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

[darjr]

Great post, but I'm going to take exception to this bit. The game was designed to work out of the box, and they did a lot of work trying to get the balance right. That's not to say it didn't admit of modifications. We heard earlier in this thread that there was a last minute change to monster HP on initial release that made combat into more of a slog. A common mod to 4E monsters I remember for folks who wanted combat quicker was to reduce monster HP and increase damage, and we saw that monster math got fixed/altered in later monster books after the initial MM. We also know that the initial Skill Challenge math was a bit borked due to rushed development/release, and that needed to be corrected later.

4E was open to house rules. It just didn't NEED them as much as other editions, maybe.


Yup. Or what you desire is different at different times. I've enjoyed several different editions over the past few years, and I'm looking forward to trying 4E and even 3.x again at some point.

The monster math inflation, I think, leads credence to his point. After all it was a change FROM the intended design that got printed.

 

[billd91]

I mean, I just ate some jello. It was a nice cube shaped piece. I didn't have much problem flipping it on it's side with a spoon. Now you might say that a gelatinous cube has less surface tension than my black cherry jello, since it engulfs anything it moves onto, but at the same time, it's able to maintain a relatively stable shape and it takes damage from being struck by weapons, so it's obviously not just formless goop either.

Honestly, I might say that it doesn't matter to the jello what side is up. It doesn't have any internal structures to differentiate one side from another so flip it over, on a different side, whatever, it remains unperturbed and unimpeded by you doing so.
So, if you want to do something to significantly affect the ooze other than just slashing it - maybe pick one of your powers that doesn't rely on impeding its movement by tripping it.

 

[CleverNickName]

Great post, but I'm going to take exception to this bit. The game was designed to work out of the box, and they did a lot of work trying to get the balance right. That's not to say it didn't admit of modifications. We heard earlier in this thread that there was a last minute change to monster HP on initial release that made combat into more of a slog. A common mod to 4E monsters I remember for folks who wanted combat quicker was to reduce monster HP and increase damage, and we saw that monster math got fixed/altered in later monster books after the initial MM. We also know that the initial Skill Challenge math was a bit borked due to rushed development/release, and that needed to be corrected later.

4E was open to house rules. It just didn't NEED them as much as other editions, maybe.

And then there was the (comparatively) rapid release of the 4E Essentials just 2 years later. The Essentials were either a bug fix to make 4E play more like other editions, or a simplification of the 4E rules to lower the bar of entry, depending on who you ask.

 

[Zeromaru X]

Torog was the best. I've considered running 5e in the Nentir vale, but haven't yet.

If only I liked 5e rules, lol

 

[overgeeked]

The monster math inflation, I think, leads credence to his point. After all it was a change FROM the intended design that got printed.

Sort of but not really. The intended design was the later, corrected math. Some suit poked his nose into the design process just prior to release and messed up the maths from the intended design, that flub was then printed...only to be corrected later.

 

[Lanefan]

I posit that D&D was originally directly intended to emulate Leiber, Howard, Burroughs, and Tolkien, and to facilitate dungeon exploration with multiple encounters between retreats from the dungeon. That it is intended to support a narrowly-won duel to the death followed by a chase and then another challenging battle. And that historically the rate of healing has been unable to keep up with the pace of action desired by many players and DMs, without the kludge of making piles of healing spells and magic potions available all the time so you can SKIP/circumvent the regular healing rules. And that this desire for such a faster pace of action is exactly why the healing rate has steadily accelerated in every single new edition from 1974 through today (5E took a slight step backwards from 4E, but is still much faster than 3.x).

I get that you're comfortable with 1E (well, your extensively houseruled 1E), and thus have evidently accommodated to its healing rules and come to accept them as "how D&D works". But the designers of every edition since 1974 have, in apparent response to players' desire to have the game better emulate heroic fantasy media (books as well as action fantasy movies), kept accelerating it.

I guess my broader point is that when designers listen to the players the end result is often a worse game, because players are always going to agitate for whatever makes the game easier and in order to keep the game challenging the designers have to (but too often don't) push back hard against that. The most obvious example of that in D&D design is the evolution of spellcasting over the editions and corresponding increase in complaints that casters are too powerful.

Natural healing in 1e was too slow as written, I won't argue that. By 3e it had become too fast, however, and 4e-5e are ridiculous.

 

[darjr]

Sort of but not really. The intended design was the later, corrected math. Some suit poked his nose into the design process just prior to release and messed up the maths from the intended design, that flub was then printed.

Yea. The intended design was more like the fix many folks started to apply and showed up in MM3.

But the original inflated HP, in the MM, was a deviation from that design.

Eh, it’s not a big deal.

 

[Lanefan]

I mean, I really don't get the "realistically..." part of this. Realistically, a gelatinous cube HAS to have a membrane, or it would splosh into a puddle.

Next time you make Jello, cut a 3-inch cube of it and put it on a plate. It's solid enough to stand on its own and not collapse into a puddle yet amorphous enough to bend and wiggle.

Next, imagine it being alive, vaguely sentient, and able to move on its own. It's also trying to eat you.

Then, using a typical D&D mini, try to trip it.

I'll wait here.....

 

[Gammadoodler]

Next time you make Jello, cut a 3-inch cube of it and put it on a plate. It's solid enough to stand on its own and not collapse into a puddle yet amorphous enough to bend and wiggle.

Next, imagine it being alive, vaguely sentient, and able to move on its own. It's also trying to eat you.

Then, using a typical D&D mini, try to trip it.

I'll wait here.....

But first... wait for your 3 inch jello cube to start moving on its own..

Because until then, you have no reasonable basis upon which to make "logical" conclusions regarding your ability to impact its locomotion.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Great post, but I'm going to take exception to this bit. The game was designed to work out of the box, and they did a lot of work trying to get the balance right. That's not to say it didn't admit of modifications. We heard earlier in this thread that there was a last minute change to monster HP on initial release that made combat into more of a slog. A common mod to 4E monsters I remember for folks who wanted combat quicker was to reduce monster HP and increase damage, and we saw that monster math got fixed/altered in later monster books after the initial MM. We also know that the initial Skill Challenge math was a bit borked due to rushed development/release, and that needed to be corrected later.

4E was open to house rules. It just didn't NEED them as much as other editions, maybe.

Well, there are different ways to look at this. I do think it is an overstatement to say that 4e didn't allow modification. But it wasn't quite as house-rule friendly as prior editions (or 5e).

Let me explain my reasoning behind this.

Think of two game systems. I'll use OD&D (LBBs) and BiTD (for those less familiar with acronyms, that's the original three "Little Brown Books" of the Original Dungeon & Dragons, and Blades in the Dark).

OD&D, famously, could not be played out of the box. You had to "mod" it somewhat, even to get it to work. Whether through 3PP or magazine articles or your own house rules (and procedures of play, aka the infamous DM binder) ... it didn't just allow for modification, it required modification. It was less complete game, than a toolbox for creating a game.

BiTD, on the other hand, is heavily prescribed in terms of the setting, rules, and processes of play (heuristics and the like). That doesn't mean you can't mod it- people to propose custom rules. But it is very uninviting in terms of substantive modifications or house rules, because the game is "tight" in the sense that it has been designed as a whole to function together. In fact, if you start to seriously "mod it," (in terms of settings, rules, etc.), you're probably better off just going to a different game based on the FiTD system.

Which brings me to 4e. It's not that you cannot houserule or modify it; the 4e DMG (which I am assured people actually read, unlike the 5e DMG!) has a DM's toolbox section which include ... wait for it ... Creating House Rules. But it's one page, and it just has an example of a fumble, and critical success and failure.

The issue is that the very advantages of 4e- the balance, the "tightness," the reasons that 4e is appealing to many people ... those are the same reasons that make it much less attractive to house rule or modify. There is no free lunch when it comes to design decisions, and the aspect of the design of 4e that are great also mean that it is less amenable to modification than some other versions of D&D.

IMO, YMMV, etc.