D&D General New Interview with Rob Heinsoo About 4E

[Chaltab]

Obviously people who post about a game online aren't fully representative of the whole player base. My point is that also applies to what people were saying about 4th Edition; it gives us a general idea of the discourse even if it doesn't apply to everyone. And in my experience '3.5 is unbalanced' was a way more common point of agreement than whether 4E was a good solution that problem.

 

[Zardnaar]

Obviously people who post about a game online aren't fully representative of the whole player base. My point is that also applies to what people were saying about 4th Edition; it gives us a general idea of the discourse even if it doesn't apply to everyone. And in my experience '3.5 is unbalanced' was a way more common point of agreement than whether 4E was a good solution that problem.

People definitely had issues with 3E. 4E was the wrong solution.

 

[Aldarc]

A complex game cannot be accessible, by definition.

A simple game might be accessible, depending on presentation.

Increased complexity reduces accessibility.

IMHO, Fabula Ultima is a more mechanically complex game than Numenera. (At least the base game.) You build a character by multiclassing in FU, and there are a lot of different combinations. In some respects, creating a character in Numenera is easier with its "I'm a (Descriptor) (Type) who (Focus)" way of presenting character options.

When my partner wanted to try GMing for the first time, they wanted to first try Numenera. They had played Numenera before. I suggested using one of the "15 minute prep" adventures: i.e., the Numenera Keys series. They found the way that it was written to be overwhelming and confusing. (I would agree that I think that most Numenera and Cypher adventures are poorly written.) I then suggested Fabula Ultima, and I gave them Press Start. It all clicked. One reason was that Press Start has excellent layout and it slowly on-boards the GM and players about the rules and the adventure, so you learn as you go.

Now, if my partner was a player instead, I still suspect that Fabula Ultima would also be easier for them than Numenera, despite the higher complexity with character creation. The core Fabula Ultima book was written for people who have never played a tabletop roleplaying game before, and its layout makes for much easier reading of the rules than Numenera IMHO.

Perhaps an alternate approach:

If most people never make it to level 12+ in a given game, and even when they do it takes multiple years to get there...

Why not chunk the game into three separate 10-level brackets? You'd cut down enormously the amount of cognitive load new players need to take on in order to learn, create massively more space to include more options without overloading the core books, and be able to focus really hard on making those first 10 levels the best they can possibly be. Include options for how to spool out the fun even once folks are level 10, so they can get that feeling of the final level or two (perhaps with some "powerful boons" that are equivalent to being a level 11-12 character) without actually needing such levels printed.

Then, a year or two later, add Paragon tier, 10 more levels to play with, with an emphasis on grander, more fantastical, more high-octane stories. And, finally, a year or two after that, add Epic tier. Without needing separate chapters on races, and being able to just extend out the class feature tables for classes, each book should have plenty of room for its own new bits and bobs, while still permitting a relatively streamlined structure.

That way, not only are you focusing on only the stuff people can realistically use early on, you're keeping things light and simple, and giving direct support for those folks who prefer a low-magic experience. And with all that extra page space, you can have actual "novice level"/"zero level" rules baked right into the PHB, so players can see them and be able to use them if they want a more tailored introductory experience.

I hadn't really thought about doing things this way before, but the more I think about it, the better it sounds. Especially because you can attempt to fix the "Fighters just fall short" problem in P/E tier with various beyond-the-mundane additions (a la 4e's Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies.)

I have suggested something like this before: PHB 1 becomes Tier 1; PHB 2 becomes Tier 2; PHB 3 becomes Tier 3.

Of course some people thought that this meant that they were not buying a complete game with this setup. However, this for me is about like B/X. It introduces the game in chunks.

 

[Shardstone]

4E was lacking in style and flare. When I read the phb I get bored to tears. Nothing less stylish, even the LBBs had some charm to them.

 

[Aldarc]

4E was lacking in style and flare. When I read the phb I get bored to tears. Nothing less stylish, even the LBBs had some charm to them.

In contrast, I loved reading the 4e PHB from front to back. When I read the 4e PHB, it made me dream. It made me want to play. I actually like the art, the flavor text, and what was being communicated about the world through the play options. It's just different strokes for different folks, Shardstone.

 

[pemerton]

4E was lacking in style and flare. When I read the phb I get bored to tears. Nothing less stylish, even the LBBs had some charm to them.

I agree with @Aldarc. I don't find 4e D&D to be lacking in style or flare. It makes me imagine how things would work out in play.

 

[Shardstone]

In contrast, I loved reading the 4e PHB from front to back. When I read the 4e PHB, it made me dream. It made me want to play. I actually like the art, the flavor text, and what was being communicated about the world through the play options. It's just different strokes for different folks, Shardstone.

I have never read the 4e phb.

 

[pemerton]

4E was lacking in style and flare. When I read the phb I get bored to tears.

I have never read the 4e phb.

These two posts seem to be in tension with one another.

 

[Shardstone]

These two posts seem to be in tension with one another.

 

[Staffan]

HP deserves its own thread, but many, me included, maintain that due to the way things interact in-universe, poisons, and other mechanics, there is a minimum of meat points each time. For me it goes beyond quite frankly, is the sameness that got me (no, not the powers, I know Clerics and Warlords powers are not the same), while for me a good Warlord class would function more on avoidance, temporary HP and so forth. But I don't use 4e mechanics.

The only thing that makes sense for people hp is Aura: a rapidly regenerating energy field that protects you from all but minor injuries, and even those heal pretty quickly, until depleted at which point you can take real damage that may kill or seriously wound you.

Why not chunk the game into three separate 10-level brackets?

Main problem is that it's hard to make a game that expands both horizontally (higher levels) and vertically (more classes).