I wonder though that, with the way things are going, what will 5th edition be like? Isn't it likely that they'll try to move away completely from any link to pen and paper roleplaying, and instead just launch an MMO?
For that reason I can't really be shrug my shoulders at those who play 4th edition. I see it as part of a worrying direction that will kill of the game.
And on that note, wouldn't it be awesome if someone reissued some of the (2nd edition) AD&D material? Since I would prefer to play that as opposed to 4th ed. rubbish. Plus my AD&D books are looking really tatty.
I looked at the new books, and I must say that they look quite nice. The art and the 'newness' of the books really made me want to start creating characters.
But that doesn't say anything about the stats and the facts that they messed up the way of the standard fantasy world. As a new setting, it would be Great. As a new edition, it's not.
They should've taken this enthousiasm into a new nice campaign setting, instead of a next edition. I like the idea of Halflings in swamps, but not as a global rule for a PHB. And where, oh where is the (half-)Orc? Are they not interesting enough anymore?
Talking about settings: that's what they should reprint: 2nd edition adventures in Planescape, Ravenloft and Dark Sun, but possibly with extra information for conversion. An inter-edition module with stats on the side for every system.
I ran the 4e adventure from the back of the DMG with my group last week, and I'm running my first homemade adventure tonight. So far everyone likes it, but we'll see how well I can translate my DMing skills to the new system.
I did get around (finally) to playing 4th ed., and one of the chaps I was playing with compared 4th ed. to an action movie whereas 3rd ed is a novel. I think that comment is spot on. 4th ed is a better system if all you're interested in is combat and dungeon-crawling, but not if you're interested in telling a story.
For instance multi-classing works better in game mechanics terms. But it also mitigates against the idea of a chaotic rogue suffering a change of heart and becoming a cleric (to take one example).
I also think that 4th ed. was designed so that the DM would not have to tell a story. Instead it's marketed as a new toy that parents can buy their kids (with a new version of the toy appearing every year). It's certainly not marketed for adults who enjoy roleplaying.
That doesn't mean that 4th ed. is a bad system. I think it's very good, but not at what I want to do.
I can see the action movie link, having DMed for the third time yesterday, but there was no lack of roleplaying at the table.
True the system itself focuses more on things like the city chase, puzzle solving and flat out combat, but it also allows for unique terrain usage, out of combat situations, and a bit more freedom from alignment.
We are thoroughly enjoying it. It adds more depth to the system, but it only takes away from roleplaying if the players want it to. I think it corrects what 3e tried to do.
If you want to write a group novel, play 2e. If you want more adrenaline, play 4e. I see no more use for 3e or 3.5 in my future.
So I've been playing it a little, and all I have to say is this: It's about damned time WotC dropped the act and just made a tabletop MMO. At least this is honestly a video game sans computer, and for that, it works very well. 3e and 3.5 were hybrid bastard-children trying to pretend to be something other than what they were, and failing across the board. I'm not a huge fan 4th, but it's better then 3 across the board. I can't think of a single thing 3e or 3.5 did better, or even as well as 4th. They gave the monk the boot again (+1M points there), and made the ranger awesome again, instead of the most worthless class in the game beyond 1st level like 3e and completely without any value at all in 3.5.
Yeah, so it's a video game masquerading as an RPG. So was 3e/3.5, but at least 4th doesn't suck at it.
I can agree with you, though I think it's great the way it is. It is literally like playing an MMO on paper - which being a veteran of MMOs (NOT WoW) I can honestly say I prefer 4e. The socialization is a lot better, and we get through more than having to endlessly grind.
If this were a video game, I think a lot would be lost the way of DDO.
It's good for what it is - that's just not the game i want to play right now, is all.
Also, Sui, your link to complaints looks like you guys got carried away trying to one-up each other and forgot pretty much at the outset what you're really making fun of. Very little of what they say bears any relation whatsoever to the actual rules presented in the book. You don't need a high strength to use a shield, you CAN make your own magic items, fighters cannot cast spells without multiclassing (unless you think cleave is a spell for some reason - do you think that?)... I could go on and on, but I'm not going to except to point out one thing more: Charisma hasn't been appearance since.. wait... never. It's never been appearance.
Posted on 2008-08-11 at 17:17:04.
Edited on 2008-08-11 at 17:20:59 by Rystefn K'ryll