PDA

View Full Version : Who plays Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition in here?



tilt
05-31-2010, 05:41 PM
So I got curious - who in here plays 4e. I for one love the system but I know a lot of people are hesitant to "upgrade". Personally I could pave a road with outdated rpg books *lol*

So, if you play 4e, join the group - the first question is allready posted in there ;)

http://www.cartographersguild.com/group.php?groupid=4

torstan
05-31-2010, 05:45 PM
I play 4e with one group and Pathfinder with another. I GM both which keeps me on my toes...

Juggernaut1981
05-31-2010, 06:24 PM
*hisses at the mentioning of the anathema*

I really dislike 4E. The whole feel of a PnP MMORPG is what makes me feel like a cat stroked backwards. I could rant about it more, but people don't need to see that thing...

Iapetus
05-31-2010, 06:25 PM
I play 4e and have the most experience with it. (I did play part of one campaign 3.5, though.) The campaign I'm working on right now is for 4e.

Jaxilon
05-31-2010, 06:58 PM
I don't play 4e - I don't use DnD for my Role Play gaming group at all. I use the Gurps system and have for decades. After following your link I am wondering why we would want to keep this in a separate area?

I would like to create maps for 4e and while it might help if I did play 4e, I don't think it limits my ability to create the type of maps I hear folks speaking about.

Since I already know Gurps and can make it as complex or simple as I want it I don't see the need for a core system change. There are plenty of rules for shoving, throwing, knocking back etc within Gurps if I want to use them and a dangerous battlemap that allows for various strategies in combat shouldn't be that big of a problem.

If I'm the only one who feels this way than no worries but it seems we would be better off if we allowed for everyone to help in making maps specific for the 4e experience. Regardless if they play it or not. *shrug*

NeonKnight
05-31-2010, 08:21 PM
Myself....I have played D&D in ALL it's incarnations, and really enjoy the 4th Edition system quite well.

DevinNight
05-31-2010, 08:28 PM
I play once a week... I'm on the fence as to if I really like it as opposed to 3.5. I think combat can be very time consuming.

Gamerprinter
05-31-2010, 08:40 PM
Of course I'm a Pathfinder/3.5 gamer as stated many times. I don't play 4e, but am working at building a site that specializes in making all types of maps, especially 4e. I've been playing D&D since 1977, so all editions but 4e - as well as plenty of other game systems: Traveler, Space Opera, Twilight 2000, Paranoia, HOL, Runequest, and several others.

GP

Gidde
05-31-2010, 10:04 PM
Joined :) I'm a noob at 4e, but running a game anyway, and having a blast. I really like what they've done with it.

bambua
05-31-2010, 10:52 PM
I run a 4e game, though previous to that I mostly played 2nd and original. I took several years off :D

Boslok
06-01-2010, 01:08 AM
I've played all incarnations of D&D as well, but it seems the group I play with has settled nicely in 3.5 and wont get out until we are poked with a very large stick and that just doesn't seem to be happening anytime soon. Personally I'd like to play more Exalted and Vampire (without the LARP, no offense to any LARPers).

tilt
06-01-2010, 04:44 AM
I play 4e with one group and Pathfinder with another. I GM both which keeps me on my toes...

I bet it does, I do believe however that I still remember most of the 3.5 rules, but I'm glad I only have to play 4e now :)


I don't play 4e - I don't use DnD for my Role Play gaming group at all. I use the Gurps system and have for decades. After following your link I am wondering why we would want to keep this in a separate area?

I haven't made the group to make a separate mapping area for 4e players, GOD NO! I believe in the common community. :)
I was curious as too how many 4e players there were in here and who they were - thats all. And in my opinion you can play 4e on any old map - only with a few added details it greatly enhances the experience. :)

Jkaen
06-01-2010, 04:55 AM
In my opinion 4e plays more as a tactial board game than a RPG (not that there is anything wrong with that). Hence given all my RP is pbp, it doesn't really appeal, hence I play a mixture of 3.5 and pathfinder

tilt
06-01-2010, 05:01 AM
I will absolutely agree that there are a lot more tactics to combat in 4e - but isn't combat tactics ... I feel its so much more fun than stepping up to an enemy and exchanging blows until someone goes down. And in addition to that people tend to focus on 4e is = boardgame or computergame. But yes, the combat has changed, but the roleplayings stays the same like in all games - good or bad rules. It is the GM/Players that define a game - not rules :)

Jaxilon
06-01-2010, 05:13 AM
I haven't made the group to make a separate mapping area for 4e players, GOD NO! I believe in the common community. :)
I was curious as too how many 4e players there were in here and who they were - thats all. And in my opinion you can play 4e on any old map - only with a few added details it greatly enhances the experience. :)

Oh, good deal then. At first I was confused by the "join up" membership thingy and was thinking, hey man, just cuz I don't play it doesn't mean I don't want to have an excuse to make more maps :)

tilt
06-01-2010, 05:16 AM
Oh, good deal then. At first I was confused by the "join up" membership thingy and was thinking, hey man, just cuz I don't play it doesn't mean I don't want to have an excuse to make more maps :)

oh no - you don't get out of making maps... no putting your legs up and having a drink for you ;)

Midgardsormr
06-01-2010, 12:38 PM
I've been running a very sporadic 4e game for about a year now, and I'm playing in IG's PbP on EN World. That one is actually moving more quickly than I had anticipated. When we're on the ball, it's not much slower than the Rifts game I used to run on an old BBS. It will probably slow down as the encounters get more complex, of course, but I'm still pleasantly surprised at the pace. 4e is fun, but it's got some peculiar limitations on character builds that I don't care for.

I like to jump from system to system, though. In the past four years, I've played Rolemaster, Wheel of Time, World of Darkness, Alternity, Traveler, Unknown Armies, 4e, 3.5, Sidewinder, Star Wars d6, and Ninjas & Superspies.

tilt
06-01-2010, 12:53 PM
..., and I'm playing in IG's PbP on EN World. That one is actually moving more quickly than I had anticipated. When we're on the ball, it's not much slower than the Rifts game I used to run on an old BBS. It will probably slow down as the encounters get more complex, of course, but I'm still pleasantly surprised at the pace. ...

okay - I'm totally lost here... PbP, EN, BBS ... I have a guess on BBS being a bulletin board thing?
...In the immortal words of Sergeant Roger Murtaugh I'm getting to old for this s*** *lol*

bambua
06-01-2010, 01:45 PM
okay - I'm totally lost here... PbP, EN, BBS ... I have a guess on BBS being a bulletin board thing?
...In the immortal words of Sergeant Roger Murtaugh I'm getting to old for this s*** *lol*

En world is one of the bigger forum sites out there for 4E.

PbP is play by post.

Hope that helps :D

tilt
06-01-2010, 01:55 PM
yep, thanks - gotta learn something new each day :)

ShadowBB
06-01-2010, 02:25 PM
I play 4ed every Tuesday (in fact, I'll be playing in a few minutes). For what it's worth, I think the stable structure, simplicity and balance makes sure that allot more time is left for actual roleplaying. I played 3.0 and 3.5 longer than 4, but feel more at home with 4 already.

I feel making maps for 4ed, is somewhat... limited. It would work if it was a tile system or something that you can rearrange every other combat. In 4ed environment plays such a large roll that I tend to make a new combat map for every other encounter instead of reusing environments for several fights. So I usually just doodle lines on a white-board and be done with it. ><

Midgardsormr
06-01-2010, 02:26 PM
Yes, BBS = Bulletin Board Service. The precursor to forum communities like these, in the days before dial-up Internet service. The biggest local BBS in my hometown (Wichita, KS) had a user base of about 300 or so, and I ran a four-year-long play-by-email (PBeM) game with 6-12 players at any given time. I think about 30 people played in it at one time or another.

I hasten to point out that as many times as Murtagh claimed he was too old for this s***, he stayed in the action.

Oh, and IG = IndustryGothica, who is running a 4e game set in The Witchlight Strand (http://www.cartographersguild.com/showthread.php?1884-Region-1-Map-25-The-Witchlight-Strand)

tilt
06-01-2010, 02:34 PM
Yes, BBS = Bulletin Board Service. The precursor to forum communities like these, in the days before dial-up Internet service. The biggest local BBS in my hometown (Wichita, KS) had a user base of about 300 or so, and I ran a four-year-long play-by-email (PBeM) game with 6-12 players at any given time. I think about 30 people played in it at one time or another.

okay.. 1 point for me - just didn't think BBS's still existed ;)


I hasten to point out that as many times as Murtagh claimed he was too old for this s***, he stayed in the action.

you're absolutely right - and the time when I stop mapping/drawing is when my stiffened cyberfingers draw their final shape (probably several minutes after rest of the body have given in) ;)

whtknt
06-09-2010, 04:19 PM
Been running a 4E game since it debuted. In fact, I posted my maps (crappy though they were) for that campaign when I introduced myself here. I like 4E, but it's not D&D. It's an entirely different animal. We (my group of 10 players and I) play 4E in an ongoing campaign, with occasional breaks for other game systems. Right now, we're alternating between a GURPS game being run by a friend, a Savage Worlds campaign (with a pulp/fantasy feel), and my 4E game.

tilt
06-09-2010, 05:26 PM
I like 4E, but it's not D&D. It's an entirely different animal.

Well, there I have to disagree - thats like saying, I like my new MPV, but its not a car... just because thing evolve doesn't mean they become something new - and I'm guessing that since Wizards have purchased D&D, they decide whats D&D (at least publicly). I've played D&D since 1980, and its changed A LOT since then, and it's changed several times... but it's all D&D ;)

Juggernaut1981
06-09-2010, 07:08 PM
Tilt,
I think more of it being like....

D&D+AD&D is a Model T
2E was the mass produced sedan of the 50s
3E was the all-terrain vehicle
4E is the "personal 4WD people mover never intended to get off the suburban roads"

Yes they are all cars... but they are very different beasts. So yes, they are all RPGs and are all based on those first ideas put out by G.G. But they are not the same. Not even close.

whtknt
06-09-2010, 08:22 PM
::nods:: Not quite sure I'd have put it that way, Juggernaut, but your discourse illustrates my point. I've been playing since 1978 (or thereabouts) and yes, it has come a long way. However, in previous editions, there was at least enough of the original mechanics that you could recognize its origins.

In 4E, much of what made D&D recognizable has been changed or removed. That isn't to say that 4E isn't fun; I enjoy the heck out of it. But when my father (who had not played since 2E) sat down to join our campaign, it was like starting over for him.

As DM, there have been quite a few conventions that I've had to acclimate to, not all of which are bad. The loss of the Vancian magic system, for example, is a good change, but it creates a whole new style of play. On a similar note, I have had to transition from extended dungeon crawls to brief encounters (by the book, the players should be able to complete an adventure without an extended rest being necessary), which goes against my grain. And let's not even get into the idea that players should provide the GM a list of magical items they want...

Gamerprinter
06-09-2010, 09:21 PM
My automotive comparison (its too fun not to join!):

D&D + AD&D = Stutz Bearcat, sure its an old car, but an awesome old car!
2e = Desoto, nothing flashy, a dependable family car.
3e = 4WD Pickup Truck with over-sized tires, V8 engine, KC headlamps, Roll bar, a winch up front - perhaps too many doodads, but still a man's vehicle.
4e = Mini Cooper, its got a prestige name, runs well and fun to drive, but beyond that, its just a tiny, little car.
Pathfinder = 4WD pickup, with an efficient V6 - back to a man's vehicle, but smarter. :P

GP

tilt
06-10-2010, 02:35 AM
this was meant as a thread to find out who plays D&D and not a 4e is better or worse than other versions - we've had enough of those just about everywhere... just check just about every thread Wizards post on Facebook where the Anti-4e people come out... no, we don't want your electricity, we'll farm the old way ;) ... I think 4e is a fantastic edition and we have tons of fun playing it.. and as a car its the new Zenvo, sharp and fast ;)
Now, I never played Pathfinder - but I'm sure I would enjoy it if invited, like I'd still enjoy playing 3.5 if asked. But I'm looking forward and the new edition has the absolute same amount of roleplaying, cause its the roleplayers that decide, the combats are more fun cause you can do much more than you could with earlier editions (and I'm guessing more than Pathfinder - cause with x books of powers the numbers are high.) ... that doesn't mean its better than anything else, cause thats for everyone to decide for them selves. But I did get provoked (in a mild way) that it suddenly wasn't D&D just because it got new "combat rules".

Is 4e perfect, no far from it, was it ever.. no... will it ever be.. Nah... :)

OldGuy
06-10-2010, 02:47 AM
My automotive comparison (its too fun not to join!):

D&D + AD&D = Stutz Bearcat, sure its an old car, but an awesome old car!
2e = Desoto, nothing flashy, a dependable family car.
3e = 4WD Pickup Truck with over-sized tires, V8 engine, KC headlamps, Roll bar, a winch up front - perhaps too many doodads, but still a man's vehicle.
4e = Mini Cooper, its got a prestige name, runs well and fun to drive, but beyond that, its just a tiny, little car.
Pathfinder = 4WD pickup, with an efficient V6 - back to a man's vehicle, but smarter. :P
GPI like this version much better :)

@tilt: I doubt there is a forum anywhere that you can start a thread titled "Who here Plays 4e?" and not have it devolve into an edition war. It speaks volumes about the fine people here that it has remained civil. :)

Gamerprinter
06-10-2010, 02:53 AM
Sorry, Tilt, I don't mean to do Edition war, just being cute -no offense. You know I have respect for that game (4e). I wouldn't have participated in this thread, just responding to Juggie's input. We are all friendly here, in general - so don't take it too seriously.

Also consider though the majority of members are also RPGers, many are not, some are just fantasy authors, some are Cartography hobbyists. I really don't think the CG is an ideal place to discuss RPGs and editions - its best to remain system neutral, unless you're specifically discussing maps for a given game. As a general RPG site, I don't think that's what the Guild is all about.

Too bad though, everywhere else its still a big flame war - even two years later, so its not even worthy discussing except at a 4e pro site, like Wizards or RPGNet. I found that its difficult to respond to a question about 3e/OGL/Pathfinder on RPGNet, I have to tread softly in any such discussion.

GP

PS: also, nothing against the game, but I have an ongoing simmer of disgust over the GSL, DDi, and WotC tactics, especially in doing lip service to 3pp's and not truly supporting them. I know they don't have to, as its their IP, but since the OGL was so great, leaving that license to something more restrictive leaves a bad taste for me. I have nothing against the game system, its the owners that bother me and I can't see a thread about 4e without having that jump out of the back of my mind. Again, I apologize if you feel disconcerted - I have all the respect in the world for you, though.

PPS: also regarding Pathfinder, to me its D&D, yes I know not owned by WotC, so its the other guy. But when comparing editions, I think it has to be included, as its more like the D&D I know, than 4e, which to me is barely D&D.

tilt
06-10-2010, 04:13 AM
No need to apologize, I didn't think you was trying to do that - I was just trying to end the 4e god/bad discussion there - and I do believe the posts were entertaining, but off topic :)
and I'm also amazed at the flamewars going on and on... get over it! *lol* ... its not like there is no books to play 3.5 with if you don't like 4e ... and if 3.5'ers want more - they should look at pathfinder which is (I believe) still evolving :)
I haven't read the GSL but if its very restrictive I understand your sentiment - especially with all the good intentions in the OGL. The only thing bothering me is that the online part of 4e (that was announced 2 years ago) haven't shown up ... that being said, the character generator rocks and so does the monster generator - both cool applications, but I would like a cool online gaming system as well :)

And back to mapping - the only maps where I actually think of gamesystem are battle maps - cause that's the only place where you can cater a bit to your audience.. .but then again - I'm mostly about just making cool maps and I'm not adding stuff just to make it more 4e - people can take it or leave it ;)

Gamerprinter
06-10-2010, 05:10 AM
My problem with the DDi is not in the tools themselves, but Goodman Games and several other 3pp have made support material for 4e, yet WotC won't allow that material into the DDi to share with the 4e community - its not Core, its not WotC, so it can't go into the system. And since the DDi is such a well used resource by that audience, and many 4e gamers don't frequent EnWorld and the other sites, when they go online they use the DDi and not a moment consider 3pp offers to expand their game. This policy makes losers out of all 3pp's wanting to support the system - which is just exclusionism (if that's a word). I think its bad policy. If those customers would only look beyond the DDi they would see how much the small publisher wants to help them out, but they won't even see it. That's my case against the DDi, otherwise its a good idea.

And for the sake of your thread - end threadjack!

GP

Juggernaut1981
06-10-2010, 05:39 AM
@Tilt: Sorry for sparking the flames... BUT *THROWS MANY PEANUTS AT TILT* Can't help myself.
@OldGuy: Yeah probably true, we're a fairly moderate almost "lasse faire by experience" kind of mob it seems.

Tilt (or anyone else), if you'd like to know my opinions on 4E, feel free to PM me. I try to keep that sort of thing out of the public arena.

tilt
06-10-2010, 06:19 AM
@GP ... I see what you mean, and wasn't aware of that - and agree that that is too bad, I'm all for the small publishers, published some magazines myself and had to fight to get any money out of advertisers to keep us running, they were much more inclined to go with "the big mags" - not fun)

@J
*lol* noooo not peanuts... I'm allergic (just kidding - love'em) ... I think I know your opinion allready Juggs ;)

whtknt
06-10-2010, 10:30 AM
I think that the fact that we can discuss it civilly is a sign that it should, in fact, be discussed. But as this is a mapping forum...

When my group transitioned to 4E, with the focus on tactics, we began looking at VTTs. MapTool is the one that we have settled on, and forums such as the Cartographer's Guild have been a tremendous aid. Even as far back as 3E, I was a fan of Ed Bourelle's e-Adventure Tiles system (and have several of them), and it makes me glad to see that finally some companies are recognizing that a digital gaming community exists (Rite Publishing (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=62326), for example).

One major irritation is Paizo refusing to offer their Gamemastery Map Packs as PDFs. They have explained themselves, and the explanation makes sense (cost versus saleability), but that doesn't do much for those of us who would purchase them if they were available.

Greason Wolfe
06-10-2010, 11:19 AM
Well, I suppose I'll chime in here, and, to be perfectly honest, I haven't played DnD since around the time 3E came out. It was around that time that I was introduced to Hero Systems, and I've pretty much stuck to that ever since. I honestly can't say anything bad about DnD in terms of the editions I played under, but when WoTC took over the reigns, I knew I was pretty much done with the system. Of course, I don't do much table top RPing at all anymore due to my work schedule (and the fact that I don't have a group to play with). My personal belief in all of this, though, is that if you're happy with the system you play under, then it's all good.

GW

tilt
06-10-2010, 11:29 AM
Hi GW, long time no hear.. :) ... and yes, down to basics its just about enjoying the game... reminds me of missing Villains and Vigilantes - that was a great game - totally unbalanced - but cool none the less. Especially the rules for flying through the air, and walls when hit hard ;)

Gamerprinter
06-10-2010, 11:29 AM
I think that the fact that we can discuss it civilly is a sign that it should, in fact, be discussed. But as this is a mapping forum...

When my group transitioned to 4E, with the focus on tactics, we began looking at VTTs. MapTool is the one that we have settled on, and forums such as the Cartographer's Guild have been a tremendous aid. Even as far back as 3E, I was a fan of Ed Bourelle's e-Adventure Tiles system (and have several of them), and it makes me glad to see that finally some companies are recognizing that a digital gaming community exists (Rite Publishing (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product_info.php?products_id=62326), for example).

One major irritation is Paizo refusing to offer their Gamemastery Map Packs as PDFs. They have explained themselves, and the explanation makes sense (cost versus saleability), but that doesn't do much for those of us who would purchase them if they were available.

I am currently working on a website where I plan to offer two free maps per week, that correspond to a map tile product of mine called Endless Terrain Battlemaps - I think is a great improvement over Game Mastery Maps. The free maps are PDFs, but the map tiles are printed and laminated hard products. I am struggling with the site, but should get it up before too long.

GP

tilt
06-10-2010, 11:31 AM
Please feel free to ask advice and etc concerning webdesign and site structure if you need help or another set of eyes... been doing that since mid ninetees :)

Gamerprinter
06-10-2010, 12:31 PM
Actually, once I get the basics setup, adding a Simple: Press forum (for example) is easily done, but to match the graphics (I do graphics) between the forum and the rest of the site requires customizations - then I will need help.

GP

whtknt
06-10-2010, 01:42 PM
Hi GW, long time no hear.. :) ... and yes, down to basics its just about enjoying the game... reminds me of missing Villains and Vigilantes - that was a great game - totally unbalanced - but cool none the less. Especially the rules for flying through the air, and walls when hit hard ;)

Ah, V&V. Now that brings back some memories. My friend and I had a campaign that lasted for almost 25 years. We recently "rebooted" the universe using Mutants & Masterminds and reimagined ourselves as teen-aged heroes once more (with similar powers to the original incarnations, but subtle differences), but this time, we are taking the standpoint of being teenagers in the modern era (even though we are, in reality, in our 40s).

tilt
06-10-2010, 01:45 PM
shhh... we're never in our 40s ;)

mearrin69
06-10-2010, 02:09 PM
How I wish that were true. :) I have played 4E but none of my current groups are using it. We mainly play Pathfinder and GURPS, with some Star Wars (Saga), Call of Cthulu, Mutants and Masterminds, and some others thrown in from time to time when we break from the main game. It's possible we'd give 4E a go in the future.

My first impressions of 4E weren't that hot but that had more to do with the situation than the game itself, I suppose. I wasn't looking to buy a new library and wasn't all that happy with some of the members of my gaming group at the time. As has been said on this thread and elsewhere, the rules are just a system that let you tell a story. I think both 3.5e and 4e were rules systems heavily geared toward the battlemap encounter...but just because they have those rules doesn't mean you have to play that way. I've run/played 3.5e games with nary a mini hitting the map for a session. Surely the same thing is possible in 4e. The rules are there when you need them...but it doesn't have to become a constant game of D&D minis unless you want it to.
M

tilt
06-10-2010, 02:19 PM
agreed... I remember one of the creators of ICE's Rolemaster once saying that in his own personal campaign there were a "fight" every 3-4 sessions... and sometimes the players ran from that *lol* ... they played a heavy political game instead...

Midgardsormr
06-14-2010, 03:09 AM
I don't blame them. Fights in Rolemaster can last for ages if you haven't taken the time to prep thoroughly. And for RM, prepping means photocopying charts for each weapon that will be used and calculating several variants of modifiers for each character in advance. Still one of my favorite games, though.

tilt
06-14-2010, 05:04 AM
yep... always had photocopies of relevant weapon tables.. and I remember my binder for my wizard, lots of pages with spells at my fingertips... loved that game :)

Redrobes
06-14-2010, 10:21 AM
I have played D&D Basic, Expert, Advanced, 2nd Ed, 3rd Ed and 4th but not 3.5 or Pathfinder. Loads of short times playing non D&D RPGs too but not ever as much as D&D. I liked the old basic and expert as it really had that Gygax feel to it. Very raw and interesting with a strong lean on the fantasy side. By 2e the rules were complicated and had a lot of anomalies to them but I had my best D&D under that system. Did a little 3e - liked the way it was all unlimited and more linear than previous rule sets but didn't particularly like the feats and skills approach. I am enjoying IGs 4e Witchlights campaign but kinda in spite of the 4e rules. I am finding the rules a little style cramping. I don't like the second wind and these set piece abilities. There's still scope for role playing but there's no doubt that the rules have diminished the role playing choices that you can make if you also want to be effective in a fight. Outside of the fight and dice stats tho there's nothing stopping all the usual role playing.

NeonKnight
06-14-2010, 10:46 AM
I have played D&D 3rd Ed but not 3.5 or Pathfinder.

While they call it 3rd and 3.5, the differences are quite cosmetic. For example in 3rd Edition you had Golems with immunity to magic weapons if the 'plus' was too low, they removed this from 3.5 and simply replace with D.R. or damage reduction. If the weapon did not qualify then a certain example of damage was reduced from the attack.; think 'Hardness'.

tilt
06-14-2010, 01:20 PM
@redrobes - I must agree, hate to make choices between powers/feats that would make a good character and a "powerfull" character.

Juggernaut1981
06-14-2010, 06:27 PM
Actually rebuilding a few classes was the biggest change. The Bard got a major overhaul between the two.

PokealypseNow
06-17-2010, 03:45 PM
Well, I'm certainly late to this thread, but I've played 4E consistently for almost a year now (had a false start with a set of random socially awkward folks that imploded when 4E launched), and am having a blast. I played AD&D 2nd Edition back in high school and then a semester's worth of 3E in college, but it's nice to be back.

I spent the majority of my time as a half-orc sorcerer, but after a campaign restart two months ago, I'm now playing a human shaman MCed invoker and having a ball.

Larb
06-17-2010, 07:37 PM
I've played in three 4e campaigns so far. They were good fun, but most of that was due to a good group and DMs. I'm not a fan of the system though, so I wouldn't want to run it or adapt it for my own world or something. Still, I had fun.
Played a Cleric when it first came out in a generic campaign, A Sorcerer (in another generic campaign) and a Swordmage (in FR). I liked my swordmage most. Despite my pretty big misgivings about the system, I wanna try a Dark Sun campaign.

On a side note, I think Keep on the Shadowfell is a really suck introductory module. Not mechanically, just the way it's designed. They need to get a good replacement out there.

Exwingzero
06-20-2010, 01:25 AM
My first D&D game was 4e and I started DMing a few months back now. I'm really enjoying it and I'm finding that I can take all sorts of ideas and apply them with relative ease (i.e. Snakes on a Plane and a RPG day Legends of the Five Rings Mod).

Redrobes
06-20-2010, 09:57 AM
I wasn't going to labor this thread to much with posts but to date I have had a hard time qualifying why I don't like 4e rules as much as previous ones and I came across the following link with a very detailed description why this guy doesn't like them and I think this has nailed it for me too. When one guy in our group was down with low HP we post to the narrative thread and the battle had ended and he said that "my character will be sucking wind all the while.." and I thought that was pretty odd but I could not think of what this wind is all about either. I don't like these non magical daily powers either and the following link does touch on that too. Anyway I think this guy has done some good clear thinking on the subject so would be interested in comments. This explains for me why I don't think 4e rules are good for the role playing side of D&D and why its not just about you and the DM not doing enough narrative or descriptions.

http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/dissociated-mechanics.html

tilt
06-20-2010, 11:20 AM
I've read his pondering about 4e too - and I feel that he is straight to the point, and also that he is actually taking a neutral standpoint. I actually agree with most of his points, but I don't agree that they are very important, at least not in our game - maybe if we still were "young" and played a lot of D&D it would be different, I don't know, but being that we play once a month sometimes less, we just need some fun action - and 4e delivers! Yeah Yeah dissasosiation and all that jazz.. and you have to make hundreds of house rules to get it to work... no, only if your care deeply about dissasosiation - if you don't you just play *lol*. And I don't know about second wind in scientific ways, but the concept is way older than D&D ... and he himself argues (in another thread) that Hit Points are mostly exhaustion and bruising adding up...
What I like about the second wind (which still don't help that much) is that every player can get a little extra chance without having a cleric riding on his back. ;)
But as mentioned earlier, I loved playing 3.5 also.. and 1.0 too... and all those other games, some with sucky rules some with cool rules... just as long as you have fun :)

Aval Penworth
06-20-2010, 11:20 PM
I see your point Tilt and I think it is an important one. A lot of players have very little time to play. Sessions are few and far between, so you want to get some bang for your buck. Perhaps 4e provides that.

For me, relationships are very important. Meeting NPCs and developing alliances and friendships is a big part of my campaign. All the players have dozens important contacts and acquaintances. Maintaining those relationships makes the game more personal and interesting. We often play out interactions with local guardsmen, stewards, merchants and shop keepers. The players enjoy feeling a part of the world. For those players who enjoy making skill checks...linguistics, appraisal, diplomacy, duping, seduction, region lore, streetwise etc can come into play. How well does 4E handle this aspect of the game? You could of course argue that you don't need any rules to 'role play' social interactions and on one level I agree. But I also think that having rules that give players the option to develop skills around which to build a interesting and memorable character is a big plus.

We have the hack-and-slash too, but we have time to do both.

If I was only playing 4hrs every month (rather than 50hrs) , I would definitely change from rolemaster to a different system.


With regard to disassociation to the real world...the concept of experience levels has always had me suspending disbelief. You know the whole concept of a guy getting better at climbing walls, and moving silently because he stabbed a few ogres. I like skills, but I don't really like the concept of levels. But players love to level up so I stick with level based RPGs. Sigh...no one plays runequest anymore.

Kelanen
06-20-2010, 11:45 PM
Myself....I have played D&D in ALL it's incarnations, and really enjoy the 4th Edition system quite well.

Same Here.

Juggernaut1981
06-21-2010, 12:43 AM
I suppose what this blog has done for me personally is quantify and make concrete the exact gripes I've had with the system. I keep on rabbitting on about how it has "destroyed the storytelling game" or "destroyed the role" part of the game... In truth, The Alexandrian is probably right - they got divorced and WotC is taking the Alimony via the Minis.

Might be time to start getting into those White-Wolf games... or just finish off that system I've been building... or both.

Iapetus
06-21-2010, 12:58 AM
We often play out interactions with local guardsmen, stewards, merchants and shop keepers. The players enjoy feeling a part of the world. For those players who enjoy making skill checks...linguistics, appraisal, diplomacy, duping, seduction, region lore, streetwise etc can come into play. How well does 4E handle this aspect of the game?

I think it really depends on the DM. Perhaps if someone's first exposure to D&D is 4e, they wouldn't incorporate as much skill checks in, especially if they were learning from the books (like many people have had to do). I had a DM for 4e who worked in the need for passive and active skill checks all the time, and the campaign functioned much better because of it. Of course, the DM in question also had a lot of experience with past versions, and that probably influenced his campaign-building.

So, maybe if people are learning from only 4e on they might not do as many skill checks in the future, but I know for now I have plenty of DMs who still have lots of habits from 3.0 or 3.5 and love skill checks. They don't go anywhere even if there is a new version.

(Personally I don't mind what version I play as long as people are patient with me in learning rules for a version I'm not familiar with! :) )

Ilvarin
06-24-2010, 04:01 PM
I started rpgs with D&D in the Fall of '76, the Greyhawk/Blackmoor/Eldritch Wizardy days (i mail ordered my first set of dice from TSR cause there weren't game stores around). I have played and/or DMed every D&D released, in most of the worlds they've released, as well as GURPS, RoleMaster, RuneQuest, Mythus, Warhammer, Burning Wheel, Pathfinder, and Riddle of Steel, to name but a few. My hands-down favorite ruleset is the D&D Cyclopedia. It takes those old rules that were so patched over that they were more about the patches and breathes new life into them, and thus into the joy and wonderment I remember. Its far from perfect, but it is fun, it works and it is fast. A lot of the other titles mentioned have so many unique and innovative systems that they collapse under their own weight. So, there is my two cents.

Xyll
06-24-2010, 04:30 PM
I looked at 4th edition when it came out and I just could not do it. I prefer a bit of reality with my fantasy and those rules irritate me for some reason maybe just because of the attitude of WOTC when they created it. I am one of those old players starting with basic D&D when i was 9 and going from there. I have played so many games with so many different rules that I grew tired of buying new books. I have come to the firm belief that the only books i ever need for a game is a players book, a gm book and a monster book (sometimes). With the prices on 4th edition books and the size of them i feel that i am being robbed by them, add in the incomplete content and I have no motivation to play that game. Then again with what I just said I am not their target audiance.

MarkusTay
06-25-2010, 08:31 PM
I don't play 4e, nor plan to.

I looked at the system when it came out, and I can't actually say it's bad - its just didn't feel like D&D to me (but that opinion is NOT based on playing, so make of it what you will). I'm sure with the right group I would enjoy a 4e session, but that goes right back to the people you play with and has nothing to do with rules. I, too, have played MANY games and systems over the years - too numerous to mention - but I always drifted back to D&D. I was one of the first people I know to start running 3e - I loved all the changes. I just didn't feel the same way when 4e came out.

I think a lot of it has a lot to do with the Forgotten Realms - I am a HUGE fan of that setting, and I feel they majorly deconstructed it for the 4e release, so I guess my 'hard feelings' in that regard may leave me some what less then objective.

In fact, it was making my own maps for the Realms that got me to discover this site awhile back.

Anyhow, I do not begrudge anyone their love of the new rules... they just aren't for me.

Midgardsormr
06-25-2010, 09:30 PM
I have come to the firm belief that the only books i ever need for a game is a players book, a gm book and a monster book (sometimes).

I agree, which is why I never really got into any previous incarnation of D&D. Far too many books. Really, I'd even go so far as to avoid any game that requires more than one core book to play. While there's something to be said for a GM-only book with secret world info in it, like the 7th Sea Gamemaster's Guide, there's really nothing of the sort in the 4e DMG, except for the sample adventure. Plus, I've never required my players to have their own copy of the rules, anyway.

Redrobes
06-25-2010, 09:49 PM
With 1st ed AD&D there was a PH and a DMG, With 2nd there was the same but they released an Unearthed Arcana which expanded the spells and magic items but was not essential for play. In fact at the time people usually stated whether their game was with or without UA. Now 3rd ed I didn't do too much of but I think there was only 1 PH and a DMG but lots of optional expansions like a fighters book and a clerics book etc. With 4e there is a PH and now a PH2 and I think they are releasing a PH3. Though its always optional what you run with I think in 4e its more important to have the extra books. I say this because I have been reading that many of the abilities that are pretty essential or powerful to play a class are in that second book. Its easier to print extra books now because whereas the old rules were more like rules. The new 4e is based on skills and exploits which are like one off attacks so all classes look more like spell casters now though they say these non magical exploits are done by drawing on ones martial power whatever that means.

In terms of monsters there was always a need to bring in monsters that the PCs did not know about so there has always been a glut of books on them or prints of stats in Dragon etc. In as much as books of monsters, dungeons, modules and maps I say the more the merrier.

But I think there should be one PH and one DMG and the PH should contain everything a player would need to know IRL and a 1st level character would know in game and at start and not much more. But this idea of having some players with some rules and others with different or extra ones is bizarre. Not so bad if round a real table where DM sets the pace but when play by post and VTT games its well odd. This I think is a 4th ed problem that was true to some small extent in 2nd too and was an even bigger issue in 3rd.

jfrazierjr
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
Ya know RR, I can see what your saying, but no matter the version of D&D you just can't have one book and have "everything" covered. This is one of the big reasons many people like systems where you have every possible thing you want available and you "buy" exactly the character archtype you want. Now, with that said, I play D&D 4E because frankly, it's faster than 3.x to run and play and is more fun IMO. Likewise,I have played since D&D (boxed sets)/AD&D onward. For quick play, the boxed sets were just fast and simple. Heck, I even played in an online one shot using pregen's and the Red box rules a few months ago via Maptool and had tons of fun... Besides being faster to run combats(no keeping track of 400 different timed durations in the initiative order.), it's just feels right being able to NOT have magic users run dry of spells and not really being able to doing much of anything afterward(other than perhaps missing every round with his crossbow!!)

tilt
06-26-2010, 02:44 AM
Funny thing is that I never really thought about the number of books comming out of wizards as strange - having some time down the line played Rolemaster, I guess I had gotten used to expansion sets. I remember 2nd ed. having lots of books too, that was actually what kept me from playing that back in the days, where I only had the money I earned from my paper route and such. Today with a somewhat steady income I mostly buy a book a month (+ some novels... and textbooks for work), and since the books cost about double in the bookstores here I rejoice in the "power" of internet shopping - thanks amazon :)

You CAN play D&D 4e with only the 3 core books - and you never have to buy more - but in my opinion it is more fun to expand on the amount of feats/powers/classes/paragon paths/epic destinies you can have (but it isn't necessary). But I'm all with Redrobes in you can never have to many monsterbooks - and I have a few Grimtooths Traps lying somewhere too *evil grin*, I've never bought a lot of scenarios but I'm guessing I have about 20 of those - most from edition 1. I might have bought more from 4e, but I've been playing those as a player, and my own campaign "mountain realms" were good on the way when 4e came out :) ... plucked a scenario or two from Dungeon magazine though :)

oh.. a little afterthought - since all the powers and such are fitting the core system - you can actually have players with different amount of rulebooks playing in the same game - the few rule changes there are (errata) are available on the website. :)

Sharpe
06-26-2010, 03:42 AM
I hope it's not antisocial or poor netiquette to say so in a thread about D&D, but I play GRUPS 4e.

If you're still reading, I'm surprised. :)

I played 1st and 2nd ed. D&D when I was a kid and loved them. Then, I found GURPS 3e and never bothered with what I call "pencil and paper video games" again. If I wanted to play something like D&D 4e, I'd play World of Warcraft online or whatever.

I'm more interested in the role-playing aspect of our table-top sessions. D&D, the system, just seems to be all about killing monsters and "gaining levels" and systematic meta gaming to me. In my opinion, it doesn't seem to represent any type of fantasy -- heroic or historical -- that I've ever read or watched on TV or in the movies very well at all. It just seems to represent a specific video game and that video game is called D&D.

I'm a full-time police officer and a part-time firefighter (was on a vehicle extraction team). I box a lot and spend a lot of time in what I'll simply call an MMA gym. I've had some pretty good training with a knife (as in, how to use one more effectively against an unarmed opponent). From my point of view, I'd say GURPS 4e does a great job representing combat and injury in a realistic yet fun way -- the best I've seen out of the dozen or so systems I've played.

GURPS' biggest problem is its staggering learning curve. At first, the system is mind boggling. But, I taught it to myself living under a rock in a vacuum (before the Internet) when I was in the eighth grade, so its steep learning peak can be summited without a teacher. Certainly not without difficulty, though.

But, whatever your group likes and has fun with is great with me. :) Using your mind and imagination is much better than watching TV or playing video games on the computer or console any day!

tilt
06-26-2010, 04:48 AM
its not antisocial to express ones opinion (although the thread has drifted a bit from just getting to know who plays 4e *lol*) I tried GURPS a lifetime ago and didn't like the system at all - and luckily we aren't all alike so there is room for more than one system. The comment about 4e = WoW is just silly though, you can never compare a PnP game with an online game (unless you play via fantasy grounds and such - which is just PnP online). I think its fine that people don't like 4e or even D&D - I played a lot of Rolemaster a half lifetime ago before the kids and job and all that timeconsuming stuff ;) ... loved that system even though you don't get much more complex than that. Now I like to play the simpler game mechanisms of D&D as we can focus on the roleplaying instead of lots of rules when we manage to scrounge up a gameday ;)

And by the way - somewhere in here there is a link to a page where a guy - very scientificly - compares D&D 3 to real life and shows us that its actually very reaslistic in its simplified way - its a fun read.

Juggernaut1981
06-26-2010, 07:11 AM
In my own system I'm trying to basically write "1 book that contains the rules" and "books that contain the other stuff". So one would have all the rules for play, the common items, lots of magic items and spells. Other books would hold: information on other realities, monsters, additional spells, additional magic items... none of it would be essential for play but would just allow DMs to use more stuff in their games.

As a DM at a big convention group... what gave me the royal *****s was this quasi arms-race of books in 3E. Especially between players and GMs, but also between players.

Midgardsormr
06-26-2010, 01:26 PM
Absolutely. And since 3e wasn't tightly templated, as a GM I could never be sure that a new book a player brought to the table wasn't going to destroy the balance of the game. Of course, then you run a Palladium game and balance goes right out the window. 4e does at least have very tight templating and carefully tested abilities that mostly ensure that a new book is going to keep the game at the same power level as all the older ones. They will make mistakes of course (Moment of Glory), but overall I am happy to let new books that I haven't looked over into my game because I trust Wizards' quality control.

As for GURPS, it's a very well designed game, but like Hero System, not one that I cared much for when I first tried it. I've matured somewhat since then, though, so maybe some day I'll give it another try.

MarkusTay
06-26-2010, 06:52 PM
The comment about 4e = WoW is just silly though, you can never compare a PnP game with an online game (unless you play via fantasy grounds and such - which is just PnP online).I just wanted to point out (in a very non-confrontational way) that the fact that SO MANY people think this means there has to be some truth to it. Tons of people would not have spontaneously come to the same conclusion by coincidence.

I've been both a Diablo and WoW player, and a huge fan of Blizzard games (they really do strive for quality), and the entire concept of 'builds' comes from VIDEO GAMES. WotC uses this very term now to describe their preset 'character paths'. Just as in an video game - be it online or console - if you go off the beaten path and do not follow a pre-established 'build', then your character is considered inherently weaker to everyone else.

Now, I'm not going to defend the truth of that statement - I have created at least three characters that can whup anyone's butt with builds that people said were 'wrong' (and one of which went onto to become one the favorite builds after I stopped playing WoW). I think the whole concept of uber-powerful builds destroys the element of individualism, and I strive for uniqueness in every character I create... even if it means giving up a little power. Sometimes, the element of surprise (when you do something completely unexpected) out-weighs the power-loss.

Anyhow, I digress - I just wanted to say as both a long-time video gamer AND PnP gamer, I do notice that D&D has acquired some very VGish mechanics of late. I'm not going to say weather that's a good or bad thing - that's a matter of opinion and is decided by each person's personal tastes. I have heard that combats have become easier to run (so long as you buy the pre-prescribed miniatures from Hasbro), so if your group is combat-heavy then that would probably be the appropriate choice for your group. Combat to me is secondary to storyline, so the rules matter very little to me (and I have used MANY in all my years of GMing). If I didn't already have a plethora of unread/un-used 3e/OGL material laying around, I might have gone that way myself.

Juggernaut1981
06-27-2010, 01:32 AM
The WoW effect comes exactly back to what is dealt with in the article by "The Alexandrian" (the article linked to earlier). The abilities of characters have no real link to the "world" of the characters. They only make sense in a disconnected and 'existential' universe (i.e. the one we are in as players of the game). The rules, by design, take us OUT of the world of our characters and make the game significantly less immersive. Marks are the key example of this. You get a challenge from a Paladin and a Fighter (called a Mark) and suddenly the challenge from one completely removes the effects of the others and so on. "The Alexandrian" does an excellent job on detailing that.

I prefer the idea that game rules shouldn't disjoin you, the player, from yourself, the Character. This is the main reason why I decided that in my own game, there are basically "physical attributes" and "skills" and these things drive everything else. Have you been taught a special combat maneuver (called a "Feat"), well to pull it off you will need to test if your skills are capable of performing that maneuver. Are you stopped from trying it 14-times each combat...? nope, you know the trick and you can use it. Will it actually work every time? Not unless you're really well practiced and skilled... then it's got a much better chance of working all the time. And so on.

To a certain extent, I want the rules to be mechanical explanations for how things "are" for the Characters and ways for determining the outcomes of complex events (like attacking people in combat) or substitutes for more ephemeral concepts (like why exactly you can beat up a university academic in three quick punches but Rocky Balboa takes a collossal pounding...)

tilt
06-27-2010, 04:13 AM
The Alexandrian, yep that was the guy. :)
@MarkusTay ... oh, I don't dissagree that 4e's combat is Videogame inspired - the "ties" to how Diablo works (haven't played WoW) is obvious - but that doesn't mean that you might as well play WoW instead of 4e ... that was what I found silly.
Concidering the combats I feel they are fun, but not easier than 3rd ed. there is a lot more to keep track off, but they are more ... epic (in lack of a better word). And I wouldn't buy a miniature from Hasbro if they payed me to do it.. ok... if they payed me well I might.. ;) we use printed cardboard pieces ... then its easy to make a new piece and cheap too.. and I REALLY HATE the idea of not knowing what you buy, that sucks... and don't go hand in hand with D&D AT ALL!! ;)

@Juggs - I agree with the alex... the game mechanics have become disassociated - but you know what - I didn't notice it before I read the article, I had to much fun enjoying combat. Yes, to bad that you can use the same power again and again, but we just think of it as a exeptionally hard thing to do which really takes it out of you until you had a rest. (Feats you can use again and again), and that might not be realistic and actually be a bit like the old magic user who only had x spells a day ... but now the new magic user have small spells he can cast all day (so he's pleased *lol*). I feel the second wind is great... and I love minions, they make great combat. And when we're in combat - THATs what its about - having loads of fun.
Will we go on to 5e when that comes - I'm not sure... we'll see ... right now we have about 20 levels to go and are thinking about playing some Mutants and Masterminds as the next game (but that might change during the next 2 years) ;)

And on a sidenote I'd like to remind people that this thread was started to see WHO played 4e inhere and not to discuss the game - not that I don't enjoy a good banter - but I wouldn't want to have begun a flame war in here ... don't wanna torch the place down *lol* ... I do however fell that everybody in the thread has behaved nicely :)

See you all on the battlemap :)

Juggernaut1981
06-27-2010, 07:12 AM
I'm one of those people that probably sees 4E as "D&D Minis with more rules" and not an RPG Game. I had that feeling from the VERY first time I read the books. Opened up a pre-release copy I'd been able to get me eyes on and that disjoin (which was identified by the Alexandrian but I'd felt it from the first time) has always been around in it for me.

MarkusTay
06-27-2010, 07:07 PM
In the end, it all comes down to having a good GM. No matter how good the rules are a bad GM will F*** them up, and no matter how bad a ruleset, a good GM will make them work. It's really just all about having a good time with some friends. :)


To a certain extent, I want the rules to be mechanical explanations for how things "are" for the Characters and ways for determining the outcomes of complex events (like attacking people in combat) or substitutes for more ephemeral concepts (like why exactly you can beat up a university academic in three quick punches but Rocky Balboa takes a collossal pounding...)Try Chivalry & Sorcery - a game I cut my early RPG teeth on. So realistic it was practically unplayable, but fortunately we had a godlike GM who was actually able to run it and keep track of everything.

Ever play a game where you had to roll for 'daily health' each morning? That's C&S....

In its defense, I still rely heavily on those rules for realism - I've yet to see a better fatigue system in any game. EVERYTHING was tied to it.

Midgardsormr
06-28-2010, 03:32 AM
Sounds a bit like Paul Cardwell's Mythworld, a hyper-realistic adaptation of Runequest. As far as I know, that one's never been available except as a dot matrix print direct from Rev. Cardwell, though. I don't mind a simulationist game, but any game that includes rules for altitude sickness and infection from insect bites is going a bit overboard.

Anyway, I thought from the first time I played it that 4e was more of a tactical minis game with roleplaying tacked on than a proper RPG, but that doesn't stop it from being fun. Although come to think of it, I'd just come off of a pretty intense game of Mage: the Ascension at that time, so pretty much anything was probably going to feel like roleplaying lite.

Juggernaut1981
06-28-2010, 03:53 AM
Nah, I'm not looking for the kind of level of realism. I know that a good GM can make or break a game. But as a long-time GM, I'd like a system that doesn't make my life as GM a living hell BUT doesn't throw the realism baby out with the simplicity bathwater. Do I want Rocky Balboa to be hard to kill? Yes. Do I want to create 4,000 rules for where you get hit, how each hit can drastically alter your current status, etc, etc, etc? CRIKEY No.

If you give the link in my signature a click and go have a read, you'll see what I mean I'm assuming. I am um-ing and ah-ing about changing the XP & Levelling System to a "spend XP" system rather than a "Get past XP point, gain abilities"