR D&D and the OSR. For superheroic fantasy, nothing beats 4E. I like both styles for different reasons.

Personally, I like the odd/even mechanic just fine. But I've seen a lot of vitriol over the mechanic over the years on various 13th Age sites.

So without getting too into it, what’s the complaint? That it’s too gamey?

 

[TwoSix]

So without getting too into it, what’s the complaint? That it’s too gamey?

Generally that it adds complexity without granting any control to the player.

 

[soviet]

Generally that it adds complexity without granting any control to the player.

I've not read it, but that's the point, right? To gate special manoeuvres behind a sense of random opportunity rather than making them spammable as at-wills or artificially spendable as daily or encounter powers.

 

[Voadam]

Worth noting that the 4e Monster Vault Pit Fiend is a soldier leader monster role, which means a tougher melee combatant with minor ally abilities.

The prior edition fire powers get subsumed into a constant 5 square aura 15 fire damage power and a flaming mace attack.

The leader thing is being able to teleport reposition allies within 10 squares and to blow up minions to cause some area of effect damage.

Magically they have some fear powers and they can at will move as a 50' teleport as their move action.

Much less magical than prior editions, much more bruisery.

Funny enough, in a bit of an echo of the 3.0 to 3.5 changes the 4e MM version of the Pit Fiend has an extra magical power that the 4e MV pit fiend does not, summoning up other devils to fight with it as an encounter power.

This is a bit of a 4e oddity, the MV revisions are generally known for things like better solo powers in the MV than in the MM, in addition to the revised monster math.

 

[TwoSix]

I've not read it, but that's the point, right? To gate special manoeuvres behind a sense of random opportunity rather than making them spammable as at-wills or artificially spendable as daily or encounter powers.

Yep, that's exactly the point.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m of two minds in that. For immersive world sim, nothing beats TSR D&D and the OSR. For superheroic fantasy, nothing beats 4E. I like both styles for different reasons.

So without getting too into it, what’s the complaint? That it’s too gamey?

Well, immersive world sim is what I always want out of D&D. I like superhero stuff too, but would rather play other games for that.