I have watched a few YT videos, over the last few months; where 4E was being hyped as an alternative, to 5E. Surely 5E has jumped the shark, by now.
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
I guess some people are just scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something fresh and novel to play in place of 5e.
It's buffling, given the trainwreck which was 4e at the time, that today some may even consider it actually good ;D
Personally I never noped a game faster than 4e after reading the first couple of chapters of the PHB, so I really cannot wrap my head on their reasoning.
Quote from: Felneth on September 21, 2023, 03:41:31 AM
I guess some people are just scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something fresh and novel to play in place of 5e.
It's buffling, given the trainwreck which was 4e at the time, that today some may even consider it actually good ;D
Personally I never noped a game faster than 4e after reading the first couple of chapters of the PHB, so I really cannot wrap my head on their reasoning.
The only explanations that I can find are that the modern estimators are either young, complete newbies for which "RPG" means "MMORPG" (and from that point of view, 4E gives a pretty good experience even if a bit dated) or dudes that drank heavily from the Forge kool-aid font and consider that thing a well designed gamist/simulationist product.
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 03:02:12 AM
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
Quote from: Felneth on September 21, 2023, 03:41:31 AM
I guess some people are just scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something fresh and novel to play in place of 5e.
It's buffling, given the trainwreck which was 4e at the time, that today some may even consider it actually good ;D
Personally I never noped a game faster than 4e after reading the first couple of chapters of the PHB, so I really cannot wrap my head on their reasoning.
Not a fan of 4e during its time, and not abhorred by 5e when it was released, I can say that considering the direction 5e has gone and where it's headed with One D&D (and the terrible stuff they're playtesting), I am not surprised that people are looking at alternate versions of D&D to enjoy. Even 4e.
As it stands currently, my interest, in order, would be (assuming these would be the only options): 5e before Tasha's, 4e, 5e in its entirety, then One D&D. Meaning, I like 5e before Tasha's enough to play or run, if that was the group's consensus (thankfully, it's 3.5). After that, I'd do 4e D&D. Those last two - Tasha's and the newer rules changes, plus the One D&D initiative? Hard pass.
It will be interesting to see that becomes the "new Pathfinder." My money is on Tales of the Valiant.
I've never been much of a D&D guy and I bounced off it pretty hard after witnessing the glorious garbage fire that was 4e, so I'm pretty much not in the loop of the current D&D situation (OGL fuckup aside). What's the problem with Tasha's ?
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 04:14:40 AM
Quote from: Felneth on September 21, 2023, 03:41:31 AM
I guess some people are just scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something fresh and novel to play in place of 5e.
It's buffling, given the trainwreck which was 4e at the time, that today some may even consider it actually good ;D
Personally I never noped a game faster than 4e after reading the first couple of chapters of the PHB, so I really cannot wrap my head on their reasoning.
The only explanations that I can find are that the modern estimators are either young, complete newbies for which "RPG" means "MMORPG" (and from that point of view, 4E gives a pretty good experience even if a bit dated) or dudes that drank heavily from the Forge kool-aid font and consider that thing a well designed gamist/simulationist product.
I would agree that this is at least a chunk of the reason. So, so many YouTubers and such out there talk about discovering RPGs and D&D midway through 3.x, and for them 4e is not so jarring or offensive—and they are also far more comfortable with videogamey-ness than older players. Compared to the sprawling mess that 3.x became and 5e/OneD&D is becoming, 4e seems a tight game (especially if you grab the Essentials books as your core rules). I personally see 4e as an intriguing skirmish miniatures game and a horrible TTRPG, but I started playing with Holmes and don't like computer RPGs.
Thinking about it, perhaps the appeal of 4e DOES directly stem from the ability to pick up the Essentials books, a campaign setting, and go with it.
4E is not a bad game. It's kind of fun to play battles with. Beyond combat, I don't know what to say about the system because I didn't play that much of it. Looking back, I would have given the system more of a chance if WotC hadn't tried to pawn it off as Dungeons & Dragons. The appeal of 4E was precisely that it wasn't D&D, as far as I can tell. The people who liked it seemed to do so for the same reason I hated it - 4E just wasn't D&D.
3E benefit tremendously of the popularity of video games at the time. The Baldur's Gate series, Planescape: Torment, Neverwinter Nights, and others drew attention to the brand. Ultima Online, EverQuest, and other early MMORPGs were essentially trying to recreate the tabletop experience in a video game. A lot of new players came into D&D from those early MMORPGs by word of mouth. It was quite common to hear Dungeons & Dragons mentioned while playing EverQuest. Given that, it made sense to try to make a new game that would capitalize on the massive popularity of World of Warcraft.
Quote from: Corolinth on September 21, 2023, 09:09:36 AM
4E is not a bad game.
No, it's simply a horrible RPG. As a fantasy skirmish simulator is probably top notch, it's all the rest that sucks. Could have a been a very tough contender for Warhammer if it had been released with supporting miniatures, terrains and adequate marketing to support the notion that it was good at handling combat and nothing more.
Interestingly enough 5E borrows many elements from 4E except 5E simply presents in an more traditional fantasy rpg style of writing vs 4E style of trying to make much of the writing come off as an mmo to appeal to that crowd. It's still an rpg despite the subjective comments of its detractors.
It also goes to show the extreme hypocritical nature of tabletop gamers. Claiming that they would never ever play 4E again. No fool like an hypocritical tabletop rpg fool.
>:( Such heresy shall not stand!
Actually sounds more like someone who didn't understand the homework. WotC ticked everyone off earlier this year with attempted manipulation of OGL contract and everyone lit them up by trying to punch them in their wallet. This just sounds like that old contrarian evangelism that hated D&D before, hates it now, and will hate it in the future and so tries to find the most acrimonious outlier version to uphold as "True D&D" for MindFuck Points. If 4e didn't exist they'd be talking up SAGA without ever playing it just for the MindFuckery... I suspect TBP & Something Awful trollollollery stuck in grievance mode.
As for 4e... it's a solid skirmish game. Outside a few questionable design choices (easy layup example, Ranger Double Strike, or HP bloat) it's better balance than a lot of the other skirmish games out (e.g. Iron Kingdoms). That said it was a pain to do status accounting, dragged on even with halved HP bloat, and its non-combat substance light to the point that it really didn't interest me for a dungeon crawl let alone anything lengthy like a campaign.
If you love it, rock on. But no, 5e is a better RPG in chassis and structure and optional content for me in nearly every way -- and I have stated my issues about 5e from 2014 beginning and throughout here on this site. As for holding the line against WotC assholery, OK, whatever. Yet all previously purchased content used without buying more new stuff is a lost sale to myopic MBAs lately. If you aren't on the buying treadmill (and now it's Virtual! ::) ) you're a deadbeat in their eyes. So just staying still is an offense to corporate sensibilities.
A TTRPG modeled after a video game is not a good replacement. Play an OSR or something like C&C
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 21, 2023, 12:56:05 AM
I have watched a few YT videos, over the last few months; where 4E was being hyped as an alternative, to 5E. Surely 5E has jumped the shark, by now.
I will never understand how, this long into everyone's experience with the Internet, that they still do the "I saw this thing on the Internet so it must be both true and representative of most people!"
Quote from: Lord Dynel on September 21, 2023, 08:32:52 AM
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 03:02:12 AM
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
Quote from: Felneth on September 21, 2023, 03:41:31 AM
I guess some people are just scraping the bottom of the barrel to find something fresh and novel to play in place of 5e.
It's buffling, given the trainwreck which was 4e at the time, that today some may even consider it actually good ;D
Personally I never noped a game faster than 4e after reading the first couple of chapters of the PHB, so I really cannot wrap my head on their reasoning.
Not a fan of 4e during its time, and not abhorred by 5e when it was released, I can say that considering the direction 5e has gone and where it's headed with One D&D (and the terrible stuff they're playtesting),
What is it you think they are playtesting at this point that's terrible?
The most common complaint is they're changing very little and discarded all the innovative changes to fall back on mostly putting common house rules into place and errata. So I am curious what it is you think is so radical?
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 08:40:29 AM
I've never been much of a D&D guy and I bounced off it pretty hard after witnessing the glorious garbage fire that was 4e, so I'm pretty much not in the loop of the current D&D situation (OGL fuckup aside). What's the problem with Tasha's ?
Here is my rant about the subject.
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/11/tasha-and-d-5e-is-for-experts-and.html
I was playing 5e at the time, and have abandoned it since, so the post contains praise to 5e that I have now reconsidered.
Might be different for others for example, some people dislike the power creep.
The TLDR is: Tasha is a book for players that are both EXPERT in 5e and at the same time COMPLETE NOOBS about D&D and RPGs in general.
This is their target audience now, and I do not fit.
Quote from: Opaopajr on September 21, 2023, 10:22:05 AM
If 4e didn't exist they'd be talking up SAGA without ever playing it just for the MindFuckery... I suspect TBP & Something Awful trollollollery stuck in grievance mode.
Which SAGA--the card-based rules set from TSR or the d20 variant used for their last iteration of Star Wars? :) I actually have played both and prefer both of them not only to 5E, but to 4E, 3E, and most other versions of D&D. :)
IMO, the best alternative to 5E is... 5E.
The problem with 5E isn't the core system, which is good, it's all the power-creep and bloat that came after it. The best way to enjoy 5E is probably 5E Basic: No feats, no multiclassing, no weird non-Tolkienian classes or races. If you want to expand from there, go slowly, with options from the PHB (and just the PHB; don't let anyone talk you into using the crap from Tasha's or Xanathar's).
Of course, the trouble with playing 5E nowadays is that all the players feel entitled to the player options from any official source. Even if you try to select against this, you will inevitably have one player begging for off-theme player options after 3-4 sessions. That was always my problem. "Hey, I know we're playing in a human-centric fantasy world based on European medieval history, but can my next character be an Elephant-person Hex Blade / Horizon Walker multiclass with spells from Splatbooks X, Y, and Z?" Sigh...
Quote from: Horace on September 21, 2023, 01:18:54 PM
IMO, the best alternative to 5E is... 5E.
The problem with 5E isn't the core system, which is good, it's all the power-creep and bloat that came after it. The best way to enjoy 5E is probably 5E Basic: No feats, no multiclassing, no weird non-Tolkienian classes or races. If you want to expand from there, go slowly, with options from the PHB (and just the PHB; don't let anyone talk you into using the crap from Tasha's or Xanathar's).
Of course, the trouble with playing 5E nowadays is that all the players feel entitled to the player options from any official source. Even if you try to select against this, you will inevitably have one player begging for off-theme player options after 3-4 sessions. That was always my problem. "Hey, I know we're playing in a human-centric fantasy world based on European medieval history, but can my next character be an Elephant-person Hex Blade / Horizon Walker multiclass with spells from Splatbooks X, Y, and Z?" Sigh...
Every group has at least one player that does that crap. I believe the rule for official Adventurer league play was that characters can be made from PHB and ONE splatbook. Multiple splatbook buffet style character building is how 3.5 got so ridiculous. I believe the designers even stated that the reason for the 1 splatbook rule was that all of the content wasn't playtested together.
Quote from: Horace on September 21, 2023, 01:18:54 PM
IMO, the best alternative to 5E is... 5E.
The problem with 5E isn't the core system, which is good,
No, it's still geared to snowflakes and children. No real D&D flavor.
Quote from: Jam The MF on September 21, 2023, 12:56:05 AM
I have watched a few YT videos, over the last few months; where 4E was being hyped as an alternative, to 5E. Surely 5E has jumped the shark, by now.
Both 4E and 5E cause Erectile Dysfunction.
4E comes with a side order of Syphilis.
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 08:40:29 AM
What's the problem with Tasha's ?
Please understand, these are my reasons for disliking it. But I didn't like the power creep of the classes (especially the sorcerer subclasses and the peace domain cleric). I am not a fan of the custom lineages and the race changes. I'm trying to remember what else...honestly, it has been so long since I've looked at it, I am having a hard time remembering. Those stick out in my mind, though as changes I didn't like. Thinking back, it was (to me) a big step in the power creep of 5e. Not that it wasn't already there, but Tasha's was when it was blatantly, and terribly, noticeable to me.
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 03:02:12 AM
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
I guess I'm a moron or a newbie, because I enjoyed 4th ed when I played it. I played in a "standard" campaign, and ran a Dark Sun campaign myself concurrently for about a year.
Now, I will say that 4th is a different beast than all the other editions of D&D. There are some valid complaints about it, re it being more of a board game, the sloggy nature of combat, and most importantly, the reason why I prefer other editions to 4th, is that it doesn't "feel" like D&D, and doesn't scratch the D&D itch. I wouldn't use it as a replacement for 5th. I'm a 2nd ed man, myself.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on September 21, 2023, 05:22:14 PM
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 03:02:12 AM
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
I guess I'm a moron or a newbie, because I enjoyed 4th ed when I played it. I played in a "standard" campaign, and ran a Dark Sun campaign myself concurrently for about a year.
Now, I will say that 4th is a different beast than all the other editions of D&D. There are some valid complaints about it, re it being more of a board game, the sloggy nature of combat, and most importantly, the reason why I prefer other editions to 4th, is that it doesn't "feel" like D&D, and doesn't scratch the D&D itch. I wouldn't use it as a replacement for 5th. I'm a 2nd ed man, myself.
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I
hate it.
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Though I suspect with everything we are hearing about 6th edition (they're not fooling anyone, it is 6th edition) it is going to be far, far worse than 4th.
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Basically what everyone I played with at the time said. An ok game. A HORRIBLE D&D
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Agreed.
It was not was I was looking for in a new D&D edition and the power creep given to PCs was too much. Damn, I played 3.5 with as few books as possible to avoid munchkins builds and seeing it codified in the core rules was a little bit too much for my taste.
Maybe I should read it again sometimes and try play it as a skirmish game, since everybody is suggesting it is nice for that.
Quote from: NotFromAroundHere on September 21, 2023, 03:02:12 AM
I never understood the fascination held by some in the hobby for something that was clearly a fuckup of apocalyptic size.
From the ruleset (practically a WOW tabletop ripoff, more akin to a boardgame than to a real RPG) to the shitty kill-the-third-party license move up to the change in the nature of the in-game universe, everything about that game screams "NO".
Only morons or complete newbies could look at that thing and consider it good.
I can actually somewhat understand it. From the perspective of people who come in from Video Games or otherwise want a very rigid and tactical experience similar to video games like Fire Emblem and X-Com. Those people do exist. But often they are too ignorant to understand what they want is anathema to RPGs and they'd be much happier playing wargames like Warhammer or X-Wing. You even see this mentality in other released games like Lancer (which I maintain was made by people who've never played an RPG in their life). And debatably Mechwarrior AToW (allthough that's more from being an RPG spin off that still uses BT rules as a base.)
An odd thing happened to me though, where I really wanted to do a WEG Star Wars D6 campaign as a 1:1 time scale with patron play game. I got some people interested but they were hesitant and had never played an RPG before. They were completely unfamiliar with it. They said they used to play Warhammer as kids. So I decided to start off our 1:1 game as a wargame campaign using WEGs SWD6 Wargame rules. Which are actually really good. Better than Star Wars Legion by miles. And now I'm gradually getting them to make RPG characters to go off on "missions" that affect the campaign. It's interesting and I'm not sure where it's going but we're all having fun. And it might be a good way to get people otherwise uninterested in RPGs to give them a go.
I actually really want to talk about my experiences with this campaign more but I will make a seperate thread so as not to drag this one down.
4e doesn't have woke politics to nearly the same degree and is still relatively easy to pick up and play. Perhaps even moreso than 5e. It was even well balanced compared to say 3e or even 5e. So I understand some of the appeal. That said, 4e has a lot of flaws and mechanically I'd say 5e and 3e outclass it solidly. To say nothing of the OSR. It lost a lot of D&D's heart and vancian feel. While being overly combat focused and arguably starting the 5e superheroics trend. To the point of basically being a squad skirmish game. And I say that as somebody who started with 4e.
It also depends a lot on what part of 4E you're using.
Give players only the Essentials Heroes of the Fallen Kingdom and you have only Humans, Dwarves, High Elves, Wood Elves and Halflings as races and only Fighter (Knight, Slayer), Thief, Wizard and Cleric as classes.
The fighters and thief use only stances/special moves and "power attack/backstab" with no daily resources other than hit points to track, while the wizard gets a spell prep feature for its spells (ex. a wizard might have 4 encounter and 3 daily spell slots, but have a dozen each of encounter and daily spells in their spellbook) and the cleric's spell list was heavily based on which god they chose to serve.
In other words the classes weren't even built in the same ways (fighters would switch between stances to gain particular advantages, thieves used the special move actions to set up their sneak attacks and backstabbing, wizards had to choose when best to unleash the daily spells they had prepared for the day, etc.
Basically it leaned much more towards earlier takes on D&D if that's what you were using for 4E.
Similarly, the monsters, especially in Essentials 4E were pretty widely praised (particularly Monster Vault Threats to the Nentir Vale which had gobs of lore with each critter (many of them unique). By the second year the monster math had been straightened out and the "padded sumo" of the early material was a thing of the past as monsters were tweaked to have fewer hit points, but hit a lot harder.
With healing surges functioning as a LIMIT on healing (it doesn't matter how many healing word spells the cleric can use... if you have seven healing surges you can only recover a bit over 175% of your max hit points in a day.
Starting with 24 hit points may feel like a lot without context, but when a level 1 "Lowtown Urchin" has 28 hp and deals 2d4+4 on a hit (and 2d6 extra on the first hit after it drops to 1/2 hit points) starting 4E PC's are actually really squishy and drop in 2-3 hits and can only get about a total of 42 hit points back during an entire adventure (healing potions also burn one of those surges so even finding a stash of those might only add a bit on the margins (each surge gets an extra 1d6 back instead of just a quarter of their max hit points).
And it's not like that doubles at every level either. Hit points go up only 4-6 per level (depending on class). So a level 3 PC might only have 34 hit points and won't have double their starting hit points until level 6).
Basically, it's super easy to run an old-school anyone can die type adventure in 4E with limited class and race options. Its a toolkit and like all editions it's early rough edges got smoothed out I'd say within the first year and started to singe by the second year (Dark Sun 4E was definitely the high point of pre-Essentials 4E) and the layout shifting to more focus on the fluff surrounding the mechanics and towards adding more outside of combat options.
Particularly for newer players who never stewed in the toxic vitriol of hatred for 4E I can see the appeal (the last new product for it was 11 years ago and Essentials was 13, so anyone younger than their mid-20's has only second-hand accounts by "old people" telling them it was bad, not first hand experience).
Quote from: KindaMeh on September 22, 2023, 05:49:56 PM
To the point of basically being a squad skirmish game. And I say that as somebody who started with 4e.
Well the 1985 video game Gauntlet was a design inspiration for 4e so that makes sense.
Quote from: Scooter on September 21, 2023, 10:26:19 AM
A TTRPG modeled after a video game is not a good replacement. Play an OSR or something like C&C
Someone should tell WotC because they are making the same mistake today and it appears they are betting the company on it.
Quote from: Ruprecht on September 23, 2023, 10:23:10 AM
Quote from: Scooter on September 21, 2023, 10:26:19 AM
A TTRPG modeled after a video game is not a good replacement. Play an OSR or something like C&C
Someone should tell WotC because they are making the same mistake today and it appears they are betting the company on it.
So? Has nothing to do with my advice to a player. What's your point?
I am agreeing with you and saying that WotC is making the same mistake. I thought that was clear.
It's weird to think that 4e's era ended arguably 8 or 9 years ago on account of the consequences of 5e's release, and that 5e has been the mainstream almost as long. Folks who aren't at least 20 probably don't remember D&D gaming arguments and 4e during that earlier time period.
Quote from: Ruprecht on September 23, 2023, 11:52:49 AM
I am agreeing with you and saying that WotC is making the same mistake. I thought that was clear.
It was clear to everyone else. Scooter is by far the least intelligent poster here. He knows it. We know it. He knows we know it. So every response he gives is hostile and condescending, as he desperately tries to quiet that little voice inside himself that is crying out in the knowledge that God gave a glass of grape juice a slightly higher IQ than him. That's the only rational explanation for his behavior...
With how much you can homebrew any game, I consider the spine the most important part. Even games with a focus on improv can be judged on their ability to deliver speed with said improv.
D&D generally falls into 2 categories:
Old School is OSR, 1e-2e with games inspired by that being Worlds Without Number. It's a reasonable desire to want more grounded lower power power-level games with it. If you want updated clean design without older jank, I would recomend Sine Nominees efforts. WWN, SWN, and now CWN are all good times.
New School is 3e, and 4e. 4e is better understanding what it wants to be, but is extremely rigid to that end. Its a good framework but goes too far (Applying poison is a power, making a deal is a power, etc).
5e is new school with enough superficial garbage to make old schoolers think its old school. Its the worst of both worlds. Lots of superficial character building, yet still all the flaws of every edition of D&D with no thing its good in particular.
If you just want to be in a location and roll dice, and just making the rules on the spot isn't classy enough, 5e will suffice.
4e is great. Best version of d&d. More RP options and incredible combat.
4vengers never give up.
I think 4e is fine, as long as you play it for what it is.
But the fact people need a computer and digital tools to keep all the floating modifiers and effects straight tells you it has problems as just a paper and pencil game.
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:23:01 PM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Though I suspect with everything we are hearing about 6th edition (they're not fooling anyone, it is 6th edition) it is going to be far, far worse than 4th.
Really, almost nobody left is calling it 6th edition anymore if they've read where the playtest is at right now. Those claims disappeared with the last several iterations. They discarded almost every "new" thing about it, and it's now mostly errata, codifying people's most common houserules, and a few tweaks.
My guess is what you're "hearing" is from the first several versions of the playtest, back when they were testing some more radical new ideas. Almost all of those were junked. It's now definitely backwards compatible (more so than 3.5 was with 3.0 in my opinion) and the most common complaint is it's not changing enough to even be called 5.5e.
Quote from: Mistwell on September 24, 2023, 02:47:03 AM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:23:01 PM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Though I suspect with everything we are hearing about 6th edition (they're not fooling anyone, it is 6th edition) it is going to be far, far worse than 4th.
Really, almost nobody left is calling it 6th edition anymore if they've read where the playtest is at right now. Those claims disappeared with the last several iterations. They discarded almost every "new" thing about it, and it's now mostly errata, codifying people's most common houserules, and a few tweaks.
My guess is what you're "hearing" is from the first several versions of the playtest, back when they were testing some more radical new ideas. Almost all of those were junked. It's now definitely backwards compatible (more so than 3.5 was with 3.0 in my opinion) and the most common complaint is it's not changing enough to even be called 5.5e.
I don't get why they're even making it anymore.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 24, 2023, 02:47:56 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on September 24, 2023, 02:47:03 AM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:23:01 PM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Though I suspect with everything we are hearing about 6th edition (they're not fooling anyone, it is 6th edition) it is going to be far, far worse than 4th.
Really, almost nobody left is calling it 6th edition anymore if they've read where the playtest is at right now. Those claims disappeared with the last several iterations. They discarded almost every "new" thing about it, and it's now mostly errata, codifying people's most common houserules, and a few tweaks.
My guess is what you're "hearing" is from the first several versions of the playtest, back when they were testing some more radical new ideas. Almost all of those were junked. It's now definitely backwards compatible (more so than 3.5 was with 3.0 in my opinion) and the most common complaint is it's not changing enough to even be called 5.5e.
I don't get why they're even making it anymore.
Cashing in as a 50th Anniversary Edition.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 24, 2023, 02:30:18 AM
I think 4e is fine, as long as you play it for what it is.
But the fact people need a computer and digital tools to keep all the floating modifiers and effects straight tells you it has problems as just a paper and pencil game.
4e has singificantly less floating modifiers and the like then 3e. I mean almost completly none. I find 3e the one that bashes your skull in with 300 buffs you can use to smash the internal mathematical spine.
I really like 4E until about 7th level, then almost all battles took HOURS! IF the monster was too much, always a TPK. The sad thing is the playtesters that I talked to TOLD WOTC the obvious problems with the game, they obviously didn't listen.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on September 24, 2023, 09:53:39 PM
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 24, 2023, 02:30:18 AM
I think 4e is fine, as long as you play it for what it is.
But the fact people need a computer and digital tools to keep all the floating modifiers and effects straight tells you it has problems as just a paper and pencil game.
4e has singificantly less floating modifiers and the like then 3e. I mean almost completly none. I find 3e the one that bashes your skull in with 300 buffs you can use to smash the internal mathematical spine.
I dunno about 3e, but 4e has lots of lingering conditions and various reactions you can do, so combat often involves tracking and remembering lots of conditions and someone reacting to someone reacting to someone else and what were we doing again?
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Hell, they could've called it D&D Tactics or Chainmail 2 and it wouldn't have irked people so bad.
Wasn't part of the plan of 4E was to move away from the OGL and SRD?
Since Pathfinder passed them up soon after if that was a goal it was a bad move.
5e is a redone 4e Essentials with the best parts stripped out of it and 5e won over all the story forge gamers, which 4e didn't do, so there's that. 5e is way more of a forge game than 4e.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 24, 2023, 02:47:56 AM
Quote from: Mistwell on September 24, 2023, 02:47:03 AM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:23:01 PM
Quote from: Thor's Nads on September 21, 2023, 08:14:58 PM
Quote from: Hzilong on September 21, 2023, 07:57:54 PM
Yeah, that's more or less how I view 4e as well. It was alright when I played it and read through it. Not spectacular, but hardly a train wreck. I get the big criticism about it that it was such a departure from previous editions that 4e probably should not have been marketed as a D&D edition and instead might have done better as a spin-off. Regardless, I don't really get the animosity I see towards it. Granted, I only ever did one-shots or short forays into it so maybe 4e doesn't work as well in long-term games.
I've said this many times. If 4e had been released as a miniatures skirmish game without the D&D branding my gaming group and I probably would have liked it.
As a D&D game I hate it.
Though I suspect with everything we are hearing about 6th edition (they're not fooling anyone, it is 6th edition) it is going to be far, far worse than 4th.
Really, almost nobody left is calling it 6th edition anymore if they've read where the playtest is at right now. Those claims disappeared with the last several iterations. They discarded almost every "new" thing about it, and it's now mostly errata, codifying people's most common houserules, and a few tweaks.
My guess is what you're "hearing" is from the first several versions of the playtest, back when they were testing some more radical new ideas. Almost all of those were junked. It's now definitely backwards compatible (more so than 3.5 was with 3.0 in my opinion) and the most common complaint is it's not changing enough to even be called 5.5e.
I don't get why they're even making it anymore.
Just a wild guess: money?
Quote from: Abraxus on September 24, 2023, 12:51:57 AM
Quote from: Omega on September 23, 2023, 11:59:36 PM
4vengers never give up.
Neither do 4E haters.
Thats because the 4vengers never fucking give up in their little hate campaign.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 24, 2023, 02:30:18 AM
I think 4e is fine, as long as you play it for what it is.
But the fact people need a computer and digital tools to keep all the floating modifiers and effects straight tells you it has problems as just a paper and pencil game.
I did not see that problem with 4e's version of Gamma World.
Quote from: RebelSky on September 26, 2023, 04:35:30 AM
5e is a redone 4e Essentials with the best parts stripped out of it and 5e won over all the story forge gamers, which 4e didn't do, so there's that. 5e is way more of a forge game than 4e.
More of a forge game than 4e? How so?
Just curious.
I have made the opposite point a few years ago (although I liked 5e at the time); i.e., 4e is purely gamist, to the point of cubic fireballs, while 5e is a bit of simulation/game/narrative or whatever.
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2015/11/d-5th-edition-bringing-balance-to-forge.html
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on September 25, 2023, 12:22:12 AMI dunno about 3e, but 4e has lots of lingering conditions and various reactions you can do, so combat often involves tracking and remembering lots of conditions and someone reacting to someone reacting to someone else and what were we doing again?
well we are talking about in-combat condition tracking moreso then modifiers which is different. I don't think it's 100% fair to say any mechanically heavy system doesn't actually want to be a RPG, which falls into "Only storygames are RPGs" type logic.
Quote from: Omega on September 26, 2023, 10:01:09 AM
Thats because the 4vengers never fucking give up in their little hate campaign.
On what? I found this site is still obsessed with slights given 10+ years ago, while happily indulging in said hate wether or not anybody is slighting them.
Quote from: Omega on September 26, 2023, 10:01:09 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on September 24, 2023, 12:51:57 AM
Quote from: Omega on September 23, 2023, 11:59:36 PM
4vengers never give up.
Neither do 4E haters.
Thats because the 4vengers never fucking give up in their little hate campaign.
Nah absolute prime grade bullshit no one has to edition war because you want to. Not because other people defend 4E.
Quote from: Omega on September 26, 2023, 10:01:09 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on September 24, 2023, 12:51:57 AM
Quote from: Omega on September 23, 2023, 11:59:36 PM
4vengers never give up.
Neither do 4E haters.
Thats because the 4vengers never fucking give up in their little hate campaign.
Which hate campaign would that be?
Seriously, I wanna know where to find some fresh 4E players.
Or do you just mean "hate campaign" in the sense of some people expressing a preference for 4E over whatever your favorite edition is on the internet?
Quote from: Chris24601 on September 26, 2023, 05:15:10 PM
Quote from: Omega on September 26, 2023, 10:01:09 AM
Quote from: Abraxus on September 24, 2023, 12:51:57 AM
Quote from: Omega on September 23, 2023, 11:59:36 PM
4vengers never give up.
Neither do 4E haters.
Thats because the 4vengers never fucking give up in their little hate campaign.
Which hate campaign would that be?
Seriously, I wanna know where to find some fresh 4E players.
Or do you just mean "hate campaign" in the sense of some people expressing a preference for 4E over whatever your favorite edition is on the internet?
Have you forgotten? All disagreement is hate now. ;)