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

[Jeff Wilder]

Hey Jeff, you can't post both in the skeptic and the pro thread! Now how am I supposed to decide which side you're on!

Honestly, I don't really know where I am on the spectrum myself.

(1) I was never going to buy more than the core 4E books, because I have literally everything WotC published for 3.5, and it will last me years as a DM. I was going to buy the core books because of the possibility I'd play. I was in no wise against 4E, and defended WotC's decision to publish it, even in consideration of their broken promise to provide at least a full year's notice.

(2) 1-1-1-1 diagonals blew the possibility of even playing out of the water. It drove me away from the miniatures game, which I loved. I cannot overstate how much I hate that rule and the (conscious or not, acknowledged or not) contempt that it shows for gamers.

(3) I also seriously hate what we know of healing so far, but only insofar as there's no such thing as lingering injury. At all. Period. Since we likely haven't seen everything on injury and death in the game, this might be mitigated ... but if not, I'll end up hating this rule almost as much as 1-1-1-1 diagonals.

But that's it. I don't particularly like their choices of core races, but I can live with them. And where it doesn't break basic verisimilitude, I'm strongly in favor of most of their game-play decisions. (For instance, I really like the mechanics of healing surges and second wind. Up to the point where it's (so far as we know) impossible to actually be injured without being dead.)

So where am I on the spectrum? Personally, I think I'm pretty damned close to the middle, but the pro-4E "side" sure seems to think I'm anti-4E, judging by the responses I get from some of them.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Well I've search long and hard my thoughts to find what I do like.
1 Action points. I use something close to this nice touch
2 Second wind .I use something like this just not as often and requires an action point to use.
3 T ouch attack vs. reflex save isnt bad
thats it all i could find I like there area few other things but they seem to have failed at them so no point in posting them.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Things that I like:

1. Unified defense progression. I'm thinking of seeing if I can find some support for writing a 3.75, or 4th edition that is still D&D under the OGL and under another name of course. Thinking about how to solve the issues that come up with saving throws in 3rd edition games, the unified progression based on level rather than simply class seems like the best way to go.

2. Shift (5' step) as a move action. I don't know how many times I've had to remind even experienced players "no, you can't 5' step and then move."

3. The removal of gnomes

4. Some of the cosmology changes. Deific realms, elemental chaos, astral sea, feywild, etc--I like them better than the current default D&D cosomology. (Of course, I never liked D&D cosmology to begin with).

5. The bloodied condition (that's the one thing I have yoinked for my 3rd edition games thus far--granted it's not really a mechanic, but it's nice to have a way to let players know how much or how little they have accomplished in injuring a monster).

6. Being able to charge through allies and being able to move then charge. Overall, I'm not a fan of the 4th edition charge rules, but the 3.5 rules were ridiculously restrictive.

7. The jury is still out on the addiiton of "per encounter" to the collection of per day and at will powers that were previously in D&D (though I recall 1st edition turn undead being per encounter so maybe it's not that cut and dried). However, I like the concept of it. Whether it works out in practice remains to be seen.

8. The artwork (at least the stuff without tieflings or dragonborn). WoW style artwork > dungeonpunk.

9. Halberds have reach! (About time).

 

[Toben the Many]

I like many things about 4e. It's just that the things I don't like...I really don't like.

• I like what they are doing with monsters...a lot. Minions, boss monsters, monster roles - fantastic.
• I like what they are doing with stake-setting and task resolution. I will probably start using that in my 3e games immediately.
• I like that the abilities of characters seem to be much more streamlined. About 1 to 3 sentences sums up what you can do. No long paragraphs of text to sort through to figure out what you can do.
• I like what they are doing with skills. This is probably the thing I like the most.
• Second wind is...okay. I'm just hoping that there can be some lingering damage after a fight. It's good that the cleric is not stuck fixing the party, however.

While I love these elements...I either hate other elements or am just lukewarm about them.

My big question mark will be how the whole game "feels" once I and everyone else sits down to play. You can't quantify it, you can't measure it, and you can't explain it, but if it "feels" right, I'll get over all of my hangups and just play the game.

 

[Minicol]

The only positive point I will make, is that they are trying to revamp the diplomacy system.

 

[Imp]

I am still about 50/50 on 4e.

The new monster generation system sounds like it would make me very, very happy indeed and is a huge huge improvement.

I generally think the combat system is an improvement, with characters doing more different things and moving around a lot more.

There are improvements in the skill system: I like the newer skill breakdowns, the renaming of some skills (Streetwise makes so much more sense than Knowledge (local)) and the skill challenges, though for those I had already seen if not implemented yet similar house rules for 3e.

I like the healing surges in that it makes having an attendant from the clergy less freakishly mandatory for adventuring parties (and I don't really like the substitute options in 3e either).

Never really been a fan of Vancian casting.

The professed adaptability for low-magic settings is a big plus.

 

[Kunimatyu]

If there is one thing that will keep me from picking up 3e it's this. I don't want regeneration in my games - except for trolls and the like.

HP != actual wounds

You know this.

 

[Monkey Boy]

NEW BLOOD - I like that they are trying to capture a new market. It's about time there was some new blood and 4e seems built to appeal to a new/younger? crowd. I am not saying it is abandoning the old, only that it is reaching out to the new. It is embracing popular memes with influence from anime, ccg, advanced DnD mini's, and WOW (there is nothing wrong with that). Bringing in new blood is a great thing as I would love to see kids experience the same sense of wonder I had with the old Red box.

LESS SWINGY LEVEL 1 - I like this as well. More HP at low level = not dead at the hands of an orc with a great axe.

SKILLS CLEANED UP - looks fine to me. skills don't = roleplaying as some have suggested. If you want to be a blacksmith just tell the DM, don't plow skill points into it.

 

[The Ghost]

There's a lot of things I like, they're just counterbalanced by things I don't.

This is largely the way I feel.

The one thing that does stand out to me as something I can really get behind is the existence of the feywild. Although, I may end up just mining 4e for the feywild concept and adding it to my 3.5 game.

 

[howandwhy99]

Hot damn Geron, those are 5 definite likes for me too. I think they are movements backwards to a better design though. There are many of those, mostly hints those so I'll wait. Forward thinking likes include:

Siloing Abilities. Groups can use what they want, alter what they want, add, create, whatever, and it all still hangs together without wiping out the rest of the system.

Level Tiers. I'll likely jam everything I like into the first one and call it "the game", but explicitly dealing with different game styles and recognizing the need for the game to change gets a thumbs up from me.

Simplifying DMing AND Play. I think they should have increasing levels of complexity options for both players and DMs, but starting off easy and keeping time requirements to a minimum. Another big plus. DMing was always hard, I hope they made it easier for this edition to bring in new ones.

Rituals. They realized magic is the big bang every so often. This bodes well at least for stripping the game down and building it into what I need.

Story Leads / Story Design positions in house. The whole damn game is a story and needs to present as good (and varied IMO) an artistry as possible. I've really been turned off by their world design and descriptive elements for a few years now, but I recognize that the Dragonlance authors and the adventure designers in the 80's sold the game far before many of those buyers knew the rules. Wizards (and any company) needs real artists in these areas. Not math heads, but visionaries. World of Darkness is likely the greatest proof of what dreams can sell, but there are many others like Paradigm Concepts, The original Warhammer trio, CoCthulhu, Midnight. It's not always rules that sell an RPG product.

Online character creation / Rules database. Simplifying the game even more to a cool computer app, so you don't even have to read the book if you are a player is 100% awesome. Rule bloat can and will get out of hand for non-computer users. I hope they put in a house rules option and a "Rules we use" selection tool too.

Online gameplay. They recognized the biggest constraint on gaming was time. ...Yet everyone is online even when they can't get together to game. This may not be the awesome I need from face-to-face, but it should entice a new community to try more FtF.

Organized Play, specifically the FREE Player Finder Database. Yeah, it's an old idea, but they are the only ones capable of really making a multi-million person database of games by area, playstyle, age, and any number of other factors. I think it will go over big. They just have to promote the hell out of it. It is soooo damn easy, so needed, and my only worry is it will be overlooked in place of other online products.

And though it's one of the throwbacks (all unmentioned here), I'd really love:
- Humans in the Monster Manual??? (please oh please)