What's the most significant difference you've found with 4e from 3e?

[Asmor]

One of the things some in my group commented on.

"Monsters are now better than PCs".

My players see things like monsters with tons of hitpoints, high initiatives, a wide array of different powers that recharge during the fight, etc, and honestly think that monsters are better than PCs.

Solo monsters are better than the PCs.

Elite monsters... It's a toss up. They have high hit points, and tend to have more and better powers than normal monsters, but I don't know if that's enough to say that they're outright better than a PC.

Regular monsters? Definitely not.

PCs have a lot more options and tend to be able to do a lot more damage.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

I like looking at statblocks again. It´s a simple thing, i know. But for me, it´s a huge change.

 

[alberand]

Running the game is actually fun and enjoyable. That's the biggest difference I've seen.

This is one of the my favorite things too, because I can sketch out a couple of ideas over the week and put together 2-3 encounters and a skill challenge the morning of game day. The rest of my spare time is spent thinking about things like plot hooks and character development.

With 3rd edition, I would have to spend a good deal of time almost every day of the week to prepare nearly as much material, and my sessions were very combat heavy because I spent all my time making unique monsters and NPCs and didn't get much time to worry about plot devices.

The other thing, and the absolute best thing, about 4th edition for me is how easy it is to pick up and play. The one player in my group that always had to have someone else help figure out her attack and damage rolls in 3e and was never very clear on the rules had no problems after just a couple session or two of 4e. I also run a monthly game that often has new people in it that have never played before, and everyone has been able to pick it up and follow along after just a few rounds of combat.

4e absolutely rocks, as both a DM and a player!

 

[Khairn]

I would say the single mechanic and the sameness of the powers.

In previous editions different mechanics were by different classes to reflect the various sources of power. (melee, psionics, arcane etc) In 4E a single mechanic encompasses all powers & abilities, with a simple, short description used to describe where that power came from. Without that short description all powers seem inter-changeable to me.

 

[Rechan]

I would say the single mechanic and the sameness of the powers.

To be fair, there is some difference. None of the martial classes have area bursts. In fact, they only have close bursts, and the rogue has Blinding Barrage, all which require weapons.

Divine classes are the only ones with channel divinity. Scratch out the name "Divinity", and you still have a mechanic which says "You have two (or more) powers, but you can only use one of these in an encounter."

 

[RangerWickett]

Players stopped coming up with interesting combat tricks, and instead just use the interesting (supposedly) combat tricks they automatically get. That has gotten boring for me.

Players complain about needing a battle map more than before.

Combat takes so much damn longer than before. Not individual rounds; they're about the same, maybe even a little faster because there are fewer fiddly numbers to track. But the combat as a whole starts with 2 or 3 rounds of cool action, and then four or five rounds of grinding down enemies' hit points until they die. This leads to me having lots of people surrender when they realize they're beaten, but in the encounters where people would fight to the death, I started just killing people at their bloodied rating, because the fights were getting tedious.

I don't want to read the books. They're ugly. Thus, I have less familiarity with the rules than I did when I was several months into 3e.

I have no idea how to make NPC stats. Like, none at all. Apparently I'm not supposed to build them like PCs, but I can't find the rules that explain it. So all my NPCs act like monsters, which gets a little odd.

Again, fights all are just PCs looking at their cards and deciding which power to use, instead of trying things that are cool on their own.

I like the core of 4e, but powers and the art just don't do it for me.

 

[Nebulous]

Again, fights all are just PCs looking at their cards and deciding which power to use, instead of trying things that are cool on their own.

I like the core of 4e, but powers and the art just don't do it for me.

I like the core too, and the DM side is fun, but i don't know if i would want to be a player in 4e. Superficially i don't much like the powers, and spellcasters seem downright boring compared to past incarnations.

We really enjoying 4e, but i foresee a day when we're going to hit a wall of "Been Here, Done That." I suppose all games have this, it's just a matter of time.

Although we do have players attempting ideas outside of the rules, and i have been using the "Yes" rule almost exclusively, even if i inwardly cringe a little. In the end, it works out just fine.

 

[LostSoul]

The resolution mechanics rules are more flexible, covering more actions, while being simpler to use.

 

[Lacyon]

Page 42.

 

[TerraDave]

another one for: ease of play.