Gothmog
First Post
Rechan makes some great points previously in this thread, mostly echoing my thoughts. There are a few things I'd like to add...
IME so far, 4e is a much better game for casual gamers. Its more intuitive, easier to pick up and play, and has fewer fiddly bits to mess with during character creation and during play. I've introduced quite a few people to gaming in the past, and 4e seems to be as easy to pick up AD&D 2e was (meaning VERY easy- almost Savage Worlds easy). The people I tried to introduce to 3e who were not previously gamers didn't like it at all- they thought it was needlessly complicated, but they were perfectly happy to play WoD, Savage Worlds, or a d6 game.
I think this is because 3e and 4e were built with entirely different philosophies as to how the system should handle character generation and what was important in the game. I'll elaborate...
3e emphasized rules and system mastery (and this has been stated by Monte Cook and numerous times during the lead-in to 3e), and gives a staggering array of options at character generation, with some options being clearly much better than others. Its the job of the 3e player to discover what options let him do his preferred "schtick" best, and then its to his advantage to use that "schtick" all the time, for every encounter or applicable situation. Also, mechanics of the 3e game were complex, and required frequent referencing or debates were inevitable (grappe, AoO, bonus stacking, etc). 3e will therefore appeal to gearheads (I used to be one of them) and is a toolkit approach that will appeal to folks who like to tinker (at least as long as they don't stray far from the assumptions used to make 3e, like CR, wealth, magic level, etc). The problem is, once the character is made in 3e, the number of options a character has to deal with a situation are extremely limited, and based entirely on his build. Also, because the game is more build-centric, I noticed a strong trend in the 5 years I played 3e for player to focus on build to the exclusion of character development and story because the game rewards this tactic so strongly, such that many 3e games I played in (and unfortunately I'm guilty of running one like this too when 3e came out) became dungeon crawls with a series of loosely interconnected encounters where mechanical grinding through combats and loot acquisition was the entire focus.
4e has a completely different set of design parameters. 4e gives more limited choices at character creation, but few to none of those choices suck or are suboptimal. Immediately, the onus in 4e is off mechanical system mastery, and more focused on HOW to use your powers effectively during play. Its still system mastery to a degree, but it produces a very different feel than 3e (in fact, it feels more like 1e/2e to me, paritally for this reason). 4e mechanics are also more streamlined and simple, and don't require frequent book checks (check out 3e grapple vs 4e grab- they do the same thing, but 4e is MUCH simpler). Characters don't really have a "schtick" in 4e based on their feats, spells, etc- their "schtick" is based more on class. The guy who is a dead-eye shot with a bow and sneaky? Ranger. The guy who layeth the smackdown on enemies and protects the back rank? Fighter. The difference here is 4e characters have more tools in their arsenals (in the form of powers) to preform their schtick, so it isn't as repetitive or boring. Because powers don't really synergize together like 3e feats, skills, or bonus stacking/buffing, the game plays faster, smoother, and is MUCH easier for a casual gamer to pick up. But 4e also has hidden layers of complexity during play- such as understanding how to maneuver opponents into situations that put them at disadvantages, so you can follow up with an encounter or daily power on them that has a higher chance of success. That appeals to us veteran gamers too. Plus, 4e gives us a different kind of toolkit- one that isn't so rigid or mechancial as 3e, but relies more on DM judgement and what would be cool. I find its actually easier for me to use 4e for worldbuilding than it was 3e. But then again, I might be weird.
In short, 4e gives the best of both worlds IMO, and isn't as limiting as 3e during play due to narrow build choices of characters that restricts their available options. To each his own, but I don't see 4e as being "dumbed down" or only for casual gamers. In fact, I see 4e as more elegant and subtle, being more rules-transparent and relying on player cooperation and resrouce management for success, rather than using the 3e model of the rules always being in the foreground and the focus of play.
Last edited:
