Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 5012570" data-attributes="member: 11300">Mixed bag...Some things I love, others I can't stand; although most of this has been done to death in previous threads. However, there are a few further points I'll add six months since the last thread with unfortunately most being in the negative:- I tried to like the magic items but they got through my will defense. In the end, I think the economic system is an abomination with magic items leading the way. Most of them are completely forgettable and about as "non-magical" as I could imagine. They exist as a mechanic and only a mechanic and usually a repetitive mechanic at that (1/day, imbue condition or effect). Any flavour requires bolting on by the DM (or player - putting them in the PHB for the first time was an abominable decision, although I can appreciate why they did it). Creating flavour takes up room and takes time to create - something I wish the 4e design crew had prioritized rather than not.- The genius of the Powers system for ease of game play has been further emphasized to me 6 months on. While I think that there are too many barely distinct powers, the actual mechanism itself is fantastic. While it does generate the "need" for power cards, this is not disimilar to what I was producing in previous versions (spell cards, item cards, attacks cards for more complex attacks such as a power attack grid and so on). - The Skill Challenge system is an absolute sham. After working with it now for 18 months, I think it is fatally flawed. It provides nothing extra to the game over previous editions and provides a poxy-mechanism that tends to take players out of the world and into a mechanic-infested wasteland of distraction as well as giving the DM a burden of work that has a productivity ratio close to zero. In the end, DMs don't need a little table of successes and failures to work out whether the party has succeeded, partially or not at a particular "task". It focuses the group more on their skill set, highest modifier and probabilities rather than on interacting with the world and mindscape that the DM creates. The skill challenge mechanics are fine for a boardgame but are completely unnecessary in a role-playing game (please note the non-use of the term RPG here; something I now associate with computer games rather than those at a table top).I can imagine some will disagree with me here saying that they roleplay their way through skill challenges and that by looking at novel ways to apply their capable skills, it improves their roleplaying. To those I ask: "You didn't do this in previous versions? What have you gained here that you could not do or were not doing in previous versions?" This is why I believe the mechanic has added nothing to D&D as a role-playing game.- Healing surges still suck. They still feel like "provisions" in the fighting fantasy game books (for those of you who remember such things). I like them more than I did originally but that maybe does not say that much. Becoming dulled to a mechanic after repeated use does not perhaps a glowing endorsement make.- WoTC adventures REALLY suck. They have some magnificent authors doing their stuff (Piratecat's Haven of the Bitter Glass is an absolute standout) but for some reason 4E does not seem to translate to good modules - most end up feeling restrictive and needing substantial opening up to breathe. Perhaps that Haven is almost twice the size of other installments  is significant?- But perhaps the greatest thing that "sucks" is that the D&D gamer base seems more divided than it has ever been (and please don't automatically attribute this to interweb "noise" alone). While not entirely the fault of 4e, I think that the design team threw the baby out with the bathwater on several issues and this has left many former players and their gaming preferences stranded.Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

Verification