There are few differences between AD&D and 4E. The main difference is that the average AD&D combat, played by an experienced group familiar with the rules, not using options and not omitting morale, etc, takes about 5 minutes. The average 4E combat takes about 45 minutes.
That's got to do with tons of things. Encounter design philosophy, different assumptions about what parts of the game are 'fun', all sorts of stuff. If you want to spend half an hour to an hour in combat, 2 to 4 times per session - play 4E. Want to spend 5 minutes, 15 times per session? Play AD&D.
Otherwise, they ain't that different.
I felt in AD&D your choices in combat were mostly meaningless I am told it may have been because my DMs sucked but after I became DM things like 1 combat round equals a whole minute of action? The choice density wasnt anything I or my players were interested in.... so I found myself hacking it to death I cant be sure what I would want from AD&D land but ultra-quick fights that feel like just rolling dice no thanks.
You may not like being to compared to MMORPG... well too bad because regardless of what Wikipedia or any othe source says. Its what 4E feels like to me and many others.
By "many others" you mean to propose that because other people share it, it's okay to have a belief, and that it somehow makes it correct. Well, that's nice, but no. If you're wrong, you're wrong, no matter how hard you and other people jam your heads into the dirt or stuff your fingers into your ears and scream whenever anybody corrects you.
Healing surges, at will powers, encounter powers, daily powers, all harken to what happens in a MMO...
Name one MMO that has healing surges? Oh, because they're actually designed for table top games. And what MMO has daily powers? Oh, right, none. So basically you are saying something that is patently false, because there isn't an MMO with those concepts. How about an MMO with an Immediate Interrupt action? Oh, because that's more or less IMPOSSIBLE to have in a video game. That is just one of the many, MANY reasons why 4th edition would make a poor video game.
Whether you lovers of 4e realize it or not this game was designed for that crowd.
If you tried harder, you might be able to sound more condencending. In all reality, the people that actually designed the game and not some fool screaming about previous editions actually said that they took inspiration from many, many sources - previous iterations of the game, other table top role playing games, video games, MMOs, board games, etc.
Where it feels like a CCG.
This idea is so ridiculous I don't even have a logical reply. No, 4e feels like a board game, no it feels like tetris, no I got it! It feels like washing a car! None of these have any bias, so you can scream about it all you want with absolutely no reality to your statement.
Those encounter cards that were given out and some being rare c'mon. I understand you love the game and you support it. I will not sit here and argue the finer points of game imbalace with you of earlier edition because they were there. I will however argue how to handle them and where the merits may have been in some of them. This no different than the fact when 4e 1st started 3 years ago... there have been many improvements. It still does not change what it is to or what it si to me.
You could just admit that you're upset 4th edition was different and not just another splatbook for a previous edition.
4e was/is a mash up of MMO's and CCG's. It good in its own right and if I ever feel the urge to use less imagination when I game I can always break out my 4E core rules and go to town.
This is patently false; MMOs are video games. I'm not sure what prevents you from using your imagination when playing a different version of D&D, but I assure you, there is actually nothing there that prevents it.
Want the tl;dr of my posts? Read the bold text; I put it there to highlight the main points for ease of skimming.
The reference to MMO or WoW is not meant literary in this context. It means when playing 4e, in your imagination you don't see realworld character, but a computer game character in a cartoon land.
For me healing surges and extended rests are the worst. After a fight, where my HP went negative, I am not "brand new" the next morning. In tom and jerry cartoon it is so. In a computer game also.
Also combat. In a computer game it is mostly about fighting. Soon you get used to it and bored with it. It becomes a grind. In real life, when facing a fight to the death, you think twice about it. In 4e usually not. When DM has drawn all the encounter map and pools of acid and lava, you just go forward and solve problems with weapon (powers).
Powers. What is power. That too is computer game concept. I swing from left to right and from up to down - 2 powers right? Does it really have to matter? In real life you don't a mighty blow power. You have a fighting skill.
Really? You couldn't have just started you own thread and talked all the negative crap you wanted to? Instead you had to come to mine and crap all over it?
Fine,I'm done.
The reference to MMO or WoW is not meant literary in this context. It means when playing 4e, in your imagination you don't see realworld character, but a computer game character in a cartoon land.
Stop,take a break,step back and look at that remark. You are telling other people what they see when they think about something. You know better than them what is going on in their own head? Come on guy! Even the worst of the worst must look at that and get a chuckle.Maybe,just maybe you realize you are a little too worked up and just flinging mess at people?
For me healing surges and extended rests are the worst. After a fight, where my HP went negative, I am not "brand new" the next morning. In tom and jerry cartoon it is so. In a computer game also
Well at least you wrote the "For Me" part. If that is actually how surges worked I would agree. Think of it this way. A ogre just hit your character with a called shot tot he head for 24 points of damage with a two handed sword. What you are still alive? How the HELL are you still alive? What a crappy game! Oh what? you mean that you have a ton more hp than that and so the blow must have just nicked your metal helm and not done any real damage to you? After the battle you rested for a second or ten and got your breath back,took off you helm and rubbed your bruised head and now are ready to march deeper in the ogre caves?
That is healing surges at work. Healing surges do not heal wounds,they prevent them. Now that is differant than other editions and you can argue not as good or better or whatever but its working off the exact same vague hit point system we always did.Just coming at it from a differant angle.
Also combat. In a computer game it is mostly about fighting
When is combat ever about not fighting? At least ya made me laugh.
Powers. What is power. That too is computer game concept. I swing from left to right and from up to down - 2 powers right? Does it really have to matter? In real life you don't a mighty blow power. You have a fighting skill.
You mean like Power Attack? Power strike? You mean like all those AD&D races that could do things 1 per day? Drow,Gnomes ect.. Tons of em.
In real life you don't a mighty blow power. You have a fighting skill.
Dude,in real life every damn character we ever made would not exist! If they did exist they would just die.
In real life you get to sit at your computer and type hate edition crap in a post asking people for no negative remarks about editions and just wanting people who like 4E to post about AD&D. In Real life life you get to ignore what other people want and spout your views on a subject regardless of the topic or desire of the other people talking.
Are you sure you want to base D&D Next on the real life?
I felt in AD&D your choices in combat were mostly meaningless I am told it may have been because my DMs sucked but after I became DM things like 1 combat round equals a whole minute of action? The choice density wasnt anything I or my players were interested in.... so I found myself hacking it to death I cant be sure what I would want from AD&D land but ultra-quick fights that feel like just rolling dice no thanks.
In the AD&D games I run, a Fighter can attack, attempt to disarm, shield bash, trip, push, charge, fight defensively, fight reckelessly, swing in from a chandelier, pick up a table and hurl it, raise an army, ride a dragon, invoke a power from a kick-$@! magic-sword, use another magic item, or do anything else he can think of, so long as it's within the bounds of the laws of the milieu.
I also give fighter's Cleave, which may be the best idea 3.x swiped from Dave Arneson.
In the AD&D games I run, a Fighter can attack, attempt to disarm, shield bash, trip, push, charge, fight defensively, fight reckelessly, swing in from a chandelier, pick up a table and hurl it, raise an army, ride a dragon, invoke a power from a kick-$@! magic-sword, use another magic item, or do anything else he can think of, so long as it's within the bounds of the laws of the milieu
Sure you do. I do as well but at the same time if you were honest you would admite that most of the time its "I swing at him and rolled a 13,is that a hit?"
In the AD&D games I run, a Fighter can attack, attempt to disarm, shield bash, trip, push, charge, fight defensively, fight reckelessly, swing in from a chandelier, pick up a table and hurl it, raise an army, ride a dragon, invoke a power from a kick-$@! magic-sword, use another magic item, or do anything else he can think of, so long as it's within the bounds of the laws of the milieu
Sure you do. I do as well but at the same time if you were honest you would admite that most of the time its "I swing at him and rolled a 13,is that a hit?"
Why wouldn't I be honest?
Of course, rolling "to hit" is the bread and butter of an AD&D fighter!
Frequency of other actions, depends upon the situation, the player, the DM and PC level. I also give players a printout, detailing combat options and modifiers. Incomplete, obviously. But, as far as older players go, I rarely meet one who plays the game like he did when he was 13. I don't DM like I did at 13, either.
Player skill is important in my games. There are incentives for players to be creative and think outside the box. Survival, for one.
Honestly, I can't think of a single system from AD&D I would like ported. Maybe some tighter balance on some of the skills and power options, but that being said, they started doing this late in 4E with much greater balance as just swapping out racial features. I liked the shorter combat times but I also remember why they were so short. Most monsters went down in one round, frequently before some characters could act. Our rogue with a bum d10 didn't act in five consecutive combats... the cleric and paladin just mopped the floor. I liked some of the optional rules for XP, such as rogues disarming traps, etc, but skill challenges are a more inclusive system and don't necessitate party members standing there not doing anything. The multiclassing was slipshod. IF human, it was a huge inconvience but could be a massive reward. IF not human, it was extremely powerful, especially if level limits were removed as we did in our games. I'd say the less reliance on a battle map, but I've been running a game for 24 levels, and due to it being an hour drive to where I run and no time to set up, we've gone this far with out one. We just do what we did in AD&D, and go, "How far away are they?" They brought back having monsters have different rules for creation in 4E, which was something I was very thankful for.
I think the only thing I would want is something that would primarily be railed against. I miss the more fleshed out worlds, and the bredth of character race options. But I also remember that's one reason why TSR went under, so again, I can see why they didn't go this path. To get that much depth, you have to produce alot of products for a very niche market. 3E tried to do this by tying in a small handful of character options, which angered my player to no end. 4E tried to completely divorce it, and I'm not sure that was successful. New DM's probably didn't have their head wrapped around the world enough to really feel enticed to run in it, even if I've tied in the new with the old in FR and it's worked out fairly well in games. So if you ask me for my opinion, these are them. Races? Yes I know too many people get frustrated with this many options, I don't blame them. It's a personal taste. Besides, nine times out of ten I'm still going to say, of these 135 races, I'm going to play... a human. I just like the options.
I'd rather them not listen and keep D&D going than kill off a fairly storied franchise.
You may not like being to compared to MMORPG... well too bad because regardless of what Wikipedia or any othe source says. Its what 4E feels like to me and many others. Healing surges, at will powers, encounter powers, daily powers, all harken to what happens in a MMO... Whether you lovers of 4e realize it or not this game was designed for that crowd.
Yeah, I really can't stand the absolute homogeny of at-will, encounter, daily, etc. It takes all the uniqueness away from choosing spells and whatnot. No pen-and-paper RPG should be that sterile. Leave that stuff to video and/or card games.
And then of course the 4E people will scream that the earlier editions of D&D were not balanced...
BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE ISSUE(!) Of course 5E needs to find ways to prevent the mechanical imbalances, but that that's not the same thing at all as homogenizing every little thing to the point of sheer monotony.
Just look at the way SAGA does it, if you need proof of what I'm saying. It is every bit as well-balanced as 4E, but without ANY of that homogenized, card-game type-stuff.
Leadership and class choice should have NOTHING to do with each other, EVER.
Conflating the two is simply horrendous game design.
In the AD&D games I run, a Fighter can attack, attempt to disarm, shield bash, trip, push, charge, fight defensively, fight reckelessly, swing in from a chandelier, pick up a table and hurl it, raise an army, ride a dragon, invoke a power from a kick-$@! magic-sword, use another magic item, or do anything else he can think of, so long as it's within the bounds of the laws of the milieu
Sure you do. I do as well but at the same time if you were honest you would admite that most of the time its "I swing at him and rolled a 13,is that a hit?"
Why wouldn't I be honest?
Of course, rolling "to hit" is the bread and butter of an AD&D fighter!
I think what he's trying to say is that you can do all of those things in 4E. Well, except maybe disarm, but I bet a GM would be willing to give you a shot at it with a -5 penalty. But at the end of the day, you're rolling a d20 and adding a modifier to determine how successful you were.
