Can anyone describe 4E in 1E/2E terms?

[Edena_of_Neith]

Imagine that I have never played 3.0 or 3.5. Imagine I've never even looked at the books.
I've only played 1E and a smattering of 2E.

To me, the fighter = good THAC0, attacks 1/1 to 3/2, does a lot of damage, has a lot of hit points.
The rogue? Backstabbing. Leather armor. Lousy hit points. %s to do things nobody else can (or wants) to do.
The wizard? Spellbooks. Memorized spells. No armor, no hit points, no attacks worth talking about. If she survives to high level, most powerful character in the game by far.
The cleric? Mr. Healing. Without him, the undead get to the party and procreate some more of their kind.
The bard? 8 levels of fighter + 8 levels of thief = one very mean character, at 1st level. Or, in 2nd edition, Jack of All Trades.


Barbarian? The Big Bad Barbarian. Mess with him, it's Axe, Sword, then squash-you time.
Druids? She entangles you. She calls Earth Elementals on you. She might even use poison. She is a bird, a snake, a tiger. Dis the woods, and you're history.
Illusionists? Scary. My 5th level illusionist with his spectral force creates a wraith, and it level drains all the monsters! (well, they think it did, so they fall unconscious, and we slit their throats.)
Monks? Useless (although the Dragon Magazine Monk was better by far ...)
Psionics? 10 attacks and defenses per round. Tower of Iron Will, anyone? Id Insinuation? Psionic telepathy? Or, in 2E, the psionicist (that's right, leave the nice illithid alone, and you'll be eaten last ...)

Monsters?
They come in 1 HD types, 2 HD types, 3 HD types, and so on.
Some have special attacks that are scary (such as carrion crawlers or ghouls) and some have attacks that are REAL scary (ghosts - 10 to 40 years per hit, ncyademons (sp?) drains attritubes permanently, iron golems (you just can't damage the things ...) and some monsters have attacks that are downright nasty (demilich = autodeath, and it eats your soul: no save, no appeal, giant green slime falls on party, TPK with no recourse, tarrasque shows up and it takes 2 Wishes to kill it.)

Treasure?
You get 1 experience point per gold piece taken home. That's taken home (how much gold a large sack will hold, is another debate.)
If you can't carry the dragon hoard home, that's a problem. Find an answer. And hope to evade the king, who wants his cut of your loot.
Well, you can always sell that +5 plate armor for a lot of gold, and that would count ... but do you really want to sell +5 plate armor?!

-

Ok, how does 4E relate to this?

A 4E fighter is what, in relationship to a 1E fighter?
A 4E wizard, thief, cleric, are what, in relation to the 1E versions?
Experience is won how, compared to 1E? Is it more difficult to earn? Less difficult? By different means?
And etc.

I wish to hear your take, for anyone who desires to respond here.

Edena_of_Neith

 

[hong]

30-level cap --> no 161st level cleric/mages

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

lol

Can anyone explain 4E in 1E/2E terms?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Imagine that I have never played 3.0 or 3.5. Imagine I've never even looked at the books.
I've only played 1E and a smattering of 2E.

To me, the fighter = good THAC0, attacks 1/1 to 3/2, does a lot of damage, has a lot of hit points.
The rogue? Backstabbing. Leather armor. Lousy hit points. %s to do things nobody else can (or wants) to do.
The wizard? Spellbooks. Memorized spells. No armor, no hit points, no attacks worth talking about. If she survives to high level, most powerful character in the game by far.
The cleric? Mr. Healing. Without him, the undead get to the party and procreate some more of their kind.

Ok, how does 4E relate to this?

A 4E fighter is what, in relationship to a 1E fighter?
A 4E wizard, thief, cleric, are what, in relation to the 1E versions?
Experience is won how, compared to 1E? Is it more difficult to earn? Less difficult? By different means?
And etc.

I wish to hear your take, for anyone who desires to respond here.

Edena_of_Neith

I have never played or read D&D before 3E, so my description might be insufficient.

A Fighter is still a Fighter. He has lots of hit points, and he deals lots of damage. He also is hard to hit because he's usually heavy armored. He is considered a "Defender", meaning he is in the face of his enemies, drawing their fire and keeping his allies safe.

A Rogue still backstabs, wears light armor, and has less hit points then a fighter. Backstab is now called "Sneak Attack", and it's a little easier to use, I presume, but it requires maneuvering on the battlefield (or surprise). A Rogue is considered a Striker, which means that he probably will deal some more damage to individual foes then the Fighter, but he can't stand close to them for long.

A Wizard still normally won't wear armor, and he has less hit points. He still uses spells and a spellbook, but some of his "bread & butter" spells (that he uses in combat at least) can be done more or less independent of that book. These spells can be cast very often (some even every round), but they are not as powerful as the spells you might remember.
. His spellbook is now also filled with rituals, basically spells that require longer to cast and provide the real utility stuff (Detect Secret Doors or Knock, as examples).
He is considered a Controller, which means he has spells that shape the battlefield (think Wall of Stone), limit the enemies options (think Hold Person) and deal with groups of foes (think Fireball).

The Cleric is still the healer guy good vs. Undead. His prayers (spells) have a similar "frequency" of use, but focus on protection and aiding his allies. If he deals damage with his prayers, it is often "radiant", which is particularly harmful vs undead. He can still turn undead and overall is probably still the best defense against undead.
He is considered a "Leader", which means he is helping his allies to do their respective jobs better, granting them bonuses to attack, damage, defense, or heal them.

Something I didn't mention yet for Rogues and Fighters:
They also get abilities that resemble something between "spells" and "combat maneuvers", called "Exploits". All classes have powers, and they are resources (similar to spells) that need to be managed over the day, over a single combat, or even from combat round to combat round.
They are similar to spells in that way that spells are the classic examples of powers that are resource managed. You have only a limited number of uses, and you need to carefully manage when and how to use them. They are in effect not spells though, since they grant combat maneuver like effects - shoving enemies around, tripping them, and so on.

Unlike earlier editions, the resource management of spells and other powers are not "daily" only. There are powers that refresh daily, and there are powers that refresh after each combat (so you can use them only once during your combat). There are also a few powers that can be used at-will.

For someone only familiar with earlier edition power management, the powers for non-spellcasters might be the hardest to understand. Normally you'd expect that you can perform a combat maneuver as often as you like (or rather: try as often as you like), while spells - well, spells are magic, and they can work however the universe tells us magic works.
The best way to approach these powers is to assume that the maneuvers could theoretically attempted as often as you liked, but to really have it work, a certain element of luck and planning is involved that is not being replicated in the combat rules directly. (Since we're only measuring distance in 5 ft x 5 ft squares, a lot of detail compared to the real world is not described in the rules). Instead of trying to describe this "subtle" maneuvering, we just assume that the specific situation can only occur once per day or once per 5 minutes, and the player gets to decide which time of the day or encounter specifically.

 

[BeauNiddle]

4th ed is 1st ed with fewer special cases.

1st ed and 2nd ed read scary. There are all these wonderful abiliities and monsters with special powers. However when running it the vast majority of DMs went out the way to protect the players from exactly those powers. 4th ed has removed a lot of those powers so it reads less scary but plays in much the same way.

Magic has been toned down a lot. One of the main things in 4th ed is they have removed nearly all save or die spells / abilities. They have instead replaced them with two turn abilities. You get one warning and then you have to react to the situation before you die (either by running / somebody else forcing the creature away / putting up the right defences / etc.)

If you played 1st ed where you had to research the creatures you were about to face to know how to survive then 4th ed supports your style of play. If you played 1st ed to see how far this current character could get before dying then 4th ed supports your style of play (although you're likely to get slightly further for the same amount of caution)


The main problem in describing the game in 1E/2E terms is the fact 1E/2E terms never existed - it was the terms of the houserules and options used by that specific DM. 4th ed is still D&D. Fighters fight, magic users use magic, monsters kill and monsters die. Good deads are done, bad deads are done. What more is there to know?

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Ah, thanks much, both of you. Thanks for the description!

Yours Sincerely
Edena_of_Neith