D&D 4E 4E sceptics - what do you like?

[Geron Raveneye]

Since my fellow german Mustrum "Gummibärchen Ridcully already started a thread where 4E fans could voice their points of doubt about 4E, I thought it would only be prudent to open a thread where 4E sceptics could voice what they find positive about the new edition. So come on, here's your chance to prove that your scepticism hasn't made you blind to those positive concepts that you saw.

Mine are:

- Points of Light:: I really like the concept of having this as the default campaign, because it leaves a LOT of space for the imagination of new players and DMs to integrate about any adventure they come across or think up themselves without stumbling over heaps of backlogged setting details.

- The implied emphasis of Law vs. Chaos in the setting and planes. Maybe it's just me, but points of light is screaming law vs. chaos more than good vs. evil, and the planar separation of the "Elemental Tempest" with the Abyss at its center below the material vs. the Astral Sea with Divine Domains above the material plane is also a lw vs. chaos dichotomy.

- The underlying principle of class roles. The method/terminology it is done with may be debatable, but the idea is perfect to introduce new players easily into D&D "teamwork thinking", something that shapes a group rather than a bunch of individuals.

- The artwork is, as far as I have seen it, better than what there is in several 3E books (with the exception of Todd Lockwood, whose artwork I love for the most part!). Good art = good visualization of the game = more immersion = better roleplaying.

- The supposedly easier monster creation. It's a step "back" towards older editions, but with an underlying framework of understandable concepts, which will hopefully be disclosed to the DM.

And please, this thread isn't for discussion/dissection of the positive points the posters make. We have PLENTY of other threads for that. I just would like it to show that not all 4E critics are "blind h4ters".

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I honestly can't think of a damn thing. Maybe points of light, as I envision that like the Wilderlands setting.

 

[kmdietri]

I like 2 things;

I like that they are at least making an attempt to enlarge the 'sweet spot' of D&D.

In all honesty, the only rule change I've liked so far is the switch to defense scores, however I dislike the saving throw mechanic that is therefore a result of them...

Pretty much everything else, I dislike or hasn't changed much.

 

[Delta]

This is what I see that's helpful:

- Points of Light. Yeah, that is a helpful campaign-design philosophy, and would help prevent me from covering the map with big elaborate kingdoms with no adventuring locales in them.

- Theory of Simplification. The idea that the gameplay could be simplified I agree with. Unfortunately, I don't see an iota in the rules being released that they've actually followed through with that.

- Full Constitution Hp, Start Level Only. I could get behind this (in fact I proposed it a few months ago). But to me that's only useful if you use it to simplify & standardize the ruleset (see above) -- get rid of creature hit dice, get rid of special NPC classes/rules, get rid of tripled class hp at 1st level -- everyone just has a number of d6 Con dice that determine their non-class hit points. But that's not what's happened here.

 

[Azgulor]

Well, since the sister thread was "what do you worry about", my response is more "what are you hopeful for". Here goes:

I hope that monster design is as fast and easy as advertised without watering down the result.

I hope the game is easier to DM and to play.

I hope it's possible to play lower magic games than just the very high end of the high-fantasy genre without making the game unrecognizeable.

I hope the GSL doesn't restrict 3rd-party publishers beyond the need for the PHB.

I hope the GSL doesn't restrict 3rd-parties abilities to continue to publish 3.x & OGL material.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Powers: I love the at-will, per-encounter and per-day structure. I also am very happy that every class has its own, unique list of powers. Even fighters look like they might be interesting to play now.

Rituals: I'm very happy to see combat/simple utility spells separated from more long term or story-based effects. Having to balance something like Cone of Cold against Scrying was always a very difficult thing to do, and really held the magic of previous editions back, IMO.

Attack vs Defense mechanic: I really like how much this simplifies and speeds up gameplay. It will make things alot easier, not only to play but also to design or make up on the spot.

Removal of Level Drain: I can't say how happy I am that, after 30 years, this god-awful mechanic will finally be part of D&D no more. I can't put into words how much I hated the idea of vampires bitch-slapping levels out of people. It was probably the single biggest gripe I ever had about D&D. Well, that and Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

Christmas Tree Gone/Toned Down: I'm still not entirely convinced that the christmas tree effect is really gone/reduced that much, seeing as there are things like +5 wands now, but any move to make magic items less manditory and more special is a good thing, IMO.

 

[Phlebas]

Stuff that looks interesting

replacement of saving throws by defense numbers - think this is well overdue and means only one person rolling dice at a time in combat.

some of the other mechanical changes (skills etc) look like they will simplify things

addition of the new races

POL, law v chaos, class roles are ok, .... but like most things 4E, I will wait and see the detail

(4E sceptic rather than h4ter)

 

[Lackhand]

Powers: I love the at-will, per-encounter and per-day structure. I also am very happy that every class has its own, unique list of powers. Even fighters look like they might be interesting to play now.

Rituals: I'm very happy to see combat/simple utility spells separated from more long term or story-based effects. Having to balance something like Cone of Cold against Scrying was always a very difficult thing to do, and really held the magic of previous editions back, IMO.

Attack vs Defense mechanic: I really like how much this simplifies and speeds up gameplay. It will make things alot easier, not only to play but also to design or make up on the spot.

Removal of Level Drain: I can't say how happy I am that, after 30 years, this god-awful mechanic will finally be part of D&D no more. I can't put into words how much I hated the idea of vampires bitch-slapping levels out of people. It was probably the single biggest gripe I ever had about D&D. Well, that and Mordenkainen's Disjunction.

Christmas Tree Gone/Toned Down: I'm still not entirely convinced that the christmas tree effect is really gone/reduced that much, seeing as there are things like +5 wands now, but any move to make magic items less manditory and more special is a good thing, IMO.

I'm a liker, so I shouldn't really be posting here. But I promise, I come unarmed!

Icicle -- I like the way that your dislikes are also your hopes (in that they're all different sides of the same issues). It says a lot about us humans.
You're alright.

 

[Derren]

So far there isn't much which I like.
Switching to static defenses is good as is having less (non) stat increasing magic items. Also the theory of simplification is not bad if the implementation of it wouldn't be so gameist.
At will and per encounter powers could also have been a very nice addition if they would have been used more decently and only for powers where it makes sense (like turning undead) but not for every power which exists.
Rituals could turn out to be very good and interesting, but I don't think that will happen as to me it is clear that my expectation of a D&D game and WotC vision for 4E are dimensions apart from each other.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I like the idea of giving humans a niche, rather than having them be everything, with niched humanoids.

I like non rolled stats and hp.