|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 8:19AM
#101
|
Date Joined:
Mar 18, 2009
|
4th edition just did something with the D&D franchise no one ever dared to do before. Really change it. The reason no one dared before is because people in the past where smart enough to know that you don't throw 30 years of tradition into the garbage without some serious lash back and thats exactly what 4th edition and Wizards of the Coast has. 5th edition design goals sound more like a public apology than a game design philosphy.
As someone who's played D&D since 2nd Edition, I find the idea that 4E "changed everything" to be baffling. The only real change I see between 4E and prior editions is a focus on balanced gameplay instead of modeling a world. It has (almost) all the old character classes, it uses all of the same dice, it uses the same fundamental mechanics of "roll a die, and hope it's a high number," it uses the same ability scores, it uses the same terms and names and monsters... The actual differences are small, and exactly the kind of changes I would expect an entirely new edition of the game to take, things like: changing the way magical implements work; a slightly more complex healing system; a tweak to 3.x's saving throws (now, static defenses).
I think that if you look at the different editions in terms of the same character being built with different sets of rules, you'll see that there are actually very few things your character(s) lose over time, and they gain a great deal more.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 8:26AM
#102
|
|
|
well it looks like 4es legacy will be that it is a one of a kind twist on dnd, never to be seen again, but quite fun, easy to run, and unique. as i suspected, 5e and 4e are completely different so you can play both and basically treat them like two different games
my only hope is that they leave the 4e tools up
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 8:34AM
#103
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
While 4e and Next are pretty different, a number of the core design principles and philosophies, even a few mechanics, have made their way into Next.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 8:40AM
#104
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
|
As much as I really enjoy 4E, I think it's legacy will be as the system that grew the rest of the hobby and industry while it personally struggled. Simply because 10s of thousands of disaffected gamers found themselves dumped out in the market experimenting with other games they would never have noticed, trying to find one that scratched the itch that 4E did not for them. Games like Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, newly popping up OSR games by the dozen. All now have gotten a foothold (or gained market share) in the industry where before they never would have at the same rate. While 4E was largely a debacle for WotC and many long terms fans of the brand, I think it was a major boon for the rest of the industry, probably resulting in a net gain for the hobby, which is ultimately good for everyone (except WotC).
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 8:59AM
#105
|
|
|
4th edition is the one that bring highlights to edition war. It's revolution pleased many and displeased just as much. It's radical, brute changing led to overreactions to both sides. Furthermore it changed roughtly how many people see the game and the interpretation they give to rules. Here comes the edition war.
4th edition is the one that overreacted to older problems, trying to solve them with a little too much changing. Some problems were solved and that's all for good for those who liked it. But for just as many other tied to fix non existing problems, beacouse in theire table some of the main issues that were pointed at 3,5 were not problems, or the way they fix them is even worse than the problem itself. Still because a too deep revolution were presented.
Balance is the other strong 4th edition related legacy. Balance is all for good most of the player say (I still prefer some umbalance). No matter what, evey new progression of dnd will have to deal with balance in a way it was never done before.
Is it a good form of balance where no one always outshine others, or is it way too much, where no matter what class you play, they all feel the same?
Yet, when I think about 4th edition I do not think about balance. I think about fanbase broken, edition war, rules many people like, fluff many people hate. I see 4th edition as the edition of division.
I think 4E was basically an over-reaction to 3E (which had many problems). Its legacy is it lead many of us to go back to 1e and 2e and rediscover how much we liked AD&D over 3E. It exposed a deep split in the D&D community over playstyle ad gaming philosophy. It established a new approach to D&D that pleased some but displeased others.
Based upon the the sales figures of both Pathfinder and 4E, I don't think we're going to see "many" gamers rushing back to AD&D any time soon. I already played the crap outta AD&D for YEARS, and then 2nd Ed, 3rd Ed, and d20, and I feel no real desire to run back to it again. Nor do any of my D&D players - most of whom are old enough to qualify as grognards, but who have embraced the balanced system and characters that 4E brought to D&D.
I'm in agreement with earlier posters. The legacy of 4E will be that it was a great game system, but a terrible D&D system, because it changed too much fluff content and canon. Had the designers found more ways to keep the D&D canon in 4E while maintaining the system's superb balance and cinemagraphic combats, it would have revolutionized the game. Honestly, some of the new canon I like - the Feywild and Shadowfell are amazing additions to the cosmology, for instance - but the older settings and the character classes needed to retain more of that "old school" D&D-ness or lose veteran gamers. Which it did.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
May 24, 2012 - 9:38AM
#106
|
|
|
4th edition is the one that bring highlights to edition war. It's revolution pleased many and displeased just as much. It's radical, brute changing led to overreactions to both sides. Furthermore it changed roughtly how many people see the game and the interpretation they give to rules. Here comes the edition war.
4th edition is the one that overreacted to older problems, trying to solve them with a little too much changing. Some problems were solved and that's all for good for those who liked it. But for just as many other tied to fix non existing problems, beacouse in theire table some of the main issues that were pointed at 3,5 were not problems, or the way they fix them is even worse than the problem itself. Still because a too deep revolution were presented.
Balance is the other strong 4th edition related legacy. Balance is all for good most of the player say (I still prefer some umbalance). No matter what, evey new progression of dnd will have to deal with balance in a way it was never done before.
Is it a good form of balance where no one always outshine others, or is it way too much, where no matter what class you play, they all feel the same?
Yet, when I think about 4th edition I do not think about balance. I think about fanbase broken, edition war, rules many people like, fluff many people hate. I see 4th edition as the edition of division.
I think 4E was basically an over-reaction to 3E (which had many problems). Its legacy is it lead many of us to go back to 1e and 2e and rediscover how much we liked AD&D over 3E. It exposed a deep split in the D&D community over playstyle ad gaming philosophy. It established a new approach to D&D that pleased some but displeased others.
Based upon the the sales figures of both Pathfinder and 4E, I don't think we're going to see "many" gamers rushing back to AD&D any time soon. I already played the crap outta AD&D for YEARS, and then 2nd Ed, 3rd Ed, and d20, and I feel no real desire to run back to it again. Nor do any of my D&D players - most of whom are old enough to qualify as grognards, but who have embraced the balanced system and characters that 4E brought to D&D.
I'm in agreement with earlier posters. The legacy of 4E will be that it was a great game system, but a terrible D&D system, because it changed too much fluff content and canon. Had the designers found more ways to keep the D&D canon in 4E while maintaining the system's superb balance and cinemagraphic combats, it would have revolutionized the game. Honestly, some of the new canon I like - the Feywild and Shadowfell are amazing additions to the cosmology, for instance - but the older settings and the character classes needed to retain more of that "old school" D&D-ness or lose veteran gamers. Which it did.
This is an excellent post.
|
|
|
