D&D 4E Where was 4e headed before it was canned?

[Parmandur]

Late to the party here. Touching back on the Essentials line, I really liked the box sets. Never played the included adventures but I appreciated them being included. I still use the monster and hero tokens included in the sets in my 5e game (when battles are too large for TotM). Essentials excited me when it released. It was definitely doubling down on classic aesthetics and it worked on me Haha. Never got to really play the line very much so I'm not sure how much of a departure it was from core 4e.

Someone mention KotSF earlier. I have seen this module get some hate. It was the first adventure I ran for 4e. I enjoyed it and my players (not quit sure how 4e should be played) seem to have fun with it. As a whole we just didnt know the focus of 4e was tactical combat. Most would just spam their basic attack. We were all returning players/DM from 2e and that's how we tried to play it. Looking back now and maybe taking more time with the introductory rules I often wonder if we would have enjoyed it more and stuck with it.

My limited 4E experience was with Keep on the Shadowfell, and we enjoyed the Adventure just fine: the campaign fell apart for personal reasons, and I never felt compelled to get into 4E again.

 

[MockingBird]

I would say they didnt even read their character sheets or chose feats or anything about their characters...

Without digging through my old stuff, if I remember right KotSF came with pregens or I'm thinking of the starter set for 4e. Either way they used pregens. It was my attempt to get them interested in playing D&D at the time. We finished KotSF but nothing ever came of it after that. They weren't interested or invested. I live in a small town in the south, so finding players is tough.

 

[Tony Vargas]

. Most would just spam their basic attack. We were all returning players/DM from 2e and that's how we tried to play it.

I cannot imagine someone even reading the description of their class and choosing to do that not even workable with just essentials... not really

Its surprisingly workable, if you dont care to do anything else, and really, about all there was to the Slayer & Thief, and not a lot more to some other eClasses.

Even some AEDU classes could be adquate running on just A. An archer Ranger, in particular, could just Twin-Strike it's way through life - at least until the player takes more of an interest.

...also...

. Maybe that's why 5e works better for the same group? I'm not sure but it just does.

5e is very familiar and welcoming to returning players. If you're used to 2e, it also removes a lot if restrictions relative to TSR eds - so it can seem "too easy" to the hard-core types, but challenging for more casual returning players.

 

[MockingBird]

Even some AEDU classes could be adquate running on just A. An archer Ranger, in particular, could just Twin-Strike it's way through life - at least until the player takes more of an interest.

Funny you bring this up. My roommate at the time, wanted to be a Ranger...named Walker...I should have known at that point it wasnt gonna be serious. Anyway that's all he did was twin strike. We had fun but it didnt go as I had hope it would.

 

[Garthanos]

Even some AEDU classes could be adquate running on just A. An archer Ranger, in particular, could just Twin-Strike it's way through life - at least until the player takes more of an interest.

Oh sure but it had switches and toggles largely in the form of feats to make it far more interesting for those who are less interested in 1 button play ... the same cannot be said for the slayer. It is one sleep inducing type.

 

[Hussar]

Heh, it's kinda funny. 4 years (ish) of 4e publication and we have what, 40, 50 hardcover books. In what world isn't that a complete game? Where was it heading? Largely up it's own butt since the production schedule left so little actual space for new ideas to come along. I mean, good grief, how many options did each class have from 1st to 30th by the time 4e wound down? The "core" classes had more than a dozen options for every power level. I can see why people thought that the online character generator was a necessity. If you actually played with all the books, holy crap it would take FOREVER to create a character.

Realistically, there's enough 4e material there to run campaigns for the next decade or so if you wanted to. Between the modules from Dungeon magazine (if you were quick enough to download them) and the actual print content, 4e has a bloody MOUNTAIN of material.

 

[MockingBird]

One of my favorite books, and I still use it for ideas in 5e, is the Open Graves (i believe that's what its called). Anytime I have an undead themed adventure I crack it open for the location samples.

 

[Garthanos]

Heh, it's kinda funny. 4 years (ish) of 4e publication and we have what, 40, 50 hardcover books. In what world isn't that a complete game? Where was it heading? Largely up it's own butt since the production schedule left so little actual space for new ideas to come along. I mean, good grief, how many options did each class have from 1st to 30th by the time 4e wound down? The "core" classes had more than a dozen options for every power level. I can see why people thought that the online character generator was a necessity. If you actually played with all the books, holy crap it would take FOREVER to create a character.

Realistically, there's enough 4e material there to run campaigns for the next decade or so if you wanted to. Between the modules from Dungeon magazine (if you were quick enough to download them) and the actual print content, 4e has a bloody MOUNTAIN of material.

Yeh the argument that 4e due to content production rate was already done is not entirely devoid of basis

 

[Mycroft]

Realistically, there's enough 4e material there to run campaigns for the next decade or so if you wanted to.

Totally, I believe this goes for every edition. and not just a decade, there is enough material in every edition of D&D, to date, to keep you busy for the rest of your life. I try not to refer to an edition in the past tense, as they are all available and playable.

 

[Hussar]

Totally, I believe this goes for every edition. and not just a decade, there is enough material in every edition of D&D, to date, to keep you busy for the rest of your life. I try not to refer to an edition in the past tense, as they are all available and playable.

I think the difference being how long it takes an edition to get there. Look at 5e - IIRC, 4e had more books by year 2 than 5e has in 5. Quickly looking at the list on Wikipedia- I see 41 Player and DM books. Plus nine setting books. O.O In 4 years. So, yeah, we're looking at a hardcover pretty close to every month. That was insane. No one could ever keep up with that pace.

Even though arguably 4e is the shortest edition, in it's time, it managed to bang out almost as much material (not counting adventures) as 3e. Good grief. I had kinda forgotten how ludicrous it was back then.