Why I Intend to Purchase the 4th Edition Books

[Lackhand]

How'd ya know?

It's a knack. I mean, doesn't everybody use their free time to read philosophy?

So, not judging, just trying to summarize: You suspect that in 4th edition you'll be able to challenge the players (instead of their characters) more than you can in 3rd edition?
That is, you'll be able to get them to play their roles more grandiosely, think their way through traps more cunningly, and solve problems with a combination of derring-do and brazenness?

Might be. I think most rules-lighter systems would do that, and 4th edition looks to be, if not rules-lighter, at least rules-less-convoluteder.

That's a word now.

 

[Jack7]

That is a very interesting phrase you have there.

It's not mine. It's from an old Anglo-Saxon poem about the Battle of Maldon and a fella who fought to the death to protect the body of his lord from the Vikings.
I like it though. I really do.

at least rules-less-convoluteder.

I like it.

But folks, I gotta go for now.
Got some of my peeps over and they're barking for beer and pretzels.

Or, something like that.

See ya later, it was enjoyable, and keep it real.

Talk among yoursleves now, and just remember to turn out the lights when you're finished.

 

[Mistwell]

Interesting thread Jack.

I definitely get where you are coming from.

I hope you are right about the direction the game is headed.

I think you are correct in some respects. For example:

It looks like some rules are simplified to remove some of the math and such that bogged things down, like the complexity of attacks of opportunity.

And it looks like magic items are reduced, and dependence on them is also reduced.

Alignment is not as important in 4e, which is a good thing because it focuses on your character being the sum of your actions and not what's written on your character sheet.

However, in other respects I suspect you are not correct, though I hope you are. For example:

It used to be that things were not expressed as "squares" for movement. Movement was movement, and a grid might be useful sometimes but it was never expected or even typical. 3rd edition changed that, and all indications are that 4th edition will not only continue it but will entrench it even more with movement now expressed in squares.

It used to be that your resources were limited. If you ran out of healing in the middle of the dungeon or out in the wilderness, you had to get creative and work your way out or invent a way to be safe. 4th edition however gives all characters per-encounter abilities, including apparently things like healing and attacks and defense and such. Which means you're never going to be "stuck" in the middle of nowhere with just your wits to go on - you will always have a magical doo-dad power to fall back on.

It used to be that your foes were whatever was out there in this theoretical world. If you were first level characters and happened on the lair of an ancient dragon, well you have a ancient dragon to deal with. 3rd edition made it so that most encounters were balanced against your group - which meant if you happened on a dragon, the DM was more likely to make it a dragon with a challenge rating appropriate to your character levels with an encounter level appropriate to your character levels and so it was a baby dragon. 4th edition, from what I can tell, will make it worse. Now, it will be 1 baby dragon for each of your characters in your group, and one baby dragon will be a "striker" to match your party's "striker" character, and another baby dragon will be a "defender" to balance out your party's "defender", and one might not be a baby dragon but a slippery surface as a challenge to balance against the movement abilities of your group, etc..

Anyway, I hope you are more right than I am. I am looking forward to 4th edition because I think on the whole it will be a better game than 3rd edition. But I do worry that some of the directions they are heading with some of this stuff is just more of the same bothersome stuff from the last edition.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I can't explain it better or more succinctly.

Lol


PS 4e will be like 3e but more so. It's not what you're looking for.

 

[Mistwell]

Lol


PS 4e will be like 3e but more so. It's not what you're looking for.

I really don't think we have enough information to come to that conclusion. You can guess, and predict. But stating it flatly like that seems, well, not well founded.

 

[FireLance]

Frankly, I'm rather skeptical. While I suppose it is possible in theory that D&D could be used as a way to develop problem-solving skills that could be applicable in the real world, I think it would require a great deal of experience on the part of the DM to separate the solutions that will actually work in the real world from those that only seem plausible. When the DM and players are a just a group of 13 or 14 year olds, I suspect that "creative" attempts to solve problems simply boil down to the players trying to convince that DM that the crazy plan du jour will actually work in the simulation of reality that they are playing in.

Now, I do think that playing D&D does develop skills and abilities that are useful in the real world: math skills, vocabulary, speech and persuasion skills (mostly from trying to convince the DM that the crazy plan du jour will actually work ), teamwork, decision-making, creative thinking and imagination, perseverence, etc. However, I don't think that any of these are unique to, or emphasized significantly more in, any particular edition.

 

[the Jester]

Wow.

I like this thread, I really do.

I like its tone and style, and the fact that it seems to... 'carry over' through multiple posters. I like the topic at hand, and the discussion of it; it has all been very civil and friendly.

Jack, I hope that 4e pushes towards challenging the players, but honestly, I am an old-school gamer that started playin' and dmin' in 1980. And I'll tell ya, while you have a point about the challenge shifting from the player to the character, a good dm can always keep the player challenged too. You just have to use twisted plots that no skill check will unravel, and Machiavellian intrigue, and puzzles and riddles. It can be done; I think, anyway, that I have been doing it for years.

But, again, I too hope that 4e leans a little more in the direction of challenging the players, as well as the characters.

One more thing: I gotta tell you, Jack, I can't picture you sounding any way other than just like Sam Elliot.

 

[Xethreau]

The original D&D was very useful in that respect. Those of you who have been around long enough to play it probably know what I'm implying.

... I did read what you said, but I totaly missed what you meant to convey. How is D&D useful besides entertainment?

 

[ObsidianCrane]

It used to be that things were not expressed as "squares" for movement. Movement was movement, and a grid might be useful sometimes but it was never expected or even typical. 3rd edition changed that, and all indications are that 4th edition will not only continue it but will entrench it even more with movement now expressed in squares.

Actually this isn't a new thing, its a reversion to 1E rules.

As to much of Jack's prior comments *shrug* its a matter of style.

I want to know what the character can do, we are role playing the character after all. That's why I like the importance of Feats and Skills in 3.X and why I hope (one way or the other) it continues into 4E.

Challenging the players with problems has never been an issue for me either *shrug*, certainly nothing we know about 4E has indicated that I will have to do anything more or less to present the players with challenges.

As to the mechanics of the game getting in the road of "getting in there and doing the killing" again *shrug* I play a lot without a battlemat or other representation of what is happening, and after doing it for 20 years its hardly a problem - even with things like attacks of opportunity. I also expect to continue to do it in 4E.

It is important that player's get prepared before the game so that they know what their character is able to do, so that the player can role play their character's interaction with the situation and the game doesn't have to get bogged down in the mechanics of it. But with experienced players I haven't found that to be a problem. Though I know I'm looking forward to the possibility of everyone attacks 1/round base, instead of the 7+ attacks some characters are able to do.

As to the "old style" encounters that someone mentioned the game I'm currently playing in is based in the Eberron mega-dungeon thing, and its stupidly annoying having encounter difficulty sway randomly from room to room. To the point that we auto-kill most of the things that we encounter - so most encounters are irrelevant. Its not making the dungeon fun, just silly. The DM skimmed over about 10 rooms on Saturday simply because they were irrelevant, thats a lot of pointless text. This does however reflect something I'm looking forward to in 4E, the 1 Monster/PC encounter which is balanced to the party desperately needs to make a return.

 

[Lackhand]

It used to be that things were not expressed as "squares" for movement. Movement was movement, and a grid might be useful sometimes but it was never expected or even typical. 3rd edition changed that, and all indications are that 4th edition will not only continue it but will entrench it even more with movement now expressed in squares.

This isn't snark, this is gentle correction.

I'm a young'n here, and my first exposure to D&D was a few 1st edition books, obtained god-only-knows-where during the mid nineties.

Can you imagine how confused I was to discover that everything -- every single thing -- in the monster manual was measured in inches?!

So squares, they are not new.