|
Stuart Robertson
Canada
Guelph
Ontario
-
Last weekend we ran a session of 4e Dungeons & Dragons, which was my first chance to play the game. I’d listened to the podcast, read a lot of previews and seen many people’s reviews, so I wasn’t going into the game unprepared. I knew generally what to expect, and had even taken the time to make some custom 4e power cards for my character.
While a lot of people seem to have taken either an over-zealous or highly antagonistic stance on Wizards of the Coast’s newest edition of the game, my impression after giving it a shot is mixed. There were a lot of things that I enjoyed about the game, but there were also a number of things I think could have been improved. Ultimately I think it’s a good game and worth taking the time to improve – rather than dismiss outright.
I particularly like 4e’s potential for me to do use my design skills to make things like terrain, maps, cards, buildings, etc. I also liked the tactical challenge of moving the minis to get around obstacles, make use of cover, and flank enemies. I liked that the enemies had a variety of attack styles and effects.
I definitely like Basic D&D, but have always felt that classic Dungeons & Dragons falls apart a bit at higher levels. Having things remain more balanced across a greater number of levels in 4e ultimately seems like a good choice.
Our group felt that combat runs a little too long. We also felt that spending so much time with the battlemat and minis took us away from the “radio theatre” style of the rest of the non-combat portions of the game. We also noted that in Classic D&D people were more inclined to make choices based on what their character would do in that situation rather than the best tactical decision or picking a specific power. (eg. I’m thinking of Rob’s awesome idea to shoot at the Lantern with his bow).
More specific elements of 4e I had concerns with include all the marking opponents (Divine Challenge, Hunter’s Quarry, Hexing) which adds an extra layer of complexity, and clutters up the map. I think a lot of this could be rolled into the regular attacks / powers. I think these elements were likely added to the system are a way to encourage characters to engage with close opponents instead of ones in the rear ranks (aka trying to model an Aggro system like in an MMO) and there are simpler ways to do that.
I found the terminology “bloodied” works against imagining what this represents in the fiction of the game world. If characters can quickly regain full hit points after a battle (without any magical help) then they’re not “bloodied” in the way I think of the term. Same for “Healing Surge” – that suggests having been injured and rapidly recovering. I think terms like winded, tired, dazzed, staggered, wearied etc. are more indicative of what this represents happening to the character in the game. “Second Wind” is a good term though. I think they should have went with a tired + resting metaphor over a wounded + healing one.
Finally (for today) I thought that everyone seemed to be adding large amounts to all their d20 rolls. I’d rather use lower bonuses and have the same math reflected in lower armour class values. Eg. Instead of d20+7 Vs. AC 17 I’d rather have d20+2 Vs. AC 12. Having looked at the number for the higher levels this seems to become more of a problem as the game progresses.
Overall my first game with 4e was fun, and I’m looking forward to our next game night. I’m continuing to think about the parts of 4e that work for me, and the parts from earlier editions that I like more. This may evolve in a hybrid game that I’ll want to run.
A recording of this game session is available if you'd like to hear an actual game in progress.
-
Chris Bryer
United States
Los Angeles
California
-
I just felt like 4e was more of a miniature wargming experience than roleplaying. The tactical nature of combat and the time it can take to play out left me feeling blah about this edition.
-
Jason Cookingham
United States
Poughkeepsie
New York
-
Rondor39 wrote: I just felt like 4e was more of a miniature wargming experience than roleplaying.
I have been playing d&d with miniatures since 2e-- and they have never gotten in the way of roleplaying.
I would say 4e has done the best job out of all of the editions of getting the rules out of the way of roleplaying.
Quote: the time it can take to play out
This can be a problem. Now that everyone has lots of options, it opens up the game to AP.
-
Michael Lavoie
United States
Nashua
New Hampshire
-
I've been playing/DMing D&D since 1979. Our group has been changing to each new edition as it has come out, but we didn't switch to 4E. That was due to me, as the primary DM for the group, being less than impressed with the new edition after reading through the PHB and DMG. One of the other players tried 4th Edition at a con and offered to be the DM so the rest of us could give the game a try.
We've played it for three sessions so far. I can now understand a bit better what the designers had in mind. It's certainly an interesting game, with many options available for combat situations. However, I remain unimpressed with it. I no longer dismiss it out of hand, but I doubt that I'll be advocating that we switch to it permanently.
Part of the problem for me is WOTC's decision to relegate important character classes and races to supplimental books. I don't feel like I should have to purchase a new book just to have Druids and Gnomes. It's blatantly transparent milking of the cash cow, and I refuse to play along.
-
Jeff Vawter
United States
Walled Lake
Michigan
-
cookinjr wrote: I have been playing d&d with miniatures since 2e-- and they have never gotten in the way of roleplaying.
I would say 4e has done the best job out of all of the editions of getting the rules out of the way of roleplaying.
Using minis to represent combat placement is one thing, but when strategic placement and movement of models hinders game play that's where I draw the line. How many times in 2e did game play grind to a halt due to a player trying to align their "whirlwind" attack, and make sure no model can get in a flank attack?
Simpler is better.
-
Jeff Vawter
United States
Walled Lake
Michigan
-
MichaelLavoie wrote: I've been playing/DMing D&D since 1979. Our group has been changing to each new edition as it has come out, but we didn't switch to 4E. That was due to me, as the primary DM for the group, being less than impressed with the new edition after reading through the PHB and DMG. One of the other players tried 4th Edition at a con and offered to be the DM so the rest of us could give the game a try.
We've played it for three sessions so far. I can now understand a bit better what the designers had in mind. It's certainly an interesting game, with many options available for combat situations. However, I remain unimpressed with it. I no longer dismiss it out of hand, but I doubt that I'll be advocating that we switch to it permanently.
Part of the problem for me is WOTC's decision to relegate important character classes and races to supplimental books. I don't feel like I should have to purchase a new book just to have Druids and Gnomes. It's blatantly transparent milking of the cash cow, and I refuse to play along.
I agree. WOTC has taken a "MTG" approach to marketing D&D. Give the players a "base set", and make all the cool classes and races "expansions".
-
Jason Cookingham
United States
Poughkeepsie
New York
-
PerfectStorm wrote: How many times in 2e did game play grind to a halt due to a player trying to align their "whirlwind" attack, and make sure no model can get in a flank attack?
Never, but I haven't had the game grind to a halt in 4e over that either.
PerfectStorm wrote: Simpler is better.
Err.. yeah, no.
You may like it better, but I prefer melee classes a lot more now.
They are no longer simple, but they are also no longer boring for me after tenth level.
And to the general tone this thread is taking (and sadly most rpg threads have to take...):
It is too bad the game can't be all things to all people, but trying to cast stones at WotC for trying to make money is silly.
-
Chris Bryer
United States
Los Angeles
California
-
We are not throwing stones as much as we are giving our fair and informed opinions.
-
Scott Alden
United States
Dallas
Texas
Aldie's Full of Love!
-
Combat gets slower and slower as you progress. I love the game, but I feel the high level combats are just too long. Next time I do a high level I am going try a D&D hack I read - reduce enemy HP to 75% and increase their damage by half their level.
-
Drake Coker
United States
San Diego
California
This is my tank for Combat Commander
-
My early impressions are much like the OP's. A good game, but it seems overly fiddly/complex for the benefits.
-
Mike Welker
United States
Steubenville
-
The 4e IMO is the best iteration for balance at all levels, for wide variety for choice, for ease if implementation by the DM, and for capturing a "flavor" of action, heroics, swords & sorcery, in a manner that is flexible and challenging.
-
Merric Blackman
Australia
Waubra
Victoria
Ramping up my reviewing.
Happily playing games for many, many years.
-
Aldie wrote: Combat gets slower and slower as you progress. I love the game, but I feel the high level combats are just too long. Next time I do a high level I am going try a D&D hack I read - reduce enemy HP to 75% and increase their damage by half their level.
Aldie, what levels are you talking about?
I've been surprised by how quickly 11th-12th level play has been going by.
Cheers,
Merric
-
DMSamuel
United States
Ithaca
New York
-
MichaelLavoie wrote: Part of the problem for me is WOTC's decision to relegate important character classes and races to supplimental books. I don't feel like I should have to purchase a new book just to have Druids and Gnomes. It's blatantly transparent milking of the cash cow, and I refuse to play along.
Ummm, they've been doing this since 2nd edition, it's not fair to hold it against them for doing it now. If they put everything possible into the 4e PHB, it would be 1500 pages...
I do agree with you in principle, in fact, having to purchase so many supplements is the reason that I stopped playing D&D at 2nd ed (I couldn't afford to buy all the newest and best expansion books). It's also the reason that I didn't get back into D&D sooner, do you know how many 3rd edition books and supplements are out there? I just couldn't imagine being able to keep up with all the new rules unless I bought everything that came out... but let's be honest, that is not new to 4e (or D&D for that matter).
I like 4e for what it is - I run a game and also play in a game, and I am having a lot of fun with it. How much roleplaying there is depends not upon the rules, but upon the players and DM.
-
Roy Stephens
United States
San Jose
California
-
lorddillon wrote:
I do agree with you in principle, in fact, having to purchase so many supplements is the reason that I stopped playing D&D at 2nd ed (I couldn't afford to buy all the newest and best expansion books). It's also the reason that I didn't get back into D&D sooner, do you know how many 3rd edition books and supplements are out there? I just couldn't imagine being able to keep up with all the new rules unless I bought everything that came out... but let's be honest, that is not new to 4e (or D&D for that matter).
THIS! a million times, THIS! TSR Did it with 2e, WotC did it with 3e, and lets not even discuss 3.5. 4E is easily the most fun, fast playing, and easiest to teach version of D&D yet. My first 4e game that I ran (i am a veteran from 1e to 3e. didn't get 3.5), I had an experienced player who knew 2e and 3e well, 2 players who had dabbled once or twice in 3e, and 1 complete D&D newbie. After characters were made (which we did a day in advance, as the chracter design app for the computer hadn't been made yet), we sat down to play and literally within the first turn of the first encounter, everyone got it and was having a blast. The only thing i did to make things easier was to fudge initiative so that the experienced player would go first so the others could see how it worked. The vets and the newb were working well together, there were no real "i don't get it" questions. things flowed well and everyone had a great time. the newbie couldn't wait to play again and said that it was a lot more fun than he ever thought it would be.
Quote: I like 4e for what it is - I run a game and also play in a game, and I am having a lot of fun with it. How much roleplaying there is depends not upon the rules, but upon the players and DM.
Exactly. The rulebooks give you a frame on which to hang your roleplaying experience, but, it is up to the players and dm to determine HOW they are going to play.
-
Sean Doubt
Canada
Vancouver
British Columbia
-
The players in 4th edition don't need to own all the supplement books to make use of the extra content if they have a D&D Insider subscription. You can have up to 5 installs per subscription so you get all the Dragon magazines, Dungeon adventures, rules for new classes, races and powers with the character creator. This is what our group does and besides myself, no one else has more than the PHB.
Some players in our group like 3.5 edition more, but I found that DMing an epic level campaign in 3.5 was a nightmare. Combat took waay too long with all the spells available and eventually the campaign fell apart.
Our group has been playing 4e since the day it came out and haven't really looked back. I agree that good RPGing is about more than the ruleset, it is how the DM runs it and how the players respond to opportunities to get into character.
-
DMSamuel
United States
Ithaca
New York
-
Hector131 wrote: The players in 4th edition don't need to own all the supplement books to make use of the extra content if they have a D&D Insider subscription. You can have up to 5 installs per subscription so you get all the Dragon magazines, Dungeon adventures, rules for new classes, races and powers with the character creator. This is what our group does and besides myself, no one else has more than the PHB.
Some players in our group like 3.5 edition more, but I found that DMing an epic level campaign in 3.5 was a nightmare. Combat took waay too long with all the spells available and eventually the campaign fell apart.
Our group has been playing 4e since the day it came out and haven't really looked back. I agree that good RPGing is about more than the ruleset, it is how the DM runs it and how the players respond to opportunities to get into character.
Yes, I agree. 4e is the easiest system to DM at higher levels (at low levels too, but especially at high ones).
Also, the DDI subscription is one of those things that everyone seems to complain about, but I think of it like this:
1) If I was going to buy a print version of Dragon Mag + Dungeon Mag every month, that would cost about 12-15$ a month.
2) If I buy every book and rules supplement that comes out I am going to spend, oh, about 500$ a year (if not more).
The alternative is to purchase a 1-year DDI subscription for ~6$ a month, or buy it in 3-month increments for ~8$, or 1-month increments for ~10$ a month.
That subscription includes:
1) the character builder (with updates from all WotC released material),
2) the other major adventure tools (monster builder)
3) the flash adventure tools (encounter builder and ability generator)
4) D&D rules compendium (online encyclopedia style searchable compendium)
5) Dragon Magazine (including downloadable pdf)
6) Dungeon Magazine (including downloadable pdf)
That sounds like a good deal to me - if the mags were still in print, I would be buying them for more than the cost of the subscription and not get all those other benefits.
-
|
|
|
