4e "getting back to D&D's roots" how?

[Hussar]

Funnily enough, I got a hold of my Basic/Expert books again at the same time as 4e came out. I see all sorts of similarities. Conceptually the idea that the heroes are just that, heroes is very much Basic/Expert. Plus, the focus of the game is very similar. Basic/Expert focused very, very strongly on the adventure, not the setting. I never played beyond Expert, so, I don't know about that, but, looking at how strongly gamist (not that that term strictly applies) B/E D&D is, I can't help but see a lot of parallels.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Funnily enough, I got a hold of my Basic/Expert books again at the same time as 4e came out. I see all sorts of similarities. Conceptually the idea that the heroes are just that, heroes is very much Basic/Expert. Plus, the focus of the game is very similar. Basic/Expert focused very, very strongly on the adventure, not the setting. I never played beyond Expert, so, I don't know about that, but, looking at how strongly gamist (not that that term strictly applies) B/E D&D is, I can't help but see a lot of parallels.

This is my feeling as well. So much so that my new 4E game is going back to Mystara (although it will always be The Known World to me). Scant setting detail but big on the adventure and the idea that the PCs are heroes and completely out of the norm. I think my players are getting that as they fairly chomped my hand off when I fed them a tiny adventure hook in the first session. In game they knew problems were happening and when the local armourer looked to be having these problems visited upon him they jumped in to help him without asking what the reward would be! For my players that is a far cry from the old days of 'what are you gonna give us?'.

 

[Treebore]

I can see how "parallels" could be seen, maybe even a similar feel, but thats it.

Still, 3E has parallels, it just got lost in all the complexity. So I can see how 4E's comparative "simplicity" to 3E would remind them of how it used to be in the older editions, however 4E isn't even close to being as simple as the older editions are, just simpler than 3E. Maybe even 2E if you throw in all the "optional" rule book complexities, but we'll have to wait for all of 4E's books to be published to do a fair comparison. Going by core books alone, 3E has the greatest complexity, with 4E, then 1E, then 2E (IMO the 2E core rules set is simpler and easier to understand, learn, and teach than 1E) with OD&D being the easiest. At least in my estimation/opinion. I am sure others will disagree.

 

[Jan van Leyden]

Funnily enough, I got a hold of my Basic/Expert books again at the same time as 4e came out. I see all sorts of similarities. Conceptually the idea that the heroes are just that, heroes is very much Basic/Expert. Plus, the focus of the game is very similar. Basic/Expert focused very, very strongly on the adventure, not the setting. I never played beyond Expert, so, I don't know about that, but, looking at how strongly gamist (not that that term strictly applies) B/E D&D is, I can't help but see a lot of parallels.

Aye, and the fact that the rules limit themselves very much to the combat aspect of the game. While they handle this aspect very different from the old incarnations, the style of letting the DM handle all the other stuff in a free-form way - if only due to the lack of rules - is very much the same. Put in Rituals for the non-combat spells and you have a lot in parallel.

 

[rounser]

Trying to say 4E is somehow closer to OD&D than 3E is simply a desperate bid for legitimacy, and IMO completely obviously false. OD&D didn't contain ungeneric poppycock like "dragonborn warlords" and blink elves in the core implied setting. That alone gets the flavour all wrong, never mind the mechanics.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Trying to say 4E is somehow closer to OD&D than 3E is simply a desperate bid for legitimacy, and IMO completely obviously false. OD&D didn't contain ungeneric poppycock like "dragonborn warlords" and blink elves in the core implied setting. That alone gets the flavour all wrong, never mind the mechanics.

So true. It does not feel like D&D. It has lost that in the kewl superpowers for everyone movement. 4E is so far from the feel and style of OD&D that I just cant even be gain to understand how people still use that line....sigh.

 

[JeffB]

For me, its a combination of how monsters are created and run, and how the rules are broader, simpler. 3.x had a rule for everything, and it was easy to feel you had to use said rules, instead of relying on your improv skills and sound judgement, as we had before.

This

I'm not wild about the whole 'powers' aspect, it just doesn't feel very D&D-ish when you ready them, but during play it doesn't really detract from anything. I know we're all enjoying playing D&D a whole lot more now, so I suppose that may be the true reason 4E feels more like earlier editions to me. At the end of the day, for me D&D is whatever gets my buddies and me around a table, slaughtering orcs and amassing treasure and having a lot of fun.

This

. I see all sorts of similarities. Conceptually the idea that the heroes are just that, heroes is very much Basic/Expert. Plus, the focus of the game is very similar. Basic/Expert focused very, very strongly on the adventure, not the setting.

This.

Along with a focus on your main class, instead of the rampant lame multiclassing prevalent in 3e (and to a lesser extent 1E/2E).

It's not so much particulars as it is broad themes that give me the B/X vibe. Regardless, I dig

 

[Engilbrand]

I never played anything before 3e, and I don't want to. That said, my players are in their 40s and keep telling me that they love how this edition has gone back to the basics. They tell me that the game, in a lot of ways, feels like 1st edition.
The "powers make it not D&D" argument is absolutely ridiculous. They're all just mechanics. It still boils down to "I hit it really hard. In the face."
If your game hasn't felt like 1st edition, then make it. Stop getting bent out of shape and looking at every rule. "Feel" comes from the players and DM, not the rules.

 

[Nebulous]

For me it's the easy of running it. I can create monsters 20 minutes before the players arrive, something I haven't done since AD&D. I love exceptions based rules systems, they really put the power back in the DM's hands. I'm not wild about the whole 'powers' aspect, it just doesn't feel very D&D-ish when you ready them, but during play it doesn't really detract from anything. I know we're all enjoying playing D&D a whole lot more now, so I suppose that may be the true reason 4E feels more like earlier editions to me. At the end of the day, for me D&D is whatever gets my buddies and me around a table, slaughtering orcs and amassing treasure and having a lot of fun.

I have to agree. DMing 4e is really, really fun. As much fun as it's ever been really. I haven't played yet from the other side of screen, but i don't really dig the whole "power" thing completely. But the players seems to be enjoying it, and if i'm having fun, and they're having fun, then we're good to go.

If i can figure out a way to make magic in 4e more like 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition (even if it makes spellcasters slightly more powerful!) then i will be happy.

 

[Holy Bovine]

So true. It does not feel like D&D. It has lost that in the kewl superpowers for everyone movement. 4E is so far from the feel and style of OD&D that I just cant even be gain to understand how people still use that line....sigh.

So this is a "line" now too? I'll echo your sigh I guess....