|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:05AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Nov 15, 2007
|
- no Bards, Druids, or Monks in the core rulebook.
They are in a core rulebook called Players Handbook 2. They told us they were going to do this. This is a nitpick complaint. Your pet class wasn't in the first book, but other classes were.
- no multiclassing,
Multiclassing exists in 4E and they even got it right. You can dabble with a multiclass feat, or go all in with a hybrid. The "homogenization" makes that work like Swiss clockwork.
- a complete sea-change to these new, cheesy archetypes (striker, defender, leader, etc.)
The archetypes have no game effect. They give you a clue as to how the character will fit in with the party, what role they will play.
- the total homogenization of the class powers,
They are only as homogenous as *you* think they are. Having built a character for every class in the game, i can tell you their powers are different. In <4E fighters were painfully dull. Your action in EVERY round was "move up and swing". 4E made fighters interesting.
- the destruction of the alignment system,
They didn't destroy it. It's there. Look in the index or table of contents. They made changes *you* didn't like. The value of alignment begins and ends at the table... in your game. It matters for some games and doesn't in others. If you miss Chaotic Good, take a pencil and write Chaotic in front of Good on your sheet. Problem solved.
- the destruction of Forgotten Realms
The only comment i can make on this is "over dramatic much?".
i've listened to endless whining about 4E by people who have very little experience playing or running it. When you scratch below the surface of the topic you get to the issue. They don't like change. They dislike different. They'd rather play a familiar game that works like something the A-Team built in the dark.
This is Grumpy Old Man thinking. This is "All the music today sounds the same, gimme REAL music like $bandThatWasPopularBackInMyDay. The day that thought crosses your mind, you become OLD. Not just 36, but OLD.
Here are a few more complaints i've heard:
It's about pushing minis - ALL EDITIONS OF D&D WERE ABOUT PUSHING MINIS. Whether you pushed minis or not is decided at the table, not in the book. D&D is and has always been a fantasy combat simulator. But that's just the BOOKS. Role playing takes place at the table NOT IN THE BOOKS.
But but but you HAVE to use minis in 4E - That depends on the game you want to run. You can use your imagination about where who is just like you did before. The DM can shrug and say "Sure, you can do that" in 4E, just like your DM in High School did. In <4E there were rules about what you could and could not do in a turn. This is not unique to 4E so stop pretending it is.
It's all about combat - How much combat occurs is decided at the table, not in the books. You don't need books to RP. D&D was never designed to facilitate RP. i recommend that you look into Indie RPGs and the works of White Wolf. But even those games can become about combat if that's what the table wants.
They Renamed Spells - If you miss Tasha's Hideous Laughter grab a pen.
Magic Missle Doesn't Automatically Hit, they changed how spells work - Find the spell that does the effect you want and rename it. Hit the fora and ask someone to write a power that does what you want. i did this for Magic Missle. It automatically hit, but the spell had to overcome the Fort of the target to do harm, that way it isn't a minion wipe.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:10AM
#2
|
|
|
- a complete sea-change to these new, cheesy archetypes (striker, defender, leader, etc.)
The archetypes have no game effect. They give you a clue as to how the character will fit in with the party, what role they will play.
Actually it does have a game effect, which is a good thing. It gives a class a focus, and as D&D is a team sport, no one class should have it all (as opposed to previous editions, where the cleric/druid/wizard's role was :All, and non-casters was "peon".
(edited: hatespeech)
Moderated by
ORC_Booker
on Jan 19, 2012 - 10:25AM
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:15AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jan 12, 2012
|
The complaints may have been imaginary (up for debate), but the effects were all too real.
Can't just yell at people that they're wrong and should like your game, even if you think it's a well oiled machince and they're blind for not seeing it. Their perception of the game is every bit as important as the reality of the game, must appease it if you want their business.
I agree it's irritating to see the 'flaws' of 4th constantly expounded upon with mistaken or biased perception of the game, but they've already decided and the market has swung in their favor. Not much left to do about that, as unfortunate as it may be.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:16AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Dec 13, 2006
|
I don't see anything constructive coming out of this thread. The people that understand how 4e works already know that a lot of the complaints are imaginary and mostly the grumblings of people adverse to change. The people that grumble and think these complaints are legitimate will still grumble and complain and stuff their heads in the sand no matter how clearly or concisely you state your points on why these major complaints are not actually things wrong with 4e.
Want the tl;dr of my posts? Read the bold text; I put it there to highlight the main points for ease of skimming.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:24AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jan 18, 2012
|
This thread is pointess, at least in these forums. 4e is coming to an end. We already know WotC is going to be actively going after people who dislike 4e. Defense of 4e are better left to the 4e forums. These forums are supposed to be about ideas for 5e that can help WotC meet their stated goal of attracting all editions. The endless bickering about whether and what 4e does or what the misperceptions are or are not (and which have been going on since it launched) does not need to be re-hashed yet again here.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:30AM
#6
|
|
|
You make it sound like WotC is going after ONLY people who didn't like 4E.
Starting an account this month and coming on bashing the current edition is not the way to prove you're somehow above the edition wars. The OP is spot-on right. Those complaints were rather ridiculous and says nothing about you can or can't like or dislike anything you want, but calls to question what was given as reasoning, which was/is full-o-crap.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:32AM
#7
|
|
|
I like 4 ed a lot - and I like using minis. And yes all editions of D&D were suppose to use minis (in AD&D they even gave your movement rate in inches ie how many inches on the tabletop you could move your mini - it goes back to the miniature wargaming roots of the game). Mind you none of the people I played with had a lot of minis (they were expensive and we were poor). We improvised with graph paper mostly.
It would be nice if 4 ed combats ran more quickly. An hour for a combat encounter is fine for a major climactic battle but is a bit annoying every time you run into a bunch of scrubs. Overall I like the system but am open to change.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:35AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 18, 2012
|
You make it sound like WotC is going after ONLY people who didn't like 4E.
Never said anything of the sort.
And I haven't bashed the current edition, either.
And I've had an account for many years, but I haven't used it since late 2008 and can't seem to recover my password, so I have a new account. Before about 6 months into 4e it was a fairly active account.
I'm not sure how your misrepresentations of what I said, or my account status, are relevant to the design goals of 5e. Maybe you can explain. Or go troll another thread.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:35AM
#9
|
|
|
The complaints may have been imaginary (up for debate), but the effects were all too real.
Can't just yell at people that they're wrong and should like your game, even if you think it's a well oiled machince and they're blind for not seeing it. Their perception of the game is every bit as important as the reality of the game, must appease it if you want their business.
I agree it's irritating to see the 'flaws' of 4th constantly expounded upon with mistaken or biased perception of the game, but they've already decided and the market has swung in their favor. Not much left to do about that, as unfortunate as it may be.
The effects are as real as someone wants to make them real. I knew tons of people willing to tell me how bad 4E was without ever playing it, just because they didn't want to try it. And when some of them did try it, they didn't want to go back to 3.5.
It's a system. It works. People might not like it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.
And I've often found that if someone just doesn't want to do something, they will do everything they can and make up tons of BS to try and prove they are right and that the system doesn't work.
It's an emotional response, which even the most amazing logic and thought and facts will not over come, until the person is willing to put aside their emotional issues and be open minded.
Until then, they will work at trying to be right about the system being broken.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 19, 2012 - 8:36AM
#10
|
|
|
This thread is pointess, at least in these forums. 4e is coming to an end. We already know WotC is going to be actively going after people who dislike 4e. Defense of 4e are better left to the 4e forums. These forums are supposed to be about ideas for 5e that can help WotC meet their stated goal of attracting all editions. The endless bickering about whether and what 4e does or what the misperceptions are or are not (and which have been going on since it launched) does not need to be re-hashed yet again here.
I agree with this.
This topic is just a rage from a guy that figured out a few days later then the rest of us nerds that 4e is dying.
And I say, it was about time.
Starcraft Saga Edition: http://sc2se.wikispaces.com/
|
|
|
