A "naysayer's" review of 4E

[eleran]

For some reason when I think of the idea that anyone can potentially do Rituals, I am reminded of Angel, Wesley, or Giles from the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series -- they performed magical rituals quite frequently, despite not being mages themselves. They broke out the components, candles, books, etc. and read out of a book, which fits the flavor of Rituals perfectly. I'm sure there are other book and movie examples of non-mages doing magic in a similar fashion, but I'm blanking right now.

I always flash to Call of Cthulhu, where even if I am a policeman, I can start a ritual as long as I have the incantations written out and the correct props and prepwork. Thats how I picture the ritual system for my game.

 

[Primal]

Hey Primal, please elaborate on this.

-W.

Gladly. I think the excellent Skill Challenge rules will (if used by the DM, that is) certainly encourage character immersion and role-playing in clever ways. I would compare it to how many Indie RPGs use mechanical "lures" to achieve that result so that players do not consciously even notice it. Another reason for my opinion was the strong focus on the story in all the books, which was even further supported by beatiful and thematically very appropriate art.

3E (or any other edition of the game) does not have any mechanics that would encourage that, consciously or subconsciously.

Of course, as I have already noted, there are some things which may actually suspend your disbelief and distrupt immersion. Mainly I would see it as a problem for more 'simulationist-minded' players, who want the rules and the setting to be more "realistic". For example, the heavy focus on combat and "cinematic action" might be disruptive for me, personally, but I think most groups will find it actually more "immersive". Of course, you need a good, story-oriented DM to run 4E and for everyone to get the "most" out of it.

 

[Banshee16]

Thanks for your perspective, Primal.

Honest and open minded. I don't know why some people decry that someone is not openminded if they read the book and come to the conclusion that 4e is not the be all / end all for them. Being closed minded is not even trying to read the books at all - and there are some who will not even do that.

It seems that if you say something negative about 4e, there are a few people who are willing to dogpile you for it. Your opinion has a much weight as theirs. We call that respecting viewpoints where I come from.

Thanks for pointing that out....it's something that's really bugged me about these boards in the last few months.

Personally, I think I am going to check the books out first, before deciding on buying. The Pathfinder RPG is looking better and better, and might be a decent alternative.

I hope that my fears with 4E are misplaced.....guess I"ll know in another week.

Banshee

 

[eleran]

I think you're spot-on.

4e is a lousy simulation of any kind of reality.

(Ironically, I think it's a decent simulation of fantasy movies and novels - but that's another discussion for another time.)

I think it looks like a pretty fun game, though, and it definitely looks like D&D to me. I can't wait to give it a shot, since it seems to fix most of the problems I had with 3.x - namely, crazy spellcasting lookup times, polymorph, and so on.

It may introduce more problems, and I might not like it in the end. This is all fine.

Just like 3.x, 4e won't be the right game for everyone. Ironically, I think 4e caters better to an RC/1e/2e mindset than a 3e mindset.

-O

Which reality that involves elves are you trying to simulate?

 

[Derren]

Which reality that involves elves are you trying to simulate?

A reality which resembles our own just with elves.

Just because there are some fantastic things in it doesn't mean that that fantasy should defy all physical laws we know like 4E does (circle = squares, etc.)

 

[Dausuul]

On the point about 'not enough options' in a way you are correct, there is usually one or two 'silos' for a class (cha pally, str pally) that given only what is in the phb will be hard to break out of. But the phb is very long (imo.) with little useless fat to trim (unless you are NEVER going to have a warlock or a dragonborn) so in order to be 'fair' and add say another power for each level to all classes they would have had a bppk that was quite a few pages longer.

Only if powers are strictly limited to one class.

 

[LcKedovan]

Gladly. I think the excellent Skill Challenge rules will (if used by the DM, that is) certainly encourage character immersion and role-playing in clever ways. I would compare it to how many Indie RPGs use mechanical "lures" to achieve that result so that players do not consciously even notice it. Another reason for my opinion was the strong focus on the story in all the books, which was even further supported by beatiful and thematically very appropriate art.

3E (or any other edition of the game) does not have any mechanics that would encourage that, consciously or subconsciously.

Of course, as I have already noted, there are some things which may actually suspend your disbelief and distrupt immersion. Mainly I would see it as a problem for more 'simulationist-minded' players, who want the rules and the setting to be more "realistic". For example, the heavy focus on combat and "cinematic action" might be disruptive for me, personally, but I think most groups will find it actually more "immersive". Of course, you need a good, story-oriented DM to run 4E and for everyone to get the "most" out of it.

Thanks, I'll check out that aspect. I appreciate the response

-W.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Is this the new "rule of nature" in 4E -- every room *must* consist of square forms and lines?

Pretty much, yeah. This is a function of 4E's dumb-tastic 1-1-1-1 diagonal movement rule. A room that is five squares by seven squares (25 feet by 35 feet) is literally twice as large if drawn on the diagonal. (This is true for any size room, I just used 5x7 as an example.) Making non-rectangular rooms, or even rectangular rooms on the diagonal, is just too weird, spatially. (In the "Dungeoncraft" sample dungeon a couple of months back, to make a diagonal room, the cartographer actually sneakily switched orientations of the grid in mid-corridor.)

 

[hong]

A reality which resembles our own just with elves.

And bat guano.

Just because there are some fantastic things in it doesn't mean that that fantasy should defy all physical laws we know like 4E does (circle = squares, etc.)

Ah, the powers of inference.

 

[Staffan]

As for magic, I like the idea of rituals but I don't like the way they've been done. Some things should just not be rituals. Tenser's Floating Disk is the most glaring example. If a wizard can conjure rams of force energy at first level I don't think it's a stretch to think he might be able to make a floating disk of force.

I don't have any problem rationalizing this. Pretty much all the spells either have instant effects ("BAM!"), instant effects with a short aftereffect ("BURN...burn...burn..."), or require some amount of concentration from the caster to maintain. Weaving magic in a more "stable" fashion that keeps it going for hours on end might very well take more time.