D&D 3E/3.5 4E vs 3E... what are the main changes?

[malraux]

4e has emergent complexity. The rules are simple, but the interactions of the rules leads to a reasonably complicated game.

I'll also add another vote to the idea that 4e is much easier to DM. Monsters tend to have all their info spelled out in their stat blocks, which makes the prep work much easier. Occasionally I'll miss an important combo/synergy of monsters, but once you get used to the basic sets, its not too bad (ie, any time you have a creature that can take advantage of combat advantage, I'll need to look for other monsters that can either flank or daze etc.)

Primal: I think you're over thinking some of the DM work. On skill challenges, for example, the formal write-up is rather long, but an informal write-up can just be the basic idea of the challenge, what skills are primary, and have the DM screen at hand to reference the DC chart. For monster powers, the rule of thumb I use is if the creature recharges on a , use the largest limited damage set, if it recharges on , it uses the smallest limited damage set.

 

[Ibixat]

Skill challenge writeups are only there in long format in current mods etc to show the person running the game all the possibilities. When running your own skill challenge that you have designed there is very little you really need to write down. The only reason for making a very large writeup of a skill challenge is to enable other DM's to run it as you intended.

You can run a skill challenge off the cuff very easily. All you have to do is be consistent. And as a home game type situation the players do most of the work in the skill challenge. Ask them what they want to try, think about what they said and tell them if it works or not. Take notes while you are adjudicating it so you don't have a 19 work one time and a 20 fail the next round etc.

 

[Raunalyn]

One of the things I'm really enjoying about 4E is the balance. A 20th level fighter is just as powerful as a 20th level mage. In 3.X, a mage at high levels was truly frightening, and standard melee fighters had an extremely difficult time bringing one down. 4E? Not so much. Everyone has their roles, and everyone has their strengths.

And is it me or does it seem like 4e is going back to the feel of Advanced D&D 1st edition? Believe me, that is not a bad thing. Some of the most classic game modules of all time are 1st Ed.

 

[SuperGnome]

Yeah, as has been said 4e is basically a different game. It's a PnP RPG, has D&D written on it and is from WotC, but it's very different. I run it for my players (and it's a bit easier to run IMO) since they like it better than 3e because of the player options they have.

I don't know I'd want to -play- it though. The tone is so different, I'd have no interest in it if my players didn't. I find no sense of immersion in 4e, or very little at best. A lot of that was let go for the sake of balance, which isn't really a bad thing, but not something that "does it" for my at all. A lot of people confuse this with saying they don't have rules for RP, but it's nothing like that at all. I just don't see any internal reality... it's just so very gamey.

So I can't say it's bad, but it's not for me. I liked the evolution of D&D (played and DM'd basic, 2e, 3x) and this just doesnt' seem part of it. My players do dig it though so far.