Do you consider 4e D&D "newbie teeball"?

[Rechan]

If it's teeball, then that means that many 3.5 DMs, and DMs of previous editions, pined away for teeball. And that GMs that run rules-light systems are playing catch?

Sure it's accessable to new DMs. But that's because it's easier to DM period. Which was the point. Reduce the amount of preparation and book keeping, which makes it easier for New and Old to handle.

A lot of the advice in DMG2 is useful for new AND old - Robin Laws' chapter was basically "The lessons from Indie RPGs to use in your game are..." That's as much a benefit to old crusty DMs as it is for whippersnappers.

 

[Thunderfoot]

<SNIP>
So, to answer the OP's question... I don't consider it Tee-ball. I consider it Australian Rules Football. Yes, it's football, and it obviously descended from the same Rugby-ish game every other type of football descended from... But, it's certainly not the football I grew up playing, and I find much of it quite odd. I'm sure its fans like it very much, and I hope they have a great time with it.

BRAVO!!! AUTHOR!!! AUTHOR!!!!
This is perhaps the most succinct and profound analogy of 4e I have ever read!!!! I finally have a way to answer my critics of playing the "wrong" version. BRAVO dear rogueattorney, BRAVO!!!!

 

[Ktulu]

Nope; don't consider it a game for newbies anymore than I consider it a game for experienced players only. It's a game system that covers a lot of ground.

 

[catsclaw227]

You have left critically important parts of the conversation out.

You are right, I did leave out the parts about the future of EnWorld and whether it will require 3.x/OGL/4e fans to step-up to the EW support drive financially.

I also left out the stuff in this post, but it still doesn't change the context of your statement.

On a note related to the linked thread above, I don't like calling any DM a "sucker", but I don't think AllisterH was meaning the definition of a man duped. I think he was talking about the inexperienced fellow that was picked from the group of players to DM the next session.

But complexity isn't necessarily a bad thing. Why should a game require months or years of system mastery to enjoy? Or to even play, for that matter, since the game requires a DM?

My main point is that 4e D&D is far from a child's entry game.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Everyone,

I have a feeling that the poster that the OP is referring to has been taken slightly out of context but in the end, the phrase is the same and more than likely a silly one that is just going to get a whole load of people's backs up.

However, I think it would be easier to introduce new players and new DMs to 4E than it would to 3.x so maybe in that context, the tee-ball example is not quite as damning. For me, 4E oversimplified the "gamespace" with numerous jarring examples of where the mechanics do not mesh with the flavour (a by-product of taking much of the simulation out of the ruleset). It is no more perfect than what 3.x was essentially. I still enjoy it, but it appeals to a different side of my gamer personality (as I entered in that poll thread, I am currently playing and enjoying both versions).

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

BRAVO!!! AUTHOR!!! AUTHOR!!!!
This is perhaps the most succinct and profound analogy of 4e I have ever read!!!! I finally have a way to answer my critics of playing the "wrong" version. BRAVO dear rogueattorney, BRAVO!!!!

Bah...you know you're playing the wrong system, T-Foot!

 

[Cadfan]

4e significantly amped up tactical complexity. I view that as pretty much objectively true, but then again I view "find the right spell to solve a problem" or "hope I roll a high number" to be examples of fake difficulty. So I never looked at earlier editions as being very tactically engaged.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

BRAVO!!! AUTHOR!!! AUTHOR!!!!
This is perhaps the most succinct and profound analogy of 4e I have ever read!!!! I finally have a way to answer my critics of playing the "wrong" version. BRAVO dear rogueattorney, BRAVO!!!!

As an Australian who's not in Victoria (and thus used to Australian Rules Football being ridiculed/referred to as "aerial ping pong", "fairy football", "kick and giggle" and the only sport where you "get a point for missing"), the analogy is perhaps more apt than you realise (in terms of the Melbourne/Sydney split in relation to AFL/Rugby League and thus the analogy mirroring the split between 3E/4E).

Again referring to that poll, I was surprised that I was only with 5% of responders who play/enjoy both 4E/3.x (although funnily enough I can't stand AFL but love Rugby League). Is the split between 3E/4E still that large?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[DaveMage]

Based on what I saw in the previews (since I haven't actually played or DMed 4E), I do not think 4E is a beginners/training game at all.

In fact, I doubt you could ever call 800+ pages of core rules (PHB1/DMG1/MM1) a "training" game.

OD&D however - that's for babies!

 

[Vorput]

I agree 4e seems easier to grasp than previous editions, especially for beginners.