D&D 4E My First 4E Game: Disappointing. Yours? (UPDATED with player feedback)

[Derren]

I have little problem with people saying 4E is not their game. But I have a problem saying that something in 4E is like in a video-game and believing that this
a) is true
b) must be bad.
c) without giving me a reasonable explanation how this negatively affects the game and turns it into something "less" then a role playing game.

Lets see.

- The characters have fixed roles which exactly describe what the character has to do in combat. Check
- The classes are restrictive and even if you can multiclass the class you took at level 1 will define whatyou can do in the game. Check
- Powerful items require a certain level to use them. Check
- NPCs only exist to A. give quests. B. sell loot and C. kill for loot. Check
- Combat involves using a small set of abilities with different reuse timers over and over again. Check
- The (default) world only serves as background for killing things and does not posess internal logic. Check
- The abilities of the PCs only work in combat, but not outside in the real world unless the game specifically wants them to. Check
- The PCs are special and work under much different rules than the NPCs. Check
- The game is financed by allowing players to spend money for more powerful characters (splatbooks->powercreep) or a monthly subscription rate. Check

As you can see there are quite a lot of similarities between MMOs (Vanguard is a better example than WoW as it has a diplomacy system) and the major distinction between D&D and a moderated MMO, the free world and "can do whatever you want" aspect gets reduced in 4E by introducing the rules != physics aspekt and other restrictions.

 

[hong]

Check

I do not think this means what you think it means.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

- The characters have fixed roles which exactly describe what the character has to do in combat. Check
- The classes are restrictive and even if you can multiclass the class you took at level 1 will define whatyou can do in the game. Check
- Powerful items require a certain level to use them. Check
- NPCs only exist to A. give quests. B. sell loot and C. kill for loot. Check
- Combat involves using a small set of abilities with different reuse timers over and over again. Check
- The (default) world only serves as background for killing things and does not posess internal logic. Check
- The abilities of the PCs only work in combat, but not outside in the real world unless the game specifically wants them to. Check
- The PCs are special and work under much different rules than the NPCs. Check
- The game is financed by allowing players to spend money for more powerful characters (splatbooks->powercreep) or a monthly subscription rate. Check

As you can see there are quite a lot of similarities between MMOs (Vanguard is a better example than WoW as it has a diplomacy system) and the major distinction between D&D and a moderated MMO, the free world and "can do whatever you want" aspect gets reduced in 4E by introducing the rules != physics aspekt and other restrictions.

You must be reading about a different 4e than I am because I am not seeing most of what you are claiming in here. Perhaps my glasses are a bit rose-colored, but at least they aren't specialized polarizing lenses that only allow you to see only what you want to see.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

I did grant you the timer thing although its realy really different.

Lets see.

- The characters have fixed roles which exactly describe what the character has to do in combat. Check

False.

- The classes are restrictive and even if you can multiclass the class you took at level 1 will define whatyou can do in the game. Check

False.

- Powerful items require a certain level to use them. Check

One item. Rings.

- NPCs only exist to A. give quests. B. sell loot and C. kill for loot. Check

WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT!
False.

- The (default) world only serves as background for killing things and does not posess internal logic. Check

False.

- The abilities of the PCs only work in combat, but not outside in the real world unless the game specifically wants them to. Check

- The PCs are special and work under much different rules than the NPCs. Check

False. The NPCs use the same rules. The PCs are no more special than other heroic RPGs.. DMs just have shortcuts to create them easily.

- The game is financed by allowing players to spend money for more powerful characters (splatbooks->powercreep) or a monthly subscription rate. Check

No. The game is fincaed by you buying 3 hard back books once.

As you can see there are quite a lot of similarities

I can see you have made a decision and are willing to torture your perceptions of the world to fit your preconceived notions.

To bad you don't use that flexibility to accept that game rules have never been physics and once that conceit is dropped gaming is way funner for more people.

 

[Wystan]

Lets see.

- The characters have fixed roles which exactly describe what the character has to do in combat. Check
- The classes are restrictive and even if you can multiclass the class you took at level 1 will define whatyou can do in the game. Check
- Powerful items require a certain level to use them. Check
- NPCs only exist to A. give quests. B. sell loot and C. kill for loot. Check
- Combat involves using a small set of abilities with different reuse timers over and over again. Check
- The (default) world only serves as background for killing things and does not posess internal logic. Check
- The abilities of the PCs only work in combat, but not outside in the real world unless the game specifically wants them to. Check
- The PCs are special and work under much different rules than the NPCs. Check
- The game is financed by allowing players to spend money for more powerful characters (splatbooks->powercreep) or a monthly subscription rate. Check

As you can see there are quite a lot of similarities between MMOs (Vanguard is a better example than WoW as it has a diplomacy system) and the major distinction between D&D and a moderated MMO, the free world and "can do whatever you want" aspect gets reduced in 4E by introducing the rules != physics aspekt and other restrictions.

[Sarcasm]
Holy Crap, you have the full rules that allow you to fully know the entire game already? There are non-combat/shopkeeper NPC's? You know all the fluff of the World already too!!!! And how Combat Abilities function in all different circumstances? Holy Crap, we should post this as news!!!!
[/sarcasm]

Lets see:

In 3.5 the archer build ranger is supposed to be swinging a sword in melee? No, the RULES explain that he is a Ranged combatant and that is his ROLE. Seems the same/similar here.

In 3.5 the character Class that you took first defines what road your character should follow, you can deviate, but at the cost of being usually useless. Seems the same/similar here.

In 3.5 Powerful items (per RAW) require a certain wealth/level to use/obtain them? Seems the same/similar here.

In 3.5 NPCs existed to Give Quests, be Shopkeepers, or be killed to take their stuff... or as Window dressing or as background filler. Seems the same/similar here.

In 3.5 Combat involves 1-2 attacks used every round for most of the combatants with ZERO deviation? Seems more involved here.

In 3.5 the default world was not. No setting that I am aware of (personal knowledge here) even used most of the DEFAULT setting... Seems there is a normal window here.

In 3.5 You walked around charging and tripping people between combats? Seems the same/similar here.

In 3.5 *EVERYBODY* was supposed to be built using the same rules, that is why that 12 year old Stable hande has 12 hitpoints and 3 knowledge skills, he needed them to get his Animal Handling High Enough? Seems to make more sense now.

In 3.5 you had the option of Core Rules or Core Rules and Splat Books, the splat books also included power creep (and it seems you have seen all the splat books as well as you state that the 4E ones have power creep very definitively.). Seems the same/similar here.

As you can see there are a lot of similarities to 3.5, so they must have been influenced by that rule set? And the do whatever you want is increased by having a HUMAN GM.....

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Lets see.

<snip>

As you can see there are quite a lot of similarities between MMOs (Vanguard is a better example than WoW as it has a diplomacy system) and the major distinction between D&D and a moderated MMO, the free world and "can do whatever you want" aspect gets reduced in 4E by introducing the rules != physics aspekt and other restrictions.

Most, if not all of your examples are incorrect inferences. You have made judgments about an entire rules system based on quick play rules from a con. Others on your list are equally strange, like the suggestion that paying money for a service was created by MMOs. Huh... well, I could be wrong, but I don't think Chris Metzen wrote The Wealth of Nations.

You have decided you do not like 4e. That's fine. No one's saying you can't. But if the crux of your argument is based on antagonism and shutting down discourse, then you are not contributing anything, and will rightly be ignored.

 

[Zil]

But the fear is irrational. They don't seem to be able to understand what actually makes a computer game and a table top game different. They only look at game mechanics, but they don't have much to do with the differences.

Who are we to say that their fear is irrational? And I don't think it really is about fear. It is more a case of they do not like how it feels. If there is any strong emotion, it is probably feeling a bit adrift now that their RPG pass-time has left them behind by going to a place where they no longer feel comfortable.

The impossibility to go beyond what the programmers thought up is the weakness of computer games. You can't decide to ally with the BBEG, unless the programmers have thought of that beforehand. You have to follow the plot set out by the game. But this has nothing to do with mechanics. Heck, most of the times you can't even try to scale a wall that's in your way, or swim through a pane of water, unless the programmers have decided you should be able to do so.

Sure, I agree with you there and I suspect they would as well. It still does not mean that they can't find that the mechanics and meta-game elements in the new system feel too much like a computer game (for them). I don't think anyone has said it is exactly like a computer game. Rather, they are saying it is starting to feel more like a computer game (or the other things it is compared to - e.g. miniatures rules or CCG game) and less like how they expect D&D to feel.

In the end, it all comes down to personal taste and what people are comfortable with.

 

[Derren]

Most, if not all of your examples are incorrect inferences.

Care to explain why they are, in your opinion, incorrect or are you just denying it because 4E is going to be "awesomecool" according to NPCs"

1. The roles will determine what your character can and can't do. For example fighters are there to absorb damage and prevent enemies to get to the other party members. All their abilities are geared towards this function and it is hard, if not impossible to do something else. Thus you have restricting roles. The concept of roles might have existed for longer, but 4E is the first time where the PCs are forced into specific roles while you still had a choice in previous editions.

2. Likewise the abilities of a class heavily restrict what a class can be good at and where not.. Want to play an archer? Then you must take the ranger as your fist class as only this class has powerful abilities with the bow.

3. NPCs have a reduced statblock containing only the combat information that shows what they are supposed to be used for.

4. The at Will abilities are strictly better than basic attacks, so there is no reason not to use them every turn (except when you use your daily or encounter power). Other combat manouvers have been nerfed (grapple)

5. The default world is still a medieval one with magic added at a afterthought. The society in this world does not take the existance of magic, heroes or the general "physics" of the game into account (3E did this too). Also there are very big logical problems when the PoL is used as presented by WotC.

6. PCs get loads of abilities the default NPCs do not have which includes things like Second Wind or even their racial abilities. It has also been confirmed by WotC that the stats NPCs (monsters) are not "build" like the stats of the PC stats were but instead assigned by level & role. That means there is a huge difference between PCs and NPCs.

While D&D and MMO are still different mediums you can see that 4E borrows a lot of its concepts, certainly more than 3E did, from computer games. Thats nice for those who thinks computer games are great and want more of them, but the question comes up why play D&D when a computer game which can be moderated (Neverwinter Nights comes to mind) gives you nearly the same experience?

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

Care to explain why they are, in your opinion, incorrect

If you had read the second sentence of my post, you would have seen why I consider them incorrect.

or are you just denying it because 4E is going to be "awesomecool" according to NPCs"

This doesn't mean anything. At all. I can only guess you're trying to imply that I'm some kind of fanboy because I do not agree with your assumptions about the game.

I could go down your lists and point out what I disagree with, but it's been done before, both in this thread and others. But as I said, you're not really interested in true discourse or debate. So I don't see any reason to belabor this further. You are now the second person on my ignore list.

 

[Cadfan]

Who are we to say that their fear is irrational? And I don't think it really is about fear. It is more a case of they do not like how it feels. If there is any strong emotion, it is probably feeling a bit adrift now that their RPG pass-time has left them behind by going to a place where they no longer feel comfortable.

The problem is that "D&D feels like a computer game now" is not a subjective feeling. It is an analogy. It needs to be based on some kind of reasoning, which can be rational or irrational. It is the sort of statement to which one might respond, "Why?" and reasonably expect an explanation.

(And on top of that, if you intend to use the defense "this is my purely subjective opinion and no one can disagree with it because its subjective!!!" you don't get to complain when you get pummeled by other people's purely subjective responses. If D&D "feels" like a computer game to you, and nothing can talk you out of it because your feelings are purely your own, then, to me, your attitude "feels" like the attitude of someone with an irrational fear. What are you going to do, try to reason me out of that opinion? You burned that bridge already.)