The D&D 4th edition Rennaissaince: A look into the history of the edition, its flaws and its merits

[Zardnaar]

I think the main reason 2E to 3.0 transition didn't provoke same response.

AD&D was long in the tooth. It's quirks and limits fan base for most part were organically sick of it.

3.5 was only 4 years old when 4E was announced. I didn't burn out on 3.X for another 5 years (went back to 2E).

 

[Thomas Shey]

This is before my time, so I'm really just guessing, but I wonder if that wasn't partially down to the lack of alternative, combined with the inverse effect of the OGL? The narrative felt a lot more like TSR was dying and WotC was stepping in to save the game, than WotC yanking support for a thing people liked. Plus the OGL was essentially sold as a promise not to go after fan works and 3rd party stuff, while also providing a path to keep the game alive forever.

Basically, the marketing and circumstance allowed the changes to be sold in entirely the opposite light that 4e's did, is my theory. WotC made moves that bought goodwill at the time, while 4e's launch ended up mostly spending it.

That at least seems credible.

 

[Thomas Shey]

In the 3e and 3.5 roll out they provided free rules online with the SRDs. People could check it out and play the complete game for free.

I did both times and was playing and buying supplements and using the SRD as a reference in my games.

In 4e’s roll out there was no SRD or free basic rules. You had to buy the keep module to get the basic rules or the core books. There was no free online resource for a long while and even then it was just the basic rules from the Keep module. I did not pick up 4e on release, I just kept playing 3.5.

I also didn't see any sign of the return-to-the-fold effect that happened for a while in the 3e era, where people who had some residual affection for D&D but who'd moved on because of various rigidities decided to give the new version a try, specifically because it was different in some important ways from what had come before. I'm not sure how much of that stuck, but it at least mattered for a while.

4e, far as I can tell, didn't get much of anything like that.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I still get gaslit to this day when I say 4E isn't the best fr roleplaying.

It's not because you can't RP but combat length takes so long irl you have less time for everything else in a typical session.

Every edition tbe hest tactic is always kill stuff fast. To enable 4E style tactics you need to slow things down. Even then I remember sone fans of 4E doing striker heavy parties to speed things up.

Of course the flip side of that was if you cared about combat at all, in most versions of D&D it was dull as dishwater. That was what chased me out of it in the end of the OD&D period; almost every decision for a non-spellcaster added up to either "what target do you pick" or "can you sell the GM on this tactic you're trying that has no mechanical support".

 

[Zardnaar]

Of course the flip side of that was if you cared about combat at all, in most versions of D&D it was dull as dishwater. That was what chased me out of it in the end of the OD&D period; almost every decision for a non-spellcaster added up to either "what target do you pick" or "can you sell the GM on this tactic you're trying that has no mechanical support".

Sure. Old school playstyle woukd probably get boring after XYZ amount of years.

3.0 changed that paradigm buy didn't blow up the Lore and a lot of spells weren't changed. Which was a disaster when the old restrictions hot thrown out.

I think that's where 5E won. If you want a complex or magical fighter you don't pick champion.

 

[SteveC]

Great Caesar's Ghost! Here we go again with the same old discussions about 4E over ten years after it was finished. I am really glad to still see interest in 4E after all this time, since it was my jam at the time and I'd much prefer it to 5E.

I'd love to see the option to play on current VTTs with the full character options. I started to look into if the character builder from days of yore was still available, and it looks like that's true. The problem is that I'm playing on a VTT and all those powers don't exist in a current VTT form. Which is sad.

I know it will just fall on deaf ears, but ... can't we just stop having the same discussions about 4E when we're one and a half editions away from it? Much like if you don't like Skills and Powers, let it go in 2025.

Folks like me enjoyed the tactical battles in 4E, and we could have the same type of roleplaying or skill based challenges as in earlier editions, or in 5E for that matter. If you don't like those battles, 4E isn't for you. And you have 5E for that style of play, not to mention BECMI or OSR games as well. It really is that simple.

 

[Joshua Randall]

I know it will just fall on deaf ears, but ... can't we just stop having the same discussions about 4E when we're one and a half editions away from it?

Nope.

Folks like me enjoyed the tactical battles in 4E,

Then you are an inferior person whose taste in games makes you sub-human.

I am, of course, being sarcastic; but my responses do seem to be the attitude of the anti-4e crowd.

 

[payn]

 

[FrogReaver]

4e was the first pen and paper d&d I’d played. I liked it.

I spent far more time creating characters for it than I actually played it. It was really fun to create characters for.

Combat was a slog though (pre Monster Manual update days). 1 action with usually a 50% to 60% chance of working also meant many turns you did nothing (I guess some powers had miss effects or granted multiple attacks but yea).

Roleplaying was there but even more than long combats, the idea of really balanced but ultimately winnable encounters seemed to detract some from roleplaying choices really mattering.

I had fun with 4e and still like building characters for it more than for 5e but I like 5e better overall. I would still play a 4e game if a dm wanted to run it.

 

[cavalier973]

I’m here! I’m here!

adjusts “4venger 4Life” button pinned to shirt

What’d I miss?

I actually read the original article, and didn’t see anything particularly objectionable. I would like to add a few points to the “merits” column.

Keywords. What an excellent concept to minimize rules lawyering and increase transparency for the players. Allows a “starlock” to be as good an undead hunter as a cleric.

The Four Defenses. Very elegant way to handle saving throws, and allows for different types of attacks to exist. This monster has excellent armor, so I need to attack his reflex defense, instead.

Ritual Magic, including ritual scrolls. A way to cast the utility spells that in other editions requires a spell slot.

Healing Surges as a limit to healing. The fighter is down to three hit points, but, unfortunately, has already used up all healing surges, so drinking this potion does no good. Time to exit the dungeon.

Wizard Cantrips. All the flavorful wizardy things we expect to see wizards doing, at will.

The Nentir Vale. Such an excellent D&D setting, with a mostly wilderness region populated with abandoned manor houses and castles, probably filled with treasure and definitely filled with monsters. Also, the World Axis cosmology, that was set up very much as a “Law versus Chaos” universe.

The Dungeon Master’s Guide. Everything, from guidelines on player types to creating new monsters to map grids that can be photocopied for use in games, is in there.

The Player’s Handbook offering two builds for each class. The suggestions for how the PC adopted the class (the rogue could be an agent from the deposed king’s shattered spy network, the fighter could be a prince on the run from assassins, etc.)

Simplified Skill List.

Acquisitions, Inc.

PirateCat’s 4e game, which may still be found somewhere on Enworld.org

Etc.