D&D 4E Presentation vs design... vs philosophy

[Don Durito]

Anthony Huso has a blog where he talks about running AD&D 1e entirely by the book.

 

[Oofta]

I always wondered how it was supposed to work really, just in terms of consistency, as generally you need a minor action to draw a weapon unless you have the quick draw feat. If you have a magic weapon it's supposed to return to your hand automatically, but one presumes it would have to first at least reach the target, while the power suggests that your attacks are so fast that wouldn't necessarily be the case.

True. It also worked with a hand crossbow. Which means you could load, aim, fire precisely a couple of times per second. Drawing and throwing daggers is just as bad.

It just isn't physically possible. Which is fine based on what you're trying to simulate. It just wasn't for me.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[pemerton]

My recollection is that, in 3E, one attack can throw up to 3 shurikens. Which means that a fighter with four attacks can throw up to 12 shurikens in a round. Does that mean that 3E shuriken throwers are supernatural?

As far as a magic dagger is concerned, can't it leap out of the rogue's hand and hurl itself with blinding speed at the enemy?

I'm one of those who finds the criteria at work in some of these analyses curious.

 

[pemerton]

It is also somewhat hard for me to understand why, if (A) is accurate, there is such a large contingent of people on enworld that played 4e and do not play 5e.

I can tell you why, in my case - it's no secret.

(1) 5e does nothing for me that 4e does not do better.

(2) 5e has no robust non-combat conflict resolution framework, which is pretty much a deal-breaker for me in my RPGing. (I've often posted that Classic Traveller has a similar weakness in its on-world exploration rules. It's not a coincidence that since I discovered this - via the process of actual play - that our game has featured no more on-world exploration.)

(3) The asymmetric resource suites in 5e mean that maintaining mechanical balance of effectiveness across the PCs depends upon multiple encounters per "adventuring day" - 6 to 8, or at least the prospect thereof. That makes the "adventuring day" rather than the immediate encounter/situation the basic unit of play. These days that's another deal-breaker for me.

 

[Maxperson]

My recollection is that, in 3E, one attack can throw up to 3 shurikens. Which means that a fighter with four attacks can throw up to 12 shurikens in a round. Does that mean that 3E shuriken throwers are supernatural?

Those three shurikens are not being thrown sequentially for a total of 12 throws. You are literally throwing three of them with a single throw.

 

[Umbran]

Now, I lack the deep and intimate knowledge of 4e to make that call for myself. It does seem difficult for me to understand how both of these claims are consistently made!

That's pretty simple - the statements aren't being made based on the same priorities, or even necessarily with logical analysis as their root.

How does the game feel to a person to play? How do people feel about the game (a larger issue concerning history and marketing and all)? The statements will be strongly influenced by these things - and two rational people cna have different feelings about the games, and thus come to contrary conclusions.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Umbran]

Weirdly, I happen to make them on a fairly regular basis, yet get a lot of disagreement.

The idea that our positions are often significantly based in emotions, with rationalizations layered on afterwards isn't a thing we are comfortable with, so we tend to deny or ignore it.

 

[Oofta]

My recollection is that, in 3E, one attack can throw up to 3 shurikens. Which means that a fighter with four attacks can throw up to 12 shurikens in a round. Does that mean that 3E shuriken throwers are supernatural?

As far as a magic dagger is concerned, can't it leap out of the rogue's hand and hurl itself with blinding speed at the enemy?

I'm one of those who finds the criteria at work in some of these analyses curious.

So once in a while 3E went too far. You could probably find something in 5E if you look hard enough. But it's the exception to the rule. With 4E they went that far and further from level 1 for every class.

I grew up reading fantasy stories. When I play D&D I want to play Fafhrd, The Gray Mouser, Conan, Aragorn or Gimli. I want to envision scenes and have capabilities that were represented in that fiction. Do the heroes sometimes do extraordinary things? Absolutely. They're heroes. But there's a line that fiction did not cross. Yes 3E may have crossed it once in a while but it was the exception to the rule.

When we were making the transition from 4E to 5E we had one guy that really loved anime. All his PC portraits were anime pictures, he went to conventions. For him, 4E enabled him to capture that feel in a game and he really liked 4E. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Where you draw the line on what makes sense for you is going to vary. With 5E they do things here and there that bug me (long bows being dex based only is one) but it's a minor speed bump here and there. It's not a giant hill of cognitive dissonance I have to climb over every encounter.