Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 41
  1. #11
    I'm not a big fan of 4E. Main problems of this system (in my opinion) are:
    This is a wargame. Consistent set of easy rules, fantastic combat moves, hard-to-believe powers - and no way to design consistent world with these rules. Too much unbelievable fantasy killed for me inner logic of PC and NPC in-game existence. If my char can push bullette back with his blow, but can't push dwarf in this same manner - this is too hard to believe for me. If PC and NPC plays by different rules - this is too hard to fit into the believable setting.
    This is combat-oriented game. Sorry, but we with our home-rules have xp rewards for diplomacy and overcoming challenges even in times of 2.5E (late 90s). And current skill system can't describe some ordinary persons with varied levels of mastery in many different skills. And any non-combat activity looks somewhat underdeveloped. So home-made rules must be written again and again. It worked in 3.5 - but it was mercilessly fixed. And when your PC finishes his chewing into solo monster (daily/encounter/encounter/at-will/at-will/at-will...) you suddenly have almost no instruments to describe his day-to-day activities. Last problem had long history in D&D games, but 4E pushed things back to 2E, if not to earlier situation.
    This is game of congruous characters. Not equal - congruous. All have equal amount of damage on basic attacks, all chars of equal levels in equal classes with same CON have same HP. All the people have basic bonuses of 1/2 of their HD to d20 rolls and passive defences for everything. Are you 20th wizard - +10 to athletics! Are you 20th pit fighter - +10 to your Nature skill! No obvious weaknesses and flaws in classes - only MMO separation on tank-healer-dps. This is concealed by bunch of different powers, but strongly reminds me about latest versions of World of Warcraft.
    I still participate in one game under 4E rules, but with some mixed feeling (and a lot of house-ruling). Our DM is most vocal supporter of 4E in our company, and he writes great stories. So our campaign continues.
    Birthright always strikes me as one of the best settings of TSR for inner logic and integrity. I still can't imagine how this can be fit into 4E. But... good luck! Maybe you, 4E folks, can do that!

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Germany near Frankfurt
    Posts
    295
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I also dont like the 4E. The 4E ist D&D for people who dont like D&D - to make a provocative statement. In my experience, the 4E is best liked by people who wherent satisfied with the 3.5.
    My major complains:
    - magic doesnt feel the same any more
    - powers are too combat focused, the rituals dont make it
    - I am missing the randomness during character creation and level ups
    - powers of monsters and NPC are too few. Take a look at the old forgotten realms evil masterminds. Only 3 or 4 powers remaining.
    - character roles are too ultra-modern

    Nevertheless 4E is a good game, but not for me.

    For that reasons our group changed to the Pathfinder system.
    my purpose is now to lead you into the Pallace where you shall have a clear and delightful view of all those various objects, and scattered excellencies, that lye up and down upon the face of creation, which are only seen by those that go down into the Seas, and by no other....

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    125
    Downloads
    81
    Uploads
    0
    I didn't like it when it came out. This was cruel because I hadn't yet played it.

    So I played it.

    Then I really didn't like it.

    While the argument is made that a good DM can home-brew it, remove the races they don't like, the fact remains that the versatility of non-combat powers/spells is lost. I have also never been a big fan of removing randomization from gaming, and making everything equal between the classes. Players should play what they want to play, not the exact same thing as the other player, other than being their archetype of Striker/Tank/Healer/whatever. Character optimization can, and does, happen - 3/3.5e saw to that, as compared to the limited choices in 2e, but I would take that variability of choice over the lack thereof in 4e.

    Bottom line is, and it has been said before: They are not the same games. Really, it's unfair to compare - it's apples and oranges. It's extraordinarily difficult to run certain styles of play with 4e, but I won't argue some points: 4e does do combat well in many ways. The skill challenge system is nifty... and easily portable backwards. It does do "a very flashy, cosmopolitan, high fantasy approach" well.

    That's just not my style of approach as a DM. I prefer gritty. I prefer dark. I prefer very low magic. I like the standard races.

    What it comes down to for me is, I already have my home-brewed campaign rules with 3.5. I adapted a few points from 4e, but otherwise... wasted my money on the books.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by tpdarkdraco View Post
    If you are working on a home brew 4e conversion and using stuff already posted, I would love it if you contributed as well. Pass on your ideas and it can inspire others in areas they might not thought of.
    It would only be proper to share! I will happily post my work once I have enough together to be able to run a very basic campaign. This will take maybe a week or two to complete. Mostly, it is a compilation of race ideas already found on the boards here, class descriptions and limitations updated for 4e, and much of the 4e blood system taken from another member of this board. I am trying to keep most every additional power included in the original material, as that is part of what made me fall in love with the setting as a player.

  5. #15
    Special Guest (Donor)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    532
    Downloads
    11
    Uploads
    0
    I'm in the camp of the people that like DnD 4e (I liked 2e and 3e). I feel sorry for all the comments it gets about WoW (as most things that people say that DnD has copied from WoW, WoW copied them first from DnD...).

    Things I really like about 4e:

    - Spellcasters aren't the owners of the game at medium-high levels.
    - No easy access to the horde of divinations that were posible in 2e/3e.
    - Combat is really fun, and it gives a more rewarding experience for the DM (when he builds a good encounter) and for the players (when they use good teamwork).
    - Skill challenges are a very nice mechanic and can be plugged everywhere (inside combat, outside combat,...).

    The only thing I'm not liking so far is rituals and their costs. But we had the same problem with 2e and 3e too: material components in spells (which we never used) and the Create Whatever feats (which we never used either, no one has forged an item paying gcs).

    Regards!

  6. #16
    I'm not a big fan of 4e, though i have yet to play a solid session, and the gamer group thats nearby i've stopped playing with for lack of.......certain qualities i think an rpg requires.

    My biggest problem, and it's a double edged sword as just pointed out, is that it feels not jsut like WoW, but like a generic computer game RPG. In fact it feels a lot like Diablo. Yes those games, and pretty much EVERY rpg out there has borrwed from D&D extensively, but they developed into their own genre, and now D&D is copying it it seems. I don't like combat heavy RPG's. To me it's practically making D&D into a first person shooter.....with leveling. D&D, at it's best(and i had qualms and loves for all three editions before) was about characters interacting and adventures. Not about hacking and slashing. But that's a personal opinion. Prior stated group was a hack and slash group, and i know other hack and slash rpgers. Thats fine, and i think 4e is suited towards them. But for me, and i feel those who were really into the Role Playing part, the other editions were better. And as for streamlined and easy to use, thats fine, but a good dm streamlines himself almost all the time. I don't think i've ever played a game where houserules and streamlining by that particular dm had taken place. And xp for outside of combat i've used since i moved onto other systems that picked it up well before 4e, or 3e for that matter.

    The mechanics, the rules, the monsters, the creatures, all scream MMORPG at me. And yes they work. And yes it can be interesting. But why play an MMORPG with paper and pencil, if thats your style, when you have WoW, or Warhammer or Conan or Dark Age of Camelot? If D&D is going to clone most of those, why not just play those? I guess for people who want to not pay a fee, but still, seems a bit silly to me. What seperated D&D from all those MMO's was that it was still an rpg. it still had those factors of roleplaying. Whether you used them or not, they were still there. Now D&D just seems to be another MMO, only paper and pencil instead. But thats my two cents.

  7. #17
    The funny part is that alot of people scream MMORPG or video game RPG (which isn't necessarily a bad thing because they have become more streamlined then tabletop and it is a big thing right now so 4E may borrow some concepts) but never compare 4E to fantasy action movies like Lord of the Rings or fantasy books where the main characters have unique abilities and aren't just swinging their blade over and over again. The focus on combat in the mechanics with their streamlining I believe allows both the GM and players to focus more on their role-playing and less on their numbers.

    It was always a bummer for me to play 3.x and I also had to houserule or as my friend once called it "bastardize" the system to make it work for me which didn't necessarily meant that it worked for my group. I had to try to make it fun to DM for me and less a chore (though ultimately I gave up on tabletop because of 3.x). 4E has made it fun to GM again, it puts the mechanics focus where they are suppose to be which is on combat and it leaves the role-playing to the groups.

    (Note that everyone says 4E is all "combat" but then how do you explain things like Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Insight? or the Skill Challenge system which is a really nice mechanic [and you can deport it to other systems with any type of "skills"]. Also the "Knowledge" skills have more support then they ever had from 3.x.)

  8. #18
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    A lack of role playing is not a feature of a game system. Its true that the books are largely silent on the subject, but they clearly assume those kinds of players are playing. The books seem to assume that your role playing type (storyteller, slayer, tactician, role-player, &c) are fixed characteristics and the DM should play to their essential nature, rather than try and regard players as capable of growth as players.

    However, role playing is a characteristic of the players, not the game, You can role-play with any game and any game system, including games that don't expect a role play component, like checkers, monopoly, and so on. If players want to role play with 4e they will. But I can imagine that with the emphasis elsewhere, 4e is not recruiting storytellers, dramatists, role-players, and players who want to explore characters instead of objects in a crypt.

    That's fine. If the game only recruited those kinds of players we'd never expand the numbers of role players because everyone playing would already play that way. Recruiting other kinds of players, like slayers, the hack-and-slash, and so on means that some portion of them will either evolve or expand over time to include more and better role playing. This expands the pool of role-playing instead of just satisfying the existing pool.

  9. #19
    Site Moderator kgauck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Springfield Mo
    Posts
    3,562
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dundjinnmasta View Post
    or the Skill Challenge system which is a really nice mechanic
    I see this a lot and it really baffles me. This isn't new. Its a formalization (and so one official way) of the various kinds of skill challenges that 3x employed, starting with the crafting system and moving on from there.

    Soon we had the concept of a standard test, or simple test, where a character used one skill one time to determine the outcome of an action, and an extended test, where multiple attempts might be made using the same skill (as in craft) or using a variety of skills (depending on what was being attempted).

    Several months before 4e was even released I posted this description of how to apply an extended test to currency reform as a way to play out a domain action.

    By the end of 3x, we could arrange an extended test to go after a target DC (like in crafting) which was good for a task which was essentially cumulative, or a competitive challenge in which the difference between two sides is tracked, to see who has the upper hand at the end, or the easiest, simply a string of disconnected tasks in which you needed to succeed in sequence.

    I'll grant the 4e skills challenge one thing I had not seen before, substituting the more complex mechanic of target DC's with the allowance of failing a few checks, which is simpler and easier to apply. I would prefer to stick with the target DC for tasks that important to the story, but I am happy to use the 4e mechanic on tangential tasks.

    But for certain, what 4e produces is 1) a minor modification of an extended skill test and 2) only one way to handle a complex situation where skills interact. Its not new or original to 4e.

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    130
    Downloads
    6
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Azrai View Post
    Hello friends,

    beeing away for some time, I would like to ask the Birthright community what they think about the 4E-D&D.
    Any discussions so far? I already have seen that there is a 4E Birthright project in the pipeline.



    Cheers,
    Azrai
    (reappearing...)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edition...ns_%26_Dragons
    Some features seems simplified,that is ALWAYS a good thing.

    So for apply the 4E to Birthright you have only to ignore the new races and ignore this "Multi-classing has been eliminated. Players may choose feats to gain abilities from classes." the rest is good.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.