-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
You don't like the new edition? Tell me about it!
- Thread starter Turanil
- Start date
Truth Seeker
Adventurer
To 4E, or not to 4E....
It is a sign of change...a time of change, but has it....change?
It is a sign of change...a time of change, but has it....change?
Magic Missiles require an attack roll.
No Grapple.
Fireball now does only 3d6.
Invisibility lasts only 1 round.
Inflicting damage on a miss.
Power Attack is only -2 attack, +2 damage.
A Wizard of equal level and strength has the same BAB as a Fighter.
No Monks.
There are no spells, magic is either a power or a ritual.
Everyone has powers.
No rolling for hit points, Wizards get 10hp at 1st level.
Turn Undead lasts only 1 round.
Dragonborn as a PC race.
Skills, no skill points or ranks.
DCs for skills depend on the level of the person attempting them rather than on what is attempted.
Dwarves have to take a feat to get only a +1 bonus to AC against giants.
Mobility now only grants a +2 to AC vs. AoO.
Nerfed magic items/spells/feats.
Overly reliant on gridmaps and minis.
These are just a few of the things. I've found myself agreeing with other things mentioned already and tried not to repeat them. It definitely feels video-gamey to me and devoid of roleplaying or like roleplaying was added as an afterthought so WotC could still call it a roleplaying game.
Its kind of like Transformers Gen 1 and Armada/Energon. Sure some of the names may be the same, but just because it has the name doesn't make it the real deal.
This edition of D&D is not D&D to me. There is no sense of adventure or accomplishment or wonder. There is no sense of skill or usefulness, you're just another PC (and you need the help of your friends to win a fight). Fighters are no longer the masters of combat--rogues, warlocks and rangers dominate that now. Clerics are just guys that can heal a little better than everyone else. Everyone else can heal without needing a cleric. Wizards are no longer the undisputed masters of magic and their spells suck more now than in any other edition.
No Grapple.
Fireball now does only 3d6.
Invisibility lasts only 1 round.
Inflicting damage on a miss.
Power Attack is only -2 attack, +2 damage.
A Wizard of equal level and strength has the same BAB as a Fighter.
No Monks.
There are no spells, magic is either a power or a ritual.
Everyone has powers.
No rolling for hit points, Wizards get 10hp at 1st level.
Turn Undead lasts only 1 round.
Dragonborn as a PC race.
Skills, no skill points or ranks.
DCs for skills depend on the level of the person attempting them rather than on what is attempted.
Dwarves have to take a feat to get only a +1 bonus to AC against giants.
Mobility now only grants a +2 to AC vs. AoO.
Nerfed magic items/spells/feats.
Overly reliant on gridmaps and minis.
These are just a few of the things. I've found myself agreeing with other things mentioned already and tried not to repeat them. It definitely feels video-gamey to me and devoid of roleplaying or like roleplaying was added as an afterthought so WotC could still call it a roleplaying game.
Its kind of like Transformers Gen 1 and Armada/Energon. Sure some of the names may be the same, but just because it has the name doesn't make it the real deal.
This edition of D&D is not D&D to me. There is no sense of adventure or accomplishment or wonder. There is no sense of skill or usefulness, you're just another PC (and you need the help of your friends to win a fight). Fighters are no longer the masters of combat--rogues, warlocks and rangers dominate that now. Clerics are just guys that can heal a little better than everyone else. Everyone else can heal without needing a cleric. Wizards are no longer the undisputed masters of magic and their spells suck more now than in any other edition.
Turanil
First Post
Woah... In reading your posts it sounds really worse than what I would have expected !
I also find funny when we get told that people don't like the new edition "because they fear change". What of a point ! When those who don't like 4e are at the same time people who play radically different other rpg, this argument just sounds totally ludicrous.
I also find funny when we get told that people don't like the new edition "because they fear change". What of a point ! When those who don't like 4e are at the same time people who play radically different other rpg, this argument just sounds totally ludicrous.
Last edited:
cwhs01
First Post
A list of things people dislike is interesting enough, but i'd very much like to hear some of the well reasoned and thougtout arguments as well. Some of the points on the lists seem to me to be mostly personal taste and bitterness.
ie. (i think i mostly quoted Hawken for this)
invisibility lasts one round... unless its sustained w. a minor action.
power attack is -2/+2(+3)... and?
damage on a miss... And? Maybe it isn't a total miss, a little like how a fireball spell did half damage on a save in 3e.
no monks... fair enough, but tell me WHY it's a problem.
no spells only powers and rituals... yes and no. wizards powers are called spells, just as a fighters powers are called exploits. And exactly why is this a problem?
Everyone has powers... why is this a problem? Should only spellcasters get to have these kinds of choices, as in previous dnd incarnations? why? would it be a better game?
Dwarves must use a feat to get +1 ac vs giants... actually its +1 against all creatures larger than the dwarf, not just giants. So what?
Wizards are no longer the undisputed masters of magic and their spells suck more now than in any other edition... why is this a bad thing? Why is getting wizards in line with the other classes bad?
etc.
And please, never ever use the "but its a sacred cow" argument. Unless you explain why keeping the particular sacred cow in is good.
ie. (i think i mostly quoted Hawken for this)
invisibility lasts one round... unless its sustained w. a minor action.
power attack is -2/+2(+3)... and?
damage on a miss... And? Maybe it isn't a total miss, a little like how a fireball spell did half damage on a save in 3e.
no monks... fair enough, but tell me WHY it's a problem.
no spells only powers and rituals... yes and no. wizards powers are called spells, just as a fighters powers are called exploits. And exactly why is this a problem?
Everyone has powers... why is this a problem? Should only spellcasters get to have these kinds of choices, as in previous dnd incarnations? why? would it be a better game?
Dwarves must use a feat to get +1 ac vs giants... actually its +1 against all creatures larger than the dwarf, not just giants. So what?
Wizards are no longer the undisputed masters of magic and their spells suck more now than in any other edition... why is this a bad thing? Why is getting wizards in line with the other classes bad?
etc.
And please, never ever use the "but its a sacred cow" argument. Unless you explain why keeping the particular sacred cow in is good.
Aus_Snow
First Post
I don't like the new edition. It fairly reeks of MMO 'flavour', rank garish cheesiness, gameplay designed compassionately to cater to those with ADD and the like, and pretty blatant cash syphoning besides.
Subscribe or perish!![:]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png "Devious :]")
Hey, you wanted emotional, right?
I couldn't quite be bothered to go the extra mile there. Hope it was still OK.
Subscribe or perish!
Hey, you wanted emotional, right?
I couldn't quite be bothered to go the extra mile there. Hope it was still OK.
Treebore
First Post
Aus_Snow said:I don't like the new edition. It fairly reeks of MMO 'flavour', rank garish cheesiness, gameplay designed compassionately to cater to those with ADD and the like, and pretty blatant cash syphoning besides.
Subscribe or perish!
Hey, you wanted emotional, right?
You know what I find funny? After this thread made me decide to give up on 4E I felt some how freed. Released. Don't ask me why, I don't know. All I can tell you is a certain degree of tension just left me, and now I feel relaxed.
I can only guess its because I was finally able to let go of "WOTC's D&D" and just be happy with "Treebore's D&D". It sure feels like thats the right answer.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
Well, if you see a list completely full of negatives, off course you will see a lot of negativity.Turanil said:
But would you agree with all the complaints?
I think the interesting thing is that a lot of the complaints do not affect someone like me, who likes the new edition. So maybe it's an indicator that 4E is simply not universally perfect or universally bad, but good for some, and bad for others. Okay, maybe not that interesting or surprising after all...
Similar Threads
