Clark Peterson on 4E

[Umbran]

It means that it is a wholly different game, like Rolemaster is, at least for me.

Setting aside that what it means for you doesn't help me understand Orcus, here

What you say doesn't really give me any information. You see, from where I sit, every major edition change has been a "wholly different game" - 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e - all wholly different in my own estimations. Thus, I have learned nothing about the specific issues he may have, or in what direction his rewrite would go.

 

[Grimstaff]

Basically, Clark says that "[4E] just isn't D&D to me".

Context Alert!

Some folks seem to be thinking this means - "Necro doesn't like 4E"


In fact, he's not knocking 4E - that's just what Necromancer games does - they help promote old-school feel under the currently supported version of D&D. Its what they did for 3E, and what they would be doing already for 4E if the GSL were friendlier.

 

[Nikosandros]

Setting aside that what it means for you doesn't help me understand Orcus, here

Of course... and I realize that what I think is also far less relevant...

What you say doesn't really give me any information. You see, from where I sit, every major edition change has been a "wholly different game" - 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e - all wholly different in my own estimations. Thus, I have learned nothing about the specific issues he may have, or in what direction his rewrite would go.

The two editions of AD&D are basically the same game. Even BD&D and AD&D are rather close. I recently run B2 for AD&D with basically very little conversion all done on the fly.

3e is another story... it has many of the trappings of D&D, but the more I played it, the more it felt like a different system, but a related one.

4e, for me, is a whole new game.

 

[Halivar]

I don't usually buy 3PP content. I bought APG because Mouse gave me confidence that he was passionate about the product he made.

What I perceive Clark as saying here is that, if/when he makes 4E content, he'll be doing without any passion whatsoever.

I'll pass.

 

[The Little Raven]

What I perceive Clark as saying here is that, if/when he makes 4E content, he'll be doing without any passion whatsoever.

I'll pass.

That's kinda what I got. Also, it seems that his passion is directed towards making a good deal of my 4e core books useless by rewriting a lot. I was intending to pick up some Necromancer Games 4e materials, specifically the Advanced Player's Guide, but now it sounds like they won't be making things to expand 4e, but things to try and replace a lot of it, so I'm not really interested.

 

[BryonD]

Context Alert!

Some folks seem to be thinking this means - "Necro doesn't like 4E"


In fact, he's not knocking 4E -

Umm, it would certainly be greatly wrong to say that Clark has declared 4E a failure.
But to say "Changing a miniature game back into a roleplaying game", "Taking out the cheesy anime crap", "Putting back in the goodness", and "lost its soul", amongst other things is not "knocking" it seems a pretty clear loss of context in my book.

He called it a miniature game that needs to be turned BACK into a roleplaying game.
Read that again.
It is a miniature game.
As it stands, action needs to be taken to make it return to being a roleplaying game.
In other words, in its current form it falls short of being a roleplaying game.

That statement has been the breath of Satan around here. Suddenly it isn't even "knocking"? ....boggle....

Does that mean Clark is saying you can not roleplay with it? Hell no. It wouldn't surprise me if Clark came back and said that was simply a poor choice of words. But it still is a clear indicator of what it stands on the scale of things.

I'm certain that there are lots of core things he does like about it. If not he wouldn't be looking at fixing the rest. As a matter of fact, that seems clear evidence that he sees what to him is a very nice foundation to work on.

But he is knocking it. Big time.
If he isn't knocking it, then there is no such thing as a hater.

 

[williamhm]

As to why the answer is both simple and complex.

The simple answer as to why 4e doesn't feel like D&D to many individuals is because too many sacred cows were changed in D&D for them. I'm sure there will be many people who will respond here and say, "The sacred cows are all still there!" Well, they're not. That's okay, but you can't say that all of the same sacred cows of D&D are there.


Some of the sacred cows I'm talking about are things like, but not limited to:

• Rolling for hitpoints.
• Different to-hit modifiers for different classes.
• Radically different hitpoints between the classes.
• Saving throws, not defenses.
• Vancian magic. Yes, Vancian magic.
• Not everything ability being a combat option. For example, disguise self or the Ranger's animal empathy.

The list above are just examples. I'm sure I'm missing plenty and there will be people who argue that X is not a sacred cow. Nonetheless, they do indeed exist.

Now the reason that this gets complicated is because the breaking point for everyone is different. Changing saving throws to Defenses might have some people crying, "No! You've changed too much!" and it might have others shrugging and saying, "Eh. No big deal." or "I like it!"

For those people who are 4e fans, the breaking point was never reached. Or there was never any breaking point at all, so long as the game was still about kicking in the door, killing monsters, and taking their stuff.

So, it's perfectly understandable for there to be a complete disconnect between the various players of the game. Some will say too much has changed, others are okay with it. But what people are responding to when they say, "it doesn't feel like D&D to me" are those sacred cows that I was talking about.

Actually I dont understand it new eddition=change, if they had sold me the same tired worn out sacred cows as a new eddition I would not have bought it. I personally feel that 4e brought a breadth of fresh air to the game. As long as the game is fun to play, and gets a group of people together Im happy, if this guy thinks its not dnd thats his opinion, I personally have never bought a 3rd party product, as none of the dms Ive ever gamed with have allowed 3rd party products so this changes nothing for me.

 

[CapnZapp]

The simple answer as to why 4e doesn't feel like D&D to many individuals is because too many sacred cows were changed in D&D for them. I'm sure there will be many people who will respond here and say, "The sacred cows are all still there!" Well, they're not. That's okay, but you can't say that all of the same sacred cows of D&D are there.

Some of the sacred cows I'm talking about are things like, but not limited to:

• Rolling for hitpoints.
• Different to-hit modifiers for different classes.
• Radically different hitpoints between the classes.
• Saving throws, not defenses.
• Vancian magic. Yes, Vancian magic.

The list above are just examples. I'm sure I'm missing plenty and there will be people who argue that X is not a sacred cow. Nonetheless, they do indeed exist.

Well, sure those are examples. But I can't say I miss even a single one of them. Those things are far from the core of 4E's problems.

Though I agree with the "Not everything ability being a combat option" entry.

Bryon is otherwise much closer to the mark...:

But to say "Changing a miniature game back into a roleplaying game", "Taking out the cheesy anime crap", "Putting back in the goodness", and "lost its soul", amongst other things

Meaning that the really sacred cows were things we took for granted and never even realized how precious they were to us:

• Different classes being actually different.
• Spellcasters having more variation at their fingertips than non-magical classes. Keeping magic, well, magical.
• Miniatures optional. What you need to play is a pen. And a paper. Not a bunch of over-priced merchandise.
• A system that generates characters that feels like "real" fantasy persons first, and combat machines a distant second.
• Scrapping the "everybody's special" crap. If everybody's the hero, no one is.
• Not being afraid of death and uselessness. You can't have real drama without risk.

This list I couldn't have created without fourth edition. Because how could we know that Wizards would create such an abomination and pass it off for a role-playing game in general and Dungeons & Dragons in particular?

 

[Firevalkyrie]

I'm going to say that Clark's lost me as a customer. I am not terribly impressed with the concrete rule changes he's citing as part of the D&D "soul" - depowered classes and wizard-uber-alles? That's what I picked up Book of Nine Swords, and later 4th Edition, to get away from! If you change the rules so that the wizard can do everything by picking the right spells, there is no game mechanical incentive to have a party that is not 100% wizard - and the designers of 4th Edition were very explicit that they wanted every class, every power to have a useful, on-the-table function.

 

[Ycore Rixle]

As to why the answer is both simple and complex.

[snip]

So, it's perfectly understandable for there to be a complete disconnect between the various players of the game. Some will say too much has changed, others are okay with it. But what people are responding to when they say, "it doesn't feel like D&D to me" are those sacred cows that I was talking about.

Well said, Toben.

To some extent, I find it disingenuous of people to say that they don't understand what causes Clark and others to find that 4e doesn't feel like D&D. There are many differences between 4e and previous editions. Each player is different. Some will find that 4e has changed too much for their tastes, and some will not.