RetroRoleplaying Forum

I had a very brief look at the Fourth Edition Player's Handbook and Monster Manual this afternoon -- about 20 minutes with each book. It's nothing like the D&D I've known and loved the past 30+ years.

OD&D, CD&D, and First Edition AD&D all felt like 100% D&D to me. 2nd Edition AD&D too was 95-100% D&D feel (but 75% to 80% with all the kits and especially with player options books). D&D 3.0 was about 50%-60% D&D feel to me. D&D 3.5 was maybe 35%. From my brief look at the 4E PHB and MM, I expect D&D 4 to be about 15% max D%D feel to me.

Oddly enough, it looks like D&D 4 may be a very nice fantasy RPG, especially for those who like lots of rules crunch and detailed tactical combat, but it is D&D in name and general concepts only.

Battle mats and miniatures seem almost impossible to do without unless one is willing to rewrite the combat system completely. Combats still look to be very time-consuming. I'm told the DMG suggests one encounter per hour of play, max but haven't seen this myself. I suppose this is an improvement on 3.x time-wise, but it is still far too slow for me.

Many of the character powers seem to have very little basis in reality and a lot of basis in MMORPGS. However, as I don't play MMORPGS I am merely going by what I've read about them and from listening to people talk about them.

Like 3.x, the game still seems to be more about building a character with lots of crunch rules and then trying to use those rules to best effect in play.

The art isn't as bad as I expected, which is good as there is a lot of it. I even liked some of the art.

All-in-all and as expected, D&D 4 is not my style at all. I will definitely not be buying this retail. However, if I see the books at a garage sale some time for a few bucks each, I'd probably get them just to have copies.

My thoughts too. Although I am not happy with how the game has evolved, I am interested.

I've seen them now as well Randall and I think you have called it fairly. They are very pretty to look at but there's not much of the same feel as the earlier editions.

They have all the names in there, heck the DM's Guide even has the "Invulnerable Coat of Arnd" in it. But there's this overpowering feeling of "dungeonpunk" badboy about everything. You half expect one of the characters to say "Yo yo yo whut up dawg? I got some fiiiiine eldar steel here gonna cut your sorry death knight heinie." j/k

But seriously, it has changed quite a bit. I'm not sure if it's for the better but it's sure for a different target group IMHO.

I'm still waiting to get a look at a 4E DMG. I want to see if Rule Zero is still there and prominently mentioned. I also want to see just how these skill sequences I've read about work. By the sound of it, I'm afraid they have turned all sorts of role-playing situations (negotiating, for example) into a series of skill rolls.

I forgot to mention that the Monster Manual looks like it is almost totally combat focused. Monsters that had all sorts of interesting abilities that were not directly useful in a hack-n-slash encounter in previous editions don't seem to have those abilities any more, or at least they aren't mentioned/listed in the ones I looked at. Lots of monsters like dragons and demons look to have been up-powered somewhat combat-wise but stripped of abilities that made them very useful monsters outside of direct combat. Heck, monsters who used magic in previous editions seem to have lost that ability in 4E. Perhaps the DMG covers adding character classes to them or something, if so no hint of that appeared in the monsters I looked at in the MM.

Reminder: my look was very brief so I could have missed something.

[Edit: bad typo fixed]

My fears are substantiated, it seems.

Having read this on RPGPundit's blog (http://weblog.xanga.com/RPGpundit/659205597/item.html)...


...my worst fears have been apparently been realized. I should see the DMG this weekend to confirm this for myself.  :'( :'( :'(

I have now seen a copy of the dm guide and what the pundit says is true. I'll paraphrase/quote so that I don't get into trouble passing on info from a book that's not been released yet. One of my friends for some unknown reason has received his copies early. Don't know why, don't want to know.

Here's the pertinent passage: dm guide page 32. If the game come to a halt while a rules lawyer tries to find a particular rule invite him to take as long as he wants to search for it.....his character essentially  steps out of game for as long as that takes. Monsters don't attack him and he can delay indefinitely.

The purpose for this is so that the rest of the players can keep playing without him.

But I think this is the most telling section.

"Playing without a DM"

It's entirely possible to play D&D without a DM. For fun and exciting combat with no plot or purpose a random dungeon and encounter deck is all you need.

It goes on from there. Opinions?

LOL. I know how I would use that. "You can pull your character into limbo for as long as you want to rules lawyer. Nothing bad -- or good -- will happen to him.  When you are ready to accept the way the rest of us want the rule to be interpreted, let me know and your character will rejoin us." I'm a huge believer in rule zero.

That option has been there since almost the very beginning.

Wow, someones response to that blog you posted really irked me.

He said that with rule zero gone, DMs "No longer have the right to cheat". Its amazing how the point of that rule has been missed- but it seems like that line of thinking is what led to 3rd edition and beyond.

There have always been players (and even DMs) who thought like this. As far as I can tell people who see it like that tend to fall into two major categories:

1) People who see D&D (and RPGs in general) as competitive games with the players trying to beat the DM and vice-versa. Naturally, if you are trying to win a competitive game, strict adherence to the rules is generally going to be important.

2) People whose early experiences with RPGs were with truly bad DMs: those DMs who are either totally incompetent or, worse, DM because they enjoy the power it gives them to mess over others (e.g. DMs who always see that the party dies no matter what it takes to kill them).

But yes, catering to these folks seems to be responsible for a lot of rules bloat. However, I think there was another reason for it. If one doesn't have to make any rules decisions let alone develop homebrew campaigns and adventures, it is probably easier to DM. Since sales really depend on having lots of DMs, WOTC was interested in making it easier for the average person to jump right into DMing without as many chances to goof up. Unfortunately, they chose lots of firm rules over lots of good advice and examples.

I suppose I can see the motivation to make Dming easier, especially since its a rather tedious task in 3.5. Regardless, its also made the whole thing a lot less fun. A bigger problem with DMing in the new editions is that its practically impossible to fairly challenge players.

Considering what I've heard about 4th- the DM is actually just setting up bowling pins for the PC's to knock over.

That certainly seems to be the general thrust of the rules I've seen. That idea is boring as hell from my point of view -- both from a DM and a player point-of-view. Why not just play some like Heroscape if that's what you want out of the game? It's less work and far less rules.

Seriously- even the traps and such seem completely toothless in 4E. I hate to sound bitter, but I really just don't understand where the fun is there.

Toothless traps? ::shaking head:: something tells me the DMG is not going to impress me.

Off on a tangent here, but I'm always amazed how ancient ruins have perfectly functioning traps <cough>Indiana Jones</cough>.

If I ever have cause to run a game featuring ruins, I think I'll include one armed with a vast array of traps that have long sprung, or plain don't work properly any more.  Possibly including the famous overly elaborate trap that can't ever be reset, and has numerous points that could cause the whole thing to fall flat. ;)

In an early OD&D session I playing in we spent over an hour trying to spring or disarm a trap that we later discovered did not work and hadn't worked for decades. :-[

I think we could easily have an entire thread for embarassing wastes of time in game... :)

No DMG reading for me this weekend. Our schedules just aren't syncing. :(

Ive seen them as well.  And the thing is, its not that I dont *want* to like them, its just that Im having a hard time in liking them period. Im glad that someone came along and saved TSR from going out of business completely, but it appears that WOTC has been incrementally trying to change something that has stood the test of time. Why not instead, re-release the boxed sets? Reprints?  Is it completely necessary to completely scrap older systems and start anew?  They take great risk in alienating their base, in my opinion, when they repeatedly do things like this.  In a day and age where kids are more into MMORPGS than pen and paper games, this seems very risky.  We've all seen it with each new release.. more and more folks deciding to not convert up. 

I think WOTC ought to stick with Magic:The Gathering (a game I am a fan of, actually), and open the license to D&D permanently.  ORICS, Labyrinths and Lords, etc are incredible works that keep the original systems alive and well.   Alas, WOTC is a company, and to make revenue, they must keep selling books.

Especially when making the game mostly combat like a MMORPG fails to take any advantage of the human GM. MMORPGs are light on anything but combat because anything but combat is hard to handle with a computer program for a GM. Worse, combat in a MMORPG or a single player CRPG doesn't require lots of record keeping or learning and applying detailed rules as the computer does all that quite well -- much better than most people.


To be honest, I think their success with MtG is part of the problem. How to make MtG a business success seems to have warped their ideas of how to make a RPG a success: lots of rules with more constantly being added, the idea that players need to master all those rules to play, the complex character build process, the randomized mini packs, the detailed tactical combats, etc. D&D/AD&D used to be an easy game for a new player or casual player to get into and play. That has not been true with WOTC versions.

 and open the license to D&D permanently.  ORICS, Labyrinths and Lords, etc are incredible works that keep the original systems alive and well.   Alas, WOTC is a company, and to make revenue, they must keep selling books.
[/quote]