Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="deadsmurf" data-source="post: 4774779" data-attributes="member: 25341">4E really has little to no restrictions on what can be done from the DMing perspective - if you want to come up with a new monster with strange abilities, you can make them in a couple minutes, no muss no fuss.  Plus just with the monster manual you can quickly reflavour monsters so they are something completely different.  Traps/Obstacles are equally quick and painless, and you can create some very interesting encounters for the party with little effort.  Monsters are easy as all their details are included in the stat block, and there are no rules embedded in creature types for example.  The math of the game allows an appropriately leveled monster to always be possible to hit and makes characters no feel useless.4E is great for brand new DMs as it can be played 'from the box' very easily, and there aren't a lot of rules to look up all the time (especially if you have a DM screen which has most of the information you'd look up when you do need to do so)  A lot of the rules are very streamlined and make for fast play.4E is a little lacking on rules aided/defined roleplaying aspects.  The Powers/Rituals are pretty narrowly defined to make them easy to adjudicate, but that leaves some of the 'neat ideas' you can get while using them out in the cold.  I would recommend allowing more 'flavourful' usage of powers outside of combat (and limitedly inside too) - for example letting Illusion spells which do damage, to just have an effect on a hit.4E's rule structure is very rigid, and playing with the rules of the game can be very very unbalancing, however because of the power system, specfic rules elements (such as races and class features and powers) can be changed quickly and easily without hurting the balance between classes.  New classes are easy to balance, but are hard to make and take a long time (if you make 30 levels of powers etc)3e on the other hand is a very open ended system. It too has many pros and cons, and I'll try looking at them in the same order as 4Es.3E's monster system is complicated.  Creature types have built in rules, each 'hit die' are tied to skill points and feats like the PCs, and have only cursory relations to the Challange Rating (level) of the monster.  AC/Saves/Damage etc can vary wildly, making some characters useless and others awesome against specific monsters.  Monster stat blocks are often missing information and require you to look stuff up (for example spell like abilities) and that slows down the game, or the preparation.3E has rules for just about anything - this is great if you don't like to just wing it and figure things out for yourself.  The problem is this can slow the game to a crawl while you look up the specific DC for skill X in situation X.3E has a very loose structure, and a lot of subsystems specific to ranges of classes.  This makes it very easy to rebuild rules - and this is practically required.  I have very seldom seen a 3E game with out some sort of major house rule (even if it's something from the books themselves like using point buy and average hitpoints each level)  Want to change the hit point system? Sure Easy! Etc etc - Game balance can be an issue, but it already is in the baseline 3E model.  Also Classes are really easy to make, but hard to balance.3E has a lot of 'rule supported roleplaying' - spells are often left quite open ended and open to interpretation and alternate usages.  There are skills for just about anything.  Some (prestige) classes force you into specific character ideas and sometimes have roleplaying only rewards or penalties.Also think about what you are trying to accomplish with your game - are you trying to tell a story, or are you trying to build a world?3E is better at rules to run a fantasy world (not great at it, but it is easier than in 4E) Hit Points are less abstract, NPCs have classes and work the same way as PCs.  It would totally be possible to have the PCs play commoners (as in the class) then work their way into being heros.  The players are elements of the world, not (nessesarily) its focus.4E is a more naratavist style, and is good for telling a story.  The players start as heroes, they're ready to go from the begining, and doesn't really support the farmboy to hero plot (unless you skip over the farmboy part, and join the narrative after he's learned his basic skills)  And the world exists for the players benefit.  Nothing really makes sense in the world except what the players are interacting with.  How can Ogres be both level 6 brutes with a ton of hitpoints and difficult to take down, and also level 14 minions that can be taken down in one hit?  Because they were threats to the players at level 6, but at level 14 they are mooks, not something that needs to take a lot of attention.I tried to stay as objective as possible, but really 4E is my game of choice now - I really love it, I think its perfect for most people who are new to the game.  It is easy to teach, and a lot of fun from level 1.3E is a good game though, so if you're into it go for it!  being a DM is really rewarding - you feel a sense of glee when you pull out a mini and the players start calling you an illegitimate child for springing this on them, and then they beat the hell out of it.Good luck on your D&D whatever edition you choose.</blockquote>

Verification