The End of 4e D&D.

[Username17]

So we're calling it. 4th edition D&D gets its last book around the September mark, with the Rules Compendium. There is never going to be an Arcane Power 2 or a Shadow Power or a Darksun Player's Guide or any of that. The DMG 3 will not happen.

Starting in Fall of 2010, they will produce a new line of D&D called "D&D Essentials" which will come in a Red Box. It will have vastly simplified rules when compared to 4e D&D, because the entire Player's Guide fits into 32 pages including the Table of Contents. It will go from levels 1-5, and the closest equivalent is the D&D Basic Rules. This strongly indicates that the new main edition of the game that will come out in 2011 will be contrasted as being "Advanced." Even money on whether the new edition gets called "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons."

In the meantime, D&D Essentials will be getting its own expansions, that will include a "Dungeon Master's Kit," a "Monster Vault," and at least two "Player's Essentials" books that will take the D&D Essentials game past 5th level. These will probably have kludgy rules that allow you to use them with 4e D&D standard, but the focus will be upon working directly with the simplified "D&D Essentials" rules.

Discuss.

-Username17

[A Man In Black]

Well, they were never making a Darksun Player's Guide anyway. The Campaign Setting GM books were crap sellers, so they folded the PG and CS books into one and made a monster book the second book.

Also, in before 17 wishful-thinking die-4e-die posts.

[Red Archon]

I don't know wheter to cheer or to sigh mournfully. 4th e. has been what some might call a huge headache for D&D and its players. However, if what Frank's saying is true, the news is bad. It's been proven to suck twice a day and three on Sundays and its fans are mostly either retarded or overgrowing PnP. But still, it was an attempt to once again revitalize the game and if they're going to just say "fuck it" and can it, it's somewhat likely that their interest in trying to keep D&D up and running is fading. I don't like the current edition but I'd like to see the franchise continuing to live on.

[Lokathor]

die-4e-die, etc. The problem as I see it is that they designed themselves into a box from the start, which is fine for a "coffee table RPG" kind of thing, but doesn't work when you're trying to replace DnD.

DnD Essentials seems like it'll have all the same problems really, which is sad in some sense, but there's nothing that can really be done about it, so oh well.

[Username17]

So yeah, Essential D&D.



They are being very to claim that Essential D&D is still 4th edition, and indeed they are keeping the 3 iconic 4e Races that no one likes (Dragonborn, Eladrin, and the 4e Tiefling with the absurd headpiece). They will not, however, be porting over all the classes - at least, not by the end of 2010. They are printing two different books for Players. And between the two of them, they are covering 8 classes. But since it's five classes in each book and there are two repeats - there's a very good chance that those 8 are the only classes. Interestingly, it's not quite the same as the classes of 4e's PHB1, here's the lineup:

• Cleric (Double Coverage)
  Ranger (Double Coverage)
  Druid
  Fighter
  Paladin
  Rogue
  Warlock
  Wizard

So apparently, the Warlord is getting shafted out of existence, and I don't think anyone cares. Each of the books is presenting five classes that are distributed: 1 Leader, 1 Defender, 1 Controller, and 2 Strikers. So since that's the 4e iconic party, I think that they are going to stick with the stupid roles nomenclature for the D&D Essentials line. Although since there is only one Leader class, they are pushing the old "someone has to play a Cleric" idea pretty hard.

So after the Basic Set redux, does that mean that they are going or Expert and Master rules to go to higher levels? You bet your ass they do! And of course, you'll need a box for Team Monster as well.

How much is there to say with the Essential D&D line? Well... potentially a lot. Every Monster set comes with sheets of monster tokens to move around the battlemaps, so you could very plausibly have like 3 of those or more and keep selling - if the core game runs smoother than 4e D&D does. And by cutting down on the rules, an thus presumably cutting down on the rules interactions and fiddly numbers to keep track of, I don't think they can fail to do that. It's rather explicitly a board game, so I imagine that it'll stay afloat better than 4e did. Unless they really fuck it up in the opening box, which is totally a possibility.

-Username17

[A Man In Black]

So apparently, the Warlord is getting shafted out of existence, and I don't think anyone cares. Each of the books is presenting five classes that are distributed: 1 Leader, 1 Defender, 1 Controller, and 2 Strikers. So since that's the 4e iconic party, I think that they are going to stick with the stupid roles nomenclature for the D&D Essentials line. Although since there is only one Leader class, they are pushing the old "someone has to play a Cleric" idea pretty hard.

I care. While four-roles-for-a-five-man-party and tank-healer-DPS-hellifanyoneknows were bad ideas, the idea of roles as a nutshell to describe each class and the idea that multiple different classes could all fill the same role were good ideas. Pitching the only alternative for one of the least popular classes is not a good idea.

[Windjammer]

Frank, you'd be correct if the fate of 4E depended on the release of physical product. But as it doesn't, a more appropriate title to your thread would be "As of September, 4E's focus on DDI will get even tighter".

The only salient question is how WotC expect new people to even know DDI exists without putting new stuff on the shelves which has comes with the "Learn more at D&D Insider" tag.

Seriously, you want to predict 4E's fate - watch DDI. When they stop updating the website tools and cut down on the in-house e-magazines... that's when you can call The End in sight.

[Roy]

You mean I might be able to have a quality D&D experience without soloing over 9,000 dumbfucks to find a handful of quality players? AWESOME.

So when do the dumbfucks get thrown out where they belong again?

[Username17]

Frank, you'd be correct if the fate of 4E depended on the release of physical product. But as it doesn't, a more appropriate title to your thread would be "As of September, 4E's focus on DDI will get even tighter".

The only salient question is how WotC expect new people to even know DDI exists without putting new stuff on the shelves which has comes with the "Learn more at D&D Insider" tag.

Seriously, you want to predict 4E's fate - watch DDI. When they stop updating the website tools and cut down on the in-house e-magazines... that's when you can call The End in sight.

I disagree with your assessment entirely. First of all: online DDI content is only advertised a month in advance. Secondly: since it isn't really quality controlled or anything, and they have a lot of crap on their desks, when it actually comes time to close up shop they'll be able to shovel stuff out the door for some time without writing anything new - if anything DDI material may increase when they stop writing it (at least, for a month or two, which is as far as their DDI previes go. Thirdly: they already said At D&D XP that they were going to be making DDI material for Essential D&D, which means that they have no intention of dropping the subscription service just because they close up shop on the edition.

So I disagree with your assessment from top to bottom. Looking at the DDI offerings on the calendar won't tell you anything at all about whether 4e is still in print or will be at any point in the future.

-Username17

[Lago PARANOIA]

Who all is getting fired in the transition from D&D to a board game?

Surely someone in Hasbro is pissed off over the whole fiasco. I see Andy Collins' name come up less and less but he's still around.



Actually, come to think, I hope that D&D Essentials is also a huge pile of fail. I think the absolute worst outcome for D&D would be for D&D Essentials to succeed while the Advanced version fails, because then Hasbro would hold onto the D&D license. With D&D reduced that low, it would pretty much destroy the PnP game.

[sake]

'cutting down on the rules' could simply mean 'exactly the same crapsack game as before only we've deleted Twin Strike, Rightous Brand, Astral Seal, Orb of Imposition, Feychargers, Pitfighters, Half Elf Dilettante, Genasi Blaster Wizards, Frost Cheese, Radiant Cheese, Charging Critfishers' basicly removing what few interesting options 4E has and further blanding the game down to the level of No Items, Fox Only, Final Destination*

*Until they just release All-New broken combos and power creep to replace it

Of course, there's plenty of people who'd claim that that really was an improvement to the game.

[NineInchNall]

Yeah, I'm one of 'em. 4e is a board game with pretensions of being an RPG. Pare out all the things that don't work in a board game, reduce the number of redundant powers, and voila!

That's something I might actually play.

[sake]

Yeah, I'm one of 'em. 4e is a board game with pretensions of being an RPG. Pare out all the things that don't work in a board game, reduce the number of redundant powers, and voila!

That's something I might actually play.

Well, enjoy your Spam Your 'Hit the Target for 1W+Stat bonus damage and Slide One Square' At Will forever game then.

[Username17]

Not forever, just one evening. The basic box, I could imagine pushing through all five levels of it in one evening, and then calling it. They could really have something if they tightened up the powers a bit.

The problem I see is that they intend to put the 6-30 rules back in, and then it will try vainly to be a campaign game again.

Anyway, quick question: is it more insulting that in the 10 races they are writing up for Essential D&D:

• One of them is Dragonborn (the lizards who inexplicably have tits) and none of them is Gnome
  
  or
• Four of them are Elves, and none of them is Gnome

?

Quite a quandary.

-Username17

[erik]

Well, enjoy your Spam Your 'Hit the Target for 1W+Stat bonus damage and Slide One Square' At Will forever game then.

That is actually more complicated that the attacks in some very fun board games.

Was that supposed to be some indictment against 4e as a board game? If so, have you played any board games?

[Windjammer]

If there was, or will be, a 4E boardgame I think it should

1. copy the base design of the D&D Miniatures game and

2. bunk that Tome of Battle design with 'powers' which dominates 4E

Let me address these points in reverse order.

(2.) Powers are simply too much mechanics for one trick - "too much" both in the context of a fast-paced RPG (4E is actually quite cumbersome I think) and certainly in the context of a boardgame, especially once you consider the level of mechanical complexity that is currently popular (Runebound or Descent e.g.). WotC has learned a great deal in simplifying the layout of the powers over the years. If you read up a maneuver or stance in Tome of Battle, you'll notice the two cardinal sinds of unhelpful presentation:

i) Quantity of information: Too wordy. If you can say it in 1 sentence, why use 4?
ii) Visual presentation of information: ToB blends the flavour and the mechanics when presenting them. That's a no-go for (e.g.) boardgame rulebooks. Boardgame rulebooks delegate these things to distinct areas on the page and colour codes them etc. so as to make these easier to pick up during play and when learning the game.

I once did a re-layouting of the ToB Warblade class using 4E layout. The amount of useless verbiage I had to cut from the maneuver write-up was enormous. The layout of 4E powers is a vastly improvement here - only shame being, most of them are extremely dull (but that's another story).

(1.) If, on the other hand, you look to the D&D minis game, the presentation of the mechanics, and the complexity thereof, is extremely neat and well done. A DDM monster's info can basically fit on one of those standard M:tG cards, provided you are allowed to print info on the reverse side when needed. If you look at the slightly more complex monsters, they have 4-6 tricks they can do, so it's not that having less space to print on what they can do (a card) means they have drastically fewer options than some 1st level PCs in 4E. Obviously this way of presenting tactical options for monsters impressed WotC itself enough to carry it over to the 4E MMs. Now, a lot of the monsters are very boring in 4E because they are essentially 1 trick ponies. But if you look at dragons, they've got tons of options (not all of them viable, but the quantity of options is there). A dragon in 4E is basically 4 monsters rolled into one; I always think of that 90s TV series where the Power Rangers merge into a Mega-Bot (or some such) i.e. merge their alter egos, some robot animals, into 1 animal. That's what 4E solos are - they are 4 DDM creatures rolled into one, even with four (or three, I forget) actions per round at certain initiative counts. And for a 4E-inspired boardgame, that's what I think the "heroes" i.e. players' characters ought to look like - that level of complexity, those number of options, presented in that format. The reduced complexity, and the much faster moving combat, when using such a type of mechanical character is owed to the fact that it was designed that a single person - the DM, the guy playing a DDM warband - ought to control multiple such characters. And that's exactly the reduction in complexity I'd expect from a game that tried to carry 4E over into the boardgame genre.

---

And, two design considerations unrelated to the above.

(3.) Just because it's called D&D need not mean your game must feature dungeons. And it better not. You create a game where little figs move around excitedly on the battlemap every turn? Well, then don't design a board with 1 square wide tunnels and areas that are 3 x 3 squares large. We already have non-functional 4E modules (like P2) thanks to cartography that disregards the game's actual design, so thank you very much.

(4.) Why build a new boardgame when you can recycle gaming products or at least a design that you already put money into developing? Here are two rough sketches to start from:

4.1. "DMs' Celebrity Death Match". You need a MM and 2 players. Have the players build an encounter group at a pre-arranged level. Get out a battlemap and have the two monster groups fight each other. Yes you've published this game before, but that's not going to stop you from selling it twice, is it?

4.2. "Guild vs. Guild". You need an even number of players (at least 4) and one 4E PHB per player (or a set of Power Cards). Divide the players into two teams. Each team builds a group of 4 PCs at a prearranged level. Let them pick whatever roles and classes they wish. Then have the two teams of PCs fight against each other.

PS. (3.) and (4.) highlight what I consider to be two inherent design failures in 4E. First, it makes use of dungeons literally when it shouldn't. Two, if you look at all the types of game they could have created from the 4e core books, they picked the most boring one: 1 DM vs. 4 players.

[ggroy]

[Thymos]

Don't we already have the 4e board game called descent?

[Juton]

How closely do you think the board game will play to 4e? I hope Windjammer is right and they pare it down to the level of D&D minis. I fear it will be only a slightly reduced version of 4e proper.

[Username17]

For a board game, 4e's powers are far too fiddly. A Grind Paladin can give himself 4 temporary hit points that last until the end of the encounter or until they are expended with his first at-will and he can give the target a -2 penalty to his attack rolls with his other at-will (under no circumstances will he know any of the at-wills from Divine Power because they blow). But wait! hat if he uses his Encounter power? He does an extra W of damage and one of your allies gets a +4 bonus to AC until the end of the round instead.

That kind of shit is just hard to manage, because it's not used when the benefits happen or by the people who are benefiting. And neither the numbers nor the durations are standardized. That's needlessly confusing for a set of powers that is, quite frankly, pretty shitty and small. Seriously, it's -2 to-hit for one enemy for one turn. It saves your team from 10% of the average per-round output of one dude. It's just not even worth the kind of accounting you have to do to use it.

I don't think there's anything wrong with a player having have two attacks he can use every round, 1 attack he can use once in each of four arbitrary stages, and 1 attack he can only do once in the whole board. That's simplistic, but it's respectable for a board game. I object to being asked to count all those -2s and shit for every single action. And I also object to each player only getting one lousy piece on the board.

At that level of complexity of choice, each player should be throwing around 3-5 units, minimum. Of course, there are so many temporary modifiers at that point that the game becomes unplayable. Which is a basic design flaw. -2 penalties and +3 bonuses that last for a turn or two are not a good substitute for being able to do interesting things.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty2]

How closely do you think the board game will play to 4e? I hope Windjammer is right and they pare it down to the level of D&D minis. I fear it will be only a slightly reduced version of 4e proper.

Well they are cutting it down to a 32 page book for players. Granted, that's only 4 classes, but that seems like a very large simplification.

My guess is that we will see all effects become either "Until end of next turn" or "save ends".

Combat rules will probably get further simplified. I'm guessing a reduction to everyone's movement speed, but the removal of AoOs. We may also see the removal of the immediate action as well.

I doubt we'll see any real big changes like the removal of ability scores and the extra simplification probably means the tactical element will lose even more. Roles also seem to be there to stay, since as Frank pointed out, the classes are the iconic 4E party.

I think we may actually see a step back to magic items being in the DMG and being nonpurchaseable. Though in all likelihood, magic items will still be bonus accumulation garbage like they were in 4E.

Rituals, and possibly feats, are probably gone entirely. The skill system is guaranteed to suck or might be absent entirely.

My guess is the game is going to be exclusively power based.

[ggroy]

[ggroy]

[老子]

You should wait at least a year between 4e is dead threads (Signs of the beginning of the end for 4E)

[Username17]

You should wait at least a year between 4e is dead threads (Signs of the beginning of the end for 4E)

I don't understand. The other thread is a discussion about what would make them stop soliciting 4e materials, with most people concluding that they were just about there in terms of failure to attract interest with 4e. With the coming of the new release schedule, it appears that those of us who made that prediction were right. They stopped soliciting new 4e products right around the time of that thread, which is why there are no 4e products left on the schedule for a year after that thread concluded.

In July of 2009, the majority opinion on this site was that 4e's lackluster sales would probably get them shut down soon. The new evidence is that 4e got a termination notice somewhere between July and September of 2009. So... all you're doing by linking to that thread is proving that we are awesome and should probably be listened to.

-Username17