D&D 4E Is 4E retro?

[Ghaerdon Fain]

I too would like to see this polled.

I agree, this is how I have felt. But my reservation is that "powers" though super-cool and I am really looking forward to them, will undermine weapon use. I know it's paranoid and lots of powers are melee enhancers but I don't want to see "basic attacks" just lost to non stop at will powers... and that is the biggest change from the past. The feeling? Ya DnD is back to being fun and fast... pre 2E or maybe it's finally the way we always wanted it to be; but let's get the books in our hands before we go that far.

 

[Harshax]

To me 4E is retro for these reasons:

The implied ease that a DM will have at throwing together a night's game. Specifics: Monsters don't follow the same rules as PC's. Short stat blocks. Easy stat manipulation.

'Points of Light'. Nothing screams Caves of Chaos! like the 'Points of Light' campaign design concept that is being pushed by WotC. It's refreshing, and is so back to basics that to define it is to claim retro cred for 4E.

Rituals. My gut tells me this is so retro. Remember rooms filled with impossible magic? Like. . . Permanent reverse gravity traps, and the insane garden in the I Series? 2E filled everyone's game worlds with unlimited (codified) magic. 3E and 3.5E filled everyone's game worlds with limited (codified) magic. 4E's answer? Quick and sweet (like Basic) + Rituals (DM hand waving).

3E and 3.5E can't really do 1, but any game system can do 2. Reason 3 firmly belongs to the earliest editions of D&D.

 

[AtomicPope]

4e absolutely harkens back to 1st Edition AD&D. Consider this:
* Temple of Elemental Evil is being used as a template for core fluff concerning both Demons and the Elemental Planes
* No more "Specialist Wizards" or "Kit (Prestige) Classes". Everyone gets their own class.
* Monsters are no longer treated as "NPC Classes." Long gone are dragons with Cure Minor Wounds (as if the DM needed to pip something).
* Class Features are part of classes, not of feats. (A clear indication that 3e was falling in on itself when feats started giving new features. It meant the core classes weren't doing their job).
* Skills are non-combat again.
* There is a clear linear progression from hero to god (red box, to blue box, to black box).

BTW - I really hope they bring the red box back. I still have mine after 24 years and I could use a new one.

 

[Serendipity]

*nods* In many many respects it has had that effect on me as well. The paragon tier options remind me of how Neutral clerics could become Druids at name level, while Fighters could become Paladins, Knights, or Avengers. The notion of blurring the lines between Epic and Immortal level (or Master and Immortal) level play seems even hazier and, honestly, the way the game opts (so we've seen so far) to not attempt to simulate every aspect of the world but only the crunchy aspects (e.g. spells, combat, etc.)
The reboot they seem to be doing to the Outer Planes seems also VERY BECMI to me (astral sea with the outer planes floating in it).
In that respect, I'm very much looking forward to 4e.

 

[Just Another User]

I'm not seeing it. Too much of 4E is either maintaining or expanding on aspects of 3E that I didn't like compared to BECMI.

Too minis-centric (a problem with 3E, exacerbated in late 3.5 [such as FCII's legion devils] and apparently in 4E)
1st-level PCs are too far above "Normal Man" -- 3E is the maximum I can tolerate for D&D, and even that's pushing it.
Too much focus on character builds and what abilities your PC has (not any worse than 3E, but that's one of 3E's biggest flaws in comparison to BECMI)
Too many temporary bonuses and modifiers (again, not necessarily any worse than 3E, but nowhere near as good as BECMI)
The very existence of "expected wealth by level" and the ability to buy magic items, regardless of how these flaws may have been tweaked
Too much offensive spellpower for clerics

Finally, one of the most important game design elements of any fantasy RPG is how to balance magic against mundane abilities, particularly in terms of the versatility that magic allows. I dislike 4E's approach and will not be switching.

I see 4E continuing the trends that I didn't like in 3E, and removing much of what I did like (e.g. Vancian magic). It just does not look like an appealing game to me.

This. All of this.

 

[Just Another User]

I don't know about 'retro', but 4e look a lot like a D&D parody to me. Many of the things I've seen for 4e are so over the top (healing surges, for example) that I could have read them in Hackmaster or Munchkin and I would have not raised an eyebrow.

Every time I read the "pcs are heroes and can do thing NPCs can't" arguments I can't help but think to the "knights of the dinner table" comic, "For gawd's sake, Sarah. They are just NPCs. It is not like they care if we kill them/beat them up" (if you read the comic, you probably know what I mean, if you don't you should.)

 

[Just Another User]

I can see where you're coming from on your other points but this one stands out. The 1st level Human Guard is a respectable combatant with a solid attack bonus, good to very good damage, some useful effects and hit points between a striker and a defender. While any given PC is almost certainly better than he is, it isn't by very much.

But the 1st level human guard is not a Normal Man, it is a "Monster", not conceptually different from the Pit Fiend or the Angel of Vengeance, the only diffenrece is the level and that the fluff describe it as "human guard".

 

[The Little Raven]

But the 1st level human guard is not a Normal Man, it is a "Monster", not conceptually different from the Pit Fiend or the Angel of Vengeance, the only diffenrece is the level and that the fluff describe it as "human guard".

And that is totally retro.

 

[mmadsen]

To me 4E is retro for these reasons:

The implied ease that a DM will have at throwing together a night's game. Specifics: Monsters don't follow the same rules as PC's. Short stat blocks. Easy stat manipulation.

'Points of Light'. Nothing screams Caves of Chaos! like the 'Points of Light' campaign design concept that is being pushed by WotC. It's refreshing, and is so back to basics that to define it is to claim retro cred for 4E.

Rituals. My gut tells me this is so retro. Remember rooms filled with impossible magic? Like. . . Permanent reverse gravity traps, and the insane garden in the I Series? 2E filled everyone's game worlds with unlimited (codified) magic. 3E and 3.5E filled everyone's game worlds with limited (codified) magic. 4E's answer? Quick and sweet (like Basic) + Rituals (DM hand waving).

I think you've put together a solid list of retro elements I can agree with -- both that they're retro and that they're good ideas.

I don't think the mechanics-for-mechanics'-sake combat system is very retro though.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

I don't know about 'retro', but 4e look a lot like a D&D parody to me. Many of the things I've seen for 4e are so over the top (healing surges, for example) that I could have read them in Hackmaster or Munchkin and I would have not raised an eyebrow.

Every time I read the "pcs are heroes and can do thing NPCs can't" arguments I can't help but think to the "knights of the dinner table" comic, "For gawd's sake, Sarah. They are just NPCs. It is not like they care if we kill them/beat them up" (if you read the comic, you probably know what I mean, if you don't you should.)

It amazes me that people with such a strong dislike for 4th Edition insist on coming to the 4E Forum and post threadcrapping comments... Why don't you go to your own corner and play OSRIC or something?