I'm not trying to answer for pemerton. I wanted to provide context to the discussion in case someone didn't have access to the text.
<snip>
I'm not sure what's promised here that only 4E delivers; we'll have to wait for pemerton to answer.
It relates to our exchage upthread (? or on another recent thread) about the relationship between wandering monsters, as a mechanic, and player goals/expectations for play.
The foreword seems to promise a game of heroic fantasy. But the mechanics of B/X - both on the player side and on the GM side - presuppose and produce a game of mostly amoral dungeon raiding and looting. Relevant mechanics on the player side include the XP rules (most XP come from treasure looted) and the non-combat mechanics, which include a reaction roll which clearly presupposes encounters with potential combatants (1 in 36 strangers are so hostile they initiate combat immediately, and another 1 in 4 are inclined that way) and mechanics for exploring a dungeon (heavy doors at which one might listen, or which one might struggle to open, plus traps and secret doors). On the GM side, the mechanics mostly concern stocking a dungeon with creatures, traps and treasure to be looted, and rules for wandering monsters.
There are no rules for encountering mysterious hermits who might give you dragon slaying swords. Nor rules for setting up scenarios involving dragon tyrants to be slain.
Fan of 4e that I am, I'm not seeing it either. AD&D would seem to deliver on the promise of the heroic warrior utterly dependent on his Vorpal Sword to have any chance of decapitating a dragon. And no edition does the 'lone hero' well, for that matter.
I agree that D&D doesn't do lone heroes - it's about group adventuring. (The main model I draw on for thinking about team heroics is actually the superhero team.)
But in my experience AD&D doesn't do heroics any better than Moldvay Basic. The mechanics are still primarily about dungeon or wilderness journeying, and taking loot to gain levels. (2nd ed AD&D has a different XP scheme, but the mechanics aren't much more developed.)
What exactly is the promise made above and how is it that 4e is the only system of D&D ever to deliver on that promise?
Are you saying that you couldn't kill dragons in other editions? Or is it the fact that 4e is the first edition that lets you kill a dragon at 1st level (though technically in 3.x a party could slay a wyrmling at first level)... Or am I totally missing the point?
Though now that I've read it, I'm even more confused... I can only echo Harlock and my previous question... what exactly is promissed here that only 4e delivers??
It's not particularly about killing dragons, in a single blow or otherwise. It's about a game that has mechanics that support a story about fantasy heroics rather than fantasy mercenaries.
In 4e, I'm thinking of the XP rules (which include XP for quests and skill challenges), skill challenges as a general action resolution mechanic for a range of non-combat activities, and story elements which are presented already embedded in a default storyline of heroic conflict.
When you can be killed in a single blow, have a level permanantly drained or die from a single save... it tends to produce a different playstyle than if you know it generally takes 3-4 attacks to knock you unconscious (but not dead), permanent level drain doesn't exist and/or it takes numerous saves to kill you.
This is more of the stuff in Moldvay Basic, and classic D&D more generally, that makes it something other than a game of heroic fantasy.
Prior to 4e, the version of D&D that had come closest to supporting heroic fantasy was Oriental Adventures (the mid-80s original), which for some classes gave XP on a basis other than gold looted, and which - via its Honour and Ancestry rules - generated PCs already embedded in circumstances of heroic conflict, and which presented monsters that were also embedded in those same circumstances. (OA had flaws - its Honour mechanics are overly presciptive, for example, not unlike classic D&D alignment, and it is still saddled with the limitations of classic D&D action resolution - but it was the first D&D book to show me how to focus fantasy RPGing onto the heroic fantasy that I'm personally interested in.)