D&D 4E Is 4E retro?

[mmadsen]

It amazes me that people with such a strong dislike for 4th Edition insist on coming to the 4E Forum...

The title of the thread is "Is 4E retro?" Don't you think fans of the older editions might show up to say, "No!"?

We can agree that Just Another User wasn't particularly helpful or polite in his criticism, but we shouldn't be surprised that people show up to answer the question in both the positive and the negative -- and on the Net we shouldn't be surprised at all that people would lash out at something other people like.

 

[DandD]

Threadcrapping is still disallowed. However, if the particular user really is offending, that's what one should use those nifty report-buttons to call in the moderators.

 

[Njall]

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.

You should pay a visit to the 3e CO boards sometimes. Really.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I think that in a lot of ways it IS retro. I've had that impression ever since I started reading stuff about it.

I think the real reason it is retro is because it really does focus on getting back to the "core gameplay" of D&D.

Back in the day, D&D was about going to dungeons, kicking in doors and beating up monsters. You accomplished this by working together: The wizard detected magic and had the powerful spells but would die easily, the fighter had the armor and the hitpoints and would protect the party, the rogue would find and disarm traps and search for secret doors and sneak around and get in backstabs, the cleric healed and increased the effectiveness of the party. It certainly felt a lot like a team working together to accomplish goals.

As much as I like 3e, I found it got away from that. No longer were characters attempting to work together, they were more often competing AGAINST each other. I find that players spend more time searching books to find that perfect feat or PrC that will get just a little more power for their character than they do actually playing the game.

And it is no longer about trying to be the best fighter you can be or the best cleric you can be, it instead becomes about how you can make the best CHARACTER. How can you make a character who doesn't need other party members to survive? Plus, the rules have multiplied to the point where there's an exception to every rule and you need to know them all to play.

At least, that's my experience.

With 4e, I feel that it really concentrates on making the experience cooperative, role focused, and easy to play again. That's truly where I feel the "retro" effect comes from. Players have to work together because they all have limitations that can't be overcome by their own class. There is more a focus on solving the problems of the adventure through creative use of skills and thinking things through. In 3e, the focus was on having the appropriate spell or class power to bypass whatever challenges you came across. It is also much more focused on simplicity. There's very little you need to remember in terms of rules in order to play. If a rule is needed, you'll likely have it written on your character somewhere.

It isn't retro in all ways. It still attempts to solve the problems of the older versions of D&D. Things like: making combat more interesting and more tactical, making the classes more balanced, making options in combat more balanced, making out of combat options more balanced, getting something interesting at every level, more character variety(without giving so much variety that it breaks the class roles), and so on.

I liken it to running a game of 1st Edition D&D where you can be rest assured that any character that people create will not overpower your campaign, any monster you use will not accidentally create a TPK, and you know which magic items to give out to avoid overpowering your campaign, while the PCs have more interesting options available to them.

 

[Just Another User]

The title of the thread is "Is 4E retro?" Don't you think fans of the older editions might show up to say, "No!"?

We can agree that Just Another User wasn't particularly helpful or polite in his criticism, but we shouldn't be surprised that people show up to answer the question in both the positive and the negative -- and on the Net we shouldn't be surprised at all that people would lash out at something other people like.

Just so I know for future reference, where do you think I wasn't polite?

 

[Irda Ranger]

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.

I was thinking about this, and here's my thought: 4E is like ECM D&D. It skips Basic and goes right to 4th level. The devs were very explicit about this too. They said the "sweet spot" was too narrow in previous editions, and they are right about that. Being 1st level in BECM/RC D&D sucks. The lethality is close to 50% for the first two levels, and WotC wanted to avoid that.

So, 4E isn't retro in the sense that it makes you "pay your dues" before you actually get to be a tough adventurer. But I'm more than 100% OK with that.

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)

I think the problem is much reduced from 3E though. It's moving in a retro direction. There's no more worrying about whether you have the right Feats at 1st level to qualify for the PrC you really want at 6th level. Just roll up your character and go; you can always retrain later.

The very existence of "expected wealth by level" and the ability to buy magic items, regardless of how these flaws may have been tweaked

This point is just BS. D&D has always has expected wealth by level, they just didn't come out and say it prior to 3E. Heck, half your XP came from treasure acquisition in the beginning, and those strongholds and retainers don't work for free.

Too much offensive spellpower for clerics

Granted, this is a change. But that's a nit, don't you think? We're looking for overall feel here.

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 is granted. Retro D&D had a terrible method for balancing magic vs. melee power, so I'm very glad they're not going retro in this respect. There won't be any more "Well, Murdock is out of Magic Missiles, and, let's be honest, he can't hit the side of a barn with this sling, so I guess he'll hang back the rest of the fight ... does anyone mind if I play some Tekken?" Good riddance to that.

 

[hong]

I was thinking about this, and here's my thought: 4E is like ECM D&D.

Wouldn't ECM be a good addition to D&D? Jam that effin' wizard before he plops that fireball down with pinpoint accuracy on your lap!

 

[Irda Ranger]

Wouldn't ECM be a good addition to D&D? Jam that effin' wizard before he plops that fireball down with pinpoint accuracy on your lap!

You're totally lost me. Sorry. To which ECM were you making a joke about?

# ECM (record label)
# Electret condenser microphone
# Electro chemical machining
# Electron Cloud Model
# Electronic countermeasures
# Electronic contract manufacturing
# Electronic control module
# Electronically commutated motor
# Elliptic curve method
# Enterprise Content Management
# Entitlement Control Message
# Equity Capital Markets
# Error correction mode
# European Common Market
# Every Child Ministries
# Exceptional case marking
# Explora Capital Management
# Extracellular matrix
# Engine Control Module

 

[small pumpkin man]

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".

Uhm, what are talking about? A Town Guard is by definition normal guy with a couple of weeks training and a spear. Your point was that 4e PCs are supposedly "a cut above this". Since an 8th level 3.x PC can completely ignore Town Guards and a 4e one can't, that completely negates your assertion.

Whether or not this NPC uses the same "progression chart" has nothing to do with this, and the fact that they don't use the same chart, is, as Mourn said, Totally Retro.

 

[TerraDave]

Wouldn't ECM be a good addition to D&D? Jam that effin' wizard before he plops that fireball down with pinpoint accuracy on your lap!

MCM, ACM?

or the E stands for Eldritch.