I have two concerns about 4th edition. Help me out.

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Categorically going to require minis more. Many more of the abilities are geared around small movements, more abilities that affect small areas, more cascading abilities that affect secondary targets or allies within X squares, etc.

 

[Rechan]

Now, by Minis, you can use bottle caps, pennies, spare dice, and anything else lying around.

I'm not spending $ one on actual miniatures.

 

[TimeOut]

Does this take the "magic" out of magic?

No, but it puts the distinction into the fluff and not into the crunch.

Best example: Our Warlock has house-fluffed his Elditch Blast into "a small skeleton whelpling bursts forth from the dragon skull on the top of my staff and flies screeching towards the enemy", while our Fighters cleave is still "I cleave into the kobold and the next one". :/

 

[Jack99]

Is D&D 4e going to move even more towards minis than 3.5?

A bit, but not that much. You can still play 4e w/o minis. (if that is your concern)

2. This whole "powers" thing. I haven't played a session yet, but it seems like the distinction between magic and mundane is gone. Instead of having a wizards who CASTS SPELLS and a rogue who CAN'T (unless he multiclasses, natch) we have a wizard who has ONE POWER and a rogue who has A DIFFERENT POWER. Does this take the "magic" out of magic?

Short answer is no. They might read alike, but in play, the wizard still feels like he is wielding magic, and the rogue still feel like he is a sneaky bastard who stabs people in the back (ie different).

Hope this helps.

Cheers

 

[Skywalker]

1. Keep on the Shadowfell reminds me of Descent: Journeys in the Dark. Every section of the map has a miniatures map to accompany it, even to the point where the DM is instructed on where to place the minis. I don't think I've ever seen a more minis-centric adventure than this one. Is D&D 4e going to move even more towards minis than 3.5?

Well, I found that there was more variety and plot in KotS than in Sunless Citadel. Also, I found the format in KotS to be almost identical to later 3.5e modules. As such, I am not sure KotS is a sign of any change from 3.5e's focus except perhaps to confirm it.

 

[mlund]

Remember that Keep on the Shadowfell is supposed to be accessible by new players - including new DMs. Having the arrangement of enemies mapped out ahead of time helps lighten the load / mishap chance for prospective new DMs when setting up encounters. As a more experienced DM, if you feel your game would be better served by setting up the monsters in a different way - by all means - put your experience and DM's prerogative to work!

- Marty Lund

 

[Khairn]

Let me preface this by saying that I'm a long time D&D player (started back in 1980) and I haven't yet picked up the 4e books. I have, however, looked through the Keep on the Shadowfell. That, combined with various lurking on enworld the past several months have prompted two concerns I'd like to throw out:

1. Keep on the Shadowfell reminds me of Descent: Journeys in the Dark. Every section of the map has a miniatures map to accompany it, even to the point where the DM is instructed on where to place the minis. I don't think I've ever seen a more minis-centric adventure than this one. Is D&D 4e going to move even more towards minis than 3.5?

2. This whole "powers" thing. I haven't played a session yet, but it seems like the distinction between magic and mundane is gone. Instead of having a wizards who CASTS SPELLS and a rogue who CAN'T (unless he multiclasses, natch) we have a wizard who has ONE POWER and a rogue who has A DIFFERENT POWER. Does this take the "magic" out of magic?

Hope these questions make sense. And forgive me in advance for asking, because I'm sure they've been debated to death by this point. But I'm coming off a brutal 3-4 month span at work and only now emerging to see what's going on in the D&D world.

Now I've only played in a couple of play-tests and on WW D&D Game Day, but my answer to both questions would be yes.

1- Yes it does look and feel more mini-centric to me, but I don't know if that perception will change with more a experienced GM and players.

2- Yes having all combat abilities under the "Powers" heading does indeed take the "magic" away from the magic system. Placing all non-combat spells under the Ritual banner (with its 10+ min casting ugh!) just reinforces the loss of "magic". At least to me it does.