4E Dungeons & Dragons - Verdict?

[jfrazierjr]

That does not mean that 4th edition is more combat oriented than previous versions, but you certainly need to bring the role play yourself.

I would argue that there is nothing new under the sun here... To me, role playing is something that is personal to each and every player, NOT inherent in a game system. Some people complain about D&D not having much role playing fluff and say they prefer other systems because they provide much more. But at the same time, many of the other systems touted have little to no published adventures revolving around them while D&D does and it does have some of said fluff. In aggregate, I would argue that D&D has far more RPing fluff than many systems out there, it's called novels.

[jfrazierjr]

I'm very happy to see this re opened. I am still debating ither to get 3.5 or go to 4. As I have only run up to 2nd. When they came out with d20 I didn't understand the system. Well that was 10 or so years and I have got the itch back to re enter the gaming world so I realy appreciate this chat. What I need to find is a good tutorial showing the mechanics at work to see if it's what I want to run. I don't mind simplified rules as long as it opens it up to more complex gameing. I need to know BEFORE I shell out the $$$$ and then find I don't like it. And its very hard to find 3.5. No one is parting with their books.

The Keep on the Shadowfell adventure module has a distilled rule book and pregen characters. It's still a bit pricey at a suggested retail of US$30, but if you can find another GM in your area who's already run it, they might be willing to loan you the materials or sell it to you at a discount.

I "BELIEVE" WotC has posted up a link to their quickstart rules as well as a downloadable copy of Keep on the Shadowfell.

Yep: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20090428 Basically, you can get a really good feel for playing 4E with no up front investment other than a few downloads and some time.

[Midgardsormr]

Even better! Thanks for that link, Joe.

[Gamerprinter]

I would suggest that you are possibly more attached to 'ki' than might be reasonable

Well I'm in the middle of developing a feudal Japan based setting, intended for publication in June 2009 under OGL with the intent to republish in August with the Pathfinder Compatibility logo. Ki is important to my setting, so its heavy on my mind.

With the announcement regarding the 4e monk, it was very much counter to my development - thus I am quite attached to Ki, because of this.

GP

[jfrazierjr]

That is exactly what I look for in the game. After looking at 4th I think I will stick with 3.5.

In what I found about 4 is what most here were saying. A good system for beginers and very streamlined for players or DMs who want to get into the game and not take hours making up a characters or adventures.

I can say, that after playing since the eary 80s, and every edition in some way, shape or form, I much prefer 4E for many of the changes it made. Just as we moved away from 5 saving throws (which were limited and narrowly defined (should my save against x be a save against breath weapon or spell???)) to a system where the attacker targets a single defense, this makes the system streamlined and faster be cause there is no opposed roll (well.. there are some in 4E, but very rare). Just as someone else noted the change from Thaco to 20+mods vs target is much easier.

As others have also noted, 4E finally FIXED the one thing that other editions have as broken as well as PF, which is mainly the Vancian spell system. My brother started a 3.5 campaign 4 years ago and we used the Elements of Magic rules, which "feels" much more right to me as it give players the power to shape magic to get specific effects once they have learned a specific discipline of magic and allows you to save your energy and do tons of low level spells during a day or a few really powerful ones and your done.

I have always been in to max detail in my games so I think I'll give 4 a pass.

Then what your looking for is in the Rolemaster family...

[Midgardsormr]

Or Mythworld, an even more detailed variant of RuneQuest. I'm not sure if that one's available anywhere right now or not, but you could inquire with Paul Cardwell on the GMMastery Yahoogroup. He certainly talks it up enough that he'd probably be willing to print on demand if there are no books available right now.

[msa]

Then what your looking for is in the Rolemaster family...

Well....

You have to like detail and *really love* table lookup

[NeonKnight]

I've played all versions of D&D except 3.5 (having played 3.0 and seeing no reason to re-buy the books) and including basic D&D. I would have to say that 4th is probably the best one from a mechanical stand point. I don't like all the rules (skill challenges and saving throws for example) but they are balanced. Perhaps maybe too balanced, but I'll take that over the alternative.

Just a clarification for some folks who may not know.

One of the main concepts behind 4e from previous editions was to change some of the rules to the concept of the attacker rolls the dice, from the defender 'sometimes' rolls the dice. What this means is, anytime a player attacks someone THEY are the one that rolls against a defense, so a physical attack is against Armor Class (which is the same as previous editions), but when a wizard casts a spell (fireball for example), Instead of previous editions where the PC hit with the fireball would roll a saving throw to resist the spell, in the new game the WIZARD'S PLAYER rolls an attack against the target's Reflex defense.

The New Saving Throw Mechanic represents ongoing effects (gone is the old SAVE-OR-DIE mechanic) like bleeding to death, suffering the effects of poisons/disease/magically held or compelled. Further, being magically held in place only means being held in place. Unless your character is lying unconcious on the ground and bleeding out, a player is never stuck with sitting there 'twiddling their thumbs' because they rolled a 1 on their saving throw in the first round of the fight.

[Torius]

Having played D&D since the early 80's my group switched to 4E when it came out and we've loved the new ruleset.

I remember a YouTube video presentation before 4E came out and they showed a scene where someone asked about grappling. Then all the players began flipping through the books to find the information they needed for the rule. By their own admission 3.5 had become too cumbersome in an effort to provide robust systems to use.

I'm not in seventh grade anymore so don't have the time to memorize every rule. The nice thing with 4e is how streamlined the ruleset is. Basic rules with many exceptions.

I also really love how all classes act the same now...meaning you get the same # of choices for your character. Unlike older versions where Wizards had a different spell chart than Clerics and Rogues got more skill pionts...just because.

We used to have many "discussions" about the rules as we tried to interpret them in earlier versions. 4e to me seems very well thought out and easy to play. Print your power cards, sit at the table and instead of having to concentrate on the rules now you can put your effort into the Role Playing....which is what it all is about anyways.

So for me a big Thumbs Up for 4E

[Gamerprinter]

NK, this is a question not a critique - so if an attacker is trying to get around an opponents defense, and the "save or die" mechanic is gone, what if the attacker rolls a 20 or whatever maximum roll to enable that mechanic. In the opposite way, isn't that the same the thing, rather, "I maxed my roll against my opponents defense - and now that defender dies."

Instead of Save or Die, its Succeed and Kill - which in my thinking is kind of the same thing.

If a monster maxes its attack roll against my defense, I'm just as dead, I just don't get a "save" to oppose the roll.

Or do I have this idea completely mixed up - explain please?

GP