D&D 4e Support, Love, and Criticism

59 posts / 0 new
Last post
Hello,with the announcement of 4e many people have gotten mad, and many have swithced to what they claim as more "stable versions". Examples, Pathfinder being the biggest one, and other RPG's entirely. What are your thoughts? Will you still support 4e in its final year or so? And have you loved 4e every step of the way? Now on a different note lets talk about 4e from the beginning to its oh so close end.

(Now before you read on, please know that my tone may seem rude, but really its just stating what I believe. That, and I'm tired of the ever growing haters. Play what you want to play)










With the release of 4e it got much hate, correct? Do any of you have a reason why? I think 4e is a perfectly fine system. Cut out powers, and add loads of munchkins and you got 3e all over. I don't see why so many people complained about 4e not being like previous editions. People also said its to MMOish, what is MMOish? Powers, roles, healing surges (Healing surges actually appeared in a RPG before 4e, though not called it. The RPG was Earthdawn)? Powers have always been there, not called powers, but still there (Examples include, called shots, spells, and prayers). And roles, oh man, roles. People said they are too restricting complaining that they didn't like getting labeled. I hate to burst your bubble but fighters always soaked damage and returned, wizards always stood back throwing the elements across the battlefield, rogues always sneaked around and done loads of damage, and clerics, clerics have always healed and kept the party together and alive. Do any of you? Maybe its just Grogs.

Now some where in the middle Essentials came out. Essentials were supposed to be more similar to older editions, yet still be 4e. Now that the Wizards cut (some) of the stuff people complained about like, some classes having powers (mainly martial characters), Loads of HP for monsters, and other tidbits. Wizards tried to reel in new players, and old, and yes I know selling books was required. I hate to say it but its hard to run a business when you can't make money off the things you create. So really why do people hate wizards when they try to make money? But anyways Essentials tried to fix what so many people said was wrong, and indeed it did fix some things. But apparently it wasn't enough. People continued to hate 4e without even trying it! Yes I have talked to multiple people that simply hate 4e because it new, and costs money. Actually most grogs I've ever talked to said they played 4e when it was released, and only a couple of times at that. I'm going to go ahead and say it: Core 4e wasn't that impressive! Core meaning MM1, DMG1, and PHB1.

Now we are in present time, and D&D NEXT has been announced. This cause many 4e players, yes our very own 4e players to turn their back on the game, and turn to older or other systems. Supporters of 4e are now Pathfinder players. Now don't get me wrong i respect all other game systems, and have played 1e, 2e, 3e, Basic, Pathfinder, and 4e. And they are all fun in their own way.

Well now that I've strayed from the main topic, I would like to return. Basically, if you forgot, I was asking if you will continue to love and support 4e even on it deathbed? I know, I, personally will still support 4e.

Come to 4ENCLAVE for a fan based 4th Edition Community.

 

Games I Play:

 

D&D 4e - D&D 3.0  - Pathfinder - AD&D 2e - Call of Cthulhu - Legend of the Five Rings - 13th Age - World of Darkness - PTU - D&D B/X

As I have since day 1, I'll buy the books that interest me and not buy the ones that don't.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
As I have since day 1, I'll buy the books that interest me and not buy the ones that don't.



This. I'm only going to support what I like. I won't blindly support 4e, as much as I like its design goals.


I think the problem with essentials is that it aliented a part of the current fan base (who thought it a 4.5/ simply didn't like the changes), and I dont think it did enough to actually promote itself to new players. It required someone to find the red box at a store, THEN buy other books. They should have just advertised on TV. Not to mention, while "simpler" it made picking which books to buy even more confusing, because now there was 2 cores, one of which the experienced 4e players stood buy, and another which was new (and thus seems less core) and not embraced by all experienced 4e players.

As for holdouts, I don't think essentials did, or could, change enough to please them without alienating more of the current base.

At the same time, the green flag for D&D Next started a couple of months after essentials (maybe the summer at the latest, as its when they mentioned the played all the editions to do their research). This may or may not have been a result of sales of Essentials. Essentials may merely have been the "book of nine swords" of 4e. The new design structure of essentials also lead to lazier class design since so much could be re-used ,and there was much less choice (not saying there isn't some gems in the last year or so), likely needin less dev time as they produced Next.   


Its quite likely that when they reshuffled their release schedual/cancelled many books, it was because D&D Next had been decided.


And i'll disagree with the OP and say the original 4e core was impressive. It gave me a love for this game like i'd never experienced under 3e. Though I will say PHB2 'era' was the highpoint of 4th edition.
Essentials may merely have been the "book of nine swords" of 4e.


I think it was just that. Kind of sad, since Bo9S classes were pretty revolutionary and options-expanding, while Essentials builds were restrictive and simplistic.

I'm sticking with 4e. If I want a game with powerful spellcasters and modularity through tons of ill-balanced feats and classes, I've still got my 3e collection.
4e D&D is not a "Tabletop MMO." It is not Massively Multiplayer, and is usually not played Online. Come up with better descriptions of your complaints, cuz this one means jack ****.
 4th ed has it charms and I had DDI for 3 years. On Sunday we are rolling up some 3.5 characters. Basically 4th ed slaughtered to many sacred cows and is was not the D&D I wanted. I do not mind powers in my D&D games but I do not want boring class after boring class designed around them. To many 4th ed books were like reading the 3.5 spell compendium.

Basically 3.5s probelm was that games tend to fall apart around level 9-12 or so. In 4th ed games fell apart because my PCs were bored and we never made it to the paragon tier. I couldn't find reliable 4th ed players either that would actually reliably turn up and play 4th ed.

 I was also a big Forgotten Realms fan and I cannot stand 4th ed Realms with a passion. Darksun and Eberron were decent enough updates. I also miss dead tree format Dragon and Dungeon.

 If I can have something resembling 3.5s modularity with 4th eds simplicity of DMing and I''ll consider it.
I'm going to be playing 4th edition for a good long time, because I enjoy the system and believe in getting ful milage out of what I buy.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]
I have played every edition since discovering the game in 1978. Each new edition gave me as much fun as the edition before it. Each new edition also made me less excited about playing the previous edition. I fell in love with each new edition through the previews -- from the first sneak peeks at GenCon (remember when it was actually at Lake Geneva?) to the website previews when those became possible, I was hooked. 4e was no exception tot his. The first previews had me sold. This was going to be great.

5e has proven to be an exception. Each preview (Gen Con) or sneak peek (Mearls' articles) or subtle probe (Cook's articles) have created anguish in me that the next edition is NOT going to be as fun as the one before it. Each hint of what is to come feels like a promise for the very things I gladly left behind.

5e announcements contain language that promises eternal youth (one game for all players of all editions) but the only thing I see it offering as evidence are the pimples, awkward interactions, and uncertainties that made youth nearly unbearable. It is the first edition announcement that has me thinking I will NOT be switching.

As for my 4e purchases, they will remain product-specific. I did not have any interest in getting the Book of Vile Darkness (and did not get it). I am devouring the Heroes of the Elemental Chaos. WHatever 4e content they release between now and the grave will be examined and purchased on a case-by-case basis.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
Core 4e was incredibly undertested and unsupported.  I didn't really start to take an interest in the supplement products until I purchased Hammerfast on a whim one day.  One of the best purchases I ever made and it's what made me fond of the 4e core setting.  

There were good ideas in 4e but they were poorly managed in the incubation phase, and the product didn't have much of a direction once it matured.   I like to bemoan essentials, but really what else could you do other than make a new mechanical style for gameplay classes?  We would have choked to death on supplement powers for the basic classes.

The real problem in 4e was Wizard's focus on vaporware.  Online tools that took years to appear, or not at all.  WotC gave up on supporting the development of the promised supplement books for things like the Feywild.  There were plenty of grand plans, but little commitment to fulfilling that vision once certain realities set in.  The Slaying Stone still doesn't have the maps that were supposed to be available online.  

All of that said, I do genuinely like parts of 4e, and presuming that 5e reverts back to most of the old cosmology trends I'll probably try to convert my favorite 4e materials into the new system.
I'll keep playing and supporting 4e until the next edition comes out, then I'll start playing and supporting that.

i like playing the current edition of the game because it's almost as much fun to see the game evolve and develop as it is to play it.
Since I have seen what a halfway-well-designed D&D rules system can be like, there is nothing that can make me go back to 3E.

4E is not perfect, though. The biggest problem with its original architecture is that there are too many sacred cows still wandering around: class imbalances in skills, non-combat options having to compete with combat options for character-building resources, spellcaster classes that can do anything (although, at least, now there's no individual spellcaster that can do everything, and they are no longer better and faster at everything than non-caster classes that specialize in it), PCs *needing* magical enhancement to keep up with at-level monsters... 

(Then they released Essentials, which is a fully-compatible add-on to 4E in spite of the fact that Essentials Martial classes break some underlying fundamental assumptions of 4E and vice versa... this is not fixable NOW, but those classes could have been written very slightly differently...)

So far, what I've seen the designers say about 5E is that it *will* resurrect the sacred cows 4E killed and *may* give us the option of pretending they are still dead. And I won't go back to 3E even if it's repackaged and relabeled as 5E. 
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
I like a lot about 4E.
I think it is a solid system, and with some tweaking, turned out to be my favorite edition of the game other than 1st Ed. (yeah, I'm an old-schooler)

However, many of those in my gaming group just could not get into it.
Citing how Magic Items work, how you "lose" powers as you level and the lack of fun skills like Blacksmithing, etc. as their main reasons for disliking it.
And so we play Pathfinder.

I'm hoping 5E/Next fixes some of the issues without reverting to 3/3.5, which is in my opinion, the worst era of D&D. (I probably disliked 2nd more, but played less 3E than any other incarnation, discounting Pathfinder)

However for me, what I find to be the problem with D&D has more to do with bad company decisions. Like the Character Builder revamp, which was just wretched all across the board and still is. (I haven't checked it in awhile, but I'll bet you still can't use your own pictures)  The way Essentials was released was also a big cluster-you-know-what. Little floppy brown books with names like "Heroes of the Misbegotten R&D Lands" and so forth.  Nothing about the books screamed "BUY ME!" or even "Pirate a pdf copy of me for free."  They were less than worthless, as they neither attracted new players or impressed many of the current players, serving only to alienate an already dwindling fanbase.
So if they start by not shooting themselves in the foot with bad decisions, I'll be happy. 
When 5e comes out i'll look at it, play it, and give it a try.  Then i'll decide weather to go back to 4e or not.


But so far, everything i've heard about 5e is pretty good.

guides
List of no-action attacks.
Dynamic vs Static Bonuses
Phalanx tactics and builds
Crivens! A Pictsies Guide Good
Power
s to intentionally miss with
Mr. Cellophane: How to be unnoticed
Way's to fire around corners
Crits: what their really worth
Retroactive bonus vs Static bonus.
Runepriest handbook & discussion thread
Holy Symbols to hang around your neck
Ways to Gain or Downgrade Actions
List of bonuses to saving throws
The Ghost with the Most (revenant handbook)
my builds
F-111 Interdictor Long (200+ squares) distance ally teleporter. With some warlord stuff. Broken in a plot way, not a power way.

Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.

Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.

King Fisher Optimized net user.  Moderate.

Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.

Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.

Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.

Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.

Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.

Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.

Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.

Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.

Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat.  One of THE most abusive character in 4e.

Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.

Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.

Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.

Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.

Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.

The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.

Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.

Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.

Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.

Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.

Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.

Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.

Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.

Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.

What are your thoughts? Will you still support 4e in its final year or so? And have you loved 4e every step of the way?

As a DM of a long standing party I will continue to support 4e until they finish the GDamn adventure or until I TPK them.  (perferably the former rather then the later, but I think if Orcus were to win the day it would be just as satisfying as if they had succeeded)

While I haven't loved everything that WotC has done with 4e I've been pretty tolerant with what I view as their mistakes, and so have my players.
With the release of 4e it got much hate, correct? Do any of you have a reason why?


The main reason as I understand it is that it isn't 3.5.  I'm not going to go through the millions of online arguments that I've spent countless hours reading, but from my own personal experience the major complaints that I've heard are:

1.  It's too combat focused (this I feel is not fully a fault of the system but of me as a DM as well, and the player who said this went on to play/run shadowrun)

2.  Magic items are a necessity (Valid as of early 4e, but with the inherrent bonus system, I feel this is no longer an issue but some people are stuck in their views, and previous games this player has gone through haven't gotten much past level 6.)

There are other arguments that i've heard personally, but these are the recurring ones.
Now some where in the middle Essentials came out. Essentials were supposed to be more similar to older editions, yet still be 4e...

Essentials...I didn't mind too much, it was more options for characters and yeah sure, as a DM my rulebook now looks like a 2nd year old child has had his way with a permanent marker but on the grand scheme of things, I didn't mind essentials. 

Though, I didn't particularily like that they changed Magic Missle to be auto hit.  If I had my way, Character Builder would let you chose between which version of Magic Missile you get to use, instead of forcing you one way or another, and I've been fine with my players doing so.  There was nothing broken (in my mind at least) about how Magic Missile worked and so they changed it simply to change it, which I feel is kinda stupid.  But I digress...

Bottom Line:

As a DM, i've loved 4e.  It's great for teaching people how to play RPG's like D&D.  As a player it initially didn't have enough options for me to want to play it.  It does now, and although I'm still upset by some of the design decisions (I WANT M0AR RUNEPRIEST!) I'm not going to be butthurt over it and I've spent far too much time and money (getting close to the 5 year mark and roughly $1000) to simply drop it to the wayside. 

I've signed up for the DNDNext playtest, but I'm not holding out for anything spectacular.
I'm going to be playing 4th edition for a good long time, because I enjoy the system and believe in getting ful milage out of what I buy.



Me too.

Most of the "problems" with 4e are based in the presentation, not the actual game.

If I want quick, fast and loose combat, I just do it. I don't need a long list of houserules, or some system, I just play fast and loose with distance and movement, judging things narratively. And combat takes half the time suddenly.

When we want detailed, tactical combat, we just play by the book.

I also love all three eras of 4e design. That is, PHB style, E style, and the new combination style. All three have options that I love playing. I love the PHB2 Bard and the Skald. I love both Assassins, even with the Optimization issues. Monks, the Elementalist Sorc, Rogues, Shamans, Avengers, Blackguards, Hexblades*, both Essentials Rangers (but not really the PHB one), Warlord are all really cool classes that are very fun to play.

And themes, I love how the implemented themes. I don't care that it's technically power creep. I really just don't. That small an amount of universal power creep just isn't a big deal, and I'm not sure I'm sold on the idea that power creep is negative, by default. I think it's neutral.

Just like "bloat". The idea that a ton of options is a bad thing is completely, unequivocally false, AFAIC.

*even though a single feat could make the warlock into a Hexblade, and I think the class should have been designed differently, with more of a "putting curses on a weapon, then hitting things with it" feel.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
Ok let me try puting this dislike of d&d4, for me as a player and dm.

1: The changes in alignment, made the posebileties of building a carracter up less fun and interesting.
2: Moving Forgoten Realms forwared, and puting in the plauge things. It isnt longer the world i like and trasure.
3: bye removing prestise classes, caracters that you have invested a long time on making, and trully start to feel a ownership to. The move to d&d4 made this caracters lose a bit of them selfs'
(i made a caracter, build it as a booring fighter, but tru the game expirience it ended up with warmaster PC, and become a protecter of his erea.) This bonuses-like batlecry-castle-armys and so on. made him a trasured figur.
I tryed to move him, but it wasnt the same.
4: taking away the euniqe thing a paladin is. Bye saying as long as you are lawfull. you can be a paladin, Make the tru batle for making a tru fighter for good, way less interesting.
The blackgards vs paladin was epic in the d&d`editions pre to 4.
5: Many learn to care and love d&d tru friends-or forgoten realms books. When you enter the world you here about  or read about, You whant to feel its a plase you know. and feel chalangest bye.
6: Finaly(in this round) my personal feeling, the times i have tested it, is that the game have become more a machine of play. and less what made D&d amasing. The fact that you made a euniqe caracter. that didnt need to get (this feats at that level/to be a tru caracter in his/here erea)And the way things moved forwared, it made all the books from earlier editions apsolite.
Yes i know that is naturly as WioC whant to sell there books, And i gladly understand that.
But when many of us build up large amounts of books in 2-3-3.5 that we easy can implement in the new edidion. We feel we can hold the game we love high.
With 4th that wasnt longer a posebilety. as many of the books just whent out of use.

And thats why many of us have changest to pathfinder, its so coomperative and give us abileties to develup our caracter-game and play group more.

I just feel that WioC forget that most of us still play. but just didnt invest in 4th. as the changes was to large, and the lack of understanding that the heritage from the past editions will allways be a importent part of every changes.
And the recognise feeling when you go to next level, is importent for a good development.
So every changes shoud be devided into 5 diferent even siced parts.

Wioc need of sale.
Moving the worlds forwared,
Making the game more playeble for new players
Insurten that the Core/old fallowers feel they are a part of the development in times of changes.
Taking into consideration the builders of the different worlds, and there belive on what to bring forwared.

if you add all this different parts into the new editions and value them about 20% for everyone. you will keep the d&d people have known.you can move forwared.Owners can sell new items.The developers of the worlds and the importent caracters there can insurten that there life work is protected, and finaly new people can find the way into the game as it is easier to understand and play.

Thats my 2 cents 
 I forgot to add that I am automatically correct because I have been here longer than all of you (ducks).
 I forgot to add that I am automatically correct because I have been here longer than all of you (ducks).

He's right, folks.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
Ok let me try puting this dislike of d&d4, for me as a player and dm.

1: The changes in alignment, made the posebileties of building a carracter up less fun and interesting.
2: Moving Forgoten Realms forwared, and puting in the plauge things. It isnt longer the world i like and trasure.
3: bye removing prestise classes, caracters that you have invested a long time on making, and trully start to feel a ownership to. The move to d&d4 made this caracters lose a bit of them selfs'
(i made a caracter, build it as a booring fighter, but tru the game expirience it ended up with warmaster PC, and become a protecter of his erea.) This bonuses-like batlecry-castle-armys and so on. made him a trasured figur.
I tryed to move him, but it wasnt the same.
4: taking away the euniqe thing a paladin is. Bye saying as long as you are lawfull. you can be a paladin, Make the tru batle for making a tru fighter for good, way less interesting.
The blackgards vs paladin was epic in the d&d`editions pre to 4.
5: Many learn to care and love d&d tru friends-or forgoten realms books. When you enter the world you here about  or read about, You whant to feel its a plase you know. and feel chalangest bye.
6: Finaly(in this round) my personal feeling, the times i have tested it, is that the game have become more a machine of play. and less what made D&d amasing. The fact that you made a euniqe caracter. that didnt need to get (this feats at that level/to be a tru caracter in his/here erea)And the way things moved forwared, it made all the books from earlier editions apsolite.

All I can say is that I'm sad to see your lack of imagination.

1: The 3E alignment system works better in 4E than it did in 3E. (I consider the 4E alignment system significantly inferior to a blank page; 3E's is pretty good if you ignore/remove its mechanical effects.)

2: So far nobody has pointed out a single reason why the 4E rules can't work in the 3E Forgotten Realms. Or the 2E Forgotten Realms. Or vice versa. Sure there'll be some work converting NPCs, but the same is true between 2E and 3E - and building NPCs is easier in 4E.

3: So you can't build the character you want in precisely the same way... that doesn't mean you can't build recognizably the same character, perhaps even closer to your concept. This of course works in both directions; and in both directions there may be some characters that can't recognizably convert - but not many in comparison to the number that can.

4: 3E has paladins of several different alignments; they just have different class names (such as blackguard). 4E gives them a single class name (and then brings back blackguard as a striker-paladin). This is not a profound change in their nature.

5: A more generalized repeat of #2. 

6: This one is entirely subjective. So I won't argue against your opinion; I'll just say that I like the much more flexible and open format of 4E in pretty much every area except multiclassing (where 4E is too expensive and restrictive, in contrast to 3E being too inexpensive and open, making them about equally bad). In particular, I note that playing "mother may I" with the DM slows combat, so it's nice that every 4e character, regardless of class (with the debatable exception of Essentials Martial-style classes), has an assortment of effective and worthwhile things it definitively CAN do in combat - without having to play "mother may I".

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
One could run a 4th ed realms game set in 1375 or whenever but FR was more or less a living world with continued support and advancement of a metaplot. That metaplot basically died in 2008 with the in game year of 1375. 4th ed realms is frozen in time so once agin it is not a living world as such with offical support and that is regardless of ones opinion of the Spell plague. As a Realms fan partd of 4th ed relams were ok such as the reestablishment of the Netherise empire which was hinted at in 3.5 ed.

 Regardless of game mechanics there was a clear line between 1s-3rd ed FR and the Great Wheel fluff. PLanescape and the fiend books in 3.5 and Savage Tides adventure path continued with the great wheel.

 4th ed demoloished both the Realms and FR which were basically the D&D setting/s in many peoples eyes. I'll leave other people to argue over if they even liked the old D&D continuity between ediitons but it was probably a stupid move in hindsight. I like the 4th ed cosmology but it would have been better off for a 4th ed campaign world much like 3.5's Eberron had their own cosmology differnet from the Great Wheel.

 We're running 3.5 for the 1st time in 3 years today. My cosmology has the astral sea, elemental chaos, abyss, and 9 hells for example. Could be fun seeing how it goes with around 2 hours prep time involved for a new campaign launch.
To me, 4E got as much right as it did wrong...much like any edition. Having played them all, I like 4E significantly more than 3E/3.5, and slightly less than 1E or 2E. Not that it really matters, anyway. I predicted to many in my games when Essentials came out that 4E would be swirling down the drain around mid 2012 and by GenCon 2013 we would be seeing/hearing about the new edition. Many scoffed and claimed with no reservations that 4E still had a good 3 or 4 years left in it. I might have been off by a couple of months, but still...close enough to earn myself an "I told you so" speech to my doubters.

As for the next edition...I'll give it a go and weigh it on its own merits. I'll go into it just like I went into 4E (and 3E, and 2E, and 1E, etc.) with no preconceived notions about how good or bad it is. After a few good runs, then I'll make the call as to whether or not to carry on with it or leave it behind. If it turns out to be good, then wonderful. If it turns out to be a stinker, however, I don't think 4E will be the edition I go back to.
Can't remember old account log-in. Using this one instead. Getting old sucks.
 I forgot to add that I am automatically correct because I have been here longer than all of you (ducks).

He's right, folks.



Is that how it works?

I like all editions, and when the new one comes out, I'll do the same thing I do with every edition and go back to my earlier versions for material as well as use the newest stuff. Bargle lives on! Warduke! Strongheart!

I'm one of the few people that looks beyond book covers to make my games fun. Editions, while self contained and useable that way, don't have to be. Why not use Klicks from Alternity in a Forgotten Realms game? Or Planescape as a setting in 4e? Or rather than Urban Arcana setting from d20 Modern, have the futuristic world invade the fantasy one.

One Shadowrun adventure had an arcology lockdown when the AI went beserk. Why not something similar to a fantasy city, but rather than a computer, it's a powerful lich....

Warehouse 13 is a fun show to watch, and is currently the basic idea for an Eberron game I'd like to run. Players will go out as a team to hunt down powerful artifacts that need to be stored before other nations get their hands on them.


But they blew the warehouse up lol.

Figured there would be one or two hiding the wood work that predate myself
I have been playing D&D since the original red box, around 76 or 77.   I have played other RP'ing games, but never have, never will played any fantasy ones that didn't have D&D on the cover.   Companies like Pathfinder will never get a dime out of me.

4E is the best version of the game I've played, and seeing as how I turn 50(!) this year, it'll be the last version I ever play.   I will continue to support it as long as WOTC makes products for it that I want.   Like Pathfinder, 5e/Next/Whatever will never see a dime of my money.  

Does anyone else find it fun that people complain about being invested in books and not wanting to buy a new set of books to play 4e and then in the next breath say they switched to Pathfinder - for which they needed to buy a new set of books?


Yeah, I'm looking at you humlind!  You're like four year old who says he doesn't like broccoli but has never even tried it.


TjD

One could run a 4th ed realms game set in 1375 or whenever but FR was more or less a living world with continued support and advancement of a metaplot. That metaplot basically died in 2008 with the in game year of 1375. 4th ed realms is frozen in time so once agin it is not a living world as such with offical support and that is regardless of ones opinion of the Spell plague. As a Realms fan partd of 4th ed relams were ok such as the reestablishment of the Netherise empire which was hinted at in 3.5 ed.

 Regardless of game mechanics there was a clear line between 1s-3rd ed FR and the Great Wheel fluff. PLanescape and the fiend books in 3.5 and Savage Tides adventure path continued with the great wheel.

 4th ed demoloished both the Realms and FR which were basically the D&D setting/s in many peoples eyes. I'll leave other people to argue over if they even liked the old D&D continuity between ediitons but it was probably a stupid move in hindsight. I like the 4th ed cosmology but it would have been better off for a 4th ed campaign world much like 3.5's Eberron had their own cosmology differnet from the Great Wheel.

 We're running 3.5 for the 1st time in 3 years today. My cosmology has the astral sea, elemental chaos, abyss, and 9 hells for example. Could be fun seeing how it goes with around 2 hours prep time involved for a new campaign launch.





The Realms metaplot continues in novels and DDI articles. Elminster is not just sitting around in Shadowdale anymore, etc. A timeline of the canonical Realms would not end at the point in time set in the FRCG.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome

 Kinda true but there is no in game tie in. ALot of the popel who rejected 4th ed realms are also going to reject 4th ed based realms novels and probably DDI.


 There has always been an overlap netween FR products and novels. Apart from the 4th ed die hards I don't think 4th ed relams has gone down very well based on what one reads online and IRL conversations. 4th ed slaughtered some sacred cows whiich alot of the hard core 4th ed players like to crow about. Pity about the alienation of D&D players and the editon war fallout that it lead to and basically the collapse of 4th ed as a viable product line. 4th ed is basically over regardless of ones opinion of it.

4th ed is basically over regardless of ones opinion of it.

I guess this leads me to ask what your definition of "over" is.

Are you linking "alienation of D&D players and the editon war fallout" to "the collapse of 4th ed as a viable product line"? I infer this from your statement above, but that does not mean that you are implying it.

Of course, 4th edition is over. WotC is making 5th edition. By definition, the release of the new edition means the end of the old edition. Madden 2011 ended when Madden 2012 was released, and Madden 2012 will be over when Madden 2013 is released. But I still play Madden 2011 (and 2010) with my friends just fine.

I have friends who play 1e AD&D still. 1e is far from over for them. And 4e is far from over for me. If 5e proves to be the game that Monte and Mearls' posts seem to be presenting, 4e will be for me what 1e is for a few of my friends. And if 5e somehow pulls off a complete reversal from what the articles are describing, I might like it enough to make it my game.


Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.

 Kinda true but there is no in game tie in. ALot of the popel who rejected 4th ed realms are also going to reject 4th ed based realms novels and probably DDI.


 There has always been an overlap netween FR products and novels. Apart from the 4th ed die hards I don't think 4th ed relams has gone down very well based on what one reads online and IRL conversations. 4th ed slaughtered some sacred cows whiich alot of the hard core 4th ed players like to crow about. Pity about the alienation of D&D players and the editon war fallout that it lead to and basically the collapse of 4th ed as a viable product line. 4th ed is basically over regardless of ones opinion of it.




But the 4e Realms aren't over. It's pretty clear from company statments that the timeline will continue without retcons nor reboots.

And while I respect each person's right to use or not use whatever they want, their refusal to use 4e continuity does not invalidate the existence of it, nor of the fact that the timeline continues.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
WoTC can do whatever they like with the realms but they lost thousands of dollars from me as I voted with my wallet over the Realms in particular. I had DDI for 3 years but bought very little 4th ed product. I don't think there will be to many 4th ed holdouts after a few years. I could be wrong but thats the gut feeling atm. 1st ed holdouts may exist but they are probably a tiny % compared to 3.5/4th ed/PF user base and they won't be buyng product in any event. Switching to 4th ed I would think WoTC lost more customers than they gained.
I personally love 4e. Its the easiest edition to DM freeform; however I dislike how married the system is to the battlegrid. Fighters/Wardens/other classes' marks, as well as other similar game mechanics, make minis and absolute positioning a necessity. I have successfully DMed 2nd and 3rd edition campaigns without minis/grid, but I don't think I could say the same for 4E.

All that said, I like the direction 4E went above all of the other editions. If anything -- I'd like 4E to merge slightly with the simplicity of 2E and BECM/Classic D&D. That'd be my ideal 5E -- but short of that, I'll probably stick with 4E.

Mr.Durriken...

Hmm, what have i not tryed?
4th? I have more then one time.

That i find 4 lacking in ereas i find importent, And therfor invest my money in stuff-books, that more suport what i find interesting in the game. Have nothing to do with me NOT investing time/money. or even imagination for d&d.

And age have nothing to do with what i say think or belive in.
I can trully understand that you and many other like 4th. and i am glad you do.
But for me it do not suport my way of development of caracter-gamestpirit or even fun.
I yoined this site. Because i trully whant to see what is happening with WOtC. and the future of the game.
That i try to say what make me not enyoing the 4th edidtion. And also in my bad way. Also make a atempht to but into words what many others just let rest, and in sted stick to earlier editions. or pathfinder. I atempht to give people here a feedback on what old players like me think.
And i have no problem with you and many other people disagreeing with me.
I do not changes my mind for that reason.

May your game be fun and prosper. May your incounters be hard and revording. May your Future be fuild with Game expirience. Regardless on what WotC 5th edition bring to the table, or not bring.
My only hope belive is, that a new edition will bring players from different editions more into the same world and knowledge understanding. In sted of more spliting and even less same existence as we have to day.
I offer you my GreatAxe any time. 
WoTC can do whatever they like with the realms but they lost thousands of dollars from me as I voted with my wallet over the Realms in particular. I had DDI for 3 years but bought very little 4th ed product. I don't think there will be to many 4th ed holdouts after a few years. I could be wrong but thats the gut feeling atm. 1st ed holdouts may exist but they are probably a tiny % compared to 3.5/4th ed/PF user base and they won't be buyng product in any event. Switching to 4th ed I would think WoTC lost more customers than they gained.



And many of us are seeing a frequency of play at game stores using FR that is just miles ahead of what we saw before 4e, so our collective anecdotal evidence suggests the opposite.

Either of us could easily be wrong, though. Right now, the word from Wizards is that no part of Realms canon will be erased. That suggests, to me, that 4e FR has a decent fan base.

That, and the huge amount of DDI support for FR in the 4e era.
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome

Great thread!

D&D has been a factor for my entire life, right from the original “Red Box” basic set and “Blue Box” expert set.  I mostly avoided AD&D proper, but pounced in with sword swinging in 2E.  I devoured as much 3E, and 3.5, as I could possibly get my hands on.  4E surprised me when it came out.  When 4E was released, though I still had great affection for the 3E stuff, I was willing to take a look at it, and even hedged my bets that I would like it by picking up the CE version of the PHB and DMG.


Something about 4E didn’t strike the right chord with me.  I could never really put my finger on it, and so I pretty much abandoned D&D altogether.

But I came back.  Hoo boy did I come back.  I'm sure I must have blown about $1,000 in the past 4 weeks alone on 4E stuff …absolutely ridiculous.  And I’m looking at actually starting up some games with my friends again.


I'm still a little put off by 3 things right now:

#1.  The forums are generally pretty toxic.  There's still a lot of "gamers" (my peeps) here who are great, but there are some really vocal, angry people on the boards (not just the WotC site, but other sites too).  So the overall mood is a little depressing, from a fan standpoint.  It actually makes me less excited about the game because there are fewer people that I can have a civilized discussion about it with.


#2.  WotC seems to be having some issues with their PR.  Some of this is blown out of proportion by the forum posters, but I'm not sure if they have really figured out the best way to deal with the forums aspect of the website effectively.  To be fair - it's a REALLY hard thing to do.


#3.  Art Direction – More of a "nuanced" thing.  I love the looks they gave the different races and classes - humans, tieflings, and female dwarves are particular great standouts.  My one complaint is that I'd personally like to see more artwork in the books that "tells a story" - 95% of the artwork is pure figure drawing, with no setting, scenery, background ... you get the idea.  I think they swung a little too far away from that sort of thing (but can understand why they did it.)  When they have those types of pictures - they've had some really great pieces!

My take on 4E?  I’m a big fan.  Mechanically, I love it.  As a player and DM, I think it's a great system, and addresses a lot of the "holes" I saw in my beloved prior editions.

5E?  Hey, I'll take a look at it.  Though it took me a few years to get over my shock of 4E, the brand hasn't let me down yet.  I'm sorry that some people had what seems to be such a bad experience with it.

Also - just in case it doesn't get said enough: to all the folks at WotC who built 4E, good job!  I like what you did with the place.  Also, here's my bucket of money (please don't tell my wife!)

I like you wizbert. You can stay. :D
Skeptical_Clown wrote:
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
104340961 wrote:
Pine trees didn't unanimously decide one day that leaves were gauche.
http://community.wizards.com/doctorbadwolf/blog/2012/01/10/how_we_can_help_make_dndnext_awesome
Some random thoughts

I've only played 3.5 and 4e, and I like 4e.

I think there were some significant problems (expertise and improved defenses feats come to mind), and some bugs which should have been ironed out beforehand.

I also liked the new martial classes in essentials.  At first I thought essentials was stupid, but I came around after trying out a Scout.  I think that's how it should have been done from the start for some of the classes, just to give the different classes a different feel.  The Psionic classes and Essentials proved that you can be balanced and give everyone cool stuff to do without a slavish adherence to AEDU or whatever mechanic you choose.  So, knowing that now, I think it would be nice in 5e to give each power source a different "feel" by having each power source do something different.

I'm a little ambivalent on the format of essentials (little softcover books vs. big hardcover books).  I like the big Player's Handbooks, but I also think a little book you can pass around the table easily is a good thing.

I like inherent bonuses.  I like to play characters who are badass because they're badass, not because they happen to own a badass sword.  My opinion is that magic items should be rare and coveted, and their property should be more valuable than their enhancement bonus.  A magic item that helps you do something cool is better than boring old +1 to hit.

I like how 4e skills work, it seems to make a lot of sense.  Although I would add a couple new skills in - "crafting" comes to mind, because using thievery to fix a wagon is just... dumb.

Skill challenges - I don't know if it's just me, but I've just never been able to do them right.

I think 5e should have more support for "off the grid" play than 4e.  I did one or two encounters "off the grid" in 4e, and it worked ok with players who were open to the idea, but it was still a little tricky.

I think 4e could have been just a bit more polished.  It's tricky because there's always some munchkin out there who is able to find some game-breaking combo that no one thought of, but I think there's a few things that shouldn't be allowed to exist (frostcheese, I'm looking in your direction), and some unclear wording in a few places.

I'd like less errata if possible, and some kind of system so I don't feel like my book is worthless because of errata (Martial Power's Dual Strike, I'm looking in your direction).  Perhaps each book should include a sleeve, and Wizards should make .pdfs of errata publicly available on their website that people can print and put in that sleeve, and in the book cross out the offending section and write "see errata 4.2" or something to that effect.  People who buy the dead-tree version of D&D should be able to get up to speed on errata just as easily as people who use mainly online tools like the character builder.

I'll probably stick with 4e as long as I can get a group together.  I'll try out 5e, but to be honest I'm not optimistic.  First off, I'm already about 90% satisfied with 4e, so I don't have a whole lot of incentive to change unless I find myself alone in the wilderness after everyone else has moved on. 

Secondly, I just have a bad feeling that this whole "modular" thing will turn 5e into a big ungainly mess, and instead of pleasing everyone and bringing everyone into 5e, Wizards will come up with something that no one is really happy with and that will have trouble winning people over from other editions.  Wizards is basically going to be trying to convice pastrami-lovers and egg salad-lovers to both switch over to a modular sandwich with pastrami and egg salad modules when pastrami and egg salad sandwiches are still on the menu.  And lets face it: the modules probably won't have as much pastrami or egg salad as the originals because the efforts of the developers are going to be split between pastrami and egg salad.  So, why would a pastrami-lover like myself order a modular sandwich with pastrami when I can order a pastrami sandwich which is better?

I'll also see if I can score some old 4e books on the cheap when people are making the switch - mostly campaign settings, but I'd be interested in anything that completes my "collection" for the right price.

All in all, as much as I have a feeling that it may go down in history as the red-headed bastard child of D&D, I like 4e.  I think it was a big step forward from 5e, and Essentials was also a great addition.  I was about 80% satisfied with 4e when it first came out, and I'm about 90% satisfied with 4e right now, which is a lot more than I was for 3.5.  I'd much rather see 5e be a system that builds on 4e, starts from the beginning with everything we've learned over the past few years of collective experience with 4e, and fixes that other 20% right from the start than be a system that tries to be everything to everyone.
DM advice: 1. Do a Session Zero. 2. Start With Action. 3. Always say "Yes" to player ideas. 4. Don't build railroads. 5. Make success, failure, and middling rolls interesting. Player advice: 1. Don't be a dick. 2. Build off each other, don't block each other. 3. You're supposed to be a badass. Act like it. Take risks. My poorly updated blog: http://engineeredfun.wordpress.com/
I'm originally a 2e/WoD player prior to 4e, and I've dabbled in 3/3.5/PF a few times. 

Over all, 4e is just the best system. It has a great middle ground.  The things that need to be more formal (combat) are dealt with very well while those that are more nuanced (Skills, interactions) are more liberated. This is how I prefer things.

I think AEDU is a great system if for no reason other than being easy to understand, read, and format.  Compare a 4e to a 3e book, and you have next to no clue what is formal and what is fluff. 4e's distinction is one of the strengths of it's design.  

Character creation is mechanically great, and the scaling attacks and defenses help keep that Skinner Box mentality of increasing in strength more active from level to level. 

I think essentials added some great ideas with poor execution.  Subclasses work best when presented as a set of options. This-replaces-that type formatting. Keeps them balanced.   Similarly, there's no reason that an essentials class should have to pay a feat tax to get powers from their original class.  The recurring powers would have been so much better with a caveat that you can take them repeatedly, or take other powers as long as you always have 1 of that recurring power. 

Were I to change anything about 4e it would be to make multi-classing far more accessible on general principle.  While we achieved a plethora of great classes, the multiclass ideal is one that is core and classic to D&D, and it just doesn't work in 4e.  I keep feeling that the better solution would be a multiclass slot, much like the Theme slot has become. Something independent of your feats and other powers.
Also, remove opportunity attacks from everyone but defender role classes. It would increase their role identity while also helping clear up a lot of overcomplicating of actions by every player on off turns. 

The one other change/complaint I have in 4e is work left undone. There's a great thread over in the Future Releases forum about things that have either not been fixed or were mentioned that never arrived.  Leaving the Seeker, Binder and Bladesinger in their current abysmal state is a very sad fate for classes that could be fixed with a little errata and a new feature or additional powers. 

However well 5e looks at launch, I know I will still be using 4e for quite some time.
I have only played 3.5 and 4e as well and I must say I liked 4e better. It is far more balanced and the cleric class is WAY better than in the 3.5 edition (in which I mostly played a wizard or similar arcane class and rarely a cleric). At least in 4e I was not standing around uselessly when I run out of healing or spells. And I can attack enemies while healing/buff at the same time which is great. I play magic users only and I must say that 4e definately made the cleric better. 

My only complaint is the huge array of spells that no longer exists, but the rituals do compensate for it.
I find 4E too confusing compared to 2nd edition. I grew up 20 years ago playing 2nd edition and it just seems to come much more natural to me and feels familiar. 4E seems like a whole new game to me. I did THACO so many times and using table savings throws, that the d20 DC check method seems so odd to me. When I am playing 4th edition I still freeze when I can't find THACO on my character sheet then I have to be reminded from other players what I use other than THACO.  I rolled for THACO thousands of times growing up as a kid, it is so ingrained into my brain it is hard to unlearn !


I am still trying to get use to healing surges and powers that recharge. Most of the time I completely forget about them because that is not the way 2nd edition was played. 

Although I never played 1st edition as a kid, I love this edition the best out of all the editions. I have 1st edition in adobe acrobat on my hard disk and I love playing this edition the best.   

On the plus side though I enjoy the way 4E handles non-combat skill better than 2nd edition did.  
I find 4E too confusing compared to 2nd edition. I grew up 20 years ago playing 2nd edition and it just seems to come much more natural to me and feels familiar. 4E seems like a whole new game to me. I did THACO so many times and using table savings throws, that the d20 DC check method seems so odd to me. When I am playing 4th edition I still freeze when I can't find THACO on my character sheet then I have to be reminded from other players what I use other than THACO.  I rolled for THACO thousands of times growing up as a kid, it is so ingrained into my brain it is hard to unlearn !


I am still trying to get use to healing surges and powers that recharge. Most of the time I completely forget about them because that is not the way 2nd edition was played. 

Although I never played 1st edition as a kid, I love this edition the best out of all the editions. I have 1st edition in adobe acrobat on my hard disk and I love playing this edition the best.   

On the plus side though I enjoy the way 4E handles non-combat skill better than 2nd edition did.  



Well of course if you have played one system for 10-20+ years, a new one is going to feel odd.  You've trained yourself to think of the entire experience only one way.  It would be like me having only played Super Mario Bros on the Nintendo from 1985 to 2005, and then thinking about playing the Wii.  Or even a different game on the NES.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]
I find 4E too confusing compared to 2nd edition. I grew up 20 years ago playing 2nd edition and it just seems to come much more natural to me and feels familiar. 4E seems like a whole new game to me. I did THACO so many times and using table savings throws, that the d20 DC check method seems so odd to me. When I am playing 4th edition I still freeze when I can't find THACO on my character sheet then I have to be reminded from other players what I use other than THACO.  I rolled for THACO thousands of times growing up as a kid, it is so ingrained into my brain it is hard to unlearn !


I am still trying to get use to healing surges and powers that recharge. Most of the time I completely forget about them because that is not the way 2nd edition was played. 

Although I never played 1st edition as a kid, I love this edition the best out of all the editions. I have 1st edition in adobe acrobat on my hard disk and I love playing this edition the best.   

On the plus side though I enjoy the way 4E handles non-combat skill better than 2nd edition did.  



Well of course if you have played one system for 10-20+ years, a new one is going to feel odd.  You've trained yourself to think of the entire experience only one way.  It would be like me having only played Super Mario Bros on the Nintendo from 1985 to 2005, and then thinking about playing the Wii.  Or even a different game on the NES.



Exactly and that is understandable.
I find 4E too confusing compared to 2nd edition. I grew up 20 years ago playing 2nd edition and it just seems to come much more natural to me and feels familiar. 4E seems like a whole new game to me. I did THACO so many times and using table savings throws, that the d20 DC check method seems so odd to me. When I am playing 4th edition I still freeze when I can't find THACO on my character sheet then I have to be reminded from other players what I use other than THACO.  I rolled for THACO thousands of times growing up as a kid, it is so ingrained into my brain it is hard to unlearn !


I am still trying to get use to healing surges and powers that recharge. Most of the time I completely forget about them because that is not the way 2nd edition was played. 

Although I never played 1st edition as a kid, I love this edition the best out of all the editions. I have 1st edition in adobe acrobat on my hard disk and I love playing this edition the best.   

On the plus side though I enjoy the way 4E handles non-combat skill better than 2nd edition did.  



Well of course if you have played one system for 10-20+ years, a new one is going to feel odd.  You've trained yourself to think of the entire experience only one way.  It would be like me having only played Super Mario Bros on the Nintendo from 1985 to 2005, and then thinking about playing the Wii.  Or even a different game on the NES.



Exactly and that is understandable.



If I had given the impression that it was not understandable, I apologize. ;)
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody." --Bill Cosby (1937- ) Vanador: OK. You ripped a gateway to Hell, killed half the town, and raised the dead as feral zombies. We're going to kill you. But it can go two ways. We want you to run as fast as you possibly can toward the south of the town to draw the Zombies to you, and right before they catch you, I'll put an arrow through your head to end it instantly. If you don't agree to do this, we'll tie you this building and let the Zombies rip you apart slowly. Dimitry: God I love being Neutral. 4th edition is dead, long live 4th edition. Salla: opinionated, but commonly right.
fun quotes
58419928 wrote:
You have to do the work first, and show you can do the work, before someone is going to pay you for it.
69216168 wrote:
If you can't understand how someone yelling at another person would make them fight harder and longer, then you need to look at the forums a bit closer.
quote author=56832398 post=519321747]Considering DnD is a game wouldn't all styles be gamist?[/quote]