D&D 4E Got to play 4E today

[Fifth Element]

I find it amazing that people still play 1st edition. I got into D&D just before the 1e DMG came out and while I loved the game, it's not exactly playable.

Welcome to the boards. I'll wager your stay will be an interesting one...

 

[mach1.9pants]

I agree that Joe's done a great job of not rising to the bait.

Yes, he made some good points.

(And as far as my 3.x vs 1E comment goes...

Hehe, yeah I might just resurrect the trollop encounter table for my current campaign

 

[parvatiquinta]

The game was played on a battlemat, with figures, and I was told that "you really can't play it without a battlemat." Looking at how some of the mechanics are expressed, that makes sense; your movement rate is x squares (1 square = 5'), spell ranges are in squares, etc.

I trust it is not hard at all to turn squares back to feet (especially as you only need to do the maths once, when you write it down on your sheet). What does strike me as possibly hard to do without some visual aid are AoO and keeping track of everyone's position to make sure you're in range for certain powers.
But I don't mind that too much as I've been using some kind of visual aid for battle scenes since before 3.X was out.

Everything seemed rather out-of-scale to me, but I attribute that to an overall inflation of numbers. Several players at the table asked about this, and we were told it was done because 1st level characters died too easily.* I wondered about that, since my 20 h.p. 1st-level wizard was taking 10-15 points of damage in an average round. If you increase damage taken at the same time you increase damage takable, isn't that a wash? But it's a minor point.

Was that in a single attack, however? The problem with 3.X was that a first level fighter could fall after a single swing of a weapon deadly enough (not to mention the poor mage).

The monster and foe composition might be easier than it was in 3.x, but all those special powers, even for the most mundane city guardsman, seems a trifle excessive to me. When I mentioned that particular aspect (the fact that everyone has powers that inflict more damage than normal attacks) to my wife, she made the connection to WoW right away.

Special powers are there to add variety (and their effect isn't only increased damage, if you have a look at the monster collection, you'll see what I mean). Anyway, the simplification strikes at higher levels, especially when you start dealing with supernatural monsters. If you're not familiar with the 3.X headache you probably won't notice that just flipping the excerpts we've been shown so far, however.

[...] In my own game, that would have been a golden role-playing opportunity that might have taken half an hour or more. But here it was done with a single die-roll. Was that a function of the system or the fact that it was an admittedly combat-oriented demo game? [...]

While I of course can't tell you what's written in the books, when I played a similar scene at my own table, there was roleplaying involved as well as the die roll. But this part is no news, as is no news the debate over "social" skills with people who feel they should be roleplayed only, people who feel they should be rolled only (like that DM seems to be) and people who stay somewhere in between like me.
What is indeed new, at least to D&D, is that the player is allowed to take part in the scene building choosing the skill to be used - that used to be the DM's exclusive.

I just get the feeling that the opportunities for role-playing are going to be overcome by the fact that the game mechanics seem very much oriented towards combat.

I haven't played first edition AD&D, I started out with BECMI however. The only rules you have in BECMI are combat rules. D&D4 actually has more for non-combat scenes

 

[BlindOgre]

We also did a sort of very abstract skill-based activity (there was a name for it, and I apologize for not remembering). We were faced with the task of escaping the town with the town guards searching for us, and we had to pick a way to elude them, roll against the appropriate skill, and if the party racked up enough successes, we got away. I must say I found this rather too abstract for my taste. One character succeeded in his roll and the DM merely said "okay, you get a lead on a safe way out of town." In my own game, that would have been a golden role-playing opportunity that might have taken half an hour or more. But here it was done with a single die-roll. Was that a function of the system or the fact that it was an admittedly combat-oriented demo game? I don't know, and won't until I get a PH and DMG in my hands. If that's the sort of thing that's at the DM's discretion, I'll certainly not be using it too often.

I also played the demo yesterday at a sanctioned event and came away with a similar impression. Our DM did preface that this was mostly a mechanics demo. We went through 3 encounters, which took roughly 4 hours (including a couple of breaks). Having 6 players seemed to slow things down compared to 1E/2E play, but was much faster than 3E play. At 4 players, I figure the speed of play would be closer to well done 2E.

The players did attempt to force some role-playing on the scenario and it actually contributed to the encounters. My character (the ranger) immediately bribed the bartender so that the ranger could tend bar. This afforded the best view of the NPC we were to meet, as well as the approaching bad guys through a window, and gave the ranger really good cover. I picked a fight by killing the main bad guy with two arrow shots through the window (at a penatly to break the window first, of course). I remained behind the bar for the rest of the fight until the last couple of turns. As I was fighting, I grabbed a lemon and a towel from behind the bar. On one of my last shots, I stuck the lemon on my arrow-head to use it (at a penalty) as a subdual shot. I kept the towel for later use (old Hitch-Hiker's Guide advice).

The point of the preceding is that I was able to throw in a few odd bits into the encounter. The other players also chimed in with rp input as we went along as well, through such had little effect on the demo other than to make it more fun.

Without creative role-playing and interesting twists of strategy provided by the players AND the DM, as with any other version, the demo would have been rather a bore.

When it came time for the escape from town, I was hoping we would get a better opportunity for role-playing, but the demo did not allow for much beyond the obvious - most likely due simply to time constraints.

I could, however, see how the skill checks for the escape could have been expanded considerably if a detailed and harrowing chase-scene was desired. The mechanics are there to reasonably govern the outcome of such scenarios at varying degrees of complexity. At least this provides a means of simplifying things when appropriate (e.g., the DM did not prepare a complex scenario and doesn't want to waste time on the event).

I am still waiting to see the final books, the DMG in particular, before deciding whether to run a 4e campaign. From what I've seen so far, it's over-powered and too much like WoW.

At present, I am more tempted to house-rule the heck out of 3.x.

 

[Fifth Element]

From what I've seen so far, it's over-powered and too much like WoW.

Your comments were generally thoughtful and welcome. And then there's this. The WoW angle has been discussed to death on these boards.

 

[BlindOgre]

Your comments were generally thoughtful and welcome. And then there's this. The WoW angle has been discussed to death on these boards.

I indicated such only as summary and did not dwell thereon. I agree. My main point is that much remains to be seen as to the role-playing elements and support mechanics and that the demo did not provide a worthy preview of such.

 

[Nytmare]

I indicated such only as summary and did not dwell thereon. I agree. My main point is that much remains to be seen as to the role-playing elements and support mechanics and that the demo did not provide a worthy preview of such.

Which parts did you see as overpowered? The fact that towels aren't restricted by level?

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I find it amazing that people still play 1st edition. I got into D&D just before the 1e DMG came out and while I loved the game, it's not exactly playable.

Yeah, the unplayability of 1E (and its even more unplayable precursor, OD&D[1974]) is why the game never took off and was such a dismal failure...

 

[drjones]

And, I would also remind you that WotC has explicitly stated that one of their goals in designing 4E was to appeal more to the online gamers. Many of the changes they have wrought were a direct response to that effort. And with several of the gamers at the table today making WoW jokes, I'm inclined to believe the comparisons are valid.

Your experience seems entirely valid and well written up. You are into a AD&D version of dnd and that is where you are coming from when you tried out 4th. All fine.

However the wow thing is way off. I have played 4ed (preview, lite) and about 8 different MMOs. They are entirely different in experience, crunch etc. Folks want to sound like they see the man behind the curtain so they joke but you should not take that as a sign of anything substantial.

 

[DandD]

It surely would, if there would have been other commercial RPGs of the same quality we have now today. Or if there were any commercial RPGs back then at all.