Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3926184" data-attributes="member: 18280">There are a number of things that I really like about 4e that I am hearing (points of light, return of Monster Levels, using creature types proactively with character race, a plane of Faerie even if poorly named, speeding combat and prep time), a number of things I dislike (dragonborn as a core race, tielfling as a core race to a lesser extent, increased miniatures focus, loss and/or replacement of much of D&D's backstory, no druid in the core), and a number of things that I am just plain skeptical about (speeding combat and prep time, end of Xmas tree effect, end of 10-minute adventuring day, some aspects of design goals, more options yet less complicated, everyone can do everything yet more distinct).There are many things about 4e that seem to mirror houserules I made for 3e, which seems good to me.  There are many things about 4e that make it seem as though it were being designed for those who don't like the "sacred cows" of D&D (by which I mean, its history, its continuity, and its backstory) which seems bad to me.The idea of everything being core, of the digital initiative, of common core elements from prior editions being spread through many books, etc., really bother me.  The idea that WotC was actively suggesting (if not directly stating) that 4e rumours were hogwash just weeks before the announcement, presumably in order to sell 3e books, doesn't sit well with me.However.....About a week before the 4e announcement, I almost responded to one of Kamikaze Midget's posts with "Maybe it is time for a new edition".  And, maybe it is time for a new edition.Certainly, high level play and game prep in 3e can be a pain in the backside.  Certainly, there are problems with the 3e model (although, for some of us, 3rd party rules have been of great use to repair these problems).  Combat in 3e can be so...bloody...slow that it's no wonder that some folks have decided that non-combat-monsters are "unfun".....they get their 10 minutes of "shine" time just before a 30-second (in game) combat that lasts several hours (in real life).So, fixing the speed of combat?  Definitely needed.  Fixing prep time?  Definitely needed.  Fixing the power curve?  Definitely needed.  Fixing the monster vs PC power ration?  Arguably needed.  Fixing the X-mas Tree Effect?  Arguably part of fixing the power curve, but needed.  Re-examining class balance, the CR System, and Wealth-per-level?  These are all part of my vision of "needed" things in a new edition.Making all characters equally proficient in and out of combat?  Not needed.  IMHO, of course.Replacing existing core PC classes with new ones?  Not needed.  IMHO, of course.  Even though I did this in my house rules, I don't think it's necessarily right for the core game.Replacing existing core PC races with new ones?  Not needed.  IMHO, of course.  Even though I did this in my house rules, I don't think it's necessarily right for the core game.Making the game more minis-centric?  Not needed.  IMHO, of course.Quest Cards?  Really depends upon how the advice in the DMG is worded.  Let players write their own cards, and the DM adjudicate their XP value, with good rules for determining XP values, and it's all good.New Monster Designs?  One of the big beefs I have with 1e is that every monster is designed to be fought.  Which makes some of these monsters less useful than they could be.  Why would you be pounding on a brownie?  Please, please, please consider monsters as more than one-dimensional "gotchas".  Please.I guess I feel that, in some ways, 4e seems to be a step backwards towards some of the elements of earlier editions that have been lost.  Exploration as a viable playstyle?  Rock on!  Yet, at the same time, 4e seems to be a step backwards from the options that 3e made possible.  I applaud the loss of "bad" complexity (complexity that bogs down the game for little purpose), but I am dismayed by what seems to be the loss of "good" complexity (for instance, many of the 3e character creation options).And there you have it.  A good revision, IMHO, builds on what has come before.  I feel that too many parts of 4e seem to be tossing out the baby with the bathwater.  If that makes me a grognard, so be it.  After all, I am in my 40s.RC</blockquote>

Verification