D&D (2024) Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?

[CreamCloud0]

Since it was only "four out of several 100" and thus an inconsequential amount, would be fine with nuking them from 4e then if it ever came back? If not, what about them makes them un-nukable?

while i never played 4e, i'd say probably not, even if there's only 'four of several 100' they're still filling a niche, a niche that might feel conspicuously empty for those types of martial character if removed? the amount of times that 5e fighters have been ragged on in threads for lacking any way to actually Defend or control the battlefield and how they desparately need something like Come And Get It to do that.

plus i don't see how nuking these options is the better, easier solution to just not using them if you don't like them, it's the 'i don't like this so nobody else should be able to play with it either' solution, other people obviously still want to use them, and removing options has never been the ideal solution to these kinds of problem.

 

[FrogReaver]

while i never played 4e, i'd say probably not, even if there's only 'four of several 100' they're still filling a niche, a niche that might feel conspicuously empty for those types of martial character if removed? the amount of times that 5e fighters have been ragged on in threads for lacking any way to actually Defend or control the battlefield and how they desparately need something like Come And Get It to do that.

plus i don't see how nuking these options is the better, easier solution to just not using them if you don't like them, it's the 'i don't like this so nobody else should be able to play with it either' solution, other people obviously still want to use them, and removing options has never been the ideal solution to these kinds of problem.

If the complaint is the direction of the game then saying ‘just don’t use an offending option’ is a non-answer.

 

[Oofta]

while i never played 4e, i'd say probably not, even if there's only 'four of several 100' they're still filling a niche, a niche that might feel conspicuously empty for those types of martial character if removed? the amount of times that 5e fighters have been ragged on in threads for lacking any way to actually Defend or control the battlefield and how they desparately need something like Come And Get It to do that.

plus i don't see how nuking these options is the better, easier solution to just not using them if you don't like them, it's the 'i don't like this so nobody else should be able to play with it either' solution, other people obviously still want to use them, and removing options has never been the ideal solution to these kinds of problem.

As @UngeheuerLich stated, it was not just "four of several 100" powers that were the problems. You could, in theory, ignore them especially by the end of 4E's run in part because they released a book that gave you options to play more mundane martial characters. But it was too little too late, coming at the very end of 4E's lifetime. Even then, the powers that I didn't care for were just a small part of the problem.

There are many approaches to how rules are built and even though I played a ton of 4E and fully supported it, by the end of it's life I was going to stop playing D&D. If 5E hadn't come along, I would have either switched to PF or gone back to 3.5 (even though that game started falling apart for me at around level 15 for different reasons). It's not like I only played martial characters either. People like what they like and I'm happy for people that liked 4E.

I'm not pushing back against people's preferences when I attempt to explain issues, I'm not someone who never played the game and rejected it because of bad "presentation" or online comments. D&D 4E just wasn't my cup of tea and it never had the same feel and rewards as every other version. Trying to tell me that I and the vast majority of people I played with were wrong about our impressions, that we were somehow mistaken, lacked imagination, or had an overblown reaction to a tiny percentage of the game just rubs me the wrong way. I'll never tell anyone they were having bad-wrong-fun for liking a game I burned out on, all I ask is that they tell me I would have liked it if I had just done it right.

 

[FrogReaver]

The problem wasn't just the builder, but all the other online resources that vanished when Wizards pulled their D&D tools. All the stuff in all the books was online, with current errata, but also the online Dragon articles which added more options, like the Class Acts. You went from having a fairly complete game to whatever materials you had laying around. Now, certainly, those resources are available again, but it was quite awhile before that was true at the time, and many groups just moved on.

I wouldn’t dream of playing 4e without the character builder. You probably don’t need it during a session, but for character creation and leveling you most likely will.

 

[Hussar]

In 4e it was way more needed than in 5e or 3e. 2000 feats or more IIRC? 100s of powers as you said.

Meh. How many spells are there in 5e? Never minding 3e which had several thousand FEATS, never minding the rest of it. If you could play 3e without a character builder, you certainly didn't need one for 4e.

You only needed a character builder if you insisted on using every single option ever printed for 4e. If you were using your physical books, then, well, it was no different than any other edition of D&D. THe only thing was, people got very used to using the Character Builder, and when it was gone, it left a big old hole - particularly because people didn't actually have those physical books.

Same with the Dragon stuff. ALl that stuff could be downloaded. All of it. It was all available for download. And people had lots and lots of warning before it was taken down. But, people ignored all that and used the Character Builder. Then when the CB was dropped, they lost access to all that stuff.

Having an opinion about 4e is fine. Not liking 4e is fine. Continuing to bang the edition war drum by pointing to stuff that is so easily discounted is not fine. Again, we're back to talking about Come and Get It and 4e=WOW. I mean, seriously? Really? These are so easily shown to be wrong.

And the worst part is, EVERY SINGLE THING that people point to as being totally unacceptable in 4e IS IN 5E. You don't like Come and Get it because it makes the game too video gamey? What, does no one play a Battlemaster in your game? No one plays a Mastermind rogue? There's all sorts of the same sort of thing that was "totally unacceptable" in 4e that appears in 5e. But, because it's worded differently, presented differnetly, and done under the radar - it's perfectly fine.

 

[CreamCloud0]

As @UngeheuerLich stated, it was not just "four of several 100" powers that were the problems. You could, in theory, ignore them especially by the end of 4E's run in part because they released a book that gave you options to play more mundane martial characters. But it was too little too late, coming at the very end of 4E's lifetime. Even then, the powers that I didn't care for were just a small part of the problem.

There are many approaches to how rules are built and even though I played a ton of 4E and fully supported it, by the end of it's life I was going to stop playing D&D. If 5E hadn't come along, I would have either switched to PF or gone back to 3.5 (even though that game started falling apart for me at around level 15 for different reasons). It's not like I only played martial characters either. People like what they like and I'm happy for people that liked 4E.

I'm not pushing back against people's preferences when I attempt to explain issues, I'm not someone who never played the game and rejected it because of bad "presentation" or online comments. D&D 4E just wasn't my cup of tea and it never had the same feel and rewards as every other version. Trying to tell me that I and the vast majority of people I played with were wrong about our impressions, that we were somehow mistaken, lacked imagination, or had an overblown reaction to a tiny percentage of the game just rubs me the wrong way. I'll never tell anyone they were having bad-wrong-fun for liking a game I burned out on, all I ask is that they tell me I would have liked it if I had just done it right.

you're completely right of course, but please note my response wasn't about if the presentation of those powers was 'right' or if you or anyone else is wrong or not in their dislike of 4e (you're not wrong your opinion is entirely valid), but simply on whether nuking those options from 4e would have a significant impact on the game, and i gave my opinion of the situation to the best of my understanding.

 

[FrogReaver]

Meh. How many spells are there in 5e? Never minding 3e which had several thousand FEATS, never minding the rest of it. If you could play 3e without a character builder, you certainly didn't need one for 4e.

You only needed a character builder if you insisted on using every single option ever printed for 4e. If you were using your physical books, then, well, it was no different than any other edition of D&D. THe only thing was, people got very used to using the Character Builder, and when it was gone, it left a big old hole - particularly because people didn't actually have those physical books.

Same with the Dragon stuff. ALl that stuff could be downloaded. All of it. It was all available for download. And people had lots and lots of warning before it was taken down. But, people ignored all that and used the Character Builder. Then when the CB was dropped, they lost access to all that stuff.

I can get behind this analysis - but as you note that makes 4e lack of character builder not really like lack of 1 for 3/3.5e character builder at all

Having an opinion about 4e is fine. Not liking 4e is fine. Continuing to bang the edition war drum by pointing to stuff that is so easily discounted is not fine. Again, we're back to talking about Come and Get It and 4e=WOW. I mean, seriously? Really? These are so easily shown to be wrong.

so what are the non-edition war, valid reasons someone can cite for not liking 4e. Can we get a list?

And the worst part is, EVERY SINGLE THING that people point to as being totally unacceptable in 4e IS IN 5E. You don't like Come and Get it because it makes the game too video gamey? What, does no one play a Battlemaster in your game?

What does the Battlemaster have that’s like 4e’s come and get it?

 

[Micah Sweet]

while i never played 4e, i'd say probably not, even if there's only 'four of several 100' they're still filling a niche, a niche that might feel conspicuously empty for those types of martial character if removed? the amount of times that 5e fighters have been ragged on in threads for lacking any way to actually Defend or control the battlefield and how they desparately need something like Come And Get It to do that.

plus i don't see how nuking these options is the better, easier solution to just not using them if you don't like them, it's the 'i don't like this so nobody else should be able to play with it either' solution, other people obviously still want to use them, and removing options has never been the ideal solution to these kinds of problem.

Harder to do when the person with the issue is the DM, but not impossible.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

so what are the non-edition war, valid reasons someone can cite for not liking 4e. Can we get a list?

Hope you don't mind me butting in here

• They screwed over Forgotten Realms
• They changed the planes
• The book is extremely mechanically written
• The completely new use of terminology borrowed from WoW and other MMORPGs. I think this was too radical for its time. I think it would be a better received edition if it was released today.
• Badly balanced monsters in the first few monster manuals
• Every class using "implements" was a strange streamlining of the design that feels just odd.
• The marketing was questionable

And I say this as someone who believes that 4E is the best designed edition of D&D.

Edit: D&D 2024 looks like an improvement in general. I will adopt it if I ever GM 5E again.

 

[James Gasik]

Some valid reasons not to like 4e D&D:

Where's my level drain?
Why isn't my Wizard all-powerful?
What do you mean all the good spells take an hour to cast and cost money and anyone can get a Ritual book with a feat? Bad enough I'd have to share this feature with Bards and Clerics.
What do you mean my Cleric has to heal and buff others?
What do you mean Fighters aren't damage machines? Protect my allies? They should stick behind me and use ranged weapons.
At-Will Powers for squishies? They should be throwing darts!
What do you mean I can only use Fireball once a day?
What do you mean I can only use that awesome sword strike once every 5 minutes?
Everyone can take an action to heal themselves? What is this nonsense?
You can heal yourself after 5 minutes?
Why does my 1st level character feel like a 5th level character? Where's my zero to hero?
Prestige classes are built into the game?
Rogues are damage dealers?
Where's my Ranger's pet and spells?
Paladins aren't Lawful Good? They can't instantly lose their powers at the drop of a hat? What is this?
Why are dragon men and demon people in my player's handbook?
I can't run my old game with these rules!
They ruined (insert setting of choice).
Where's my extra attacks? What's this "2 [W] garbage?"
Magic items are expected? Nobody should be entitled to magic items!
Magic items are lame now.
So I have to track ammo, but he can just fire magic all day?
So every class can use different stats to hit and damage? And you can wear plate with Strength 10? What's the point of ability scores?
Wait, you start with plate?
Where's my glaive-guisarme?
Where's my spiked chain?
Where's my skills? I can't have a Profession?
I have to use a battle map?
Why is everything in squares? We use the Imperial system in my country!
Why is everything in 5' squares? We use the metric system in my country!
Fireballs are not cubes!