D&D 4E New campaign, time to switch to 4e?

[Timely Drought]

So, a friend of mine says he wants to start a D&D campaign. I said sure. However, when I asked which rules he'd be using, he said 3.0. I'm a bit worried about some of the clunkiness of 3e, which I played for a few months, years ago.

Anyway, so far what I've learned is its gonna be mostly homebrew, undefined at the moment (he's going for the start small, add stuff as its needed world design). He wants us to be bad guys (I'm not sure exactly why at the moment). And his brother is a drow fanboy and wants to play a drow /). Also, he's gonna start us off with a small mini-campaign from a published scenario (not sure which) adapted to his homebrew. And another thing, he wants permanent death, no-resurrection stuff (which I know gets increasingly iffy the higher level you go, and the more save-or-die abilities appear).

Anyway, I'm not opposed to giving it a try, though I'm worried about the drow fanboy, and the evil thing has the potential of being stupid. Hopefully we can make it into a morally ambiguous, what-would-you-sacrifice-to-accomplish-you-destiny kind of thing, and not a killing-babies-because-its-funny thing.

I'm familiar with 3rd edition, and I don't know anything about 4th edition. So what's 4th edition like, and should I encourage him to switch? Is making characters easier than 3rd edition? Is it easier to run a no-rez campaign with it? Is it easier to run an 'evil' campaign with it? Is combat simpler? Is it better balanced?

 

[darkadelphia]

Making characters is easier, imo. Also, monster characters no longer have level adjusts, making drow, bugbear, goblin etc. PCs viable and simple (if the DM allows the optional races in the back of the MM).

The big difference, imo, is from the DM's side of the screen--it takes a lot less time to plan for the game (especially if you like custom monsters). Less time dealing with the mechanical details, more time thinking about the fun stuff and a fantastic DMG all leads to DMs getting a lot of bang for their prep time buck. If you want your DM to try 4e, this is the way I'd present it to him.

 

[ulrikbb]

I agree - everything runs more quickly with 4E once you get the hang of it. My party enjoys it a lot, and as a DM, I look forward to creating the sessions whereas before, with 3.5, I often found the work a bit tedious.

 

[amysrevenge]

He wants us to be bad guys

That's the one that would keep me personally away from it. Others might enjoy it more though...

 

[Timely Drought]

Apparently there's less alignment mechanics in 4e? The seperation between alignment and mechanics should help a alot. I always disliked the alignment system, and with the alignment mechanics gone, seems like we could just ignore alignment completely without needing to revise spells, powers, etc. I'm not interested in a game where the players dick themselves over, so I'm not worried about lack of support for that type of game in the DMG. If the DM and other players don't agree on some faction, organization, kingdom, religion, etc. that would tie the group together I simply won't play.

 

[David Sid]

Is it easier to run a no-rez campaign with it? Is it easier to run an 'evil' campaign with it?

Probably the "no resurrection" bit would go better. "Save or die" effects are extremely rare and usually result in bad stuff, but not death. To die from a beholder's death ray, you have to get hit by it, be already bloodied (i.e. at half your hit points or below), then fail two saving throws. Getting hit still hurts, as does failing the first save, but whether you live or die is based on three rolls, not one. Also, dying at negative half your hit points instead of at -10 HP means you'll almost never go from positive hit points to dead in one attack.

As for being easier to run an evil campaign: I think so, though I can't speak from experience. The lack of alignment-specific mechanics means practically nothing will be barred to you. Also, the fact that most people are minions with only 1 HP means that pillage and slaughter of enemy cities and armies will be quite crunchy...if that's your party's kind of thing.

 

[Vayden]

Would I consider switching? Definitely, and I'd also encourage it. However, I would not try to force it on anyone - talk to the DM, ask him if he's taken a look at 4 - if he's open to it, suggest a quick play-test so the whole group can get a feel for it - it's much more interesting in play than just looking at the books. If your group enjoys the playtest, then switch - I love the new system personally. If you guys don't enjoy it, then roll with the game - it's amazing how much silliness can be put up with by remembering that it's just a game and you're all friends there to have fun.

 

[timbannock]

So what's 4th edition like, and should I encourage him to switch?

It's a lot less about having a system for every little situation/condition/weather type and more about concentrating on cinematic action. There's a focus on making combat more interesting (and a bit more "gamey"), but there's also good rules and advice for non-combat encounters (as long as you check out the errata on Skill Challenges, or the billion and a half threads about the same).

Is making characters easier than 3rd edition?

Not really. Different but takes about the same time, and there's still math involved.

Is it easier to run a no-rez campaign with it?

Looks like. Not many save-or-die effects as has already been said.

Is it easier to run an 'evil' campaign with it?

No more or less, IMHO. Lack of alignment written into all the rules is helpful though, but content is up to the DM.

Is combat simpler?

No. Different in feel, and more to do with less to worry about, yes. But overall, I'd say it's still complex, just in a different well. Players will each be doing more on their turn, but it's easier to keep track of everything once you get a feel for it (2-4 encounters seems to be the learning curve at low level play).

Is it better balanced?

Define that? Judging by most threads and errata, I'd say -- given the fact that every class has about 75 powers or thereabouts -- it's pretty well balanced, but there's still stuff here and there that's wonky. A lot more balanced when comparing it to the volume of 3E splats and all that stuff, but when comparing core 3E to core 4E, I'd say about the same.