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

[ggroy]

To simplify DM'ing even more, one could adapt the 4E DM'ing methodology to the 1E AD&D ruleset.

 

[Lanefan]

Is 4e a newbie-teeball game overall? No.

But, could 4e be used as a newbie-teeball game? I'd say yes, more so than probably any edition since OD+D; one can use the basic framework of 4e to learn the game, and it then becomes a jumping-off point into full-on 4e, or 3e, or 1e, or Pathfinder, or... And all in all I think that's a Good Thing, as is anything that could draw more people into the hobby.

Lanefan

 

[Thunderfoot]

<SNIP>
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

Well you know how opinionated we Americans are.
Unfortunately, yeah, I think that's pretty much the way of things. With every edition the gap from the last is larger than before. I can't tell if it's marketing or just plain taste change. I will say that I use a stripped down version of 3.x and am thinking of reverting back to a 1e/2e ADD campaign with 3.x combat. I like story, 4e doesn't do it for me, combat is a RARE thing and magic is nearly non-existent so for me, 4e doesn't work - 3.x is also a little combat heavy, but workable.

So, if I'm an indication, and I think I am, yeah, when it comes to campaigning, there is a separation - although for one offs, I'm fine with 4e, its simple and quick and if you don't add a lot of extra rules can be pulled off without a hitch. I get the appeal, but long term (my last two campaigns have been three plus years for both) it just doesn't fly, at least for me.

 

[Gothmog]

Uh, No, I most certainly am not.

While you might be quoting what people have said, I think you certainly are misunderstanding their intent behind saying those things.

Let's face it, as life progresses and responsibilities increase, most of us don't have the same amount of time to spend prepping and running a game. While 3.x might have worked fine for a high school or college student who has lots of free time, for someone holding down a full-time job, and maybe with family responsibilities, preparing a system-intense/heavy game might not be feasible. A lot of people apparently thought this way, and gave feedback to WotC that they wanted a game that was easier to prepare and run, while still offering pretty much the same in-game experience. WotC listened, and we got 4e. While 4e is easier to prep and more intuitive to run, it certainly isn't a dumbed-down or t-ball version of D&D. As a happy side-effect, it is also more friendly to new DMs, and thats a wonderful thing! 4e also allows experienced DMs to do ANYTHING they could in previous editions, with much less hassle. Its a win/win situation for all DMs.

And speaking from a personal standpoint, when you make the claim that 4e is "dumbed-down" and "t-ball" D&D, it is insulting, only serving to further the edition war. While I'm sure you're a fine man, it makes you look like an elitist jerk online (and being elitist over a game is about the silliest thing I can imagine). I realize some of what you are stating might be hyperbole, but seeing the same thing over and over is annoying.

I ran a 3.x campaign up to 18th level, and played 3.x from 2000 until around 2004. During that time I was in grad school for my PhD in Neuroscience, and my MD in Neurology. And let me tell you, preparing a 3.x game while juggling research in lab, studying for classes, my teaching duties, and residency was a royal pain in the ass. So much so that we quit 3.x in 2004 (we also quit due to player frustration with the system), and went to Savage Worlds as our go-to system until WHFRP2 and 4e came out.

When you insinuate I cannot handle prepping a 3.x game while I am able to do computational neuronal network modeling, neuroelectrophysiology, neurobiochemistry, and neurology is laughable and absurd. 3.x, while a fine system for some folks, is not the be-all and end-all system, and doesn't provide everyone with what they want. For me, the effort that went into prepping 3.x simply wasn't worth the work, especially with my other life responsibilities. 4e is much more in line with what I want when I prepare a game, gives me more bang for my buck (in a time invested manner), and while it isn't perfect, 4e allows me to run more freeform type games that I enjoy more as a DM. I run 4e games in EXACTLY the same way I ran 1e/2e games- with lots of plot, character development, and roleplaying, with S&S/horror/suspence/investigation based slant. At this point, there is no way I'd ever go back to prepping or running a 3.x game, and very likely wouldn't play one anymore- not because I am incapable of doing it, but because the time investment is too great for the small payoff, and I just don't find the system a good fit for my gaming style.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

...
I do not consider this free form. This is intricately mechanical and hardcoded. The whole system is filled with IF you want this, THEN you must do that. That's not free form at all.

I never said and the post I was referring to never said that 3.x was free-form. I was just responding that I thought it was closer to the freeform end of the axis than your 3.x 8.5, 4E 9.0 indicated. (I would have had it more 6.0 and 8.0 if you like).

As well, in 3.x, if you wanted to be able to do A, B and C, there was usually a way of doing it. Using your terminology, if you wanted this, this and this, then you needed to take that, that and that. This is more permissive than what I have found 4E to be where some character themes are quite restricted to the point of being impossible (although as more classes come out, the more holes are being filled). For myself, I think I would enjoy 4E significantly more as a player if all the wonderful ideas, powers and concepts could be mix and matched more permissively than current. Something where I could more easily match my

...
I had FUN with it, don't get me wrong, but I knew darn well that I wasn't doing free form character creation.

I don't think anyone here was saying that you were.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[AllisterH]

Wasnt one of the 4e design goals to make "race matters"?

Outside of levels 1-3, class abilities tended to dominate your char sheet so 4e offers the racial package

(for example, it is quite possible to build an race neutral class in 4e - basically one that ANY race could play but also, thanks to racial feats/PPs/Destinies, you can end up with wildly different builds)

Not sure if there's a way to resolve that and yet make character creation freeform.

re: Poor sucker
I used the poor sucker comment because of how much effort you put into the game yet how much return you got.

It's like you have to prove something to be a DM...I disagree with this...I think a DM shouldn't have to prove anything other than the fact he can make the game interesting for his players.

 

[pawsplay]

If I set "free form" and "programmatic" on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the most programmatic, 4e would be a 9. 3e would be an 8.5.

Seriously, what else can you say about a system that assigns a vast number of abilities to specific levels of specific classes or prestige classes, requiring you to jump through numerous hoops to combine them as you please? You must have six levels of this in order to get that class ability, you must have these prerequisites to dip two levels of that to get this other class ability, you need these other five prerequisites to get that feat you wanted so you'll need some levels of fighter to qualify before the end of your career...

You don't "need" most of that stuff, and if you're not getting until 11th level and your concept depends on it, your concept is not going to work as a beginning character.

 

[Doom]

No, DnD4.0 is no 'tee-ball' game. I've been running a campaign for over a year now, and I've a few players that still struggle wtih what happens when a critical is rolled...and even with aleatools, we get overwhelmed with the 20+ effects blinking on and off every round in a combat.

 

[Jack99]

I'm not worried about anything. I just called it like I see it and got my own celebrity thread.

Its not a celebrity thread until it breaks 100+ pages and people have compared you to Hitler and Satan! (True story)

Regarding the whole tee-ball, it's only true if teeball implies better, smoother and slicker.

 

[jdrakeh]

You don't "need" most of that stuff, and if you're not getting until 11th level and your concept depends on it, your concept is not going to work as a beginning character.

This is a good indicator that the character creation is anything but "free-form." Free-form character creation isn't picking finite options from lists and altering your concept to fit predefined restrictions. In fact, that's pretty much the antithesis of free-form character creation.