When did I stop being WotC's target audience?

[Simon Atavax]

I call this "royale with cheese".

PULP FICTION! PULP FICTION!

Sorry to interject, but I had to brag about recognizing a cultural reference. Ahem.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

2) Character classes in D&D have always varied wildly. Some had fixed abilities or limited choices (1e fighter, 3e Barbarian), some had weird and wacky abilities (1e and 3e monk), Some had awesome magical might and flexibility (1e wizard, 3e cleric). Now character classes are a fixed set of slotted silos. So many at-will, encounter, daily and utility powers. For everyone. Always. Sure the stuff in the slots varies somewhat within the limits of role and holy balance, but ... I think for me not having a range of 'class work loads' to choose from was one sacred cow too many.

It was the different sub-systems used to differentiate character abilities and the multiclassing rules of 3rd Edition that ramped the power curve up too high for me to enjoy myself anymore. Each new splat book offered interesting aspects that I wanted to add to my game, but too often there were unforseen abuses hidden within the new options. Not with the individual new option, but how it interacted with other portions of the game. With unified power structures I can see a better way to add options without adding a power curve due to combinations of two innocuous powers. I'm not saying we won't see power creep in 4E, but I believe the designers have better tools to work with so they can focus on the design of an individual power and how it compares to others of its kind without having to anticipate how it interacts with a growing library of options.

 

[Tian Zi]

But 4e didn't pursue that goal. they wanted every class to contribute to combat in different ways. In narrowing the focus like that, they've lost sight of many of the reasons that people played D&D -- not to fight goblins, but to plumb the lair and uncover their mystery. This involved combat, sure, but it also involved avoiding deadly traps ("gotcha monsters!"), and communicating with friendly slaves ("what's the use of Charisma, anyway?!"), and figuring out how to escape from the tomb you've been sealed in ("I'm a wizard, so I can walk through walls!"), and, ultimately, beating up the goblins ("I'm a fighter! I put pointy things into squishy things!").

This is, I think, for me, part of why 4e doesn't seem as "rich" as previous editions. Like it's a step back and down, away from possibility toward selling minis and internet toys, and designing a system that can handle minis and internet toys better than previous editions.

SoooOOoooo...

How is dungeon exploration more 3.5 than 4.e?
How are traps more 3.5 than 4.e?
How is communicating with friendly slaves more 3.5 than 4.e?
How is "possibility" not part of 4.e?

 

[Shroomy]

1) The characters experience never changes. This is the 'sweet spot' effet and was a deliberate design goal of 4e. But... the 'hero's journey' has always been about growth and change. The hero starts off a normal dude, maybe marked by destiny, maybe with a funny birthmark, but still a farm boy. Then he grows into a hero and does great deeds and experiences great victories and losses. And when he has ahieved greatness his role changes again and he becomes a leader or a teacher. - And this is what 4e takes away from the characters in pursuit of the 'sweet spot'.

I'm not sure I completely understand what type of experience are you getting at. I mean, I think I see what you are getting at in terms of low-level play followed by a steep upwards power curve, but 4e's introduction of paragon paths and (especially) epic destinies seems to take care of the second type of role change that you describe.

 

[Tian Zi]

I agree with this. Very well said. Couple this with the feeling that classes are defined by powers, with less flexibility to imagine different character concepts with the mechanics, and that would pretty much sum it up for me.

How were 3.5 characters defined? If not by Powers, than what? In anticipation of your answer, how are Feats, Class Abilities, etc... Powers by any other name? If not 3.5, answer which edition you prefer... I'd love to hear how 2e characters were not defined by Powers.

How does 4.e mechanically limit your imagination? It's *your* imagination. You want a stumpy dwarf with a lisp? Have it. it's yours at the DM's discretion. Imagination =/= rules. What in the rules would encourage your imagination? What in 3.5 encouraged your imagination?

 

[Tian Zi]

I see a lot of THIS going on:


"I have read the new Better Joy Cookbook and I am devastated to my very core. Their macaroni and cheese recipe, the very macaroni and cheese I've been making since I was in college, has been ravaged and disfigured and left bleeding on the page. Where once it contained only cheddar cheese, now the recipe calls for a mix of cheddar and Colby. It may contain macaroni, and it may contain cheese, but it is not macaroni and cheese."


Just sayin'.

LOL, yes! And I have a hunch a fair amount of those complaining about the mac n cheese haven't prepared it with the new recipe. But ya know, you can just *feel* it by reading the recipe

 

[Tian Zi]

You can play any prior version of D&D as only a combat simulator if you want to.

Indeed, however, as we age, the rosy colored glasses get more and more... rosy for the past.

I loved that post though, got a good chuckle out of it. How is 4e NOT a RPG? Heck, that begs the question... how WAS 3.5 a RPG game?

 

[Tian Zi]

Furthermore I'm playing in a group that is new to gaming. The GM picked 4e because they had few e books and it was the new thing. And he is absolutely floundering outside of combat. Has no idea what to do or how to resolve things. But roll initiative and suddenly everything works.

Good thing he has 4.e to help him out! Running 3.5 combats, especially after, say, 8th level, is a nightmare. Perhaps if he read the DMG, or maybe has a natural inclination for RPGing, he'd be a better a DM.

Or, you know, DMing is hard regardless of the edition. It takes practice and time. No edition can help that.

 

[MrMyth]

I'm not sure I completely understand what type of experience are you getting at. I mean, I think I see what you are getting at in terms of low-level play followed by a steep upwards power curve, but 4e's introduction of paragon paths and (especially) epic destinies seems to take care of the second type of role change that you describe.

To hop back in on this idea, I thought it was awesome that one of the FR Epic Destinies, the Mythic Sovereign, gives out properties and estates as a class feature, which very much felt like the way high level characters in older editions formerly gained strongholds and the like.

Now, not every Epic Destiny gives out property - but they all do seem to represent becoming an important figure. One character becomes the king of their nation and a powerful ruler; another the preeminent archmage, training apprentices in the ways of magic; another approaching divinity itself as the greatest champion of their faith.

Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies actually feel relevant and defining, as opposed to the scattered Prestige Classes of 3.5, which often simply became tools for PCs to pick and choose from. They didn't have to be, mind you - I've been running a campaign where characters only get 1 prestige class, and every prestige class has specific in-game requirements to be met to acquire it. But making them feel that special and unique, while it may have been the original intent of prestige classes, required some active focus on my part as DM - energy and effort that I find Paragon Paths and Epic Destinies to not require, in order to yield the same result.

 

[Greg K]

4E's skill system is easier to use/build characters with and is far more inclusive of the entire party. I really don't see the complaint here..

And, apparently, you never will understand, but the over consolidation of skills and sacrficing of skill rank purchase is deal breaker for many people and, one of the leading reasons why 8 groups I know won't touch 4e.

Had 4e kept the diversification of skills (although, I doubt anyone would miss use rope, but may be wrong), skill rank purchases (giving some classes more skill points per level) and used the 4e skill challenge (or the 3e version in UA), they would have been happy. For these players, its about better reflecting the character as they envision it. They don't care if they have to sacrafice keeping more commonly used skills maxed out to put points into other skills that may rarely come up as it's not abut "gaming" the system. It's about having the abiity to fine tune their vision of the character based upon the character's background and organic growth. 4e's over consolidated skills and automatic level bonuses is an impediment to this approach.