Is 4E still D&D to you?

[DonTadow]

No, its a nice system and works within itself, but its not related to any of the d and ds. If i made a tree it would be a distant... distant cousin. True20 would be much closer and gurps would be slightly above it.

But, 4e is not trying to be dungeons and dragons, its trying to be 4e. Wotc can't make money off of dungeons and dragons. Dungeons and dragons can be played with just one bookand a d20. 4e though needs you to keep buy supplements. Races, classes, character upgrades, their brand of adventures. A more restrictive license to insure no one is hotshoting on their territory.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Sorry it may be an ok game.but to me its not D&D. It has lost that feel I am sad to say.

 

[WanderingMonster]

Still D&D and makes me excited to DM again.

 

[TheWyrd]

Dungeons and dragons can be played with just one bookand a d20.

Having started with AD&D, I'm not possitive how true this is. But I know the original pamphlets were at least three books but you might have been able to play with just a D20 I don't know. I know that AD&D required at least three and I'd have had a hard time only using a d20.


My Criteria for D&D is the ability to play a Cleric (who heals), a Fighter (who hits things), a Wizard (who blows stuff up), and a Thief (who disarms traps), plus be able to be Human, Elf, Dwarf, or Halfling(I'll accept Kender ..maybe). They mostly spend their times in Dungeons, can fight Dragons and accumulate magic items. There are probably dice involved.

 

[apoptosis]

I would say definitely No.

I have played so many fantasy RPGs over the years (T&T, RM, Dragonquest, Fantasy wargaming, etc.) that the separation between D&D and other games was based on a lot of the little oddities and mechanics D&D had (aka sacred cows).

If I wanted to play D&D it means I wanted to play a game with these elements. 3E seemed to veer off a bit but was still D&D (to the imaginary and arbitrary line that i drew).

4E has lost a lot of those mechanics. There is not much that connects 4E with traditional D&D that is not shared by a multitude of other fantasty RPGs.

IOW: It does not seem to have (m)any discriminatory elements that are unique to traditional D&D and not share by many other other fantasy RPGs.

Still seems to be a well-designed game though. I think you can play traditional D&D modules and dungeoncrawls with it and they will probably be fun. It wont feel like D&D (closer to D&D than The Shadow of Yesterday or Burning Wheel but farther away than Palladium or Tunnels and Trolls)

 

[Felix]

Certainly true but was Mostin the norm or or an abberation as far as overpowered caster classes ....?

He would have been smart enough not to get into melee with Eadric, if that's what you mean by "overpowered".

 

[Treebore]

Is it D&D? No. Its HARP, Rolemaster, GURPS, Paladium Fantasy, etc...

IE its a rules set for playing a fantasy game, but it isn't D&D. I've played HARP, Rolemaster, GURPS, Paladium, and others, so I'll likely play 4E. Its just not going to be my fantasy game of choice.

 

[Teflon Billy]

No, not really. And I don't mean that in any hostile way or anything.

It looks like a lot of fun, but this edition--and this is the first time I can recall this happening with an edition change--bears virtually no resemblance to it's predecessor.

I think 3.5E was the last "D&D" We're going to see.

4E, despite a bunch of w2ailing and gnashing to the contrary, really does take most of it's cues from MMORPG's. And frankly, given their success, I think it would almost have to given the fact that the publisher is a publically traded company.

Like I said, it looks like it could well be fun to play. But Mutants and Masterminds is fun to play. So is Spycraft...neither of those is D&D.

Sorry, but at the end of the day D&D (in the context it's being described here) isn't just a brand name. For me it's 20 years of shared assumptions.

This edition has mostly rubbed them out. And yes, I'm aware they will be selling them back to us later when the creative well starts running dry, but that's really not the same thing I don't think.

 

[Jasperak]

I have played 4e several times now and can say I have had a good time. I will most likely continue playing it.

Unfortunately since all of the classes use the same mechanics, none are easier to play than others. Why do I care, because the wife has no interest in playing it. She likes rolling a d20 and smacking badites, not playing a Vancian Fighter. She has played D&D3e for the past 5 years or so and has had a blast rolling her d20 and could care less about resource management. She would NEVER want to play a spellcaster.

I think when 4e increased the learning curve for the game by making all the classes use the exact same mechanics, it took something away from newer players. If all I had to introduce my wife to hobby was 4e, she would not have stayed with it.

D&D to my wife is rolling a d20 hitting stuff. For that I will continue to use D&D3e, C&C, BRPG, or maybe even Pathfinder. For myself, by the end of the night after I have imbibed a bottle of wine and have forgotten to mark my enemies or marked another player's enemy, it feels a little less like D&D to me.

 

[thedungeondelver]

No.