Honestly, if WoTC didn't create it would 4e be D&D?

[Mr. Wilson]

This. When 3e came out, I wasn't exactly sure it was D&D. Sometimes, I'm still not sure.

Other than the lack of true "Vancian" slots for casters, 4e seems to be as much D&D as 3e was. In some ways, it's more D&D than 3e was, what with more rigid archetype choice at 1st level, simplified stat blocks for monsters, and a rule set that focuses almost exclusively on combat.

IMO, 4e is the fix to 1e/2e that 3e should have been. Most of my complaints about the game have been related to hating spell slots and wanting a few tricks to customize your character and grant additional choices in combat.

/agree.

 

[Jack99]

Reign by Greg Stolze... here's some reviews.

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13062.phtml

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/13/13162.phtml

http://gamesteratlarge.blogspot.com/2007/08/reign-by-greg-stolze.html

http://www.lulu.com/content/825234

Thanks. Sounds intriguing. I might take a look, even though I will never get my players to play anything but D&D (Yes, the brand is that strong) However, regarding it being superior to D&D. One of the reviews linked, summarizes:

Overall: reads like a solid, dependable fantasy system with some good new ideas. Still basically traditional gaming style.

Another of the reviews says:

All in all, Reign is a hell of a buy. Hopefully, this review will have underlined why it’s a hell of a buy above and beyond the company rules. If you’re interested in running a game that involves “companies,” this is a game you can’t pass up. And if you’re interested in running a fantasy game that doesn’t involve companies, Reign is still an option you might want to consider.

To me that doesn't sound like a game that is superior to D&D. Unless of course you regard D&D's rule' system as really poor.

 

[Jack99]

Games that have D&D's mechanic style but perhaps are superior in certain parts: Decipher's Lord of the rings, BESM.
Games with different or similar mechanics, but inspiring a superior number of different styles: Burning wheel, Cadwallon, Reign, ConspiracyX 1st edition, Issaries' Runequest, Decipher's Lord of the rings.

Could you expand on the "inspiring a superior number of different styles"? It is my impression from reading boards (I have gamed with the same 7 people for almost 20 years, so not much imput there), that D&D is played very very differently from table to table. So much that some games barely resemble each other.

 

[Mallus]

If 3e is D&D, then so is 4e. It's that simple.

 

[xechnao]

To me that doesn't sound like a game that is superior to D&D. Unless of course you regard D&D's rule' system as really poor.

How can something sound superior really? You'll have to test-drive it and check for yourself. In fact, this is the reason that D&D's brand name is so strong. It was the first rpg around to be played.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

What do you mean by "interesting characters" and "player characters that shine"? What exactly fits the bill here?

3E or 4E style characters for example. If I speak of interesting and shining, I always speak of mechanically. You can always spin a story that makes a character interesting or shine, that's only a strength of you and your play group, rarely of the game system.

I found Warhammer somewhat good in "interesting characters", as each career brings its own flavor and story. But still, each Rat-Catcher is still just a rat-catcher and the mechanics are relatively bland.
But PCs shining? Hardly if ever in Warhammer. It might be part of the grim & gritty feel, but you never really get the feeling as if your abilities are powerful or unique.

DSA (Das Schwarze Auge) has somewhat in the interesting character part, with its flaws and edges, but if I look at something like combat maneuver "talents", I am sorely disappointed. They are mechanically clumsy, and the end result is usually disappointing.

3E and 4E both give the option - right from the stat, to diversify your character using different races, classes, powers and feats.
Each of these choices can make your character interesting. Each of the special abilities your choices grant you will let your character shine. You bring something unique to the game.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I found Warhammer somewhat good in "interesting characters", as each career brings its own flavor and story. But still, each Rat-Catcher is still just a rat-catcher and the mechanics are relatively bland.
But PCs shining? Hardly if ever in Warhammer. It might be part of the grim & gritty feel, but you never really get the feeling as if your abilities are powerful or unique.

Hah, I think someone once said something along the lines of "If your characters aren't worse off then when they started, you aren't playing WFRP correctly."

 

[Imaro]

@Jack99 I'm not exactly clear on what it is your asking for. Do you want a blow by blow comparison of games to D&D, because in my experience very few reviews do something like this. IMHO, the fact that Reign allows you to play a single PC and manage and "play" a company he may be a part of or lead, is steps beyond what D&D 4e allows you to do. I think Exalted also has rules for things like this as well. Now in 10 years when this is added to D&D will it be "revolutionary"... no, it's already been done.

The comment about it being a traditional rpg is because it is an indie rpg and often times they do not subscribe to the set up of traditional rpgs... Reign does. If you want to know what makes Reign superior, IMHO, I'd be happy to tell you.

 

[xechnao]

3E or 4E style characters for example. If I speak of interesting and shining, I always speak of mechanically. You can always spin a story that makes a character interesting or shine, that's only a strength of you and your play group, rarely of the game system.

I found Warhammer somewhat good in "interesting characters", as each career brings its own flavor and story. But still, each Rat-Catcher is still just a rat-catcher and the mechanics are relatively bland.
But PCs shining? Hardly if ever in Warhammer. It might be part of the grim & gritty feel, but you never really get the feeling as if your abilities are powerful or unique.

DSA (Das Schwarze Auge) has somewhat in the interesting character part, with its flaws and edges, but if I look at something like combat maneuver "talents", I am sorely disappointed. They are mechanically clumsy, and the end result is usually disappointing.

3E and 4E both give the option - right from the stat, to diversify your character using different races, classes, powers and feats.
Each of these choices can make your character interesting. Each of the special abilities your choices grant you will let your character shine. You bring something unique to the game.

From what you are saying in this thread the game for you is not D&D. The game for you is Exalted.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

From what you are saying in this thread the game for you is not D&D. The game for you is Exalted.

No.