evilbob
Adventurer
I think everyone else has already done one of these, but I figure: hey, why not? I have opinions no one cares about, too! 
I'll try to keep it short and simple for quick reading, and bulleted so that it's easier for you to quote when you tear my points apart. Enjoy!
Pros:
- Core rules are extremely simple. This is obviously where they spent the majority of their time: it is easy to pick up. They did a good job of "Wizards of the Coastifying" it by applying what they learned from printing millions of magic cards: create a very small, very simple ruleset, and then make (and sell) a jillion exceptions. Each exception is small, self-contained, and easily referenced (although it requires reference). It plays a lot like MtG. Power cards are a natural extension.
- Realism is officially defenestrated. Not that D&D was about realism before, but now it is all about being cinematic. Some will probably list this in the "con" list, but I like it. The DMG basically says, "don't sweat the small stuff" like encumbrance, traveling, and where to sell/buy items. A few of these principles are the exact opposite of the 3.5 DMG, some of which are specifically called "boring" or otherwise ridiculed, which I think is pretty funny. But they repeatedly say, "this is a fantasy game - just skip to the fun." Get to the fun - good motto.
- The DMG is a DMG. I really liked how the DMG talks more about how to be a good DM than about crunch rules that players just shouldn't know. I like that they pretty much took the 3.5 DMG II and reprinted it as the main book for 4.0. It makes me wonder if they will actually need a DMG II for 4.0 (whereas PHB II and MM II are a forgone conclusion).
- Interesting choices. The core classes (while sparse) have lots of good choices in them. The wizard's different possible playstyles are very cool and distinct (within their realm), and the feat selections - while arbitrary at times - really make you choose between specializing and rounding yourself out. At the same time, you're not overwhelmed. The heroic tier feat list is the biggest list of options you have - not too bad.
- No more save or dies. I agree: they just aren't fun. There's a certain level of challenge and failure that everyone has to deal with, but having a 14th level character just turn into a pile of dust because you rolled low one time - yeah, that isn't fun. That's punishing. But then again, I also never played Hardcore in Diablo, either. Some people won't like this change either, and it does have some weird effects (like monsters that can't really affect you for more than a round or two with ANYTHING).
- Everyone's power level is the same. Sure, 3.5 wizards are fun when you get to level 15, but they really sucked when you started out. I never play a 3.5 caster under level 6 anymore because it isn't worth it. 4.0 worked really hard at making everyone equal in power at every level, and I think it worked. Granted, there were costs paid (see below), but the overall equal fun level was achieved.
Neither good nor bad, but different:
- Don't be boring. I lost count of the number of times the DMG cautioned against something because it would be "boring" or some synonym of boring. I can't tell if this is one of those "how to bring in casual players" things or one of those "kids these days have no attention spans" things. I agreed that most of that stuff is boring, but some of it was also pretty standard DM fare. Interesting that this is a major concern.
- Youcan't shouldn't be evil. I appreciate how you don't want a bunch of kids or newbies picking this up and going, "heh, I wanna be the bad guy!" But there are reasonable adults out there who want to play a reasonably adult game. Sometimes this involves bending morality or breaking it altogether. I'm sure we'll get supplements that cover this stuff (the demand is there), but I'm not sure if I appreciate being told "don't do this." Especially next to "but your imagination is the only limit!"
- D&D is rated G. There is a demon or devil in the MM that has some side-boob action going on, but otherwise nothing in any of the books couldn't be in a Disney movie. As above: I understand the motive of trying to draw in all types of new/casual players, but I'm also ready to be treated like an adult, please.
- Epic slugfests. All powers do damage (even healing), so monsters have insane HP - especially solos - and all powers never do MUCH damage. There's no way you can chew through even half some solo monster's HP using every encounter/daily your group has. So what's left after that? I'm reserving my opinion for when I've seen it in play a few times, but I'm worried.
- Big monsters don't do much. I can appreciate that a narrow range of options makes a DM's life much easier and tactics more obvious, and when you're running 4 different types of creatures I doubt it's even noticeable. But I wonder if big, powerful monsters with hundreds of HP will seem quite as cool after round 15 of the same 3 things? In particular, iconic super-bosses like balors, pit fiends, and the terrasque (sp?) seemed much more like huge bags of HP than terrifying foes. Again, I will reserve my opinion for when I've seen it, but I'm still worried.
- Skill challenges seem designed to make you fail. Thanks to the sliding scale of skill DCs (see below), there's always about a 50% chance that you'll make a normal skill check for your level. That means it's mathematically very difficult to get 8 wins before you get 4 losses. I guess I just don't understand how these work yet, so I'm reserving my opinion. Although I understand that "aiding" apparently means the difference between winning and losing. And that maybe the DMG meant something other than "you should only completely win or completely lose," which is how they are presented.
- Stuff isn't broken anymore. (Yet.) Sure, this is overall a good thing, but it comes at the cost of less overall options and less flexibility within those options. Players can come up with the darndest things, and that's great - but usually it is also unfair. Flattening out the power levels and restricting what your powers do means less broken, but less creativity - some good, some bad.
Cons:
- The art is horrible. The MM is about 70/30 good (with lots of recycled art), the PHB has about 50/50 good/bad, but the DMG is more like 80/20 in favor of bad, bad fantasy art. Seriously: there were two illustrations in the DMG I thought were good. Where have all the good fantasy artists gone?
- Extreme lack of character creation options. No, this is not a reference to the fact that there are currently only eight 4.0 classes and 47,000 3.5 classes; I know more will come, and I'm not sweating that. I mean 3.5 classes were so modular and the rules for creating new classes so simple that it was very easy to envision any kind of class you wanted within those few rules. Now the game is easier, but creating classes is much more difficult. Maybe this will get easier as I get to know 4.0, but for right now it seems extremely daunting to try to come up with a class concept - I don't know if I can make up dozens of powers across 30 levels. But I do know that I need to if I really want to play the characters I want to play.
- Irony or hypocrisy in how much imagination is involved. I can't tell which it is when the books say things like, "your only limit is your imagination!!!" right next to "but you have to have maps and minis to play." (There are too many ads in these books in general.) MANY of the rules are designed to codify what you can do, but the net effect is that they restrict your options. Powers especially are very narrowly defined: you do damage; sometimes you do something else. There's not a lot of room for imagination in that. But the weirdest paradigm is the MM: on one hand, you have an extremely small range of possible monster actions, but then if you want a monster to do something more like its mythological base, you basically have to make up all the rules entirely. (For example: vampires. If you want to dominate someone for more than a round or two, you have to make up those rules yourself. And demons/devils: how do they leave their own plane?) They restrict you tightly or they leave it completely wide open; I don't feel like there's much in between.
- Skill checks scale with your level. I'm not sure why they just didn't say, "All skill checks are a 50/50 chance. Go for it." I don't understand why swinging from a chandelier when I am a level 2 character has a DC of 13, but then if I am a level 15 character it has a DC of 22. Why did the same task get harder? I know you're trying to match skill challenges to the level of the player, and that's great - but honestly, I think more static DCs are in order. There should be some things you just can't do at heroic tier and some things you can easily do at epic tier. Don't just make the DC harder because I leveled up.
- 4.0 means 4.0 classes. There are only 4 classes (and really, 4 powers). Sure, we have some flavor differences here and there and some guys wade in while others stand back, and occasionally someone has a power that heals or does a different type of damage or is otherwise slightly different, but there are 4 character roles and there is not much variation in the roles. I think this is mostly because they tried so hard to get the power levels the same, they just gave everyone the same types of powers: you do damage; sometimes you do something else. Everyone does damage. Even healing is done by doing damage. It's like they decided that only damage matters - which is probably why monster HP is crazy high. Hopefully this problem will be solved with more classes, but the first 8 are pretty much just 4 with different flavor text.
Final thoughts:
It has come full circle: D&D is World of Warcraft. Video games are easy to pick up and lots of fun, but they also restrict your imagination by narrowly defining the rules and giving you specific numbers, figures, and places to focus on - and 4.0 does the same thing. I have no doubt 4.0 is going to be a blast. It is already fun to play, and I can already see hours and months and years going in to make it a great experience. But then again, I enjoy cinematic, tactical play. Honestly: I like video games. 4.0 is radically different than the gaming styles that have come before it, and I don't think that's a good thing or a bad thing. But I am looking forward to what's coming out next.
I'll try to keep it short and simple for quick reading, and bulleted so that it's easier for you to quote when you tear my points apart. Enjoy!Pros:
- Core rules are extremely simple. This is obviously where they spent the majority of their time: it is easy to pick up. They did a good job of "Wizards of the Coastifying" it by applying what they learned from printing millions of magic cards: create a very small, very simple ruleset, and then make (and sell) a jillion exceptions. Each exception is small, self-contained, and easily referenced (although it requires reference). It plays a lot like MtG. Power cards are a natural extension.
- Realism is officially defenestrated. Not that D&D was about realism before, but now it is all about being cinematic. Some will probably list this in the "con" list, but I like it. The DMG basically says, "don't sweat the small stuff" like encumbrance, traveling, and where to sell/buy items. A few of these principles are the exact opposite of the 3.5 DMG, some of which are specifically called "boring" or otherwise ridiculed, which I think is pretty funny. But they repeatedly say, "this is a fantasy game - just skip to the fun." Get to the fun - good motto.
- The DMG is a DMG. I really liked how the DMG talks more about how to be a good DM than about crunch rules that players just shouldn't know. I like that they pretty much took the 3.5 DMG II and reprinted it as the main book for 4.0. It makes me wonder if they will actually need a DMG II for 4.0 (whereas PHB II and MM II are a forgone conclusion).
- Interesting choices. The core classes (while sparse) have lots of good choices in them. The wizard's different possible playstyles are very cool and distinct (within their realm), and the feat selections - while arbitrary at times - really make you choose between specializing and rounding yourself out. At the same time, you're not overwhelmed. The heroic tier feat list is the biggest list of options you have - not too bad.
- No more save or dies. I agree: they just aren't fun. There's a certain level of challenge and failure that everyone has to deal with, but having a 14th level character just turn into a pile of dust because you rolled low one time - yeah, that isn't fun. That's punishing. But then again, I also never played Hardcore in Diablo, either. Some people won't like this change either, and it does have some weird effects (like monsters that can't really affect you for more than a round or two with ANYTHING).
- Everyone's power level is the same. Sure, 3.5 wizards are fun when you get to level 15, but they really sucked when you started out. I never play a 3.5 caster under level 6 anymore because it isn't worth it. 4.0 worked really hard at making everyone equal in power at every level, and I think it worked. Granted, there were costs paid (see below), but the overall equal fun level was achieved.
Neither good nor bad, but different:
- Don't be boring. I lost count of the number of times the DMG cautioned against something because it would be "boring" or some synonym of boring. I can't tell if this is one of those "how to bring in casual players" things or one of those "kids these days have no attention spans" things. I agreed that most of that stuff is boring, but some of it was also pretty standard DM fare. Interesting that this is a major concern.
- You
- D&D is rated G. There is a demon or devil in the MM that has some side-boob action going on, but otherwise nothing in any of the books couldn't be in a Disney movie. As above: I understand the motive of trying to draw in all types of new/casual players, but I'm also ready to be treated like an adult, please.
- Epic slugfests. All powers do damage (even healing), so monsters have insane HP - especially solos - and all powers never do MUCH damage. There's no way you can chew through even half some solo monster's HP using every encounter/daily your group has. So what's left after that? I'm reserving my opinion for when I've seen it in play a few times, but I'm worried.
- Big monsters don't do much. I can appreciate that a narrow range of options makes a DM's life much easier and tactics more obvious, and when you're running 4 different types of creatures I doubt it's even noticeable. But I wonder if big, powerful monsters with hundreds of HP will seem quite as cool after round 15 of the same 3 things? In particular, iconic super-bosses like balors, pit fiends, and the terrasque (sp?) seemed much more like huge bags of HP than terrifying foes. Again, I will reserve my opinion for when I've seen it, but I'm still worried.
- Skill challenges seem designed to make you fail. Thanks to the sliding scale of skill DCs (see below), there's always about a 50% chance that you'll make a normal skill check for your level. That means it's mathematically very difficult to get 8 wins before you get 4 losses. I guess I just don't understand how these work yet, so I'm reserving my opinion. Although I understand that "aiding" apparently means the difference between winning and losing. And that maybe the DMG meant something other than "you should only completely win or completely lose," which is how they are presented.
- Stuff isn't broken anymore. (Yet.) Sure, this is overall a good thing, but it comes at the cost of less overall options and less flexibility within those options. Players can come up with the darndest things, and that's great - but usually it is also unfair. Flattening out the power levels and restricting what your powers do means less broken, but less creativity - some good, some bad.
Cons:
- The art is horrible. The MM is about 70/30 good (with lots of recycled art), the PHB has about 50/50 good/bad, but the DMG is more like 80/20 in favor of bad, bad fantasy art. Seriously: there were two illustrations in the DMG I thought were good. Where have all the good fantasy artists gone?
- Extreme lack of character creation options. No, this is not a reference to the fact that there are currently only eight 4.0 classes and 47,000 3.5 classes; I know more will come, and I'm not sweating that. I mean 3.5 classes were so modular and the rules for creating new classes so simple that it was very easy to envision any kind of class you wanted within those few rules. Now the game is easier, but creating classes is much more difficult. Maybe this will get easier as I get to know 4.0, but for right now it seems extremely daunting to try to come up with a class concept - I don't know if I can make up dozens of powers across 30 levels. But I do know that I need to if I really want to play the characters I want to play.
- Irony or hypocrisy in how much imagination is involved. I can't tell which it is when the books say things like, "your only limit is your imagination!!!" right next to "but you have to have maps and minis to play." (There are too many ads in these books in general.) MANY of the rules are designed to codify what you can do, but the net effect is that they restrict your options. Powers especially are very narrowly defined: you do damage; sometimes you do something else. There's not a lot of room for imagination in that. But the weirdest paradigm is the MM: on one hand, you have an extremely small range of possible monster actions, but then if you want a monster to do something more like its mythological base, you basically have to make up all the rules entirely. (For example: vampires. If you want to dominate someone for more than a round or two, you have to make up those rules yourself. And demons/devils: how do they leave their own plane?) They restrict you tightly or they leave it completely wide open; I don't feel like there's much in between.
- Skill checks scale with your level. I'm not sure why they just didn't say, "All skill checks are a 50/50 chance. Go for it." I don't understand why swinging from a chandelier when I am a level 2 character has a DC of 13, but then if I am a level 15 character it has a DC of 22. Why did the same task get harder? I know you're trying to match skill challenges to the level of the player, and that's great - but honestly, I think more static DCs are in order. There should be some things you just can't do at heroic tier and some things you can easily do at epic tier. Don't just make the DC harder because I leveled up.
- 4.0 means 4.0 classes. There are only 4 classes (and really, 4 powers). Sure, we have some flavor differences here and there and some guys wade in while others stand back, and occasionally someone has a power that heals or does a different type of damage or is otherwise slightly different, but there are 4 character roles and there is not much variation in the roles. I think this is mostly because they tried so hard to get the power levels the same, they just gave everyone the same types of powers: you do damage; sometimes you do something else. Everyone does damage. Even healing is done by doing damage. It's like they decided that only damage matters - which is probably why monster HP is crazy high. Hopefully this problem will be solved with more classes, but the first 8 are pretty much just 4 with different flavor text.
Final thoughts:
It has come full circle: D&D is World of Warcraft. Video games are easy to pick up and lots of fun, but they also restrict your imagination by narrowly defining the rules and giving you specific numbers, figures, and places to focus on - and 4.0 does the same thing. I have no doubt 4.0 is going to be a blast. It is already fun to play, and I can already see hours and months and years going in to make it a great experience. But then again, I enjoy cinematic, tactical play. Honestly: I like video games. 4.0 is radically different than the gaming styles that have come before it, and I don't think that's a good thing or a bad thing. But I am looking forward to what's coming out next.
Last edited:
