D&D 4E I'll say one thing for 4E... It is more accessible.

[Ruin Explorer]

Having gotten back from my best friend's wedding over the weekend when 4E was released (my most munchkin player, too!), I finally got my hands on 4E yesterday and have been reading through it. I'm not going to bore you all with some sort of lengthy proper review, but I have to admit, some of what I felt was negative or limiting - actually turned out to be distinctly beneficial.

Specifically, 4E seems like it's really genuinely good for a new player, or a player who doesn't want to do too much work (which is to say, half of my players).

The combination of using the standard array as the "default" system, together with the clear "this race is good at these classes", further combined with the "here's two default builds for this class", instead of being limiting, really seems to allow players to slam a character together in OD&D-like time, and a character that they're excited about and interested by at that. As an example, my wife, who was put off by the complexity of 3.XE, and the "frontload" of information it required you to absorb to make a solid character, was able to put together a Dwarf Cleric in no time at all, and was distinctly pleased with it.

Once the players are "hooked" that way, it looks like they're going to presented with further options at very good but controlled pace, and that they will end up with a lot of powerful abilities, but will not end up being overwhelmed. This is quite an achievement.

 

[Storminator]

My son (not quite 9) whipped up a character really quick, just following the guidelines in the PHB. I did type it up as he went tho.

But dang slick easy.

PS

 

[Cadfan]

Agreed. After a weekend of laying about reading my new D&D books and chatting amiably with my fiance whenever I found something cool or funny, she gave a HUGE SIGH, declared that I was turning her into the BIGGEST NERD EVER, then took my PHB and ran off and made her first character. She's created a handful at this point, mostly just to try out ideas and see how they work. The array and the sections of the book that discuss what races and classes go well together were invaluable for her, because they let her craft characters without knowing all the rules details. The other thing that I think really helped was the skill system. I think she'd have had analysis paralysis if faced with the 3e skill system, but the 4e system, where all you do is pick a handful of skills you want to be good at, was an absolute breeze for her.

For the record, her first, and favorite character is an elf ranger who fights with two bastard swords. She saw that she could have two swords, that there were no limits on how big the swords could be, she saw the picture of the bastard swords, and it was love.

 

[Larrin]

I agree, my wife went with me to D&D game day, and positively owned the white dragon for the first half of the battle (she had no previous experience) she said it was much easier to understand that she'd though it might be. She was able to pick up on the characters tactics and abilities quickly and use them well. then she took an icy breath to the face (critical), and her character started needing back up (and medical attention) but she still had a lot of fun, and i think would be up for playing more 4e.

She hasn't done anything with my PHB, and i doubt she will much unless we actually get involved in a game somewhere, but i think she wouldn't really be intimidated about it if she had to.

 

[Felon]

It's a very well-laid-out book to be sure.

 

[Mirtek]

Specifically, 4E seems like it's really genuinely good for a new player, or a player who doesn't want to do too much work (which is to say, half of my players).

Actually I can't agree with that. To me it's one of the more complicated editions.

Even going from 2e to 3e I had almost immediately an idea how to build my fighter after the first reading of the class.

Now I have read the fighter a dozend times and still have no clue. Especially in combination with the high ability requirements of the 4e feats.

So some classes may have become easier, but for someone like me, who always played melee classes, the game became much more complicated

 

[Plane Sailing]

Even going from 2e to 3e I had almost immediately an idea how to build my fighter after the first reading of the class.

That makes it sound like you're not a new player though?

 

[Lizard]

The combination of using the standard array as the "default" system, together with the clear "this race is good at these classes", further combined with the "here's two default builds for this class", instead of being limiting, really seems to allow players to slam a character together in OD&D-like time, and a character that they're excited about and interested by at that.

Whereas one of the people in my group is put off by the fact he can't make an "interesting" (non-standard) character, that, basically, character building is done for him.

His comment was "It's like playing Magic using only pre-built decks."

It's a good point.

In D&D, the tactical focus has shifted from "deck building" to "deck playing" -- you have more choices on the field and fewer choices off. For some people, this is a win. For others, it's a lose. For a lot of gamers -- the people who WOTC wants to sell to -- *character building is a game in itself*. We're the people who spent hours designing starships in Traveller, heroes in Champions, etc. Excising the builder/tinkerer audience from the game may or may not be a good marketing move, depending on how popular that playstyle is. This isn't about "power gaming" or "munchkining", it's about having fun playing with the system to see what you can do with it, about coming up with a concept and then making it work according to the rules. 4e says, "Here are your concepts. Pick one." Customization is very limited; boolean skills, small selections of powers, etc. While some 3x classes are now a lot more customizable -- Paladins, for example -- most are less. Clerics lack Domains (and most of their spells), Wizards lack specialization, fighter builds are greatly restricted (no more brawlers, fencers, or knights, for instance), rangers no longer have favored enemy, no one has pets/companions, etc.

"But now no one sucks!"

Perhaps. But no one is special, unique, or interesting, either. And if playing a character who feels like one-of-a-kind isn't one of the main edges D&D has over MMORPGS, what is?

"Personality isn't mechanics!"

Yeah, and you can give your Night Elf Hunter all the personality you want in WoW; mechanically, he's still the same as anyone else following the flavor-of-the-month build, wearing the same armor, etc. Good game design has mechanics reflect personality, turning it into something which comes into actual play.

 

[The_Pugilist]

On the other hand, each character only gets one selection from each level of powers (except for wizard). So there will be a lot of variation, especially towards the high end. I do agree that each class seems to allow less concepts by default, but multiclassing feats seems to cover a lot of that.

Guess I'll see what it is like in play.

Clerics are a big issue with me. They should have gone with domains/spheres and then associated the feats with that. As it stands now it will be harder to say, just use the Greek pantheon without at least making one feat per god.

Of course this leads me to point the 2nd. I plan on keeping all of my 3.5 stuff. I'd love to move some of the 4e stuff backwards (alignment, skills, monster construction, how playing monsters as pcs works, etc) but I am not overly excited at the idea of Pathfinder really being a new RPG that is not truly compatible with all the 3.5 stuff I already have.

So if I hate 4e (which is unlikely) or sometimes feel like something a bit more "simmy" (which is much more likely) I can always go back to my old friend with its Hexblades and Dread Necromancers.

Edit: My prediction is that since balancing is really done through power selection at each level and the separation of dailiy/encounter/at will/utility is that a lot of customization will come through feats, especially as new items are released through DDI.

 

[bobthehappyzombie]

I don't really get this Lizard, if your mate was willing to play a sub-optimum character for flavours sake in 3e why not in 4e?
If you want to be a dwarven rogue, or an elven paladin or a dragonborn wizard, or a whatever there is nothing to prevent this.
I dinnie ken yer logic.