4E - 18 Months Later: Love it or hate it?

[Plane Sailing]

Kafen, jdrakeh and others - please drop your arguments about skills etc now.

Start a thread about it if you think you can discuss it in a civil manner, by all means.

But leave this thread for the topic at hand.

Thanks

 

[pawsplay]

Dislike it. I am just not the target audience. It is not a bad book, per se, but I definitely prefer 3e versions to 4e in the vast majority of respects, and I think it came way too soon.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Well, I voted like it, and that is getting stronger. I ahve been working back and forth on like dislike for a while, but I realized over the weekend that I absolutley do not want to run combats in 3.x anymore. I run and play in games in both 3.5 and 4E and 4E combats are simple. I know what the players can do, and they can be forced into a combat pretty easily. With 3.5 they DD or teleport, or some up with some spell that negates everything. Some people might call that good player play and come up with a long list of reason I am a terrible DM for not being able to anticipate and deal with ......... but that is just not true.

The massive number of overpowered spells jsut ruin 3.5 for me these days.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Well, I voted like it, and that is getting stronger. I ahve been working back and forth on like dislike for a while, but I realized over the weekend that I absolutley do not want to run combats in 3.x anymore. I run and play in games in both 3.5 and 4E and 4E combats are simple. I know what the players can do, and they can be forced into a combat pretty easily. With 3.5 they DD or teleport, or some up with some spell that negates everything. Some people might call that good player play and come up with a long list of reason I am a terrible DM for not being able to anticipate and deal with ......... but that is just not true.

The massive number of overpowered spells jsut ruin 3.5 for me these days.

Actually, this is an interesting point. High level play in 3.x was a completely different kettle of fish (I think Sepulchrave's Wyre story hour captured this really nicely - best SH ever by the way). Handling a party that can do just about anything does require a different mindset and capability from the DM. You can't box them in like you may have at lower levels as you say.

Our group has no experience of 4E Epic level play and so it is difficult to comment, but I don't believe that 4e has this dramatic shift in playstyle you mention. I don't think 4e at epic levels is the same but with bigger numbers, but at the same time I guess it does not have this shift in playstyle. In some ways this is good. In other ways, you lose something special that is inherent in that story hour I mentioned.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[JoeGKushner]

Mixed.

DDI? Awesome.

Timing of content release? I'm heavily spoiled by the amount of material for 3e so it seems glacial slow. Psionics in PHB3?

Part of that though is the organization of the material. Various PHBs and DMGs and what not. Not a long term useful organization in my opinion but I could be wrong.

Dislike some of what went down with the GLS and Dragon/Dungeon going digital even though I like the DDI as a character building tool.

Dislike some of the changes to the core setting. Dragonborn and Tielflings as a core race with elves 'officially' split in the core book? With lots of talk of keeping 'evil' races to a minimum and then having several already available? Planar changes due to alignment changes?

Lots of good stuff though. Like the core 1-30, like that fighters are useful at all levels, enjoy the 'equalization' of the classes, the fairly rapid release of errata via the DDI and the production quality, outside of the reprinted art which pisses me off, is still top notch.

 

[MerricB]

Actually I think maybe a little too much hyperbole on my part regarding this point. There is just the feeling they could be so much more but are not.

I wonder how much of it is just "Adventures suck." As I've revisited what I considered the classics of 1e, I'm getting seriously underwhelmed by a lot of them. They were good because they were first. In retrospect, not so good.

So much of what makes a good adventure comes from the DM (and players, to some extent).

Cheers!

 

[Wormwood]

System: like
Support:++love
Running the game: +love
Playing the game: +love

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Aside from a few warts, I love the system.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I wonder how much of it is just "Adventures suck." As I've revisited what I considered the classics of 1e, I'm getting seriously underwhelmed by a lot of them. They were good because they were first. In retrospect, not so good.

So much of what makes a good adventure comes from the DM (and players, to some extent).

Cheers!

This is an interesting point - I'm glancing across at the cover of the Temple of Elemental Evil and it carries so much good baggage that I could forgive it's foibles as 80's era specific. However, referring to a more recent pair of adventures that we have in common - I believe "The Whispering Cairn" and the "Prince of Redhand" are absolute classics. Now while I know that the Age of Worms adventure Path and 3.x turned to mud for you from your excellent blog, I think even you would have to say how great these two adventures were - and not just from a DM/player's perspective either.

On the other hand, with 4e I'm really struggling to think of any instant classics. Is it just the style that I'm not jiving with? The official series has fallen flat for our group - it has been saved I think by DM skill rather than any overt inherent brilliance. We have found the official hooks to be a little flat in these adventures. I think though that this is the opposite experience to your group [perhaps the sans-mini approach has really invigorated some stale RPing muscles?].

Still, I think your Rose Coloured Glasses of Yore angle carries some weight in this regard - good point.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[BryonD]

They were good because they were first. In retrospect, not so good.

I kinda think retrospect is an unfair assessment. They had no giants shoulders to stand on.

I loved 1e at the time. Now, aside from a nostalgia one-shot or the like, I have no real interest in playing it. That doesn't make it any less awesome or an achievement. But a lot has been learned along the way and so, imo, it doesn't hold up well at all against some more recent games.

But it was still good, very good, because it was "first" (for me, no offense to OD&D, etc). Retrospect is not applicable.