Why did you quit playing 4e
- Thread starter Evilusion
- Start date
aboyd
Explorer
I've played 4e and I'd play it again, if necessary.
However, for me it just wasn't necessary. I have a 3.5 game that I play in, and it's still going strong, and it's fun, so why stop having fun? And I started my own 3.5 game, and I got more players asking to play than I had chairs. I turned away a few people and now have my own game going strong. So 4th edition just hasn't been needed yet.
For my personal tastes, I like most of the things that 4e was trying to solve. Having to do character optimization or generally work to make a non-broken character? Yes, I like reading the books in my off-time. Having to juggle 4,000 spells that do unusual things that cannot be replicated by fighters? Yeah, I enjoy that. Having a 9 point alignment system? Love it.
There are two things I like about 4th edition that I'd like to put into 3rd edition. I like the combined skills, and I like that critical hits don't require a confirmation roll.
One of the things that I very much dislike about 4e is the definition of types such as defender & striker. I've deliberately not learned what those titles mean. I do not play any MMORPG, and never wanted those concepts to make an incursion into D&D. So when those words started getting explained, I flipped the pages until I got past that.
Also, 4e is too miniature heavy. I like the cover of 1e, which says something like "this game has no board, the action takes place in your imagination."
However, for me it just wasn't necessary. I have a 3.5 game that I play in, and it's still going strong, and it's fun, so why stop having fun? And I started my own 3.5 game, and I got more players asking to play than I had chairs. I turned away a few people and now have my own game going strong. So 4th edition just hasn't been needed yet.
For my personal tastes, I like most of the things that 4e was trying to solve. Having to do character optimization or generally work to make a non-broken character? Yes, I like reading the books in my off-time. Having to juggle 4,000 spells that do unusual things that cannot be replicated by fighters? Yeah, I enjoy that. Having a 9 point alignment system? Love it.
There are two things I like about 4th edition that I'd like to put into 3rd edition. I like the combined skills, and I like that critical hits don't require a confirmation roll.
One of the things that I very much dislike about 4e is the definition of types such as defender & striker. I've deliberately not learned what those titles mean. I do not play any MMORPG, and never wanted those concepts to make an incursion into D&D. So when those words started getting explained, I flipped the pages until I got past that.
Also, 4e is too miniature heavy. I like the cover of 1e, which says something like "this game has no board, the action takes place in your imagination."
Festivus
First Post
I am curious how many of the above posters really enjoy the high level wizard type classes in 3.5 as a player. I have played a high level wizard and found it wasn't for me, too many options, too many things I had to decide to use in the midst of combat. It was a chore for me and I did not enjoy it. I suspect however that many of the above do enjoy that level of complexity in their characters.
Second question, how many of the above posters are DMs of high level 3.5 games? Stat blocks in 3.5 can get long at higher levels, becoming very complex to run. I know, I am running a 3.5 game that is at level 17 right now, and I hate running it compared to lower levels. I have yet to run 4E at higher levels but from what I have read, it's not that much more complex.
I have tried 4E, and still do play 4E. But I also still play 3.5 and are about to make a foray into pathfinder I believe. My days as a 3.5 DM however may be limited to level 12 and lower, as the role turns from a fun one to a job for me.
Second question, how many of the above posters are DMs of high level 3.5 games? Stat blocks in 3.5 can get long at higher levels, becoming very complex to run. I know, I am running a 3.5 game that is at level 17 right now, and I hate running it compared to lower levels. I have yet to run 4E at higher levels but from what I have read, it's not that much more complex.
I have tried 4E, and still do play 4E. But I also still play 3.5 and are about to make a foray into pathfinder I believe. My days as a 3.5 DM however may be limited to level 12 and lower, as the role turns from a fun one to a job for me.
Hella_Tellah
Explorer
I found Warhammer Fantasy Roleplaying, which is exactly the fantasy game I wanted and everything 4e isn't. It's gritty and deadly; magic is mysterious, powerful and dangerous; and for starting characters, it feels like a bunch of peasants attempting to survive in a hostile, medieval world.
Warhammer characters either dodge, parry, or get killed in 2-3 hits, and they never have more than 16 or so wounds (hit points) at the absolute maximum, while damage is 1d10+Strength mod. Much deadlier, which makes each combat feel like an achievement. Killing a bunch of goblins should not feel routine and easy, and getting hit should cause the whole table to go "oh crap!" I don't like flashy, explosive magic--this is the WoD Mage lover in me--and the 4e wizard and cleric both just scream "Blast 'em all and let Pelor sort 'em out!" And I don't really like starting out as heroes--it would take a Warhammer character a year of play to get remotely close to the power level of a 4e character, and by that time he'd be insane and missing three fingers and an eye.
Basically, 4e is insufficiently GRIMDARK for my tastes these days.
Warhammer characters either dodge, parry, or get killed in 2-3 hits, and they never have more than 16 or so wounds (hit points) at the absolute maximum, while damage is 1d10+Strength mod. Much deadlier, which makes each combat feel like an achievement. Killing a bunch of goblins should not feel routine and easy, and getting hit should cause the whole table to go "oh crap!" I don't like flashy, explosive magic--this is the WoD Mage lover in me--and the 4e wizard and cleric both just scream "Blast 'em all and let Pelor sort 'em out!" And I don't really like starting out as heroes--it would take a Warhammer character a year of play to get remotely close to the power level of a 4e character, and by that time he'd be insane and missing three fingers and an eye.
Basically, 4e is insufficiently GRIMDARK for my tastes these days.
bouncyhead
Explorer
Lack of depth/complexity. I LIKE subsystems. I like the fact that in 1/2/3 you couldn't just sit down and play a Wizard (or MU) - you had to learn.
The game has no hinterland, whimsy or wonder. No room for anything 'unnecessary'. D&D should be a baroque cathedral, riddled with passages, cul-de-sacs and surprises.
The last thing D&D needed was 'streamlining' - I want my game to perform well on the table, not in a wind tunnel.
The game has no hinterland, whimsy or wonder. No room for anything 'unnecessary'. D&D should be a baroque cathedral, riddled with passages, cul-de-sacs and surprises.
The last thing D&D needed was 'streamlining' - I want my game to perform well on the table, not in a wind tunnel.
It does when the DM and players instill their campaign with those qualities.
I think the campaign world should be that... the rule set used to create it, not so much...
Giltonio_Santos
Hero
Now, if I had the habit of quoting other people in my signature, I'd know exactly where these words would be going next.
Cheers,
LostSoul
Adventurer
Correct me if I'm wrong - what I'm reading is that you want different methods of resolution for different gameworld things, right?
For example: instead of rolling a d20 to make attacks with spells, you roll 2d10. If any die comes up a 10, roll another d10 and add the results. If one of the original dice comes up a 1, then the spell is flubbed. If you roll a 1 on both dice, the spell targets another character at random (or stuns the caster (save ends) if that makes more sense).
This represents to unstable nature of magic. Well, actually what it does is that it makes the player feel the way the wizard does in the gameworld - he can't trust his magic; it's unstable.
That sort of mechanic would have been an interesting design decision.
Eldragon
First Post
This sums up my opinion of 4e quite well. So for now I'm sitting on the sidelines waiting for more supplemental books or 4.5e
I will also add one HUGE problem with 4e: No SRD. Only 1 or 2 of us actually buy books in our group, the rest borrow books from the first two. With the 3e SRD everyone had access to the basic rules, so people could create characters and read the rules in depth in their own time. With 4e, its not an option. When we all get together, we want to PLAY the game, not sit around making characters and reading the rules.
Similar Threads
