Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chzbro" data-source="post: 5212372" data-attributes="member: 83964">I too started with Redbox and played many editions up to and including 4E. I enjoyed them all, but am a particular fan of the current system. As some others have said, it feels very much like &quot;old school&quot; D&amp;D to me because simulationism and rules always took a backseat to &quot;cool&quot; in the games I played in when I was a kid imagining that I was a hero who could kill giants and dragons.This doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy 3.x for its run, but from a story perspective 4E has been very liberating and has brought back a lot of what I found so fun about D&amp;D all those years ago. Ironically, 3.x felt like more of a board game to me in retrospect than 4E does (I say ironically because &quot;feels like a board/video game is a common complaint leveled against 4E) because in OUR 3.x games (not necessarily in anyone else's) everything usually came down to knowing the rules and how to exploit them better than the next guy. We still all try to know all the 4E rules, but since the rules for players aren't necessarily the same as the rules for NPCs and monsters, every combat still has the potential for one of those &quot;WHOA!&quot; moments (like the first time we saw a Deathjump spider shift right past the fighter and land on the wizard).What's really great (to me) is that in a recent game our party stumbled on two wizards (one of them a major villain) engaged in a sorcerous duel. They were both protected by magic bubbles, and during the fight some party members participated in a skill challenge to help the good wizard overcome the bad guy's shield. And no one at the table said, &quot;What spell is that?&quot; or &quot;What level are they?&quot; or &quot;According to rule y the shield won't protect him from spell z, which I cast now.&quot; Instead, it was &quot;I'm going to try Arcana to see if I can help drop that bubble,&quot; and &quot;I'll try to lock those zombies down to keep them off of you while you do that,&quot; and so on.For me, that flexibility--this monster/villain can do this because it's cool and fun and it doesn't matter if anyone else in the world can--really defines what I love about playing 4E.And if you'll all indulge me for just one more point: Some of the players at my table have started renaming their powers to reflect the individual flavor they want it to have, and it's really pretty great. Mechanically, everything stays the same, but maybe the swarm druid calls Locust Swarm (for example) Stinging Hornets (or whatever). While the mechanical impact has been nil, from a story/fun perspective it has made a big difference. &quot;I cast Stinging Hornets,&quot; evokes a different feel from &quot;I cast Locust Swarm,&quot; or &quot;I cast Faeriefire Storm,&quot; even if all three of them do exactly the same thing.It pains me to say that after so many years of 3.5, making changes like that still feels a bit like cheating. Slowly but surely, though, I'm re-embracing the notion that it's not cheating no matter what system you use; it's just awesome.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chzbro, post: 5212372, member: 83964"] I too started with Redbox and played many editions up to and including 4E. I enjoyed them all, but am a particular fan of the current system. As some others have said, it feels very much like "old school" D&D to me because simulationism and rules always took a backseat to "cool" in the games I played in when I was a kid imagining that I was a hero who could kill giants and dragons. This doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy 3.x for its run, but from a story perspective 4E has been very liberating and has brought back a lot of what I found so fun about D&D all those years ago. Ironically, 3.x felt like more of a board game to me in retrospect than 4E does (I say ironically because "feels like a board/video game is a common complaint leveled against 4E) because in OUR 3.x games (not necessarily in anyone else's) everything usually came down to knowing the rules and how to exploit them better than the next guy. We still all try to know all the 4E rules, but since the rules for players aren't necessarily the same as the rules for NPCs and monsters, every combat still has the potential for one of those "WHOA!" moments (like the first time we saw a Deathjump spider shift right past the fighter and land on the wizard). What's really great (to me) is that in a recent game our party stumbled on two wizards (one of them a major villain) engaged in a sorcerous duel. They were both protected by magic bubbles, and during the fight some party members participated in a skill challenge to help the good wizard overcome the bad guy's shield. And no one at the table said, "What spell is that?" or "What level are they?" or "According to rule y the shield won't protect him from spell z, which I cast now." Instead, it was "I'm going to try Arcana to see if I can help drop that bubble," and "I'll try to lock those zombies down to keep them off of you while you do that," and so on. For me, that flexibility--this monster/villain can do this because it's cool and fun and it doesn't matter if anyone else in the world can--really defines what I love about playing 4E. And if you'll all indulge me for just one more point: Some of the players at my table have started renaming their powers to reflect the individual flavor they want it to have, and it's really pretty great. Mechanically, everything stays the same, but maybe the swarm druid calls Locust Swarm (for example) Stinging Hornets (or whatever). While the mechanical impact has been nil, from a story/fun perspective it has made a big difference. "I cast Stinging Hornets," evokes a different feel from "I cast Locust Swarm," or "I cast Faeriefire Storm," even if all three of them do exactly the same thing. It pains me to say that after so many years of 3.5, making changes like that still feels a bit like cheating. Slowly but surely, though, I'm re-embracing the notion that it's not cheating no matter what system you use; it's just awesome. [/QUOTE]

Verification