Some thoughts on 4e getting long in the tooth.

[am181d]

Excepting, of course, that the online Character Builder includes ALL and EVERY current rules addition, edition, and inclusion to date... and you can't easily filter out what the DM says is not fair game for his campaign.

That seems to be an argument that DDI means 4e is easier to pick up. You don't need to buy ANY of the books. Just use the DDI Character Builder and Online Rules Compendium.

 

[Mercurius]

I thought these kind of posts died out a year or two ago, although I guess this is a combination of "Leaving 4E Confessional" and "5E Wishful Thinking."

That said, I agree with most of the OPs points. Something is just off with 4E and it needs a major overhaul. I think the essence of it goes back to the "Everything is core" design approach which, while initially well-intended, may have turned into a disaster. That approach has led to the unwieldly mess that is 4E today; everything being core means it is hard to find the "needle" (the core, basic game) amdist all of the "chaff" (the countless splat options).

So [MENTION=55066]Dice4Hire[/MENTION], I disagree with you in that I think Monte & Mike get this problem, which is why they're talking about complexity dials and a simpler core. If the game was designed from the get go as a relatively simple, basic game--something along the lines of a 4E version of True20--then everything after that could be optional. This is a reversal of the "everything is core" approach, and a more viable and long-lasting "only the core is core; everything else is optional" approach."

[MENTION=22424]delericho[/MENTION], maybe this is my inner grognard speaking, but the idea of Shardminds and Warforged joining Dragonborn and Tieflings in the Player's Handbook is borderline nauseating to me. Actually, having the Dragonborn and Tiefling in the first PHB is one of the mistakes that WotC made with 4E, imo. Yeah I know, they were trying to appeal to the "WOW crowd," but they forgot that a bird in hand is better than two in the bush and all they did was lose the bird in hand...thus Pathfinder.

As with what I said above, with 5E I'd rather see them go back to a "Classic D&D" feel for the core game--both with the starter box set and the three core rulebooks. Save the fancy stuff for PHB 2, 3, etc. I see something like this:

Starter Box Set: basic four races (human, elf, dwarf, halfing) and four classes (fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric, ranger) levels 1-5.
Player's Handbook: eight races (as above, but also half-elf, half-orc, gnome, and maybe one fluffy race like the eladrin) and eight classes (as above, plus ranger, paladin, druid, and bard)
Player's Handbook 2 (maybe just six months later): 4-6 more races and 6-8 more classes (warlock, warlord, sorcerer, barbarian, assassin, avenger...or something like that).

Etc. Cover the classic game first, and then go hog-wild after that. This pleases everyone.

 

[Herobizkit]

With regards to my mentioning DDI, I was going for the "right to entitlement" that some players may feel when given choices. Once seen, they cannot be unseen... and some players get frustrated when they are denied clearly available choices.

For me, 3.5 became the standard on what books are dis/allowed... mostly, Core, Completes, and Unearthed Arcana if the DM was feeling generous. Issue is, this now becomes Core, Powers, and PHB 2+3. Or something.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

You can play 4E just as easily with the 'Core 3' as you could with any previous edition. There is no more expectation to use all the books as there was any time previous. Since you apparently have never learned how to play 4E, you might not have realized this fact. However, it is still true.

I have to disagree. The model adopted for 4E releases, at least initially, was a conscious effort to make later incarnations of the core 3 as important as the initial ones, by simply taking away things that were part of core D&D experience for as long as I can remember, such as druids, bards, frost giants and metallic dragons. You could convert a core-only 2E edition campaign almost directly to 3E, while the same is not true of 4E.

 

[Desdichado]

Huh. I feel a tiny bit baited and switched on the title; those are certainly complaints about 4e, but I don't think they have anything to do with its age, perceived or actual.

In general, I'd say that 4e is not long in the tooth. Heck, I'm not done with 3.5 yet, and frankly, I'm still miffed that 3e migrated to 3.5 in the first place. I can see how from a publisher's perspective they may have wanted to hit reset and start over on the treadmill to sell more books. But that's not because the current edition of D&D... or even the past one, was necessarily "long in the tooth."

I think that your complaints would have been just as valid when 4e was still fairly new, if your tastes were such that you didn't like that. Or, your complaints are more about the fast and furious pacing of releases rather than the age of the edition overall. Both of those are unrelated to the age of 4e. You're better off just saying that 4e isn't the game for you and pick up something else, IMO, than look for an ever increasing pace of new editions to solve your problems with the game.

 

[Plissken]

You know what would be an AWESOME core race addition to D&D? The PANDAREN!

Meet the Pandaren - Game - World of Warcraft

 

[Hussar]

It's funny. I have been playing 4e for almost two years now. I just got a DDI sub for my birthday in September.

Despite my being the only person in the group who didn't have a DDI sub, I was still capable of running several interesting (at least the players seemed to think they were) adventures and play multiple characters throughout the Heroic tier and at no point was I sucking hind mammary.

Having the DDI is a tool, nothing more. It's nice having it, but, it's certainly not necesary to play.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I have to disagree. The model adopted for 4E releases, at least initially, was a conscious effort to make later incarnations of the core 3 as important as the initial ones, by simply taking away things that were part of core D&D experience for as long as I can remember, such as druids, bards, frost giants and metallic dragons. You could convert a core-only 2E edition campaign almost directly to 3E, while the same is not true of 4E.

I have to agree. You can certainly play with just the first three core books but they definitely spread out elements long time players expected to be in the initial releases.

 

[delericho]

Excepting, of course, that the online Character Builder includes ALL and EVERY current rules addition, edition, and inclusion to date... and you can't easily filter out what the DM says is not fair game for his campaign.

The offline Character Builder had a handy "configure" page, allowing you to quickly and easily filter options by source. Narrowing it down to the "Core 3" only, or indeed whatever other set of sources you wanted, was child's play. I would be surprised if the online CB doesn't contain a similar option.

What would be nice would be an option for the DM to set up a more detailed profile for his campaign that allows much greater control over options (perhaps he doesn't want Dragonborn, for example). The system would of course need to allow the DM to export that profile and send it to his players for their later use.

(I'm not sure how much work that would actually be. Certainly, I consider it a "nice to have" rather than a "must have" feature.)

[MENTION=22424]delericho[/MENTION], maybe this is my inner grognard speaking, but the idea of Shardminds and Warforged joining Dragonborn and Tieflings in the Player's Handbook is borderline nauseating to me. Actually, having the Dragonborn and Tiefling in the first PHB is one of the mistakes that WotC made with 4E, imo. Yeah I know, they were trying to appeal to the "WOW crowd," but they forgot that a bird in hand is better than two in the bush and all they did was lose the bird in hand...thus Pathfinder.

I once thought as you did. I was particularly annoyed by the comments that "Gnomes don't really have a niche", which was definitely untrue (trickster).

But...

The truth is that when 4e was released with the Dragonborn and Tiefling in place, the world didn't end. It was easy for groups to just ignore them if they didn't want them, and DMs always had the power to ban them. And WotC very quickly moved to support the 'missing' races, so that wasn't an enormous issue.

The Dragonborn and Tiefling are popular - more popular than either the Gnome or the Half-orc were. They are interesting races, each with their own character, and they genuinely do bring something to the game. (The same would be true of the Warforged and the Shardmind, IMO.)

If I were doing a 5e PHB, I would definitely drop the Eladrin and the Half-elf from the list of races. I can certainly see an argument for restoring the Gnome and Half-orc in their place. But, yeah, I think the Shardmind and the Warforged just have a stronger claim at this time.

 

[IronWolf]

You can play 4E just as easily with the 'Core 3' as you could with any previous edition. There is no more expectation to use all the books as there was any time previous. Since you apparently have never learned how to play 4E, you might not have realized this fact. However, it is still true.

I think this might be a common perception though. Whether an accurate perception or not it seems to be a hurdle that at least some of the potential audience needs to cross.

That seems to be an argument that DDI means 4e is easier to pick up. You don't need to buy ANY of the books. Just use the DDI Character Builder and Online Rules Compendium.

This is great if you know you are going to be vested in the game. I don't see people that are just starting to want to play a pen and paper game being very comfortable with signing up for a DDI sub to get started.

The entry point sort of becomes I see a 4e book at the local bookstore, look through it and then come home and go to Wizards site to purchase a DDI sub on a month by month basis to get started? That just doesn't strike me as a clean entry point to a game.

Note, this isn't a slam on DDI - I am certain it is useful for those that are vested in playing 4e to make play easier. It does seem to muddy the starting point for new players though in my opinion.