What I absolutely love about 4th edition thus far

[Charwoman Gene]

---

 

[Irda Ranger]

...I can dissociate parts of the game that I don't like.

Yes!

I've come back to D&D because I could not modify 3.x in the ways I wanted to play the games I wanted. I had to buy Iron Heroes and Conan instead.

This is part of why I get a "retro" feel from 4E. I can swap around rule systems to my liking, just like in the AD&D days. Of course, the rules are much better than AD&D too in many ways, but all the good parts of the "feel" are there without all the stupid.

all thanks to modular design and rules transparency.

I love the transparency, but both are key. It wouldn't be very helpful if they transparently said "This is all written in stone."

 

[Irda Ranger]

Paizo has come across as increasingly disingenuous and smarmy in their press releases.

Now now, let's just be happy for what Wizards have pulled off here.

 

[Sojorn]

I love the transparency, but both are key. It wouldn't be very helpful if they transparently said "This is all written in stone."

Heh.

"Sorry, but you can't change anything without breaking 20 other things. But here's a sidebar about a optional rule that only breaks 2 things!"

 

[thc1967]

I like the feeling of discovery. No longer are Goblins mere nuisances that can toss javelins or stab with shortswords if they manage to keep their feet out of the buckets on the floor. Goblins still need to be wary of said buckets, to be sure, but if they manage that feat, they're going to pose dangers to the PCs in new and unexpected ways.

So are all the rest of the monsters.

Eh, there's so much more to love than that. The aforementioned rules transparency and modularity. The balance and simplicity of the mechanics. Enhanced mechanics for RP scenarios. Sooooooooooo much...


SHIP IT ALREADY!

 

[katahn]

Heh.

"Sorry, but you can't change anything without breaking 20 other things. But here's a sidebar about a optional rule that only breaks 2 things!"

Unearthed Arcana!

 

[morgul97]

As the previews come out, I am finding that the game seems to be very modular. And although the elements fit together as a part of the greater puzzle, I can effectively put the puzzle together still and not use all the pieces to complete it.

Along this same lines, I like the fact that monster powers are pretty modular. I can envision a sourcebook coming up called something like "Monsterous Powers" that would basically contain a list of about 200 different powers you could add to a monster. It would then have information about how to scale the damage, XP, etc for more or less powerful monsters. You could have an almost endless number of different monsters using the basic monster templates and then adding various powers to them.

 

[DreamChaser]

Along this same lines, I like the fact that monster powers are pretty modular. I can envision a sourcebook coming up called something like "Monsterous Powers" that would basically contain a list of about 200 different powers you could add to a monster. It would then have information about how to scale the damage, XP, etc for more or less powerful monsters. You could have an almost endless number of different monsters using the basic monster templates and then adding various powers to them.

Like how they described templates...

 

[Wormwood]

Along this same lines, I like the fact that monster powers are pretty modular. I can envision a sourcebook coming up called something like "Monsterous Powers" that would basically contain a list of about 200 different powers you could add to a monster. It would then have information about how to scale the damage, XP, etc for more or less powerful monsters. You could have an almost endless number of different monsters using the basic monster templates and then adding various powers to them.

While I'd be interested in such a book, that's essentially how I plan to use the 4e Monster Manual.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I have had this feeling for a while, and the interesting thing is that I really don't understand the firm stance of the anti-4e crowd at all. It really does seem vey modular. Paizo has said that 4e does not allow them to tell the stories that they like to tell, but I feel like the storytelling power of 4e is massively better than previous editions. PCs have had a major protagonizing boost and infusion of variability in actions, and this is accomplished without a real boost on power. The modular style of 4e allows a greater variety of fantasy worlds to be "simulated" so from a GM perspective this gives fantastic freedom for storytelling. In the bildungsroman thread it has been discussed that, potentially, these changes allow a better representation of this literary style in the fantasy tradition. Vancian spellcasting is virtually dead. All these things add up to an amazing toolbox for fantasy gaming.

While I don't consider myself firmly anti-4E at all there are basic genre established theories of gameplay that it treads on with a heavy foot.

Characters in classic fantasy (as I like to think of them) are defined by who they are as people, and more importantly WHAT they do.

Characters in a superhero oriented environment are defined heavily by what they CAN do.

4E is moving in the direction of the superhero environment and thats ok. Its different than traditional fantasy and different does not mean wrong or bad.

I am looking forward to seeing how 4E plays out on its own merits instead of comparing it to earlier games that happen to share the same name. I can understand the excitement for the new direction yet still understand why some may not care for it.