Main Page

Archives by Category



Archives by Month

Search


Dungeons & Dragons 4th edition
February 12th, 2010 -- Categories: Dungeons & Dragons

My gaming group finally got around to giving the latest edition of D&D a trial run. I’ve had the Player’s Handbook for many months, and I’ve read most of it. Reading it just didn’t turn me on to the system.

Reading the rules gave me one main feeling: this ain’t D&D.

The rules/mechanics — races, classes, abilities, etc. — seem well balanced, but there’s a lot of stuff that just feels like a new game system than D&D. But I withheld real judgment of the game until I could actually play it.

Well, now that I’ve played it, I have one main feeling: this ain’t D&D.

I know “this ain’t D&D” is an inflammatory statement among D&Ders, and I fully understand how and why it will completely piss off some of 4th edition’s fans. But it’s an honest feeling from me. Just too much has changed, too much is drastically different from the game’s predecessors. It feels like a whole new game system, not a new edition of D&D. I don’t see an evolution, or even a revolution. It’s just, different.

There are some things that I just don’t want in my D&D, like dragonborn and tiefling player character races. There are some things that just seem alien to D&D, like 1st-level characters having two dozen hit points (and goblins having equal combat lasting power). And there are some things that seem to go counter to making D&D “better,” like so many character abilities and even more things to keep track of.

But when I look at the game system as a new game (rather than an evolution of D&D, specifically), I still see problems. For instance, the 1st-level characters have half a dozen abilities. (My pregen tiefling warlord had 7 abilities to choose from each round.) That’s a hell of a lot of stuff for beginning players, with 1st-level characters to deal with. (It was a lot for me, an experienced gamer, to keep up with.)

I like some of the concepts the designers said they were trying to incorporate into, or eliminate from, the game. Like make the characters abilities work well with a group of allies, and give the characters the ability to keep going beyond the 15-minute adventuring day (after expending their big daily powers). But many of the systems the designers put in place really didn’t solve the problems, or worse, made things more problematic.

I thought the new edition was supposed to make the game easier and smoother, especially when running combat. But what it really did was make combat more complicated and longer. Absolutely not an improvement.

Playing the game felt like trying (but failing) to mimic D&D with an entirely different system not actually meant to be played as D&D. It felt as weird as playing in the Star Wars universe with the Marvel Super Heroes rules set — a bad fit.

Now, I don’t hate this game, though I do see some flaws in the design (especially when I consider what the designers said they intended to make better). But it really does not feel like D&D. A new edition of D&D should be like coming home to find your spouse has dyed their hair, lost weight, and put on sexy new clothes. 4th edition as D&D is like coming home to find a new person there, posing as your spouse. No matter how good they may look, it ain’t what you know and love, and want.

Bullgrit


Email this post to a friend.

Read the Comments

Comment from Cory February 12, 2010, 1:49 pm

Preach on, Bullgrit. I’ve been playing 4E (Living Forgotten Realms) since last April (mainly because it was my only chance to play instead of DM an RPG on a regular basis, and a friend begged me to play to have a legal LFR table), and I’m of the same opinion. If you didn’t know that 4E was supposed to be a new edition of D&D, and you opened up a copy of a 4E PHB with all instances of Dungeons and Dragons removed from it, I doubt that “Hey, this is D&D.”, would be your first impression. You might think that it is a game based on D&D (maybe via the OGL like True20, M&M, etc.) but I doubt you would be convinced that this truly is a new edition of D&D. It really is a new game with the Dungeons & Dragons label slapped on it, rather than a new edition of our beloved game. What’s really bad is that they made some of the main things they were supposed to fix worse. A mid heroic level 4E combat can easily be as lengthy, complicated, and cumbersome as a near epic level 3.5 combat. That is just ridiculous and reeks of failure on the 4E designers part.

Comment from Umbran February 12, 2010, 2:58 pm

4e, in my mind, has its strengths and weaknesses. It is not the same game as 3e, but I won’t go as far to say it “ain’t D&D”.

I note what I consider to be a couple flaws in your analysis. These don’t mean you don’t feel how you feel - I’m just giving you fodder for thought.

1) Number of powers - I think you’ll find that the number of options a character has in combat hasn’t actually changed that much. 4e has lumped them all under “powers”. 3e didn’t lump them together under one name, but when you list all the the possibilities open to you, there’s still quite a stack. Most of them you don’t use, true - and a 1st level 4e character is mostly going to use his “at wills” - and there’s only a couple of them.

2) One of the most common house rules I’ve encountered in previous editions is “we don’t start at 1st level”. If your campaign started at 3rd level, would it still be D&D? If yes, then I’d question how the power level of starting 4e characters make it “not D&D”.

I thoroughly agree with yo that there are lots of fiddly-bit things to remember. But the same can be said for earlier editions, too.

Comment from Tallifer February 12, 2010, 5:30 pm

Classes. Levels. Dungeon crawls. Alignment. +1 swords. I am 44 years old, and in all my years of many different roleplayign games, I have never encountered any system other than D&D (or its imitators) which centred on these things.

Playing 4e feels much like when I played 1e 20 years ago.

Comment from Christian February 12, 2010, 6:44 pm

I think 7 powers at level 1 is just about right.

I remember testing 4e when it first came out. I used the pregen characters and ran the sample adventure and I don’t think I used more than 10-20 minutes total to explain the characters and new mechanics total.

Regarding races I do tend to agree with you. Tiefling? Dragonborn? On the other hand, my first character was a Tiefling. Go figure.

Regarding having a completely random chance of dying at level 1, it’s an experience I have never wanted. That 4e lowered the randomness at level 1 is something I really like.

Regarding combat length in 4e - how long it actually takes depends on what meta-rules you use. My current group of 5 players gets a normal fight over in 30 minutes. A hard fight might take 45 minutes. About on par with my dnd 3.x fights.

Dnd 4e fights usually takes about 5 rounds, while most of my dnd 3.x fights take 2 rounds. The positive side is that in 4e you can actually see that you should run, instead of see that your character is dead. An improvement in my eyes.

Dnd 4e has a slower curve when it comes to magic. Flying, invisibility, knock, wield skill, etc are very limited resources and don’t impact the game it does in dnd 3.x.

My last dnd 3.x campaign I played in we did a commando-raid using teleport, stoneshape, fly, and lots of other buffs. It took 1-2 hours to plan and maybe 1 hour to fight. A Dnd 4e fight would not have needed 1 hour planning to see what spells you needed, and the encounter would have taken about the same amount of time - 1 hour.

Regarding too many powers at level 1. It starts of relatively high at 7, but doesn’t go much over 20. My current dnd 3.5 cleric has about 3-400 available spells and 30-40 memorized every day. For a novice player this is nearly impossible to do in a good way. As a friend of mine who was new to dnd 3.5 and new to 4e said: this was easy and intuitive. (He has played on character in each edition)

Comment from Psion February 12, 2010, 7:13 pm

Bullgrit… I totally agree. I was saying something very similar in the “Has the horse left the barn” thread, though perhaps less flattering. ;) I played through BX/BECMI, 1e, 2e, and 3e, and this is the only edition that I felt didn’t pass my personal D&D litmus test. As such, it might be a fine fantasy game like Exalted or Arcana Evolved that lacks the elements I expect. As such, it has to sell me on its merits as something I want to play. And it hasn’t.

Comment from Windjammer February 13, 2010, 5:44 am

Bullgrit, there are two sides to the ‘it ain’t D&D’ sentiment, the mechanical one and the flavour one. From personal experience I’d just like to point out that as a DM you’ve got quite some lee-way to get rid of what doesn’t feel like D&D to you in 4E (if you ever wish) when it comes to flavour.

To mention something you did, I too hated dragonborn and tieflings from the get go and found them out of sync with D&D. So I table banned them - as, incidentally, did one of the 4E core designers (James Wyatt).

Once I kicked out everything that the 4E designers thought would help the game to be in touch with what they call “contemporary fantasy”(check out this interview: http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drdd/20080828a) the game felt less immature. It also felt more D&D’ish.

Finally, I personally enjoy the game less as an incarnation of D&D than as a good game in its own right that kicked out *everything* in 3E that 3E didn’t inherit from previous editions and improved on the rest. It’s an update from the non-D&D-side of things in 3.5 (feats, prestige classes, combat maneuvers, magic item system), nothing less, nothing more.

Comment from Gene February 13, 2010, 9:35 am

Bullgrit,
I’m in agreement with you. Our group plays 1E and 3E and refuses to play 4E. Everything we have read and seen indicates to us that 4E is not D&D as we know and love it. 3E could have used some rules tweaking to bring it closer to 1E and that would have been a fine 4E not this new game we got instead.

Comment from Ron February 13, 2010, 10:50 am

Back when our group first looked at 4E we had the same impressions : this isn’t D&D anymore. Still, we decided to give it a chance. When it finally came time to play I decided to create an Eladrin wizard. I was pleasantly surprised that I actually enjoyed playing my wizard for the first game session, but even so the game didn’t quite feel like D&D. It felt more like an amalgam of the D&D miniatures game and a computer game with the trappings of D&D draped over it. Still, we decided the first game session was fun so we continued for a for few more sessions.

Sadly the 4E game proved to be less fun in future sessions as things seemed to be more repetitive (use encounter, at-will, at-will, …, and repeat) and the in-your-face mechanics just got really annoying.

So we gave up on it and went back to 3.5 and then eventually Pathfinder.

Comment from pogre February 13, 2010, 11:32 am

D&D 4e is not for me either, but it’s D&D as much as any other edition. When you hit 12th level in 3e you better be hasted, flying, invisible, mind-linked, and buffed. A D&D 1e player could easily point at this and make the same complaint. Your criticism has echoes of a Diaglo-like point of view. You don’t like it, I don’t prefer it, but it is definitely D&D.

Comment from Zork February 13, 2010, 9:44 pm

I think the radical change had more to do with Hasboro getting away from the OGL than it did advancing the game. If you look at the landscape after it’s release and the fiasco with the GSL it becomes clear that keeping the D&D brand and loosing 3rd party publishers was the objective all along. You should check out Pathfinder it really is what 4e should have been. Its like having your wife with a boob job. :-)

Comment from CleverNickName February 13, 2010, 11:46 pm

Hey there, I was going to post this in your thread at ENWorld, but it was locked by the time I got to read it.

I just wanted to say that I thought your post was very respectful and appreciated. I didn’t get into 4E either, mostly because of the flavor. The popular phrase at my game table is “too much zowie.” It feels like a superhero game, not D&D.

My two coppers anyway. See you around!


Write a comment





Recent Comments
  • Hayabusa Gurl: A house is just a place to keep your stuff while you go out and get more stuff. Sent from my Android...
  • sitcom fan: One can never know for sure what a deserted area looks like Sent via Blackberry
  • Paulsleal: Keep posting stuff like this i really like it
  • Pausleal: My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!
  • CleverNickName: Hey there, I was going to post this in your thread at ENWorld, but it was locked by the time I got to...


© Copyright 2006-2009 Bullgrit