The Nature of Change (or, Understanding Edition Wars)

[Dire Bare]

But, there is a pretty understandable reason for it. Actually, there are several understandable reasons for it.

Right before the announcement of 4e, you had the reaction to the ending of the print versions of Dungeon and Dragon. People went off the deep end for a bit, and then Gen Con hit and we learned of 4e. Even before we knew anything about 4e, people were massively over reacting. Heck, there's a few names that used to be common around here *cough Razz cough* that exploded into spontaneous nuclear flames right after the announcement.

So, it's not surprising that there might be a fairly equal and opposite reaction.

Also, there are more than a few criticisms that have been leveled at 4e that were basically rehashes of the criticisms we saw for EIGHT YEARS over 3e. Heck, you STILL see people claiming that 3e isn't really D&D. It's too [insert whatever term you like here] got chucked around pretty constantly.

So yeah, people got very, very defensive. And, people are still defensive about it. Because, you still see post after post of people claiming that 4e isn't "real" D&D. Heck, earlier in this thread people are claiming it's not even a fantasy role playing game. Add to that claims that it's an "inferior" product (also claimed in this thread) and do you honestly not see why people come out swinging constantly?

Think of how insulting it would be to a fan of any hobby to be told that the thing that he or she likes/enjoys isn't even really what he claims it to be. "Oh, yeah, it's not like a SS is a real muscle car, it's just a cheap knock off wannabe"

This is how I see it. The few times I failed my own will save and starting frothing at the mouth have always been in reaction to some chucklehead being insulting towards fans of the new edition. Doesn't excuse the times I've overreacted myself, but my own diatribes have always been in reaction to rude anti-4e folk. I've also noticed this behavior in some other posters as well, they are calm and rational until provoked with the ignorance and snark of a hater. My blood pressure still rises a bit when certain *ahem* posters post at all as they have insulting and inaccurate comparisons of the various editions in their sigs.

I've never seen a 4e fan START a flamewar (throw more fuel on the fire, oh yes). I'm sure it's happened, and maybe my own biases have gotten me to "not see" it when it happens, but that is my experience.

To try and get back to the thread topic, while I do think that many who are not fans of 4e have valid and honest criticisms and problems with the game (and post here accordingly) . . . the most vocal 4e detractors tend to have irrational and inaccurate beefs with the edition. And while anyone is free to like or dislike 4e for whatever reason they wish, I do think in large part this is a classic example of resistance to change that has little to do with the change itself (4e).

 

[FireLance]

Granted his representation for 3e and 4e may not be subtle, but for players that continue to enjoy earlier editions they are accurate and represent what some feel is a near exponential growth in power for characters as the edition has "evolved "

I'd say that the lack of accuracy in the representation of the 4e ability score generation system (and perhaps the 3e and the 2e one as well - I'm fairly sure neither of these were recommended as the standard method by the books) is more troubling than the lack of subtlety. If you wanted to make a point about numbers inflation, comparing the average hit points of a 1st-level fighter in each edition would bring the point across in a clear, and more importantly, factually accurate way.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

When you say, "I hate healing surges, they remind me of a little green health bar" we hear "I hate a system whereby the amount of healing is calculated based on the healed target's base hit point value with a capped amount of healing per character per day, possibly as opposed to previous edition's methods of basing healing almost purely upon the skill of the caster of a healing spell, it reminds me of a little green bar."

Which is ludicrous.

I know that certain classes can initiate healing via a PC's healing surge. I know that items can initiate healing via a PC's healing surge.

Can a PC in 4Ed use a healing surge without the aid of another PC? As I recall, the answer is "yes."

If that is true, then that is EXACTLY why I'm reminded of the combat games, and is thus, not ludicrous.

So what do I see when I look at the 4Ed D&D Wiki?

Healing surge - Dungeons & Dragons 4.0 Wiki - a Wikia Gaming wiki
Outside of combat you can usually use healing surges freely. After combat you must take a short rest before spending surges, and then you can spend any number you desire.

However, you cannot simply use a healing surge any time you please during combat. The following situations allow you to use one:

* You use your second wind
* A power (either used by you or an ally) allows you to spend a healing surge. See the section below for a list of these powers.
* A power, effect or item requires that you spend a healing surge as a cost (such as to renew an item's power, or to use a potion); doing so does not usually heal HP, at least not the normal amout. Potions use a healing surge to heal a set amount of HP independent of your surge value, be it higher or lower.

(emphasis mine)

There is my green bar.

Hence it is hard to understand how one way of recovering these abstact units of survivabillity is inherently superior to an other way of recovering them.

I didn't say "superior." I said they remind me of certain combat games, and I don't care for that. By echoing that videogame mechanic, it disrupts my immersion in the game, and thereby interferes with my enjoyment of the game, so I count that as one of the reasons I don't play 4Ed.

 

[Piratecat]

I've never seen a 4e fan START a flamewar (throw more fuel on the fire, oh yes).

Bwah ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha... gasp... ha ha ha ha!

And I say that as a fan of 4e, too.

No bickering or baiting please, folks (and that's directed towards everyone.) I know it's a self-referential topic, but we want to keep the discussion friendly.

 

[Cadfan]

I'm saying one thing, you're responding to something entirely different. I take pains each post to point out that I get what you mean to be saying, but that you're not saying what you mean to be saying. And each time you just say it again, as if I were contradicting you. There's nothing left for me to say except to read what I've already written, because your responses clearly indicate that you haven't.

What can I do except repeat myself, now with numbered paragraphs!

1. Healing surges are just a system of calculating healing amounts based on the recipient rather than the healer, and capping healing per day. Obviously this isn't like a video game in any meaningful way.

2. You dislike non magical in combat healing. That's fine, I can get that even if I disagree. That isn't the same as not liking healing surges. That's, at best, not liking second wind and certain other martial healing surge triggers.

3. I don't care about the video game comparison.

4. But the fact that you keep saying that you don't like healing surges, when you really mean that you don't like non magical in combat healing, is confusing people.

5. When you don't seem to make sense (because you're saying something other than what you mean), people start wondering if you're just a grognard without a legitimate complaint. Because we get those around here, and they usually introduce themselves by making video game comments. Its the hip new thing for counter culture warriors to do these days.

6. You could fix that by saying what you mean- that 4e has a lot of non magical healing, and you don't like it. People might not agree, but at least they won't think that you're a crazy guy who doesn't make sense.

 

[Harlekin]

There is my green bar.



I didn't say "superior." I said they remind me of certain combat games, and I don't care for that. By echoing that videogame mechanic, it disrupts my immersion in the game, and thereby interferes with my enjoyment of the game, so I count that as one of the reasons I don't play 4Ed.

D&D invented the green bar. When a fighter is hit by 6 arrows and looses 20% of his life energy rather than kneel over and die, there is your green bar.

 

[FireLance]

1. Healing surges are just a system of calculating healing amounts based on the recipient rather than the healer, and capping healing per day. Obviously this isn't like a video game in any meaningful way.

It's only a matter of time. Once a video game that uses healing surges is launched, healing surges will be vidoegamey again!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'm saying one thing, you're responding to something entirely different. I take pains each post to point out that I get what you mean to be saying, but that you're not saying what you mean to be saying. And each time you just say it again, as if I were contradicting you. There's nothing left for me to say except to read what I've already written, because your responses clearly indicate that you haven't.

I've read what you've posted. It doesn't alter my position one whit, and its you who are having the "understanding" issue.

That a PC can heal himself without the aid of others via his surges- as the Wiki points out he can- reminds me of combat videogames, and that is disruptive to my enjoyment of the game.

What can I do except repeat myself, now with numbered paragraphs!

I can repeat myself too!

1. Healing surges are just a system of calculating healing amounts based on the recipient rather than the healer, and capping healing per day. Obviously this isn't like a video game in any meaningful way.

Except that with a 4Ed healing surge, the healer & recipient can be one in the same, without the use of magic. The PC just uses his second wind or a particular power within his class...and as I recall, all the base classes can use their healing surges to heal themselves.

Yes, there are ways that "real" healers can do healing surge effects on other PCs. That doesn't bother me at all.

2. You dislike non magical in combat healing. That's fine, I can get that even if I disagree. That isn't the same as not liking healing surges. That's, at best, not liking second wind and certain other martial healing surge triggers.

OK, I dislike a certain subset of of the ways in which Healing Surges can be initiated and used. Happy?

3. I don't care about the video game comparison.

But I do. That's at the core of what bugs me about this particular aspect of 4Ed.

4. But the fact that you keep saying that you don't like healing surges, when you really mean that you don't like non magical in combat healing, is confusing people.

I think its perfectly clear English. "I." "don't." "like." "Healing." "Surges."

I'm sorry you feel otherwise.

5. When you don't seem to make sense (because you're saying something other than what you mean), people start wondering if you're just a grognard without a legitimate complaint. Because we get those around here, and they usually introduce themselves by making video game comments. Its the hip new thing for counter culture warriors to do these days.

OoOOOOoooh, the "G" word.

As I've said elsewhere, I pre-ordered my 4Ed Core 3 as soon as my FLGS let me. I had hoped to upgrade my campaigns to 4Ed, but found that the game's design precluded that.

The "videogame" complaint for me was relatively minor. Its just the thing about healing surges reminding me of combat video games- I have no frame of reference to compare 4Ed to WoW or other CRPGs as most people who voice that kind of complaint about 4Ed do (like my buddies who program computer games).

I have many problems with 4Ed. Healing surges weren't a major concern at all, just another brick in the wall.

6. You could fix that by saying what you mean- that 4e has a lot of non magical healing, and you don't like it. People might not agree, but at least they won't think that you're a crazy guy who doesn't make sense.

I can't help your perceptions any more than I can help mine.

Healing surges that can be initiated merely by the PC taking non-magical actions remind me of the green bar in combat video games. The exact details of how & why & whatever justifications don't matter.

Harlekin
When a fighter is hit by 6 arrows and looses 20% of his life energy rather than kneel over and die, there is your green bar.

There is your green bar.

Mine pops up when he can heal himself without the aid of others or magic.

 

[Jasperak]

I'd say that the lack of accuracy in the representation of the 4e ability score generation system (and perhaps the 3e and the 2e one as well - I'm fairly sure neither of these were recommended as the standard method by the books) is more troubling than the lack of subtlety. If you wanted to make a point about numbers inflation, comparing the average hit points of a 1st-level fighter in each edition would bring the point across in a clear, and more importantly, factually accurate way.

I don't see any lack of accuracy in the representation of 4e ability score generation in his sig. To me it is an absurdist response to what I feel is a bad attempt at balance. TDD may have something different to say but here again is my take.

When the first method for generating ability scores is a standard array that is arranged by the player, it reminds me of games like Ultima, Final Fantasy, and Dragon Warrior, where you may have the ability to arrange the scores or put points wherever you like, but in reality there is only one or maybe two ways to arrange your scores.

What person is going to not put their highest score in Strength if they want to play a fighter since all of the Fighter's attack powers use Strength. What would happen to the game's balance if someone decided to put their 10 in Strength instead of their 16? In every other edition of D&D you could put that 10 into Strength and the 16 into Dexterity and not be gimped, you'd just be a ranged Fighter. Not so here. If you want to put that 16 into Dexterity you better pick Ranger or Rogue.

Since the ability scores are not expected to be randomly determined and those scores are tied so closely to the classes' powers, why bother even having them as a separate entity? I think the game is built expecting +3 bonus to go into the Fighter's Strength. I mean it is the equivalent of six levels.

Just counting up the bonuses for the default array 16, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10 (+7/+3) and counting the bonuses from the table for method two, they go from (+6/+4) to (+8/+2) where the first number in the parenthesis is the total bonus and the second number is the highest bonus. Not much variation there.

And if balance if so important to the game that it allows the DM to arbitrarily lower your scores if their bonuses are too high (higher than +8), or raise them if they are too low (lower than +4), why bother allowing players to roll for them in the first place.

This is a far cry from 3d6 or even 4d6 drop the lowest.

As for the numbers inflation, that is something that bothers me but not necessarily implied by TDD's sig.

 

[Filcher]

For me, Healing Surges are more Pulp than Video Game. Indiana gets the crap kicked out of him, then gets his second wind and boffs some Nazis (minions of course!). In my opinion, 4E owes a more to cinematic pulp action than MMORG action.