Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Two Camps of 4e Players (a rant)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dan'L" data-source="post: 4946379" data-attributes="member: 68954"><p>From my POV, the software support is part of the current problem. It has enabled more players to quickly access the game, which is a good thing for sales I'm sure, but it has done so by allowing them to gloss over the rules and enter in with decidedly less than a firm grasp of the rules interactions. It's certainly not a perfect adaptation of the rules set, but some will treat it as such.</p><p></p><p>Ideally, you'd have players starting with something like the Character Builder and expanding their rules knowledge around their particular shtick through reading the actual rules text and game play, but that won't always be the way things go. And there's nothing worse than thinking you've got this cool build, only to find out in a game from the other players or the DM that no, that's not how it works despite what you thought the CB was telling you.</p><p></p><p>As far as the monsters go, I can't speak except anecdotally*, but my DMs have commented how incredibly easier it is to customize monsters and encounters relative to 3rd edition, and this was before the software tools were even available.</p><p></p><p>So I have to wonder, perhaps the software has become/is becoming a crutch that players and DMs are perhaps relying on a little too much. It's a great time saving supplemental tool, but it shouldn't be a substitute for actually learning the system. Bottom line, you'll get out of it proportional to what you put in, and the software tools allow a player to put in less so they'll naturally come out with less.</p><p></p><p>(*Not so anecdotal, I find that 4th ed is, overall, <em>extremely</em> simpler than previous editions to play, thanks in large part to the streamlining of the class system. Sure, if you compare playing a 1/2/3 ed. fighter to a 4e fighter, things have gotten more complex. But if you'd learned to play a 1/2/3 ed fighter and wanted to try a 1/2/3 other class, you pretty much had to learn a whole new rule set; with 4e, if you've learned to play a fighter, you've basically the same rule set you need to any of the other classes (although you'll do well to learn a new set of tactics) And if you think "hand writing out all the details for even a low level character is a pain in the butt," realize that you wouldn't even <em>think</em> of hand writing out all the details for even a low level spellcaster in a previous edition, you'd just list out your spells and have to look them up each time you'd go to cast them.)</p><p></p><p>-Dan'L</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dan'L, post: 4946379, member: 68954"] From my POV, the software support is part of the current problem. It has enabled more players to quickly access the game, which is a good thing for sales I'm sure, but it has done so by allowing them to gloss over the rules and enter in with decidedly less than a firm grasp of the rules interactions. It's certainly not a perfect adaptation of the rules set, but some will treat it as such. Ideally, you'd have players starting with something like the Character Builder and expanding their rules knowledge around their particular shtick through reading the actual rules text and game play, but that won't always be the way things go. And there's nothing worse than thinking you've got this cool build, only to find out in a game from the other players or the DM that no, that's not how it works despite what you thought the CB was telling you. As far as the monsters go, I can't speak except anecdotally*, but my DMs have commented how incredibly easier it is to customize monsters and encounters relative to 3rd edition, and this was before the software tools were even available. So I have to wonder, perhaps the software has become/is becoming a crutch that players and DMs are perhaps relying on a little too much. It's a great time saving supplemental tool, but it shouldn't be a substitute for actually learning the system. Bottom line, you'll get out of it proportional to what you put in, and the software tools allow a player to put in less so they'll naturally come out with less. (*Not so anecdotal, I find that 4th ed is, overall, [I]extremely[/I] simpler than previous editions to play, thanks in large part to the streamlining of the class system. Sure, if you compare playing a 1/2/3 ed. fighter to a 4e fighter, things have gotten more complex. But if you'd learned to play a 1/2/3 ed fighter and wanted to try a 1/2/3 other class, you pretty much had to learn a whole new rule set; with 4e, if you've learned to play a fighter, you've basically the same rule set you need to any of the other classes (although you'll do well to learn a new set of tactics) And if you think "hand writing out all the details for even a low level character is a pain in the butt," realize that you wouldn't even [I]think[/I] of hand writing out all the details for even a low level spellcaster in a previous edition, you'd just list out your spells and have to look them up each time you'd go to cast them.) -Dan'L [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Two Camps of 4e Players (a rant)
Top