Reynard said:
One of the implicit design goals of 4E seems to be to reduce the influence the DM has over the game, particularly as it relates to "fun".
The role of the DM is to facilitate (and participate in) the fun of the Players. Having a rules set that implicitly seeks to make the experience more fun for the players is having a rules set that is implicitly seeking to make the DM's job easier, and more fun.
You use the word "influence" but I think you are more concerned about control, and so I think you would hate me as a player - my DMs have learnt that having anything planned in detail is a bad plan. I either take an entirely different (and entirely character driven) route, or I find some previously unforseen solution that circumvents 90% of the planning (as I did last Friday to my L5R GM).
This is where those things you are railing against become really good DM tools.
Through RP the players take a radically different aproach to the quest to what you originally planned - the new generic monster stat blocks (if they exist) mean in moments you can have new encounters if needed. The Quest system means that you already know what the characters are trying to do and how much XP they are going to get if they do it. The class Roles means that the Players have more control over their characters abilities and options without gutting the parties mechanical effectiveness - better RP withour mechanical interference = more fun for my players (and me as a player or DM).
As to the Quest system...
Quests consist of a few basic parts;
- A Quest Giver
- The Quest Locations
- The Quest Targets
- oh and the PC(s)
The Quest Giver is that situation that triggers the PCs to undertake the quest, it usualy involves the PCs establishing the task to be done and what (if any) IC rewards will be given (treasure, glory/fame, favors, poltical power etc etc). In a computer game the game will then store away somewhere (a Journal or Quest Log typically) the Quests you have agreed to undertake and what IC reward you are getting - this is the role of the suggested Quest Card.
The Quest Locations are those places you must go to complete the quest. Players never
have to go directly from one place to another, and clever PCs might find ways to circumvent going to certain locations even. At least 2 quest locations are always known to the PC - where the Giver is and where the First, and Last Targets will be.
The Quest Targets are the things (objects, places, monsters, people) that the PCs must interact with to complete the quest. The Quest Giver is often the last Quest Target. There may be many quest targets, there might only be one. It all depends on the complexity of the quest. The Players need to know when they have achieved certain quest targets of course.
Here's a simple (and typical) quest;
The PCs enter a bar (Location), the Barkeep (Quest Giver) sees their weapons, or otherwise knows them to be adventurous. He asks them if they can help with the rat problem in his basement (Location) and offers them 1gp for each rat tail the PCs bring him. (The reward and the first and second targets).
Now even if the PCs take the Quest there is nothing that requires them in this example to go immediately down stairs and start hunting rats. They can do as they please still, but the quest is still there in the background. To get verisimilitude, if the PCs leave it to long you might have them hear that some other group finished the quest for them - sorry missed out folks. (You can bet they will not go wandering off away from the next quest if this happens

)
But nothing about this arrangemet is new - its the way Modules and DMs have been doing things for ages, its just got better scaffolding for DMs - its apparently made explicit which means overall design going to be better and easier for DMs. There is nothing new here except for people protesting about someone making it clear what other people have known and done for a long time.