D&D 4E Is 4E doing it for you?

[BryonD]

But like I said above 4E is a good game in many ways, it just didn't scratch my RPG itch like I thought it would.

This is a good summary of my true view of it.

If it was game night and we were not going to roleplay, then using 4E as a heroes vs monsters simulation would be a perfectly good option. I'm certain we would enjoy it.

But 95% of the time, if not more, we want to role-play. And there isn't a "4e isn't a roleplaying game" claim here, but it simply doesn't scratch our itch. It is in the ballpark of the 15th or 20th best roleplaying game on the shelf. It also happens to have some other nice features that make it redeemable if roleplaying isn't a key concern.

But if you want to roleplay, there are a range of better options available.

 

[BryonD]

If I wasn't prepped, we didn't play. Game cancelled on account of "interference from life". I've never had to cancel my SR game because I wasn't ready to run. Long enough doing that, the game falls apart.

As an experiment, I'm running H1 without having read the adventure until the day I'm running it. I did that with 3.x modules, and the results weren't pretty. *And* I'm doing it with 6 PCs, so some scaling is going to be a good idea.

So far, so good - we'll see what happens once they actually get to the Keep...

Fair enough.

I've run 3X on the fly many times and it has never been a problem. That said, I rarely run modules. I'm certain that I could not do that. But honestly, that doesn't have anything to do with game mechanics and everything to do with knowing how everything fits together. So if you *can* run 4E modules without any prep, then that just further reinforces my view of it.

 

[BryonD]

The issue with prep-time BryonD is that I suspect many of us just don't have the time we did 10 years ago.

I was a player in a 1e game before high school and became a DM during high school. Keep in mind that not only did I have less distractions during high school than kids today (even with obesity increasing among kids, there simply is more structured extra-circular activities and of course the rise of the videogame) but also I had more free time.

I mean, I doubt I was the only kid who while in school would spend a couple of hours designing adventures or when I got home, had time each day to spend an hour or two for a week to prep for the weekly game.

Now though? If I have a job and a couple of kids?

First of all, I have a 50+ hour a week job and two kids. I completely understand the time issue.

But more importantly, this has nothing to do with my point.
My point was, when the group is together, we play. Regardless of how much time I did or did not spend prepping, we play when we are together. That was the whole point. So how the time away from my group is spent is irrelevant.

 

[LostSoul]

But if you want to roleplay, there are a range of better options available.

I like games that have rules to resolve conflicts between characters.

For me, 4e does a better job of resolving all sorts of conflicts using the rules than any other edition of D&D. It does a better job for me for two main reasons: I like 4e's combat system more than any other, not just because I think there are more options available in combat, and I like the framework that skill challenges provide.

 

[The_Gneech]

I've recently decided (after playing it a little more) that "No, it's not."

...

2. Too "kewl powers."
I don't like that phrase, but the Martial classes aren't martial enough for me (too magical feeling), and the Barbarian released today really drives home the point. Conan has no place in this game. Bo9S was a really cool "Everyone's a Jedi" variant on D&D, but I'm not down with that as the default for my worlds and campaigns. I prefer Tracy Hickman's take on Sturm Brightblade to (as yet theoretical) John Woo's take on the same character. Matter of taste.

Thank you for posting this.

-The Gneech

 

[IanArgent]

Fair enough.

I've run 3X on the fly many times and it has never been a problem. That said, I rarely run modules. I'm certain that I could not do that. But honestly, that doesn't have anything to do with game mechanics and everything to do with knowing how everything fits together. So if you *can* run 4E modules without any prep, then that just further reinforces my view of it.

Which is what, exactly? I tried to do 3e on the fly; and it failed. Not because of lack of story (the point I'm making with SR is that I don't have a problem coming up with story), but because of mechanical issues. Combat would too easily end up in TPK or cakewalk, with no obvious reason why. It ended up being very hard for me to adjust difficulty on the fly and do so transparently to the players. That's the important part to me. really; that the players not be able to see that I'm fudging the numbers behind the screen.

I really can't point to a specific thing in 3E that made it feel like pushing through waist-deep water to run it; but that's what felt like, mentally. And laying a PC in that system wasn't much more fun. (Playing with the system was kinda fun, building PCs, combos, etc.But not so much when the dice hit the table).

I don't get that feel from 4E. I've been playing a bit more than DMing, I wil admit. But last session I played in, except for some corner-case items, I played without reference to any book. That's a Good Thin(tm). My best gaming experiences have been when we haven't cracked a book at all in a session. I've had this happen in Rolemaster (GM was a system GOD), WHFRP, SR (on both sides of the screen there). Never happened, for me, in 3E.

I consider myself a moderately skilled GM. I am not a system master (I have generally expected players to know the subsystems for their characters more deeply than I do - though I will have a good overview). I know at least 3 people much better than I. But if I'm not "skilled" enough to run a game, there's 6 people who have to find something else to do on a Saturday night...

So from that POV, yes, 4E is doing it for me. It's enormously easier to run, and a good bit easier to play anything but a BDFighter. And the BDFighter got easier to play effectively. Limiting mechanical options is not a Bad Thing(tm), especially for new players. One of the things that killed my last 3E eberron game was the hidden subtle complexities of a fighter. ("How much should I power attack for this round? Should I charge or move up? Wait - how much damage am I doing this round again?" I mean, there's some pitfalls in fighter powers - particularly with some powers adding the stat to damage and others not, but at least you don't have to have a statistics class.)

 

[Wormwood]

So if you *can* run 4E modules without any prep, then that just further reinforces my view of it.

Yep.

Which is why 4e is the only version of D&D I would ever run again.

 

[BryonD]

Which is what, exactly? I tried to do 3e on the fly; and it failed. Not because of lack of story (the point I'm making with SR is that I don't have a problem coming up with story), but because of mechanical issues.

I don't understand how you come up with story on your own when you are running a module. Like I said, the great majority of the time I run my own stuff. But the whole point of running a module is the story is provided.

But for me the mechanical side is a non-issue. It does not present a problem.

For me running on the fly is no problem. Running prepped is no problem.
The only problem with running a module is making certain I have someone else's story backwards and forwards before I start.

Combat would too easily end up in TPK or cakewalk, with no obvious reason why. It ended up being very hard for me to adjust difficulty on the fly and do so transparently to the players. That's the important part to me. really; that the players not be able to see that I'm fudging the numbers behind the screen.

<snip>

I don't get that feel from 4E.

You are not going to get an argument out of me here.
I agree 100% that 4E is easier to run.

For me that is a non-issue and the price of that simplification is a total deal breaker. I'm not asking you to have the same point of view.

 

[BryonD]

I like games that have rules to resolve conflicts between characters.

For me, 4e does a better job of resolving all sorts of conflicts using the rules than any other edition of D&D. It does a better job for me for two main reasons: I like 4e's combat system more than any other, not just because I think there are more options available in combat, and I like the framework that skill challenges provide.

Wow, you've suddenly convinced me with this compelling presentation.

sigh

I'm not going to start this debate over again.

I'm glad you like 4E. I know what it can do and I know what it can't do.
In my view it has a decent combat engine on a fair to middling RPG.
We disagree.
Fine.

 

[BryonD]

Yep.

Which is why 4e is the only version of D&D I would ever run again.

Of this I have no doubt.