D&D 4E I am Happy They Finally Announced 4E

[Villanelle]

OK, so now that you've made the personal evolution towards embracing your true self and your one love for pre-3E DnD, you'll promptly be excusing yourself from future threads regarding 4E. Because it's not your bag. Right?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

No offense, but you obviously aren't familiar with the OP's posting history here. He seems to only post when he has something negative to say about the current edition of D&D. For instance, what kind of postive contribution did this backhanded insult add to ENWorld? What good thing did him gloating about the demise of D&D 3x bring about? I don't deny the man his right to be a bitter ball of hate, I just wish that he didn't seek out 3x forums with the express purpose of raining on everybody else's parade

That's pretty much how I read it. "3.x has been a thorn in my side for far too long, but today I have my revenge!"

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Thanks. Been playing D&D since '81, but I appreciate the refresher.

This isn't the first time that I've seen a 1e/2e/oD&D proselytizer assume that the person he was addressing had not played the edition he was promoting. I played all the editions. I remember what it was like to play them. I remember weapon speed.

Not sure what you're talking about. My players get extremely pissed when their plan falls apart and they don't "save the princess" or the bad guy gets away. They also woot it up when they do take down that annoying BBEG.

I also remember looking forward to leveling up in AD&D. But hey, YMMV.

Of course, if you were a fighter, "levelling up" actually meant "getting the next better Belt of Giant Strength".

 

[William Ronald]

This isn't the first time that I've seen a 1e/2e/oD&D proselytizer assume that the person he was addressing had not played the edition he was promoting. I played all the editions. I remember what it was like to play them. I remember weapon speed.


Of course, if you were a fighter, "levelling up" actually meant "getting the next better Belt of Giant Strength".

Of course, there were also the horrors of the grappling/pummeling/wrestling rules that caused PLAYERS to avoid using those attacks, the complexity of first edition psionic combat (anyone recall the psionic attack versus an undefended psionic character?) and racial level limits.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Of course, there were also the horrors of the grappling/pummeling/wrestling rules that caused PLAYERS to avoid using those attacks, the complexity of first edition psionic combat (anyone recall the psionic attack versus an undefended psionic character?) and racial level limits.

Well, considering that you had to roll to see whether you got psionic powers, and the chance was extremely low, we never actually had a single character with psionic abilities in my gaming group. And yes, I remember never seeing anyone grapple anything in 1st edition.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So much to disagree with, so little time.

Battlemats and minis

The game evolved from tabletop miniature warfare. Battlemats & minis have been a part of my D&D experience since I first picked up the dice in 1977.

too many options

Almost no such thing. As long as the options are meaningful and distinct the more the better, IMHO. 3.X supports a broader range of fantasy well than any of the previous editions. Swords & Sorcery and High-Fantasy are fine sub-genres, but there's no reason why the game has to be eternally yoked to just those two. That inherent flexibility is gives the game a certain attractiveness that is good not only for WotC or for the game, but for the hobby as a whole.

too much emphasis on the player

That makes absolutely no sense to me.

too much taken out of the hands of the DM

Like what? Concealing what it takes to hit an enemy combatant? Play 1Ed a couple of years and you'll probably have the To Hit tables memorized, and THAC0 was no more difficult to suss out.

the consistent slide toward dumbed down action adventure fantasy

That is a DM problem, not a system/game problem.

the death of exploration and dungeon delving

That makes absolutely no sense to me. My personal rate of dungeon delving/city adventuring etc hasn't changed at all.

But if you look at 1e and 2e, the "cookies" you get for levelling is very small. "Dead levels" weren't even an idea, because it was common for everyone but casters.

Nah- even back in 1Ed there were players painfully aware of dead levels. Perhaps you weren't one of them, but they were definitely out there.

3.5 in particular made it a requirement that players be rewarded with mechanical bennies everytime they came to the table.

Players can get spoiled, to be sure, but there simply is no such requirement.

 

[(contact)]

From what we're hearing so far, 4e seems more focused on creating fluid, dynamic tactical combat and far less concerned with the classic old-school exploration themes.

Or rather, it's most likely about wondrous exploration (the "ohmygod that's cool" moments) rather than exploration as a tactical challenge ("how many torches do we have left? Who brought the iron spikes?").

As a player who started playing during the white-box era, I have to say that I prefer the premise of 4e to the premise of OD&D. If your ideal D&D session is solving the exploration puzzle that is the dungeon, and being led through a DM-centered story, by all means go for it. The point of the game is always just to have fun.

But for me, the old-school tropes of empty rooms, resource management, "mapping," controlled environments and DM-driven plotlines leave me flat.

I think the players should be at the center of the story; I think they should have an opportunity to drive the action, plot and even metaplot. My best campaigns of the past have been the ones where this happens. D&D is most interesting to me as a group story-crafting event wedded to a tactical fantasy combat game.

My best groups have really enjoyed the tactical combat in 3e, and we've milked it for a lot of fantastic scenes and moments. I am looking forward to a more fluid and streamlined version of the combat system in 4e.

Getting mechanical bennies for leveling creates engagement with the character power arc -- the more balanced choices for any given PC at level-up the better. I do appreciate that the PCs can be very good at what they do, and I think that it makes the game more fun. I don't need the 4e fighter to balance with the 2e or 3e fighter, just the 4e monsters.

So far, everything looks great for 4e. The ideas are all in the right place, IMO, and eventually, we'll all know if the mechanics actualize them.

 

[Odhanan]

I'm happy you cleared up that point in your mind, Reynard. I hope you'll enjoy your gaming more for it! Have a good one!

 

[Reynard]

I'm happy you cleared up that point in your mind, Reynard. I hope you'll enjoy your gaming more for it! Have a good one!

Not that it will matter in the end. My local, biweekly group is likely to go for playing 1e, but the other group will follow D&D to 8e if necessary, so despite my reservations I will kind of have to engage in the new edition. Given cerain circumstances, we are a pretty good lock for playtesting, in fact, so I am likely to experience it sooner rather than later.

Here's the thing: I would like 3.x and 4e to provide the same kind of fun that 1e and 2e do (as distinct kinds of fun, by the way -- 1e and 2e are pretty different in everything but the dice). I want to like the newest, current version of D&D, because I like D&D and I like playing D&D and playing D&D is a whole lot easier if you are playing the current version. And I do the best I can with what I've got, taking little victories where I can (I am currently running Dragonlance 3.5 and try and slip into combat mode without pulling out the minis as often as possible).

So, 4e isn't likely to functionally change anything about the way I game, for real. But it has had me thinking about it for a few days straight and I am better off for recognizing what I really like.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

First of all this is the 4e forum, and was probably previously in the grneral forum. I don't believe ENWorld even has a 3e forum.
Second, there are plenty of threads bashing AD&D running around, but that seems to be quite okay here for some reason. I don't like 3e either and I haven't heard one thing yet about 4e that I like. That doesn't mean you guys that do are all morons. I can hate the game without hating the player.

No offense, but you obviously aren't familiar with the OP's posting history here. He seems to only post when he has something negative to say about the current edition of D&D. For instance, what kind of postive contribution did this backhanded insult add to ENWorld? What good thing did him gloating about the demise of D&D 3x bring about? I don't deny the man his right to be a bitter ball of hate, I just wish that he didn't seek out 3x forums with the express purpose of raining on everybody else's parade