Reading 4e

[Andor]

It's no secret that I have problems with 4e, I think it desperately needed another 6 mos to a year of development and polish.

That having been said I'm not sure that one of my big problems with 4e is solvable with mere polish.

It's just so damm dull to read. Page after page of powers that all do basically the same thing. It's worse than trying to read poorly commented code.

Race entries? Readable. The Classes? Okay, until you get past about second level in the powers. After that it's like trying to read 'the joy of accounting'. Equipment lists? Kill me now. Paragon paths? Now they can be interesting, but I'm not sure if it's because or inspite of the limited interaction they have with the system. (6 powers/affects.)

I skimmed AV and MP and they were deadly dull too, except for some of the PPs and new class options.

What is it about 4e that makes it so dull? The lack of fluff? The disconnect between what fluff there is and the mechanics? The endless fiddly details?

Could it just be that I'm old? I recall eagerly reading the 1e PHB spell setions and absorbing all that data. I never managed to do that in 2e, or 3e, or 3.5e. I just didn't care enough to make memorizing 1000 spells worthwhile. Now in 4e you have no choice. All classes are wizards.

OTOH the Druid preview actually seemed interesting and engaging. Was it because I didn't see those endless lists of incrementally different powers? Or has WotC learned how to write for the new rules set? Maybe there is a delicate art to scetching out a class with such a light touch of fluff, or maybe the novel mechanics of the druid are more evocative to the imagination.

What do you think?

 

[thecasualoblivion]

4E reads badly. I've said that from day 1. Unless you're a systems/math head who can look at the accounting and accurately envision how things will work in actual game play. I can do that, though I imagine I'm in the minority.

That being said, for as same as things may look on paper, when you actually use the mechaincs in the game well they are far from similar. If you just stand still and don't really try to tactically use your powers, they will same just as dry and boring as they appear on the paper. When you try to use those powers in the most advantageous manner possible things become very different.

The big thing is, there is an unwritten part of every power description, and those are the tactics involved in using that power well. While the powers look the same, its those unwritten tactics that are wildly different.

 

[yesnomu]

I'm thinking you just don't like to read and interpret long lists of powers, one after another. And there's nothing wrong with that, I wouldn't pick the Spell Compendium or Martial Power for bedtime reading either. These new splatbooks are tightly focused, which has pros and cons.

I would guess that the druid is more interesting to you because there aren't very many powers listed, and that the full class writeup will look as dull to you as any other. Which again is totally fine, people have different tastes.

 

[DandD]

What more "fluff" was there in the third edition player's handbook, compared to its 4th edition counterpart? Why are the descriptions of the spells and the feats in the 3rd edition handbook not dull, whereas 4th edition spells, rituals, feats and powers are, according to you?

Also, why are you starting another anti-4th edition rant?

These questions above are something I'd like to see answered, so to better understand what irks people who are vehemently against the new edition and have to complain about it all the time, in this case about this "dulleness".

 

[nightwyrm]

Personally, I think people find 4e powers dull as compared to 3e spells because the write ups of the 4e powers are very formulaic and concise. The flavour text is seperated from the mechanics just like Magic cards. In previous editions, spells are written in paragraphs and you actually have to plough through the words. Even if all spells can be broken down to damage + effects, two spells that do very similar thing can seem different if their write up is different.

I guess it's the difference between getting information from reading an essay (previous ed) vs reading a point form summary (4e).

 

[RefinedBean]

You mean people can get bored reading D&D/RPG books?

Seriously, though. 4E is pretty boring to read. For the most part, the nitty-gritty of any game system is boring, or at least too pedantic to thoroughly enjoy. I thought we gamers prided ourselves to find a marginal amount of enjoyment out of what's basically How to Simulate Fiction Poorly.

And pointing to the AV and the MP as also boring to read is like pointing to two puddles and saying "They're just as wet as the ocean!" Perhaps the Draconomicon and the upcoming Manual of the Planes will be more to your liking?

 

[Imaro]

What more "fluff" was there in the third edition player's handbook, compared to its 4th edition counterpart? Why are the descriptions of the spells and the feats in the 3rd edition handbook not dull, whereas 4th edition spells, rituals, feats and powers are, according to you?

Also, why are you starting another anti-4th edition rant?

These questions above are something I'd like to see answered, so to better understand what irks people who are vehemently against the new edition and have to complain about it all the time, in this case about this "dulleness".

Better yet...read what he wrote. The OP states he had a hard time reading 3e and 3.5 for enjoyment too. You seem like the one itching for an edition war and really blowing the post out of proportion.

 

[DandD]

He's refering to 4th edition as being unpolished, and dull. That means that Andor thinks that the previous version is not unpolished, and more exciting to read. Quite easy, don't you think? You don't have to interprete much into it to see that this is going to end like that.

Also, it's an open secret that Andor belongs to the 4th edition critics. Heck, he even admits it in the very first posting above.

 

[malraux]

Even if the books are boring to read, so what? If you want entertaining fantasy books to read, WotC has a line of fiction (which I assume is reasonably ok, the only DnD fantasy fiction I've ever read was I, Strahd). Rulebooks should be good at conveying rules, which the more formulaic setup does.

Beyond that, why would you even want to read all the powers in a class? The iconic or high leveled spells in 3e sure are cool to read, but it gets pretty tiring either way.

 

[RefinedBean]

Andor makes his/her opinions on 4E known, often. That's fine.

It's phrases like: "4E is unpolished and dull," and "Everyone's a Wizard" that put people on edge. These are opinions posited with no thought towards really showing that they're only opinions.

It's about as annoying as the standard 4E defense of "Use your imagination, everyone! Use it, and fly into a magical mystery of wonder!" Which usually doesn't solve anything, and just pisses people off more.

I mean, each "side" has their annoying points. Some sweet day*, we'll all look back on this and laugh.

*Probably a bit further out than any of us think