compared to what came before 4th ed? the only time i look back is to see how far we've come, and that's a good thing.
A thousand times this.
I haven't really played any Essentials characters as a player. I've ran them as a DM, and I've found them to be actually good to use in that regard. (Before you crucify me for running Mary Sue DMPCs or whatever, it was because a player was missing.)
Gold is for the mistress, silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman, cunning at his trade." "Good!" said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all." -Kipling
Defenders: We ARE the wall!
I've replaced the previous Edition Warring line in my sig with this one, because honestly, everybody needs to work together to make the D&D they like without trampling on somebody else's D&D.
Miss d20 Modern? Take a look at Dias Ex Machina Game's UltraModern 4e!
I was in the pre-order crowd for 4E. I got the core set the day they were released, and dove in as deep as I could. I started converting old adventures and modules to 4E. I released several 3rd party products for 4E. I loved it. I was neck-deep in the edition wars. I fought off the 3.5 haters and nay-sayers. I DMd and played 4E as much as I could. All was going smashingly until around the time the 3rd PHB was released. I started to realize something...if I was spending so much time converting old adventures and creating alternate 3rd party materials for 4E that incorporated things from older editions, then why exactly was I playing 4E? Why was I trying to make it into something that it wasn't? Was I just wasting my time?
Eventually, I concluded that I was, indeed, wasting my time. While 4E captured my interest immediately and held it for some time, it eventually ebbed. I started growing tired of the rigid, strong-armed adherence to balance. I generally dislike the AEDU style. I dislike the need (not requirement, mind you) for cards and scores of minis. I began to feel that, while the various classes certainly played differently in many ways, they played the same in just as many ways. I know that in order to maintain that iron-like balance, there has to be a certain degree of sameness. For the people who require a perfectly balanced game in order to have fun, then 4E is a goldmine, and I hope for those peoples' sakes that 4E is around a very long time.
In the end, I decided that instead of trying to make 4E into something it is not, I would simply leave it alone. I have enough BECMI, 1E, and 2E material to last a few lifetimes. Instead of trying to make 4E more like those editions, I will simply play those editions. Since 4E emerged, I have had plenty of people happy to play the old editions. During the 3E (and especially the 3.5) years, I had a Hell of a time finding players interested in the old editions. Maybe it's a "what's old is new again" thing, or maybe it's curiosity of the older editions. I don't know, and honestly don't care what the reason is. All I know is that I'm happily DMing two 1E games and one 2E game every week, and it's just as much fun now as it was all those years ago. I don't really care for 4E that much anymore, but then I have no need to. As long as I still have a metric ton of old-E material and people who want to play them, then it's whatever. 4E exists outside my interest zone, not in spite of it. I don't mind that some people love every aspect of 4E and want it to be around forever. I don't mind that they dislike older editions. I care about my own interests, and the interests of my players.
4E is far from perfect, and wasn't helped by the decision to try to redesign and rebuild the foundation without disturbing the occupants of the house. Or to attempt to fix the failures of that silliness by redesigning and rebuilding the foundation a second time. (The new foundation design - either version - isn't bad, but a new foundation with a new design needs to come with a new house built on top of it; this would have the advantage that they wouldn't have to worry about breaking the existing house.)
But so far I've seen precisely one complaint about how 4E is worse than prior editions that I agree with. That's the alignment system - which can be tossed out, and optionally replaced with the earlier version of your choice, with no mechanical impact. I build a fair number of Chaotic Good characters, and a smattering of Lawful Neutral characters, in 4E.
Other than that, based on my experience from AD&D to 4E, there are: * cases where people are objecting to precisely why 4e is better, e.g. more balanced classes (granting that 4E may overdo something that prior editions underdid, or vice versa; if it's closer to the sweet spot, it's better) * cases where people are saying 4E is worse, but it's actually the same, e.g. ability to play without a map/grid and minis/tokens * cases where people are saying 4E is worse, but it's better, e.g. long lists of powers to sort through (try taking every spell block from every spell-casting class in PHB and PHB2, and putting them in one alphabetic list; the classes get lists of spell names by level) * cases where people are saying 4E is worse, but it's merely enough better organized to LOOK bad without being enough better organized to alleviate the problem, e.g. the long list of feats which get gathered into one poorly-organized place in the Character Builder and Online Compendium but were scattered among many books in prior editions
"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 the playing and the potential of 4E, but I am disappointed with the management of it by Hasbro and WOTC. I tried going back to pathfinder, but found all the 3.5 problems re-occuring. All I can do is wait and see what Hasbro and WOTC will do next. A little consitency, and less PR blunders would help.
I've played D&D from the Red Box across all editions till 4E. 3.x was a big leap forward from all the editions before, but 4E is by far above all of them when it comes to mechanics. Indeed it is the first edition that feels truly and properly designed.
As a DM it makes things very easy to prepare and setup, and above all it makes the game controllable on my side, in that I can provide meaningful and balanced challenges to the players, according to their resources.
As a player I enjoy trying the different 4E classes as almost all of them presents many options to explore, while being consistent with each other and genarally balanced. I particularly I like the introduction of roles, which highly rewards teamplay: the party is greater than the sum of its parts and every character is relevant.
I've started a 4E campaign in 2008 with the AEDU class structure and still think it to be the best solution so far. One of my player has tried recentrly an E-class (assassin) and got bored with it quickly, falling back to a Rogue Scoudrel instead. But I can see how E-classes can be useful to introduce inexperienced or very casual players to the game; all in all I guess I can live with them, since some are still articulated enough to be interesting.
Still there are a number of things that can be improved (feat system for instance) but I'm having a lot of fun with this edition.
4E runs better that it sound. With a little step back, D&D has always been a cooperative game, but 4E enforces it very well. 4E still run like a charm. Its entertaining, vivid its mechanic for Powers and sturcture has it all for everyone. Likes easier PC ? Got one. Prefer more complex one ? Got one. Everything. 4E is dynamic.
Last night i ran The Dymrak Dread on the VT, a D&D 1st edition adventure that i converted to 4E. It went great, was challenging, entertaining and fun.
Start Time: Thursday July 21st 00:01 AM EST (23:00 CST / 22:00 MST / 21:00 PST / 04:01 UTC) Duration: 06:00 (CST / MST / PST Time on July 3rd Date and not 4th) Campaign System: D&D 4th Edition Campaign World: Core Campaign Format: One Shot Adventure DM:Plaguescarred Players Info:5 players*. - Microphone required- Characters Info: 1st Level Legal PC. No Hybrid. Themes allowed. Background Skills or +2 only. Starting Gears: 100 gp to purchase mundane gear only.
*Please announce your presence and paste your Character Summary from the Character Builder and i'll invite you to the table. If you join and can't attend, please have the courtesy to advise me ASAP if possible.
Beware this is an D&D 1st Edition adventure updated to D&D 4th Edition.
Ever since you were children , you’ve heard the frightening tales of the DymrakForest . While the human foresters and elven clans who live there are gentle and peace-loving , there are also goblins , and even more terrible monsters! Many of these creatures live in the low , swampy heart of the forest , where humans and elves dare not go. These goblins are not just imaginary , or stories to scare naughty children. The fact that they are real and dangerous has been brought home by the raids in recent weeks that have struck human and elven communities alike. An entire village was destroyed! The leader of the goblin raiders is a war chieftain named Kosivikh , known widely as the “Dymrak Dread” because of the fear he strikes into the hearts of his enemies.
Clearly , it is time to act. Roderick , the Duke’s Lord Forester , has decided that the mayhem must come to an end. He has announced a bounty of 1 , 000 coins of gold to anyone who brings him Kosivikh’s head. The challenge is irresistible for adventurers like yourselves , eager to prove your heroism. Do you dare penetrate the fens and confront the Dymrak Dread ?
compared to what came before 4th ed? the only time i look back is to see how far we've come, and that's a good thing.
A thousand times this.
I haven't really played any Essentials characters as a player. I've ran them as a DM, and I've found them to be actually good to use in that regard. (Before you crucify me for running Mary Sue DMPCs or whatever, it was because a player was missing.)
Thirded.
Truthfully, having played from way back in the OD&D days there's no edition of D&D that has ever had the standard of quality level that 4e has. Every race is playable and interesting (at least to someone, well except maybe the Bladeling... lol). Every class WORKS, a few of them slightly less well than others, but after 30 years of playing versions of the game that literally had dead classes that were almost totally ineffective and others that were way overpowered, we have 30+ classes that can all show up at the table together and nobody needs to laugh. Finally all the 16,000 different types of die rolls are reduced to one simple mechanic and any character can actually do anything well.
The whole game was really thought through, the vast majority of all disfunctions of other editions that could clearly be removed were. That is what I appreciate. Some of the new ways of doing things can still be improved a lot, but compared to many of the giant glaring flaws of past editions the worst of it is better than most of what came before, and the rest is great.
I think we all get caught WAY too much up in miniscule nit-picking and empty gamecrafting debates and forget just how solid a game we're playing with. I've played a lot of RPGs and very very rarely do you find one that has equally good mechanics overall. Hopefully this will continue to be built on too. The new cosmology and such are also really well done and consciously intended to give maximum ease of use. If WotC does do an update frankly I don't hope for some giant upset of the game, just incremental things.
I liked 4E very, very much. In fact I never liked any other edition of D&D before.
I liked the power system, and the way classes were designed. The ability to design your character's way to fight was a big improvement.
I didn't like much the "power and feature encyclopedia" accept. I would have prefered a way for the player to build the powers he wanted himself - by spending points, with a class-specific table of costs, for instance, and a few "pregenerated" powers for the lazy. I must confess, though, that I always like reading through a power list - they give me ideas of situations, characters and encounters each time I do... I think the feats should have been kept more class or race specific - many feats, but short lists for each character.
I did not like that the game was built, and the power balanced, around the concept of "exploring dungeons" (dailies, rests, so many encounters a day) when I think it should have been thought for more generic adventures and possibilies (investigation, long outdoor exploration, and so on). At least, specific rules for non-dungeon adventures should have been provided, rather than letting the DM houserule for other kind of adventures...
I liked the combat rules. Easy to use, balanced, interesting, with many space for easy improvisation and wild tactics.
Rituals should have recieved more work. Also, I didn't like the insistance on magic items and the christmas tree effect the rules encourage.
I Liked the new D&D universe, cosmology, deities and planes.
I liked the way the "heroic feeling" I felt, when young, playing 1st edition, was recaptured, improved, and made playable, at last.
I don't like the Essential classes,and many other changes introduced. For me they are unnecessary changes in a wrong direction - I think that they should have thought longer and harder, and solved their problems with classes and their "complexity" in better ways.
I think PHB2 was the best of the PHB, wth classes more inspiring, more "consistant" and better designed, than what PHB1 provided - and less prisonner of traditions. (I always eflst that rangers and clerics had no real "concept" behind them other than the fact that they are traditional classes. I think the only "real" ranger is the MP2 version, for instance, while beast master, two weapon raider and archer should have been three different concepts, and not stuffed together in the same class, but that's just me.)
I liked many things in PHB3, but disliked the way psionics were implemented. I often think that they did never test the idea of psionic points, and just put it out at the last moment for the sake of change, or for the sake of leaving their imprint on the game. But I liked the rune system of the Runepriest, and the concept of Full Discipline - both proof, for me, that the power system was already an "open space" to explore. Also, I liked the concepts of the new classes. Too bad the psionic rules were such a bad idea.
And I liked the team work, too.
Summary : 4E was the best incarnation, for me, of D&d. I still take much pleasure in playing it, even if I had to houserule many things to make the game fit more my own tastes for adventures and stories. I am disapointed to see the game go back in the direction of the "old school" D&D and lose its focus. I don't spend money on the game anymore, as I've seen nothing in the last year that could be useful to me and the way I like to play.
I am not interested in a new edition, as I feel that it will be even more "old school" than Essential.
