It's not that we underestimate 4e, we just came to the realization that we could do more and better with another system. 4e has lots of options for combat, even though there is too much of them and they seriously lack in quality, but is very under-whelming when it comes to Exploration and Social gameplay.
"But you can still do it, you are only limited by your imagination...!", well I could also do with it some spare changes and some house rules, would still wouldn't change the fact that the system I'm using to create deep, engaging, "real" stories (where life isn't just about whacking something for whatever reason) is rather poor.
But hey, go ahead since you guys are such good DMs, play your next campaign with just some coins, instead of with 4e, maybe then you will understand. People went in 4e expecting some emphasis on Exploration, Combat, and Social part, they got the Combat part for sure but the rest was as lacking and featureless as the coin system I was talking about.
And I want to point out that I was a 4e GM, I actually made 3.5 grognards try 4e, had some great games, BUT I quickly saw the glaring problems the edition had (hours long combats, no deep non-combat framwork or custumization, and a really bland power system).
@BeastSoulEyes you raise good points, and no matter the arguments to the contrary I think everyone realizes that this has been one of the biggest criticisms of 4e from day one. It is highly likely that the developers are going to move away from 4e in this respect. I think it is a given, in fact. So the defense of the 4e approach in this regard is moot - that approach is going to be gone. I expect 5e will be designed in part to address the concerns you raise.
I think that the crux of the problem here is this sentiment:
"I should have character options for interacting with the world outside of combat"
Combined with a feeling that 4e's powers have not provided the same. Though I admit to seeing very little of 4e personally, I have not seen a great opposition to this feeling. Instead, sides choose to talk cross purposes. one will say "I don't have powers that do out of combat things" and the other replies "Look at these skills!"
And spells.. oh by the way they are called rituals? Skills are more significant in part because rituals and powers dont overwhelm them (thats right just because there is a waterbreathing ritual doesnt mean knowing how to swim isnt useful under important circumstances). I also get the impression that skills are treated as broader more complex things If I want to perform for a crowd to convince them of something or some other plot worthy goal, my DM has me rolling insight and depending on what I want to accomplish with the performance maybe (diplomacy, bluff or wierdly intimidate) and possibly history (not necessarily by the performer). Its unlikely to be just roll against your dex with a bonus because of your background.(though that option is there)
Not sure but they seem presented as being used/useful in more situations than they were previously.
It's not that we underestimate 4e, we just came to the realization that we could do more and better with another system. 4e has lots of options for combat, even though there is too much of them and they seriously lack in quality, but is very under-whelming when it comes to Exploration and Social gameplay.
"But you can still do it, you are only limited by your imagination...!", well I could also do with it some spare changes and some house rules, would still wouldn't change the fact that the system I'm using to create deep, engaging, "real" stories (where life isn't just about whacking something for whatever reason) is rather poor.
I feel like this gets at an important facet of the editions rifts. Some players believe rules are only really needed for combat. Others don't. I am in the latter group. We've all seen the arguments for having social, exploration, etc rules, like
Combat can be roleplayed without dice or rules.
Just as much as my persons swordskill doesn't affect my fighter's ability to fight, my personal skill at persuasion shouldn't affect my diplomat's ability to diplomance.
D&D rules put a lot of focus on telling you how you can advance - become better at something. That can apply to anything, even becoming better at making chairs or singing.
Rules can add enjoyment. I like roll+adds mechanics. I like to sometimes succeed outrageously or fail horribly. I like those events to relate to my general likelihood of normal success or failure.
Rules can add consistency. Last week I had a 70% chance to hit and Orc. This week (having neither levelled or geared up) I still have a 70% chance. Last week I had a 20% chance to bluff the guard. This week?
If broad, catch-all rules are enough, why do you need more than one combat power? Just make those very broad in their application.
And so on. Trivial analysis tells you that you can apply rules to... well, pretty much to whatever you like. The payoff you will get from doing so varies. Perhaps the best argument that can be made against rules for social situations is that one might rather those pages were spent on more spells, combat tricks, or whatever; but with the vast amount of pages that will ultimately be published for a D&D edition that is kind of a weak argument. The core sets do their best work by providing for expansion upon the themes they have crystallised into their core rules frameworks.
People went in 4e expecting some emphasis on Exploration, Combat, and Social part, they got the Combat part for sure but the rest was as lacking and featureless as the coin system I was talking about.
Actually, I found it to be quite the other way around on the social and exploration part. I am currently reviving an older 4E campaign that was all about exploration, and we used the Skill Challenge mechanic quite nicely in that campaign.
From begin on the campaign features complex and diverse skill challenges as a medium for the exploration part. Together with the other game rules and actualy, you know, roleplaying, we came to incredibly awesome results.
I mean, come on, what exploration mechanics were present in older editions, pray tell? Name them, explain them and show me how you used them. Then we can continue that path of discussion. Far as I know there was nothing systemic / mechanical to aid you in the exploration, gameplay wise. What was there, with 3E, was a skill system. And that is also present in 4E.
Furthermore, social stuff.... what rules were present for social stuff in pre 4E, please? Except "I Win" spells that immediately obviated the need for social challenges? Again, you come to a skill and attribute roll system, something still present in 4E to boot.
So yeah... besides an awesome tactical combat engine, 4E also features for the first time a mechanic (SC's) the could be used to model more complex social interactions than "roll a single die". Sure, you could do the same in pre 4E, but as you argued "why bother if it's not given to you?" (paraphrased).
And yes, while I argue pro-SC, I would also like to point out that it took some time for WotC to catch up to the good modifications players made over the time. The SC mechanic in itself is quite awesome, it's applications as shown in earlier books is not so much. So there you go... something good to improve upon for 5E Wotc!
If you have questions about 4th Edition - don't hesitate to ask me via PMs.
Join the Community Monster Manual Group and help to collect a mass of monsters which will make your life as DM easier, and your life as Player pure hell!
I am a cartographer. You can find some of my maps in my profile, free for non-commercial use. Also, if you happen to like maps or make them yourselves, join into the Cartographers Group!
They are just really bland, offer no deep gaming experience ("Roll Insight, Roll Bluff, Roll Insight, Roll Bluff, oh you have a Bluff utility power?? Use it. Roll Insight,...). Good luck trying to make a character that is non-combat focused, deep (filling your skills attributes is not deep character customization, sorry), and that actually has a progression path that enable him to get better at it (instead of "oh +2 to Charisma -> better Bluff).
Now, I know from seeing you around these boards, that you prefer 3.5 or Pathfinder, right?
So, tell me, how is it a deeper gaming experience when you roll Bluff? How is your Sense Motive skill any less bland or more colorful than my Insight? In 3.5, a character gets better at skills over time. They do in 4e, as well. Both games even include a variety of spells and class features that are primarily intended for non-combat use.
You say "good luck" to me trying to make a deep, non-combat focused character, but I don't need luck to do it. I can make a Rogue, and get powers that let me run up walls and hide in shadows. The skills on my 4e Rogue will actually cover more possible activities, because of the condensed skill list.
But no, it's only deep gameplay when you roll Bluff or Hide pre-4e. In 4e, the same exact mechanic for determining such things is bland and empty.
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
Why are you guys abusing of strawmen and logical fallacies? This is not true that 4th edi. is all combat, it is highly rping.
You do not need load of rules for rping, ya know.
No, just try playing a Ravenloft campaign in 4e. Most would agree that 4e isn't the right system for it. In those games you might have 90% role playing and about 10% combat. Typically there is a huge portion of the scenario devoted to investigation and horror with a battle being the climax of the story.
Why are you guys abusing of strawmen and logical fallacies? This is not true that 4th edi. is all combat, it is highly rping.
You do not need load of rules for rping, ya know.
No, just try playing a Ravenloft campaign in 4e. Most would agree that 4e isn't the right system for it. In those games you might have 90% role playing and about 10% combat. Typically there is a huge portion of the scenario devoted to investigation and horror with a battle being the climax of the story.
That has nothing to do with 4E being a bad system, the Ravenloft thing.
Problem here is, 4E is a good game for the default Big Damn Hero trope. You are awesome from get-go. This clashes obviously with the more horror-like elements of Ravenloft and the general "crapsack world" feeling there.
I am the first to admit that 4E is not a good system for horror in it's default state. You can make it work, but 4E assumes a more heroic approach.
Now, pre 4E wasn't really all that good for horror games either, just a bit better because the earlier levels tend to be swingy and death can be common even with basic monsters. Playing Ravenloft would be more appropriate in a wholly different system IMO.
If you have questions about 4th Edition - don't hesitate to ask me via PMs.
Join the Community Monster Manual Group and help to collect a mass of monsters which will make your life as DM easier, and your life as Player pure hell!
I am a cartographer. You can find some of my maps in my profile, free for non-commercial use. Also, if you happen to like maps or make them yourselves, join into the Cartographers Group!
People went in 4e expecting some emphasis on Exploration, Combat, and Social part, they got the Combat part for sure but the rest was as lacking and featureless as the coin system I was talking about.
Actually, I found it to be quite the other way around on the social and exploration part. I am currently reviving an older 4E campaign that was all about exploration, and we used the Skill Challenge mechanic quite nicely in that campaign.
From begin on the campaign features complex and diverse skill challenges as a medium for the exploration part. Together with the other game rules and actualy, you know, roleplaying, we came to incredibly awesome results.
I mean, come on, what exploration mechanics were present in older editions, pray tell? Name them, explain them and show me how you used them. Then we can continue that path of discussion. Far as I know there was nothing systemic / mechanical to aid you in the exploration, gameplay wise. What was there, with 3E, was a skill system. And that is also present in 4E.
Furthermore, social stuff.... what rules were present for social stuff in pre 4E, please? Except "I Win" spells that immediately obviated the need for social challenges? Again, you come to a skill and attribute roll system, something still present in 4E to boot.
So yeah... besides an awesome tactical combat engine, 4E also features for the first time a mechanic (SC's) the could be used to model more complex social interactions than "roll a single die". Sure, you could do the same in pre 4E, but as you argued "why bother if it's not given to you?" (paraphrased).
And yes, while I argue pro-SC, I would also like to point out that it took some time for WotC to catch up to the good modifications players made over the time. The SC mechanic in itself is quite awesome, it's applications as shown in earlier books is not so much. So there you go... something good to improve upon for 5E Wotc!
Spells like Endure Elements, Detect Secret Doors, Light. for Exploration Sure I know that they were part of the problem in how casters became OP and needed, by nonetheless this is an exploration mechanism to make Exploration part of the game.
For the social aspect, the alignment system, you had plenty of situations where you had to work around this system when interacting with people, you had spells that worked around this system, you also had spells that played with the emotions of targets (Charm Person, yay). All of are more than lacking in 4e, with nothing worthwhile replacing them.
Before someone start accusing me of wanting to have casters do all the work, I will say that I am of the opinion that such tools and effects should be redistributed equally among casters and non-casters.
Skill Challenges are a failure, even 4e players know it. They were borked, got barely some support, and were not expande upon in any way. They were a good attempt to create a framework around skills, and give some structure to non-combat, but unfortunately did not get the attention they deserved, so yeahhhhh....
Actually, I found it to be quite the other way around on the social and exploration part. I am currently reviving an older 4E campaign that was all about exploration, and we used the Skill Challenge mechanic quite nicely in that campaign.
From begin on the campaign features complex and diverse skill challenges as a medium for the exploration part. Together with the other game rules and actualy, you know, roleplaying, we came to incredibly awesome results.
Quoting myself ftw
It's not that we underestimate 4e, we just came to the realization that we could do more and better with another system.
You could have done better with another system, FATE for example.
Spells like Endure Elements, Detect Secret Doors, Light. for Exploration Sure I know that they were part of the problem in how casters became OP and needed, by nonetheless this is an exploration mechanism to make Exploration part of the game.
Oh man! Endure Elements, Detect Secret Doors, and Light! I love those spells. I just opened up my PHB and there they were. Hey, wait, this is my 4e PHB!
Seriously, though, you should check out the PbP Haven. You might also like Real Adventures, IF you're cool.
Knights of W.T.F.- Silver Spur Winner
4enclave, a place where 4e fans can talk 4e in peace.
