The "real" reason the game has changed.

[pemerton]

Shadzar, I think by HeroQuest you may be meaning the boardgame(? board-based RPG) of that name, whereas I am referring to the indie RPG written by Robin Laws. A lot of people regard it as a leading example of story-promoting roleplaying design. And its action resolution mechanics and encounter building guidelines resemble 4e skill challenges and encounter building guidelines in many respects. (This resemblance has been further consolidated by Robin Laws' role in authoring DMG2, but predates that particular rulebook.)

And as for your response in respect of Militant Wizards, (i) that didn't exist in 1st ed AD&D, (ii) I'll give you another example, then - an AD&D wizard can't raise the dead, whereas a 4e wizard can - and (iii) the "you can houserule" it reply surely applies equally to 4e. Nothing stops you, as a player, from just not adding your level bonus to your mage's Athletics skill if you really don't want to (although personally I think that using this houserule would miss the point of 4e design).

4th evens out all classes to have similarities, so forces some thigns on you as you play, rahter than letting you decide how you advance. So if in AD&D you chose the wizard, you either worked with the group to remove the banishment of swords, or you accepted it and still could choose what other things you did as you leveled for character growth, rather than your growth being decided for you; as i think BryonD is suggesting with the things 4th dictates as the character grows which impedes player decided growth options for the character.

I personally haven't noticed this feature of 4e. The PCs do very different things both in combat and out of it, and my players are constantly making choices about the growth of their PCs, in terms of feat, power and skill selection and retraining as they level their PCs, establishing the in-game basis for their pending Paragon Paths, etc.

I'd be interested to hear more about the actual play that has led to you having the opposite experiences. My most recent actual play post of a 4e session is here.

 

[Imperialus]

YEAH! TECHNOLOGY IS THE DEVIL'S TOOL!

DOWN WITH TECHNOLOGY!

But then there'd be no paper for our RPGs or fantasy habits...

I've heard that when Diaglo referees OD&D (1974) your attributes are pressed into clay tablets that are then left to dry in the sun.

His players are encouraging him to switch to vellum just so that character creation doesn't take a week of sunny weather.

 

[fumetti]

Sorry, respectfully, I don't buy the "I have a life" angle. If someone out there wants to play D&D (or game system of choice) or wants to prep said game they will find the time. I have yet to meet a gamer who didn't compromise in order to arrange their game and their prep (and that includes one player who has a partner and 3 young kids!).

Sure, in theory there are no barriers. But in reality, it's different.

It becomes impossible to keep the group together. First, the schedule becomes unworkable. The gang is almost never free to play at the same time. Second, playing keeps getting pushed farther down the priority list. Time becomes the most precious commodity of all. And gaming is a major time consumer.

Playing DnD-type games requires a massive commitment of time and energy that (seems apparent to me) most maturing players don't believe they can afford. And/or their group is unable to keep it together. Life just gets in the way. And the other option is chasing down strangers to play and for whatever reason that just isn't satisfying enough.

I've always said that DnD is the greatest game ever invented by humans. But it's hard to keep it going over time. Anyone who has managed to keep a group together from high school or college until their 40s has IMO achieved a major accomplishment. A rarity to be treasured for certain.

 

[Bluenose]

I've made my point many times before and I don't have issues with supporting the story; be it in regard to 4E or any system. But when 4E says that my wizard gets better at climbing as he levels, that is the system imposing itself on the story, not simply failing to remind you of a story.

When my wizard gets better at firing a crossbow as he levels, despite never touching one; when my rogue gets better at opening locks despite having just leveled up following a stroll through a goblin warren when he never touched one; when D&D has never imposed a restriction on getting better only at the things you do rather than on all sorts of things in one go; that's also the system imposing itself on the story.

 

[fumetti]

I've made my point many times before and I don't have issues with supporting the story; be it in regard to 4E or any system. But when 4E says that my wizard gets better at climbing as he levels, that is the system imposing itself on the story, not simply failing to remind you of a story. When 4E says that challenge level defines attacks, damage, defenses much more than what the challenge in question is, that is the system imposing itself on the story, not simply failing to remind you of a story. Over and over the system is about the game balance and mechanics coming first. Andy Collins strongly endorsed and praised this as a difference between 4E and other editions saying ". In a lot of editions of the game, classes compared to new classes were designed by [first] imagining what could exist in the D&D world, and now I assign the mechanics that make that feel realistic and then I’m done" and that for 4E class design the key is instead "why is this game piece different than another game piece and why do I want to play it instead another game piece."

You can absolutely role play anything in 4E that you can in any other system. But, the presumption of 4E is quite different than most any other system that I have played in that it presumes the roleplay will follow the path assigned by the mechanics rather than the other way around.

I agree entirely. I have been trying to make this argument in another thread, albeit from another angle.

The way I see it, the 4E game as published is about 95% combat encounter. Roleplaying is given a nod, but most of it is reduced to summary. Virtually all the rules are written in combat encounter terms. Spells, which traditionally have been easy to use outside of combat, now take extra mental work to get the spell description to fit a non-combat event. IMO, this is pushing the game to be just a combat strategy game (but with just enough latitude to be used as an RPG). And to tie to your point, combat is just an element of story. It is not the story itself.

For game purposes, not realism, 4E homogenized all the classes. They all function pretty much the same in combat (4EE might turn all this around, it's still early to tell). Glancing through the descriptions, every class uses combat feats and combat powers. And all classes powers function very much the same -- usually a to-hit roll, deal [W]+prime req adjustment, change of PC or monster placement, perhaps a continuing effect. It's GREAT to play a low-level wizard in combat in 4E! Not only do they get to make an attack every single round all day long, but they also get the same kind of non-magical AC boost other classes always got--now INT can boost your AC. And with healing surges, you are your own cleric.

All great for game mechanics, but what kind of story is being told here? Is it realistic to say charisma should add to melee damage?

I would differ from Andy Collins's quote by saying that in 4E there really isn't much difference in the game pieces. It's not like 1E where the differences are great. It's like Ninja Turtles--just pick a color. You're going to be doing the same basic things in combat anyway.

 

[fumetti]

When my wizard gets better at firing a crossbow as he levels, despite never touching one; when my rogue gets better at opening locks despite having just leveled up following a stroll through a goblin warren when he never touched one; when D&D has never imposed a restriction on getting better only at the things you do rather than on all sorts of things in one go; that's also the system imposing itself on the story.

Use'em or lose'em has never been a part of DnD, and leveling-up THACO charts made wizards better with daggers even if he never used one--but your point is well made.

Pre-4E, it was fairly safe to assume that a thief was using thief skills to gain XP, because he surely wasn't relying on combat. If a player wanted combat, thief was a poor choice. In 4E, everybody's effective in combat--far more than ever before, anyway.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I think it's a little disingenuous to attribute all or even most edition differences to something akin to nostalgia.

That is absolutely at work in it. But it's more than that. It's one part of the equation, but it's not the whole thing (or even the most important thing).

It's certainly part of the reason that, even for D&D to reinvent itself, it needs to pay attention to where it has come from.

 

[Raven Crowking]

When my wizard gets better at firing a crossbow as he levels, despite never touching one; when my rogue gets better at opening locks despite having just leveled up following a stroll through a goblin warren when he never touched one; when D&D has never imposed a restriction on getting better only at the things you do rather than on all sorts of things in one go; that's also the system imposing itself on the story.

Your point is taken but, as a nitpick, I note that BTB 1e required training time to be spent; you are presumably not improving in X without any experience of X.

OTOH, 1e had a very rigid increase in thief's skills, which made it impossible (without houserules) to specialize. While I think 1e had some amazingly good ideas, it is certainly not the be-all and end-all of rpg design!

I think it's a little disingenuous to attribute all or even most edition differences to something akin to nostalgia.

That is absolutely at work in it. But it's more than that. It's one part of the equation, but it's not the whole thing (or even the most important thing).

It's certainly part of the reason that, even for D&D to reinvent itself, it needs to pay attention to where it has come from.

This mirrors my thoughts on this thread as well.



RC

 

[BryonD]

When my wizard gets better at firing a crossbow as he levels, despite never touching one; when my rogue gets better at opening locks despite having just leveled up following a stroll through a goblin warren when he never touched one; when D&D has never imposed a restriction on getting better only at the things you do rather than on all sorts of things in one go; that's also the system imposing itself on the story.

Well, in my game of preference Rogues don't automatically get better at opening locks.

You ARE correct about wizards and crossbows. I have suggested in the past that some classes should gain no BAB advancement whatsoever.

But, in the end we are comparing what I consider to be minor warts on one system to what is the root design basis for another. Again, Andy specifically called this out as the difference in how 4E is designed compared to prior editions.

 

[BryonD]

To reinforce this conclusion, I'll pose the question that I frequently do and that is rarely responded to - if metagame-heavy design and play really impeded story, then it would be the case that a game like HeroQuest or The Dying Earth was a weaker vehicle for story-rich roleplaying than a game like Rolemaster, Runquest or 3E D&D. But is there anyone who believes this?

And I'll again answer by repeating my point that nothing is "impeded".

You can't STOP me from roleplaying when I play chess. 4E is several orders of magnitude better for roleplaying than chess. It isn't even a legitimate comparison. And yet even in this absurd extreme the ability to roleplay is not impeded. It is just the the rules and mechanics requirements so restrict the games ability to *mechanically* react to the roleplay that the experience is unrewarding.

The experience of roleplay in 4E is NOT unrewarding. But, for people with my tastes, games in which the roleplay comes first and the mechanics are forced to do the best they can to keep up are notably more rewarding.