4e is too complex.

[Crissa]

Because everything has its own abilities, own lists, and own mechanics...

...I think the game is too complex to balance, or even care about playing. I don't really see how people are 'making' campaigns, as the little bit I've read seems to indicate there's no meter by which to tell if something is out of bounds. And the game seems to be designed to absorb all sorts of way-out mechanisms without actually changing the gameplay...

...The gameplay which doesn't really seem to involve a chance for the bad guys to win.

I dunno. It's not the D&D I grew up with. I never ascribed to the 'roleplay is best when there's no rules for it' paradigm, so I don't feel any stories here.

I might as well be playing WoW. Which might be cheaper.

-Crissa

[Psychic Robot]

"Making" a campaign doesn't really require a ruleset.

What rules for role-playing, exactly, is 4e missing, and what do you mean in saying that you don't "feel any stories"?

[Voss]

Huh. I think the game is too simple.

Its a pain in the ass to learn, because everything operates individually and very little actually has any kind of logical sense (particularly rules in relation to anything else), but most of the complexity has been chopped out of D&D with an ax.

But yes, the stories are gone as well. Goblins are sneaky, conniving cowards anymore [or whatever conception you may happen to have of goblins]... they're bags of hit points that get a special move when you miss them.

[RandomCasualty2]

But yes, the stories are gone as well. Goblins are sneaky, conniving cowards anymore [or whatever conception you may happen to have of goblins]... they're bags of hit points that get a special move when you miss them.

What?

This is just your own personal bias clouding your ability to create flavor text.There is nothing mechanical that stops you from doing that.

I can understand people who say that 4E prevents them from telling over the top high magic stories. That's actually very true. What I don't understand is how goblins have somehow changed in 4E.

Why can't you play goblins as sneak conniving cowards? I must have missed that section of the 4E books.

There are many good reasons not to like 4E, but "4E prevents me from thinking fo flavor text" is not one of them.

[Voss]

Because the RP part of the game is gone, RC. IF it doesn't happen on the battlemat, it doesn't really exist. You can do roleplaying in addition to playing 4e, but you're playing two different games- the D&D Advanced Miniatures game, and magical tea party. The two have almost no interaction at all, and when they do its handwaved away.

So it doesn't matter how goblins behave, because all you do is kill them.

[Psychic Robot]

What I want to know is: how did 3e have more RP than 4e? I understand that some of the spells you like are gone (such as illusions), but spells do not an RPG make.

[Username17]

What I want to know is: how did 3e have more RP than 4e? I understand that some of the spells you like are gone (such as illusions), but spells do not an RPG make.

3e is more conducive to stories on several levels. The most obvious one of course was the fact that the skill system does something. If you want to bully or sweet talk a goblin there are actual DCs involved for that and you can look them up. It's not a great system, but it kicks the crap out of either the pre-errata "You fail" system or the post-errata "you succeed" system of 4th edition.

But it's also on other levels. The 3rd edition Goblin is a template for making a character of any type. An while fully statting up a 3rd edition goblin is kind of a pain and more trouble than it's worth, filling in the stats up to the point you need them is pretty fast. If you want a Goblin Rogue of 7th level or a Goblin Cleric of 5th, that just happens. On the flip side, a 4th edition goblin is a completely arbitrary set of powers with no real guidelines at all. Every goblin has a special goblin tactics power, and you can dump that on, but all the numbers and all the powers are basically right out of your ass. So you're basically left from-scratching it unless you use the same cardboard cutouts of a half dozen goblins over and over again. And while that goblin selection is diverse enough and more to cover a single encounter or two with flying colors and some sweet variation in opponents, it's not enough to fill a world.

4th edition is designed to make for an entertaining combat. An entertaining combat. It really lacks staying power. My guess is that the entire game was written to be cool enough for a demo game, and then they just crapped out.

-Username17

[Porrage]

But it's also on other levels. The 3rd edition Goblin is a template for making a character of any type. An while fully statting up a 3rd edition goblin is kind of a pain and more trouble than it's worth, filling in the stats up to the point you need them is pretty fast. If you want a Goblin Rogue of 7th level or a Goblin Cleric of 5th, that just happens. On the flip side, a 4th edition goblin is a completely arbitrary set of powers with no real guidelines at all. Every goblin has a special goblin tactics power, and you can dump that on, but all the numbers and all the powers are basically right out of your ass. So you're basically left from-scratching it unless you use the same cardboard cutouts of a half dozen goblins over and over again. And while that goblin selection is diverse enough and more to cover a single encounter or two with flying colors and some sweet variation in opponents, it's not enough to fill a world.

-Username17

Have you even glanced at page 278 where they give you racial traits for a goblin? That right there can be used to make any type of goblin you want.

It seems to me that most of the arguments here are inspired by laziness on the dungeon master's part. My brothers and I have been playing D&D for a very long time, and our philosophy has always been "What is presented in the manuals can easily be changed to fit anyone's playing style."

I've rewritten half of the rules based around healing surges. I like the idea, but my personal opinion is that its far too easy to heal between encounters. I've mixed up the rules of death as well. I've even ported over all the equipment and weapons from my AD&D PHB to the 4e campaign I'm running. Don't like a rule in 4e? Change it! And if you don't agree with the majority of the rules in the book... play 3rd edition. Or use your old AD&D books. It took me 5 minutes to change the rules of how healing surges work...

I bet all of you have spent much longer than 5 minutes arguing on random forums about how the game works.

[RiotGearEpsilon]

I'm completely behind Porrage on this one. You can excoriate 4e for all sorts of things, but that argument doesn't hold water, Frank.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

I bet all of you have spent much longer than 5 minutes arguing on random forums about how the game works.

...
Are you implying that we are arguing about inconsequential Rpg topics, and generally taking things too seriously?
...

[Kaelik]

I'm sure that Frank, one of the Tome authors is absolutely way to lazy to come up with flavor text or change some mechanics. I bet that's just his problem.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Don't like a rule in 4e? Change it!

I guess saying this is my formal initiation into the Den.

Saying the rules work because you can change them to make them work is admitting that the rules don't work.

[angelfromanotherpin]

I've rewritten half of the rules based around healing surges. I like the idea, but my personal opinion is that its far too easy to heal between encounters. I've mixed up the rules of death as well. I've even ported over all the equipment and weapons from my AD&D PHB to the 4e campaign I'm running.

Yeah, so you're not even playing 4e. You're playing a homebrew which is heavily informed by 4e.

And if you don't agree with the majority of the rules in the book... play 3rd edition. Or use your old AD&D books.

Nobody is arguing that 4e invalidates previous games. Some people are arguing that 4e is objectively inferior to previous games. Which it is.

[Username17]

Have you even glanced at page 278 where they give you racial traits for a goblin?

Yes. If used as specifically written, it is a starting point for writing 4e monsters. It is specifically not supposed to be used to make characters as you would a player character. It says that right at the beginning of the chapter.

So yes, it tells you that if making a new Goblin Wyvern Riding Archer you start by giving it Goblin Tactics and some bonus stats - on top of whatever stats you feel like giving it because NPCs don't have stat guidelines and of course it doesn't really matter because NPCs don't have final numbers that are based on their stats in any meaningful or consistent way. But sure, it has Goblin Tactics and some attributes. Now you give it a level and a monster role, which give some baseline numbers that you are apparently then supposed to change arbitrarily to best fit your whim.

And here's the fun part: the Golin Wyvern Rider will be mostly defined by 2-4 powers aside from Goblin Tactics that you will now make up from scratch.

---

And yes, you can rewrite the Goblin into a PC template and make a player character out of him instead and use that. This would actually be way faster than what the rules actually tell you to do. But we're talking about the actual rules of 4th edition, not how easy is it to use 3rd edition rules instead when they work better.

-Username17

[RiotGearEpsilon]

Objectively inferior to previous games at the specific goals which we deem desirable, to be extra specific.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Objectively inferior to previous games at the specific goals which we deem desirable, to be extra specific.

Well, it's also objectively inferior to previous games at the specific goals presented in 4e's own published mission statements. It truly does go above and beyond.

It might well be superior at the unpublished mission statements, which seem to be 'act as gateway to CMG,' and 'act as gateway to online games.' I will say that purchases of D&D minis have spiked at the store I work at since 4e came out.

[RiotGearEpsilon]

Ours has sold out on the PHB a surprising number of times.

[angelfromanotherpin]

Ours has sold out on the PHB a surprising number of times.

By surprising, do you mean surprisingly high or surprisingly low? It would have to be really high to surprise me. People are idiots for brand-names. People bought all kinds of crap material for 3e (often compulsively) because it had the D&D logo on it.

Popularity does not equate with quality. How many 'burgers' has McD's sold?

[MartinHarper]

If you want to bully or sweet talk a goblin there are actual DCs involved for that and you can look them up.

You can bully a goblin just fine. It's Intimidate vs Will, with modifiers. PHB 186. Diplomacy is pure DM fiat, though, as you say. This is sad because they made a skill system where it didn't have to be.

[RiotGearEpsilon]

I mean surprisingly high - at least to me. Perhaps I was too optimistic.

[Username17]

I mean surprisingly high - at least to me. Perhaps I was too optimistic.

I see a huge number of ads for people trying to sell or trade their 4e books, but that's all anecdotal. It'll take a while for us to be able to really see how many people like the new system and how many purchased it because of the marketing hype and get bored really fast.

I get bored with the new rules extremely quickly, but I also see through to the code very rapidly.

-Username17

[RiotGearEpsilon]

My boredom has nothing to do with the code - I suspect that, frankly, if they'd presented it in a more engaging and 'flavorful' fashion, I'd be enthusiastically in favor of it, though aware of the crippling flaws. I'll swallow a lot of crap if it comes with good spice.

[Voss]

It seems to me that most of the arguments here are inspired by laziness on the dungeon master's part.

Nope. Laziness on the designers' part. They dropped half the game, and then disingenuously stated that people didn't want those parts anyway. Except with the other parts, which 'people' apparently did want, they didn't manage to improve either. So its pretty much an abject failure from any perspective you care to look at, except, unfortunately, sales.


Hopefully the lack of staying power will kick in after the 'ooo, new shiny' period wears off. I suspect the new FR setting books will jumpstart that.

[Porrage]

Yes. If used as specifically written, it is a starting point for writing 4e monsters. It is specifically not supposed to be used to make characters as you would a player character. It says that right at the beginning of the chapter.

Uhh, on page 276 it says "This information can be used as a guideline to create PC versions of the creatures"

So yes, it tells you that if making a new Goblin Wyvern Riding Archer you start by giving it Goblin Tactics and some bonus stats - on top of whatever stats you feel like giving it because NPCs don't have stat guidelines and of course it doesn't really matter because NPCs don't have final numbers that are based on their stats in any meaningful or consistent way. But sure, it has Goblin Tactics and some attributes. Now you give it a level and a monster role, which give some baseline numbers that you are apparently then supposed to change arbitrarily to best fit your whim.

And here's the fun part: the Golin Wyvern Rider will be mostly defined by 2-4 powers aside from Goblin Tactics that you will now make up from scratch.

Actually... that does sound fun. I don't see what you're complaining about here. Sounds to me like you don't want to take fifteen minutes to make a monster. Making up powers isn't exactly hard.....

Goblin Rider Encounter Power 1:
Flyby Ram: Strength vs Reflex. Hit: Deal xdx damage and move target x number of spaces.

It took me thirty seconds to come up with that Encounter power.

And yes, you can rewrite the Goblin into a PC template and make a player character out of him instead and use that. This would actually be way faster than what the rules actually tell you to do. But we're talking about the actual rules of 4th edition, not how easy is it to use 3rd edition rules instead when they work better.

-Username17

I don't believe I ever said to substitute 4e rules with 3e.... I said you could easily modify rules to suit your playing style.

[Porrage]

Nope. Laziness on the designers' part. They dropped half the game, and then disingenuously stated that people didn't want those parts anyway. Except with the other parts, which 'people' apparently did want, they didn't manage to improve either. So its pretty much an abject failure from any perspective you care to look at, except, unfortunately, sales.


Hopefully the lack of staying power will kick in after the 'ooo, new shiny' period wears off. I suspect the new FR setting books will jumpstart that.

Oh don't get me wrong, I wasn't too keen on some of the things kept out of 4th edition. But that's just it. Most of the people are sitting on these forums and on WotC forums complaining about 4e rules. When I said laziness on the DM's part, I'm talking about how people have hours to complain on random forums... but they can't take a few minutes to tweak/alter the rules to fit their style of play.