Doug Williams wrote:Anyone on this forum played the new 4th edition D&D yet? What are your opinions, and could you help me understand how it differs from previous editions?

Anyone trying to collect 4th edition? I realize that print runs are so large now that is is doubtful that anything released by WoTC for 4th edition will ever be valuable (with the possible exception of the Hommlet module). What are your thoughts on the quality of the materials being released?

It is fun fantasy roleplaying game that is Dungeons & Dragons in name only. It is simple to learn and simple to prepare for. Combat take longer due to the ability of both sides to heal liberally. High level plays about as smooth as lower levels. High level monster are only slightly more complex than their lower level equivalent.

4e is an exception based design where most of the game resides in the
"powers" that various characters and monsters have. While mechanically similar not all "powers" are protrayed as super power.

4e biggest issues are the length of combat. In a 4 hour time period you probably get three stretches of roleplaying done and two combat encounters. Another issues is the over the top high fantasy feel of classes and powers in the core rulebooks. This makes it less of a swiss army knife for fantasy campaign than older editions of D&D. Not to say you can't run a gritty fantasy campaign 4e but you have to work at it more.

In theory 4e is can be tweaked to produce whatever style you like but Wizards hasn't really done this well yet. The upcoming Dark Sun may change this assessment. Plus D&D Essentials coming out this fall may tone down the high fantasy a bit.

I don't think it has a long legs as older edition of D&D because of the focus on Combat mechanics. For most everything outside of combat 4e is a throwback to OD&D/AD&D 1E. However the attention of the player handbook is clearly on combat. Because of this once you get bored of the combat system people will move on.

It has rituals which works nicely in making the non-combat spells more readily available and usable. I adapted this for Swords & Wizardy (a OD&D clone) in my Majestic Wilderlands Supplement.

Purely from a collector/investor standpoint, 4E will throw up things that will quickly become sought after, and possible become rare in the future. Always worth looking for and picking things up for cover price rather than buying in later when the prices are rising. Hommlet looks to be a case in point.

Pipswich wrote:I like 4th and play regularly.  But, my group was formed with some people who like the minis game so the strategic combat is right up their alley.  I have to tinker with the storylines to get them to roleplay a bit, but that seems like what a dm should be doing anyway.

I can't get used to having all the healers nearly equally good at healing and the classes doing remarkably similar damage.  The leadership group bonuses for warlords and the like are nifty.  

There is a bit of a video game feel, with some tendency toward exp grinding through endless similar rooms in some modules.  The production quality is high and the variety of classes, abilities, armor, equipment, etc is endless.

Tactical combat. Strategic is large scale.

serleran wrote:I think I would appreciate the game more if it was called Warhammer Quest II.

World of EverWarhammer Quest II The Reckoning

I got the core books. Reading the PHB now.....

Chuckle.  I don't actually see a reason a wizard shouldn't be able to swing a sword ineffectively.

Wizard with +1 magic 2hs = +1
Average fighter with same and no power ups = +9

At level two...  +1 vs +10 and it gets worse fast.

And damage wizard = 1d12+1  vs fighter which ramps up to 2(or3)d12+bonuses

Level one human guard AC =16  hp over 30 and in groups of 4-6.

The Fighter will have trouble with a group of guards.
The Wizard is as effective as the Fighter saying abracadabra... but he can try, lol.

I would let the wizard swing a sword and simply not include it in the xp division since it wasnt' helping in any fights.  Unless of course the likely TPW ensued for his stupidity.

Tactical is certainly the right word for it.  Thanks Jason for the note.

Those of us old enough to have played od&d or ad&d are a very small minority and probably not relevant to the success of current and future manifestations of the game.  

I expect most people playing rpg's now are heavily if not almost solely influenced by online gaming.  

The online game model online evolved from (EQ driven) warrior/cleric tanking of bosses with min/max damage dealer support for raid encounters into a situation where support classes were not even allowed on raids or in "uber" guilds to play the end game encounters.

Now, many games have been forced to make most roles more generic.  Melee classes emphasis tank/offtank function OR damage.  Healers generally all have equivalent heals.  Casters do equivalent damage.  Most games struggle with specialty classes like Shaman, necromancers and hybrids like rangers....  and the developers tinker with them endlessly against tidal waves of complaints that they are over or under powered.  

4th edition accommodates the experiences and expectations of a generation of gamers who want to tinker with their characters and classes and not be forced into defined roles.  It also allows people who are interested in gaming and tactics to minimize the role play if they chose.  I expect it can be played reasonably well with uncreative DM's, if necessary, lol.

4th is a complicated rule set, and emphasizes tactics, certainly.  But, you can strip it down and skim where you need too if the story/module/action is lagging or getting repetitive.  That's where we come in as DM's.  

There is a ton of flexibility.  

It isn't Od&d or Ad&d.  It's a different game.  

But to say it is not d&d seems equivalent to saying this is not the U.S./Canada/U.K./Italy/Australia/etc. because things are so dern different than they were thirty five + years ago.

I currently play in a group of seven people with ages of 45, 45, 44, 43, 43, 40, and the baby 20. His dad played till he went on the road trucking age 47.

The game I DM is a group of six people with ages of 45, 43, 43, 43, 43, 40.

Each campagin is played every other week. The game I DM is all but one guy I went to school with.

Michael

Purely anecdotal, but it seems a lot of people got into 4E and are now trading up to Pathfinder, which seems to be the system du jour for post-2000 gamers. Anyone here have that experience?

Mike B.