D&D 4E Is 4E retro?

[Scribble]

I had a similar feeling when 3e came out actually... A sort of it's retro, back to the past kind of thing... But it changed by the time 3.5 was in town.

For me it's not so much the rules... (althougha simpiler set of rules does add to it I think) but the community feeling maybe? The sense of D&D is D&D, and we all play D&D. D&D is dark mysteries in old forgotten dungeons, magic items and crazy monsters...

And not only in adventures you play, but the products that came out... Imaginitive and mysterious.

Which is one of the things I think I liked about previous editions... When new rules and concepts came out, they were so different and unique I found it slightly more fun then 3e's idea of a new way of using the base system to achieve the effect... (which worked betetr rules wise... but wasn't as... neat? to me...)

I think the thing that feels so "retro" to me about 4e is that they're playing into that idea. 4e is rehashing the mythology... So the new stuff is mysterious and fun. The community will be D&D players again all eagerly waiting for the next thing to come out...

it might fade. It probably will. I'm also not explaining my thoughts that well.

 

[TerraDave]

As noted above, 3.0 was "back to the dungeon"...the PHB had the monk, barbarian, half-orc...adventures where 32 pages long and set in greyhawk...the 4 core classes--fighters, wizards, clerics and the renamed rogues suddenly became popular again....many of the books had the same name as 1E counterparts...at first 3.0 had a bit of a "back to 1E ADD" feeling.

I think as people played it the "new elements" (PrCs, spiked chains, epic levels, warlocks, warforged...) became more prevelant. And the supplements that came out, especially later (and especially after 3.5) pulled it even farther away from those AD&D roots.

Its very possible that will happen again.

 

[Scribble]

As noted above, 3.0 was "back to the dungeon"...the PHB had the monk, barbarian, half-orc...adventures where 32 pages long and set in greyhawk...the 4 core classes--fighters, wizards, clerics and the renamed rogues suddenly became popular again....many of the books had the same name as 1E counterparts...at first 3.0 had a bit of a "back to 1E ADD" feeling.

I think as people played it the "new elements" (PrCs, spiked chains, epic levels, warlocks, warforged...) became more prevelant. And the supplements that came out, especially later (and especially after 3.5) pulled it even farther away from those AD&D roots.

Its very possible that will happen again.

Yeah... I can hope (but it won't happen) that they don't get stuck in a rut of simply releasing countless new powers for the differnt classes...

 

[Irda Ranger]

Thought so.
I jumped straight from the Basic Set to the Rules Cyclopedia and was blown away.

I wish I still had that book. I've found it online, used but in great condition, for $55. I'd be tempted if 4e didn't look like it was going to scratch this itch for me.

I bought the PDF at RPGNow for $5.95. It's not the same as having the book, of course, but it's quite legible. I printed it out on my laser printer and had it bound with a simple plastic binding at work's word processing department.

 

[Steely Dan]

As a DM of about 20 years, I totally agree.

To me, 4th Ed has captured some of the vibe and philosophy of pre 3rd Ed, but without the vague and cryptic rules, or the player pleasing/DMs go crew themselves vibe of 3rd Ed.


Also, 3rd Ed, to me, was more like a mathematical exercise, great in theory/on paper, but in practice/implementation, not so much.

 

[Nikosandros]

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

Electronic Counter-Measures.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Eldritch Countermeasures

 

[hong]

Idiots. Elven countermeasures, aka a pair of pruning shears.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

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.

I suppose my problem is the convergence of these three things:
1) Expected wealth by level
2) Magic items having a GP value
3) PCs expected to be able to buy the magic items they want.
I have never liked buying magic items in any edition of the game. I don't even like picking out magic items when I make a mid-to-high level PC. I love finding them in-game, and that's something that 3E discouraged. No more making do with what the DM gives you -- you are expected to be able to sell it and cash it in for an item optimized for you. That shift was one of 3E's biggest failings compared to BECMI.

Expecting a certain wealth by level in terms of ships, strongholds, hirelings, and so on, all that is fine with me. The fighter PCs are becoming Lords, after all. But I don't think reducing magic items to a GP value and assigning an expected amount per level has worked particularly well, and I do not like the way it feels in-game.

 

[Dausuul]

I suppose my problem is the convergence of these three things:
1) Expected wealth by level
2) Magic items having a GP value
3) PCs expected to be able to buy the magic items they want.
I have never liked buying magic items in any edition of the game. I don't even like picking out magic items when I make a mid-to-high level PC. I love finding them in-game, and that's something that 3E discouraged. No more making do with what the DM gives you -- you are expected to be able to sell it and cash it in for an item optimized for you. That shift was one of 3E's biggest failings compared to BECMI.

So, you like the direction 4E is heading with this, then? 4E appears to be doing away with #3 and possibly even #1 as well. (The main limiting factor on PC gear is now bonus level rather than wealth--i.e., a 5th-level charater should have +1 gear.)