For the first time... apprehension

[eve_of_dante]

I agree there. What I've seen of the art so far dispenses of the "dungeonpunk" look: less tattoos and massive piercings, no crazy armor spikes, more normal looking shields, and armor that doesn't look pieced together from a dozen different suits.

I don't think you'll like Races and Classes, it's all armour spikes, big shields and tattoos and massive boots... but that seems to be just one artist's style... the one who draws nearly all the book...

 

[Orius]

Not necessarily a bad thing.

I don't really mind them getting inspiration from WoW. That thing is damn popular, and there can be elements of an MMO that can work in a traditional RPG. Things I like about MMOs are exploring a big world, or crafting my own items. No reason for D&D not to emphasise these things. Feat trees don't sound like a bad idea; a lot of modern video games set up the learning of abilities in a logical progression, I don't have any problem with D&D applying this approach to feats.

What I really don't want to see added to D&D from WoW is massive player-on-player ganking. D&D has always been about cooperative play, and should remain that way.

 

[Gloombunny]

I am by no means trying to say that Lord of the Rings is the be-all-end-all of fantasy gaming. However, I do believe it provides the best overall model for a "generic" core. It includes the skeleton of virtually every fantasy world with little EXCLUSION required.

Look... I'm sorry to be so blunt, but this is just complete bollocks. The only reason Tolkien stuff seems generic to you is because you're used to D&D, and stuff derivative of D&D. There is all sorts of other low-tech fantasy that doesn't have a single dwarf, elf, hobbit, or orc in it.

Not to mention all the extremely non-generic stuff that's always been built in D&D that didn't come from Tolkien. Like the magic. "there are two kinds of magic, and one can heal people and doesn't stop working if you wear armor but the other can do more things" doesn't apply to any fantasy world that isn't a D&D setting. D&D has never been something you can generalize to all sorts of fantasy.

 

[Najo]

Why is anyone surprised they're trying to ride the success of WoW? Hasbro doesn't care about people who have been around as long as you have, let alone the grognards who cut their teeth on OD&D like me. They want to market to 14 year olds, or people with the minds of 14 year olds. The only influences these twinks have are MMO's and anime, since most of them are functionally illiterate. When you say Lord of the Rings they might think of the Peter Jackson movies, maybe. Expect more big eyes and stupid hairdos in the art too, even worse than the "punk" look of 3.X.

But I'm just a grumpy old grognard, what do I know? This day was bound to come sooner or later. The murder of Dragon magazine and the new subscription scam mark the passing of an age. It'll be called D&D, but it sure as hell won't feel like D&D to me.

That is a bit harsh. One thing that roleplaying has working against it is lack of new blood. It has to keep veterans like us happy AND find a way to get 14 year olds playing it. The game needs new blood. D&D IS competing with WOW.

With that said, from all I have seen, 4e is not trying to be a pen and paper WOW, nor could it compete with WOW if it did. D&D needs to flex its own strengths against computer gaming. Namely, that is story telling, encounter scenes, back ground, fluff and the like. So far, it seems that is exactly what WOTC is doing.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I'm honestly not sure if I'm feeding a troll or what, but you asked for specific responses, so here you go.
EDIT: Apparently I lost a couple paragraphs here and I'm too lazy to retype em. Oops!

Dexterity now apparently counts full even when fully armored. One of the most logical and game-balancing changes of the 3rd edition has been scrapped for the sake of character power.

This has been mentioned (I believe) as a high-level class ability for some specific classes (like Fighter). It's not a return to invincible elves with platemail.

Also from our friends in the MMORPG business, fighters and paladins can now apparently will their opponents to attack them. Will we have a "threat" score as well?

No. Fighters get lots of attacks of opportunity when bad guys attack allies they're protecting, and paladins have abilities that do stuff like giving allies (but not themselves) boosts to AC, so enemies have more incentive to attack the paladin. Paladins also have a high-level mind-affecting ability that forces the enemy to attack them for (I think) one round. But it's been confirmed repeatedly that there are NO "threat scores" in 4e.

Ah, the Warlord class... how wonderful, a class that can do pretty much the same thing any other class can do with the right skill combination. A warlord is not a class, it's a role.

Here are two official examples of Warlord abilities:
"Feather Me Yon Oaf" (temporary name): The warlord points out a specific enemy target, and everyone in the party gets an immediate action to use a ranged attack against it.

"Hammer and Anvil": The warlord strikes his opponent in a way that leaves it vulnerable, offering immediate attacks to allies adjacent to the enemy.

You couldn't replicate those with any "skill combination." The warlord is a "martial leader" class, which means he uses tactical prowess and battlefield experience to guide his party to victory. Played right, it sounds like the party is your greatest weapon as a warlord. It's a role that's super-prominent in all fantasy literature (think Faramir or possibly Aragorn if LOTR is your favorite).

Power Progression... gone are the days when a world can be defined by its prestige classes, another of the brilliant additions of 3rd edition. Now we are stuck on this destined path where we must reach a given level no matter what organization or devotion we wish to join with. There always were level issues, but they were adjustable... emphasizing the prestige of those with high requirements.
...
Multiclassing... FYI, sometimes restrictions are good things. To simply allow a character to willy-nilly grab whatever class/race combo they want generally does not make for a great game.

We still know very little about these paths and destinies, but I would be REALLY surprised if they didn't have all the flavor and specificity and flexibility of 3e prestige classes.

Bear in mind that in 4e, classes don't have different BAB and saving throw progressions, and skills will work pretty differently. So the only big difference between classes is what special abilities and "powers" they get.

We also know almost nothing about multiclassing. Some people seem to think it's completely GONE from 4e; others think favored classes are dropped and multiclassing is completely free.

For both these cases, we have very little actual info. This makes the pessimists assume WOTC is going to screw everything up and it makes the optimists think they've got the world's best systems lined up, and every complaint they've ever had about prestige classes or multiclassing will be cured in 4e (even if each of them has different and sometimes contradictory complaints). Obviously I'm more in the latter camp, because I don't think WOTC designers are idiots. But also obviously the real answer will probably be somewhere in the middle.

Wizardly implements... again, forcing the mythology of a campaign on us where it will may not fit.

Wizards use staffs, wands, or orbs in pretty much all high fantasy, including LOTR. And they're ALREADY IN 3e. 4e is just making them actually build on the wizard's own power, rather than acting as a weird backup spell battery.

Combat... listen, guys, there comes a point when speeding up combat takes too much complexity from an already simplified system. 3rd edition sped up combat to an astonishing degree. It seems like it's a bit too much of an emphasis at this point considering how well 3rd edition handled it.

How so? Cite specific rules changes we know about (good luck), and tell me what complexity is lost in those changes. Most of the changes I've seen seem to make things faster without sacrificing strategic options and complexity.

4th edition skills focus on encounters... no use rope, no tailor... in other words, you're a video game character now. Stop your role playing, damn it!

Just the opposite effect, I'd say. Previously, you were penalized for roleplaying - it made your character suckier in combat, because you were spending all those points in Profession: Cheesemonger and Knowledge: History of Applied Entomology while Joe Hackandslash just dumped them into combat-useful stuff like Tumble and Spot.

Now, if your character is a cheesemonger with a gentleman's interest in the epic past of that noble hobby of bug-collecting, you can just write that on the "background" section of your character sheet. A decent DM will give you ad-hoc bonuses when those aspects of your character are applicable... just like right now, I can (with DM's permission) write on a character sheet that my character is the Earl of Shadowdale, and expect the DM to give me bonuses and penalties where appropriate because of that.

 

[Najo]

I get the impression that this edition is inspired not by a long standing role playing tradition nor a century of fantasy literature, as previous versions were. This seems to be the pen and paper son of Everquest, Utima Online, and World of Warcraft.

This edition is aiming to compete with MMOs yes, but not by joining them, by streamlining D&D and playing its strengths against the weaknesses of MMOs. D&D 4e is embracing roleplaying, story, fluff and drama, questing as a means for advancing, heroic focus adventure focused on the players. They intend to compete with MMOs by 1) appealing to casual players for the first time (the non-gamer friend or girlfriend/ wife who plays WOW) 2) making D&D more visual and fluff driven. 3) make D&D WAY more intuitive and faster to DM.

The core game continues to drift further and further from its Tolkienesque roots; the beautifully simple and recognizable foundation upon which world's can be molded from the DM's mind. In the place of that elegance is an almost forced mythology, with Tieflings... which should always be a DMs option... presented from the outset as a base race.

They are re-establishing what D&D is and making it as appealing to the entire market as possible. LOTR has been done to death. Fantasy is in most cases, edgier and gritter, as our action heroes in film, television, comics and books. Look at 300, Transformers, Heroes, Lost, Marvel comic's Civil War, or Game of Thrones and you will see what is successful right now. D&D can't live in the 70's or 80's and make it.

Further, we have roles which seem to mirror the common class roles in our pure-combat/no-role-play online RPGs. Might as well have cut to the chase and renamed the Fighter class "Tank".

The roles are to help define and guide the classes for new players and for game designers to work with. Look at magic the gathering's color pie for how open ended you can make a "role".

There have been references to "Trees" rather than free form feats. The abominable power tree system from WoW does not free the player, it shackles him.

Dexterity now apparently counts full even when fully armored. One of the most logical and game-balancing changes of the 3rd edition has been scrapped for the sake of character power.

Also from our friends in the MMORPG business, fighters and paladins can now apparently will their opponents to attack them. Will we have a "threat" score as well?

Ah, the Warlord class... how wonderful, a class that can do pretty much the same thing any other class can do with the right skill combination. A warlord is not a class, it's a role.

I understand your frustrated and concerned. But alot of these worries are either wrong or do not have evidence yet to support them. Talent Trees are not going to be in the game, the closest form may be what Star Wars Saga has, which is grouping of talents into general areas and a couple prerequsites. You still choose the talents you want to have, and they replace class features. Feats are still open eneded and you are getting more of them.

As for the bonuses, they need to be as intuitive and easy for a new gamer to work with as possible, or no new customer. I know D&D 4e is cutting out ability loss, negetive levels, touch AC and flat footed, so dexterity limited by armor is a natural change too. The designers have stated that the game still has effects that do these things, just that it is done in ways that do not hamper play time (i.e. from readjusting your whole character sheet), instead there will be negative effects placed on you. Armor could "encumber" you and give a penalty to certain tests and bascially be working against dexterity as it does now, but with out the recalculating of your secondary stats.

Finally, the melee classes do need more to do than swing their sword every round. Taunting, distracting enemy and drawing heat is all things that heroes do in other forms of entertainment. That is the reason they do it in MMOs too. Why not here. The designers have flat out said that they tried a taunt rule and it was totally wrong for the game. They said that taunting as you see in MMOs is NOT in the game.

Power Progression... gone are the days when a world can be defined by its prestige classes, another of the brilliant additions of 3rd edition. Now we are stuck on this destined path where we must reach a given level no matter what organization or devotion we wish to join with. There always were level issues, but they were adjustable... emphasizing the prestige of those with high requirements.

There will still be ways to represent these things. My understanding is that characters are getting more flexibility and that multiclassing has been overhauled and balanced. I am sure we will find ways to represent what prestige classes were, if not, then Forgotten Realms is going to have some issues when it releases.

Dragonborn... once again, what should be a DM's discression race available at the outset, force the DM to be the bad guy if the race does not fit his world.

Multiclassing... FYI, sometimes restrictions are good things. To simply allow a character to willy-nilly grab whatever class/race combo they want generally does not make for a great game.

Wizardly implements... again, forcing the mythology of a campaign on us where it will may not fit.

Combat... listen, guys, there comes a point when speeding up combat takes too much complexity from an already simplified system. 3rd edition sped up combat to an astonishing degree. It seems like it's a bit too much of an emphasis at this point considering how well 3rd edition handled it.

4th edition skills focus on encounters... no use rope, no tailor... in other words, you're a video game character now. Stop your role playing, damn it!

Anyways, I'll stop now, I just wanted to get some weight behind my feelings. Maybe some of you can ease my fears, I'm sure I'll get a flame or two. Maybe I'm just overreacting... but I've never been hesitant about a new edition before... those issues just jumped out at me.

Dragonborn allow D&D to own their mythology now.

Most players like the wizard implements. WOTC is doing this for all classes, giving powers and class effects instead of just raw ability bonuses. It makes magic items more special and interesting. With that said, they said magic items are rarer and the Christmas tree effect is supposedly gone. This is part of that.

My understanding on combat is as follows:
1) Classes have more options than before. You will have tactical chooses based on class abilities, magic items, and other actions you character can take.
2) Combat is more fluid and involves movement, position and terrain more than before.
3) Monsters are simpier to run, their CR is based on total xp value (so you can throw 100 goblins at a level 10 party and have it work), and they have tactical options too. Lots of DM support to make the monsters more intersting for the players to encounter.
4) Combat runs faster and more intense. So far, the playtest reports have supported all of this and more.

Skills are streamlined yes, but the same as they were in Star Wars RPG SAGA edition. You should check Star Wars out, everyone was happy with 90% of the changes and begged for WOTC to do it to D&D 4e. Well, it is happening and then some. I think WOTC is going to surprise you.

 

[Dormammu]

I notice the original poster making many references to 4E seeming like it will be more combat-oriented (eg, more like WoW) and less role-playing conducive. I'm not sure if you realize it or not, but D&D has pretty much always been on the wargaming end of the RPG spectrum. There are many different levels of roleplay that happen in D&D from group to group, but typically people who are interested in roleplaying to the exclusion of wargaming choose a different game.

More combat options is not more role-playing. Simplifying combat will actually benefit role-playing. However, I am concerned that they are heightening the style of the game to a degree that will hurt its generic nature. Some things can't really be generic. There is no such thing as a generic magic system, really. And the Wizard implements are no more arbitrary than were the old systems of spellbooks and Vancian memorization.

But there are things which are more stylized in a specific way. Some of the respondents to this thread don't like "Tolkienism", but elves and dwarves really are more generic in Fantasy mythology than are Tieflings and Dragonborn. More to the issue for me is the combat style. It's very Hong Kong martial arts cinema. Super movement-oriented combat, Wizards using magic melee attacks at will, zombies modeled on modern zombie movies... these present a very specific flavor. It's hard to imagine using the base rules for something like Ravenloft without completely altering the setting, for example. It will be more like "Van Helsing" (the movie)!

But, as usual, anyone can role-play within any system if they want to. D&D continues to hold down the boundary between RPGs and wargames, being closer to miniatures gaming (and now computer gaming) than almost any other RPG out there. Even games like Tunnels & Trolls and Hackmaster are actually less wargame-y, as they simplify combat. Focusing on maps and figurines like it's a tactical boardgame made 3E super-duper-not RPG-like imo.

I actually think this might be closer to 1E than either 2E or 3E were... think about that!

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I am by no means trying to say that Lord of the Rings is the be-all-end-all of fantasy gaming. However, I do believe it provides the best overall model for a "generic" core.

That's a terribly mistaken assertion.

It includes the skeleton of virtually every fantasy world with little EXCLUSION required.

Virtually every low-quality Tolkien knock-off fantasy world, you mean.

 

[VirgilCaine]

AD&D 2nd Edition Player's Option

Hmmmmm. I'm not quite sure, but you might be the first person I ever heard refer to this as a new edition rather than a series of supplements they disliked (often because of power issues).

Dragonborn... once again, what should be a DM's discression race available at the outset, force the DM to be the bad guy if the race does not fit his world.

I, for about two years, have not allowed Elves or Half-Elves in my campaign world, and I haven't had any complaints.

3) make D&D WAY more intuitive and faster to DM.

That's how I imagine the "aggro system" helping.

(I feel like the PR lady from the PC vs. Mac commercials...)

It provides guidelines to streamline a new group's gaming experience--helping them answer vital questions that come up, often unexpectedly, in play, until he gets enough experience to make his own decisions at least some of the time, helping the crucial beginning game sessions to be smoother and more enjoyable, helping the group to avoid confusion, disagreements, etc. (Hey, not every 12 year old is as smart as you [think you] were, or has the same background)

(We might even see a difference on the WotC forums...but that's probably hoping too much.)


And if 4e contains, believable, reasonable, two to four inch armor spikes, I have to say I totally support that decision.

Tentacles, giant's hands, oozes, tentacles, bears, giant snakes, werewolves, tentacles, ropers, and tentacles need to be discouraged from grappling adventurers i.e. my character.

 

[HeinorNY]

The core game continues to drift further and further from its Tolkienesque roots

PRAISE ULÚVATAR!!!