Promises, promises...what WotC said, and actually did, with 4E

[TerraDave]

On "should and shouldn't".

I guess if I was to say they "overpromised" it was the extent to which the game was done.

We can now see that some things were not as developed (to use their term) as we might have been led to believe.

But its good they fixed some mistakes.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I do not thing 4e require minis any more than 3e did.

Take that as thou wilt.

I am not sure I can entirely agree. I find the miniature-chess game more interesting in 4e, though. There just seem more possibilities now...

 

[Stormtower]

It just happens that mythological resonance is D&D's lifeblood in terms of vibe and atmosphere, and this kind of game design just haemorrhages it away, turning the game into a cypher that has nothing to do with anything else but itself.

I respectfully suggest that mythological resonance is related to narrative rather than mechanical choices, and that for all intents and purposes that this statement applies axiomatically across all editions of D&D. Game mechanics change, but mythological resonance has always sprung from the shared storytelling experience between players and game masters.

IMO 4th Edition does a fine job of running clean and fast, getting out of its own way and allowing DMs and players to play the game in the manner of their choosing at various points along the narrativist/gamist continuum. One may play it as a wargame-lite or "fantasy chess," or one may play it as a near-diceless storytelling exercise. If a given group is having fun and defining their experience as "playing D&D," I fail to see how that harms anyone's sense of mythological resonance.

 

[Stormtower]

Double post.

 

[rounser]

Game mechanics change, but mythological resonance has always sprung from the shared storytelling experience between players and game masters.

This would make sense if the game's crunch was purely bare bones number crunching. Unfortunately for your argument, that skeleton of numbers has flavour "flesh" attached, and that flavour has to do a lot of the heavy lifting with regard to what D&D represents.

It even has a name - the core "implied setting", a critical part of which is what gets into the PHB, because that gets a huge amount of screentime. Get that wrong and you've got D&D wrong. I think it leaves a lot to be desired, this iteration.

 

[TerraDave]

And this reminds of yet another early statement: no default pantheon.

The reversal on this they did explain: when they had an adventure with a temple in it, whose temple would it be? And what art should be used for symbols. Hence the default pantheon.

Still, this is one reversal I found to be annoying.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

And this reminds of yet another early statement: no default pantheon.

The reversal on this they did explain: when they had an adventure with a temple in it, whose temple would it be? And what art should be used for symbols. Hence the default pantheon.

Still, this is one reversal I found to be annoying.

Oh, I didn't remember that... Might be because I think even World & Monsters started introducing a few of the default gods, so they gave that up pretty fast.

 

[lutecius]

They apparently felt that the best way to make all the classes 'more interesting' was to port the existing 3e spellcasting system over to non-casters. This is fine in itself, but for whatever reason they also felt obligated to keep the notion of per-day limits on powers. So even though it's impossible for an individual character to completely blow her wad, you still have the fundamental issue of the party 'going nova' and using all/most of their dailies in their first fight of the day, then being left with the choice of sleeping to refresh dailies or continuing on at reduced potency. They didn't fix Vancian magic in the most obvious way (by getting rid of daily power limits entirely), so someone who had a problem with the 3e 15-minute workday is still going to have a problem with 4e (and I'm pretty sure I've seen this complaint made elsewhere).

that... and the lack of flexibility (not being able to use a power twice, no matter the level), not to mention the simulationist issues caused by vancian combat.

I’ve never liked dnd’s quirky magic system and I guess all those who applauded when wizards announced they would get rid of it didn’t either. Seeing this fire-and-forget nonsense extended to every ing class was a major disappointment. I had reservations about things like missing classes or the new races but ironically, the power system and the so called multiclassing, both of which looked great in the announcements, are the true dealbreakers for me.

As for the crunch before flavour thing... what rounser said. This is the kind of design that gives 4e this wargamey feel.

This would make sense if the game's crunch was purely bare bones number crunching. Unfortunately for your argument, that skeleton of numbers has flavour "flesh" attached, and that flavour has to do a lot of the heavy lifting with regard to what D&D represents.

yeah, i'm still not over the fey warlock's teleporting because he offs someone. The page count for power descriptions would go up dramatically if they actually tried to justify things like this.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

that... and the lack of flexibility (not being able to use a power twice, no matter the level), not to mention the simulationist issues caused by vancian combat.

There is more to Vancian magic then just daily resources. If it was, psion power points, spell points or Barbarian Rages per day would also be "vancian".

Of course, "Vancian" is not defined precisely.
I would identify the following as critical components:
- Spells are memorized/prepared
- Spells handed out in individual slots
- Spells cast are no longer available
- All spells replenish at the same time.

Wizards still are partially vancian in 4E - they prepare spells from their spell books. But these are not the only ones they can cast. But spells and all other powers replenish at different rate (each round, each encounter, each day).

Spell Points or Spell Powers allow you to keep your spells even after you cast them, as long as you still have some power points. (Same is true for Sorcerers)

 

[TerraDave]

Oh, I didn't remember that... Might be because I think even World & Monsters started introducing a few of the default gods, so they gave that up pretty fast.

It was early, and is harder to confirm with an exact quote (I am tempted to listen through the early podcasts again, but not that tempted)...

...but for example:

Greyhawk will not be default setting in core
We want to leverage the assets of the assumed parts of a D&D world – Mordenkainen, Bigby, Vecna, Llolth, Tiamat, Asmodeus, etc. However, we also want to call upon the great mythology that is more commonly known such as Thor, etc.

Of course, there could still be a Deities and Demigods with Thor, Zeuss, etc, but again, for Thor to go from so prominent (he is also mentioned by Mearls a few times, and that you can google) to not there, is a pretty big change on the world side.

As an aside, the above is from this thread. Pretty intersting to look at it a year latter.