Maggan
Writer for CY_BORG, Forbidden Lands and Dragonbane
Nah, that complaint was about 3e. The complaint de jour regarding 4e is that it's similar to World of Warcraft.
/M
What direction will D&D head in?
- Status
Nah, that complaint was about 3e. The complaint de jour regarding 4e is that it's similar to World of Warcraft.
/M
Wormwood
Adventurer
Bingo.
Grimstaff
Explorer
My game's chugging along fine, with no more and no less RPing than in previous editions. If I had to guess, I'd say the amount of RP may actually INCREASE, if I devote some time to absorbing these new Skill Challenge encounter guidelines.
I think the whole "4E has no RPing!" thing is a common misconception based on some internet-griping and the fact that most 4E previews have been combat-focused (since RPing hasn't really changed, there was no need to preview that end of things).
The Highway Man
First Post
You mean the same ScottR who was saying the OGL would be kept intact? That's his job to say whatever soothes the fans, even if that means half-truths and demi-lies, people. Open your eyes.
The Little Raven
First Post
The OGL is intact, since there's no way to cancel a perpetual license of that nature.
Gothmog
First Post
I really don't understand the claims that 4e leaves roleplaying behind in favor of all combat. I suspect this is mostly a claim made by folks who are upset about the direction 4e took, and are looking to believe/manufacture an excuse to dislike 4e beyond "4e isn't my style of game, but apparently other people like it."
My experience with 4e (having played in 10 six hour sessions, and DMed 12 eight hour sessions) is that if anything, the roleplaying is MORE rewarding and emphasized than in previous versions of D&D. Now hear me out.
Yes, I've heard the screaming and ranting of taking out the profession and craft skills, but thats not what I'm taking about. What I have found in practice is that because tactics and teamwork are the focus of 4e rather than rules mastery, that the players tend to work better together as a team and come up with ideas as a group. In practice, this pulls people more into their roles as their characters and thinking as their characters, rather than distancing themselves from their roles and seeing their characters as simply numerical representations to milk every possible bonus out of their stats for optimal success. Its a subtle distinction to be sure, but its something I've noticed becoming more and more pronounced the more I've played and run 4e. And yes, I added back in profession and craft skills- I let every character take two trained skills not on the list in the PHB at character creation, but they are free to come up with some suitably narrow skill, such as cartography, carpentry, armorsmith, jeweler, etc.
I grew up playing 1e AD&D, and to me and almost everyone I've gamed with who has tried it, 4e feels a lot like 1e in play. 4e is more freeform and unrestricted feeling to me- if I want to make up an adventure or monster, I don't have to worry about building the effect or beastie from scratch using convoluted and overly complicated rules. I just make something fun and run with it- and I'm encouraged to do it that way! Because 4e's mechanics are more transparent and character builds and number crunching are less important than in the last edition, people have flat out told me that 4e helps them to put themselves in their character's place more easily. Plus with the excellent advice in the PHB and especially DMG for roleplaying and running a game for new players, I've seen 4 people who have never roleplayed before "get it" right off the bat after a quick perusal of the PHB, compared with 0 people who "got it" from the 3e books. Thats not an edition war statement, just that the designers in 4e were aware that making the game rewarding for existing players as well as being easy to comprehend for new players was important, and they succeeded in that goal admirably.
Now, as for where D&D will go from here, I'd imagine we'll probably see a continuation of 4e's design philosophy. Games that are easy to prep and run, better game balance between classes, and games that provide options to players that don't require extensive study of the rules for mastery. I also think D&D will probably become more gamist in nature, which I have mixed feelings about. On one hand, I'm a fan of simulationist games, and I loved 1e for all its weird little quirks and details. On the other hand, I am also really enjoying 4e for being the best designed and most logical D&D that has ever been in existence, and it runs like a dream. Yep, I miss random encounter tables, random treasure tables, and some of the monster fluff and weird options they had in previous editions, but then you gotta also realize, NOTHING is preventing you from reinstating those aspects or giving those abilities back to the monsters in whatever way you see fit (powers, rituals, innate abilities, etc). 4e is simple enough to design for that you can have the best of both worlds with hardly any difficulties.
And hey, if 4e isn't to your tastes, you've got literally tons of material to use for any verison of D&D do you enjoy, so everybody wins!
My experience with 4e (having played in 10 six hour sessions, and DMed 12 eight hour sessions) is that if anything, the roleplaying is MORE rewarding and emphasized than in previous versions of D&D. Now hear me out.
Yes, I've heard the screaming and ranting of taking out the profession and craft skills, but thats not what I'm taking about. What I have found in practice is that because tactics and teamwork are the focus of 4e rather than rules mastery, that the players tend to work better together as a team and come up with ideas as a group. In practice, this pulls people more into their roles as their characters and thinking as their characters, rather than distancing themselves from their roles and seeing their characters as simply numerical representations to milk every possible bonus out of their stats for optimal success. Its a subtle distinction to be sure, but its something I've noticed becoming more and more pronounced the more I've played and run 4e. And yes, I added back in profession and craft skills- I let every character take two trained skills not on the list in the PHB at character creation, but they are free to come up with some suitably narrow skill, such as cartography, carpentry, armorsmith, jeweler, etc.
I grew up playing 1e AD&D, and to me and almost everyone I've gamed with who has tried it, 4e feels a lot like 1e in play. 4e is more freeform and unrestricted feeling to me- if I want to make up an adventure or monster, I don't have to worry about building the effect or beastie from scratch using convoluted and overly complicated rules. I just make something fun and run with it- and I'm encouraged to do it that way! Because 4e's mechanics are more transparent and character builds and number crunching are less important than in the last edition, people have flat out told me that 4e helps them to put themselves in their character's place more easily. Plus with the excellent advice in the PHB and especially DMG for roleplaying and running a game for new players, I've seen 4 people who have never roleplayed before "get it" right off the bat after a quick perusal of the PHB, compared with 0 people who "got it" from the 3e books. Thats not an edition war statement, just that the designers in 4e were aware that making the game rewarding for existing players as well as being easy to comprehend for new players was important, and they succeeded in that goal admirably.
Now, as for where D&D will go from here, I'd imagine we'll probably see a continuation of 4e's design philosophy. Games that are easy to prep and run, better game balance between classes, and games that provide options to players that don't require extensive study of the rules for mastery. I also think D&D will probably become more gamist in nature, which I have mixed feelings about. On one hand, I'm a fan of simulationist games, and I loved 1e for all its weird little quirks and details. On the other hand, I am also really enjoying 4e for being the best designed and most logical D&D that has ever been in existence, and it runs like a dream. Yep, I miss random encounter tables, random treasure tables, and some of the monster fluff and weird options they had in previous editions, but then you gotta also realize, NOTHING is preventing you from reinstating those aspects or giving those abilities back to the monsters in whatever way you see fit (powers, rituals, innate abilities, etc). 4e is simple enough to design for that you can have the best of both worlds with hardly any difficulties.
And hey, if 4e isn't to your tastes, you've got literally tons of material to use for any verison of D&D do you enjoy, so everybody wins!
Last edited:
Vague Jayhawk
First Post
Players have all of these KEWL moves and KEWL spells that they can do. But in order to do them you must have a card in your hand that says you are able to do that power.
These collectable cards are sold in random packs of 12. They do not contain a stick of hard gum.
These collectable cards are sold in random packs of 12. They do not contain a stick of hard gum.
The Highway Man
First Post
Right. Unless you got a GSL that basically bans you from producing OGL and GSL materials for the same line. AND bans these products perpetually from the OGL if you decide to switch.
Nice try on the play on words/1st degree answer, though.
4e's design is not incompatible with roleplaying but it does not provide either something to promote it. I could very well be wrong but I think there are no substantial rules in the mechanics that tell you to and how to take into consideration aims, goals and actions of various organisms such as guilds, contacts, various groups of people (even the PC classes as NPCs) or even creatures. Same about environment, cultures or whatever.
Sure as some people have said around here you can roleplay in Monopoly too. This does not mean that monopoly is a good roleplaying game.
Of course splats and setting books could cover these stuffs but the core books do not seem to provide anything substantial rules wise but general advice or information that these things may exist and are possible to have in the game.
Sure as some people have said around here you can roleplay in Monopoly too. This does not mean that monopoly is a good roleplaying game.
Of course splats and setting books could cover these stuffs but the core books do not seem to provide anything substantial rules wise but general advice or information that these things may exist and are possible to have in the game.
Last edited:
It's not a play on words... it's the truth. There's nothing that says you have to use the GSL. But if you do choose to, you can't also use the OGL. That's not very different than actual Open Source licenses (ie, you can't use GPL stuff in BSD projects).
TANSTAAFL.
The "cost" of the free (as in beer) GSL is to not use the OGL.
Back to the OP...
I don't foresee any class (at least, not of WotC design) that breaks into the "more utility powers than attack powers" idea you had. That would require a completely new level progression chart, and non trivial power balancing (it's a lot easier to balance an attack power of level 5 versus a new attack power of level 5, as opposed to balancing a new utility of say, level 5 (where one normally isn't gained) versus an existing one of a nearby level.
I figure the development direction will be fairly status quo (at least, with the base of 4th edition)... other than supplements, I don't see any really change in emphasis until at least PHB III or IV (ie, not until all planned power sources have several classes out).
- Status
Similar Threads
