The Nature of Change (or, Understanding Edition Wars)

[Dannyalcatraz]

Removing options that are actually hidden traps is positive advancement, IMO. Your viewpoint on this is probably going to be colored by who you game with - if your group is all people who like reading game rulebooks in their free time, putting those hidden traps into the game is fine (note: such people are not the norm). As someone who games with a few low-information players who just want to sit down at the table once a week and have fun roleplaying & killing stuff, the myriad of actively harmful 3e character options is a minefield and a headache.

My main game group largely consists of relatively experienced gamers who are married with kids. One guy has ADHD. At least one is a casual gamer. Most don't have time to kick back in a wing-back by the fire with an RPG book and a glass of sherry.

Me? I'm the guy who has been playing since '77, and could (at one time) design a HERO PC without the books. (I haven't tried that in a while...)

For me, having more options is ALWAYS good, even if some are sub-optimal. Every option gives me something- some combo I haven't explored, a new kind of PC I haven't played, a character with a new set of motivations- suboptimal or not. (And yes, I routinely do a 20 level extrapolation on each 3.X PC to ensure he or she goes where he's supposed to.)

So what if my PC is mechanically suboptimal? As long as the PC makes sense to himself- is true to his own internal logic- its all good.

Your "hidden traps" are my pathways to roleplay treasure.

I'm not looking to adventure with a bunch of supertweeked turbocharged PCs, I'm looking to adventure with a bunch of unique and interesting individuals. If someone is having trouble designing a PC, I help them out. If someone is working in a suboptimal direction (and doesn't know it), I inform them of this and point out other options to them.

I don't design anyone's PC for them...and 3Ed recognizes that adults should be able to make their own PC design decisions. But 4Ed doesn't trust gamers the same way 3Ed did.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

On being "videogamey":

Personally, I don't play any of the multiplayer online CRPGs, so I can't say "4Ed mechanic X is so WoW-like!"

My main observation in this this particular arena was that Healing Surges reminded me of combat games like Tekken and Mortal Kombat. I love those games, but I don't like that mechanic in RPGs.

OTOH, many of the guys in my group are not only big fans of those CRPGs, at least one programs games professionally.

THEY found elements of 4Ed, like "marking" to be distastefully videogamey for their tastes. In their opinion, things like that were for computers to keep track of, not flesh-and-blood players.

I think its OK- unavoidable, really- for RPGs and their computer counterparts to cross-pollinate each other. Problems can arise, however, when the influences are both 1) mechanical and 2) obvious to the player in question- nobody cares too much when the influence is a storyline or a bit of fluff.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The only video game influence I fear is plots that the players can't really affect, and things you just can't do because the designers forgot the feature (like climbing in general, or merely getting behind a certain wall to see what's there) But as long as we have a DM, we can avoid that in RPGs.

 

[diaglo]

I don’t think I’m the only one who keeps coming back here for reasons other than 3e, d20, or 4e.

you are not alone.

diaglo "been coming back to D&D since 1979 even tho they don't make OD&D anymore" Ooi

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMaclean
What surpises me this time around is the level and duration.

I suspect that there was just as much reaction to the 2e->3e change (and the 1e->2e change), but there are now more people online and in this forum, so you see more of the reaction than before. (I can't prove this at all, so take that guess for what it's worth--not much ).

However my personal observation also includes 'real world' activities as well. I can only speak locally, but I do not remember this depth and length of reaction in 1e->2e and 2e->3e. Not saying that's a good or bad thing, just that's what's happening in my area. I find it unusual in light of past experience.

However, the 4th ED DMG certainly is popular becuase of its advice on dealing with players in general. I know copies have sold just because of that.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Game supplements written by the game's author are incompatible with a "well judged campaign"?

Yes, by the game's designers as well as other authors. I remember reading a quote from Gary about the amount of magic items awarded in published modules, including his, to be well above what should have been awarded.

There's loads of BS in D&D, and always has been. The dual-classing rules in 1e. Multi-classing not being available to humans. Level limits. No one but humans and half-humans being to take the clerics class. etc. etc.

Sure there is BS and you are correct that its always been there. Arbitrary rules exist in all editions. The number of these rules that would cause a character to scratch his head when observing the effects (marking?) has grown in the most recent editions.

Some rules changes would cause both a character and the player to take psychic damage when thinking about them.

Confusion anyone? How does inflicting brain damage along with a dose of short term domination come to be called confusion? Its because confusion is a recognized spell name that players expect to be in D&D. Uncertainty about taking actions, and against whom for any measurable duration simply doesn't fit into the precisely measured crap called game balance.

So, instead of doing away with the power (which would be fine if it didn't fit the design) they kept the name intact and attached it to effects that don't cause confusion for anyone but the reader. The gutting of all the flavor from recognized spell names is a lame attempt to hide whats been taken from the game.

A feel that has nothing to do with MMOs. You could fail at crafting items in UO, EQ, and possibly other online games as well.

Great examples and true of earlier MMO games. Notice how this got cast aside with the later games and then made the trek back into tabletop gaming. What makes for a better play experience in one medium can ruin the flavor in another.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

However, the 4th ED DMG certainly is popular becuase of its advice on dealing with players in general. I know copies have sold just because of that.

I borrowed a copy from a friend to read for that very reason.

 

[diaglo]

I can only speak locally, but I do not remember this depth and length of reaction in 1e->2e and 2e->3e.

i can. but i can remember this kind of reaction to OD&D from Chainmail.

"you punk kids" was a common reaction from the wargamers.

 

[DaveMage]

My point is that, IMO, I didn't do my (limited) snipping at pro-4E people because I was resistant to the change between 3.5 and 4E. I "warred" with them because I felt they were breaking up the largest D&D group ever. And they warred with me because they felt I was.

Well said. This fits me as well.

 

[Spatula]

So what if my PC is mechanically suboptimal?

If that's what you're aiming for, great. I have a fondness for weird characters myself - optimizing for damage or one-trick ponies isn't interesting to me. I'd much rather create unusual concepts out of the available options.

If you got there through no fault of your own, not so great.

I'm not looking to adventure with a bunch of supertweeked turbocharged PCs

Neither am I. The point is to be able to contribue & have fun.

I don't design anyone's PC for them...and 3Ed recognizes that adults should be able to make their own PC design decisions. But 4Ed doesn't trust gamers the same way 3Ed did.

So you can't make your own PC design decisions in 4e? I see plenty of options...