Subscribe
With four games under my belt, along with talking to some of the designers and developers at length, I’m ready to give you my Critical opinion of D&D fourth edition! Of course, this was only a preview, and things could still change, but many of these are pretty core to the system.
Critical Hits:
- More choices for everyone. Just judging by what you can do at first level, I’m quite looking forward to higher level characters.
- Combat really is more dynamic. More movement around the battlefield, and they managed to do it WITHOUT changing the interesting tactics that existed in 3e. You still get attacked if you withdraw from combat and aren’t careful. You still have to plan your movement around. But there’s more powers and abilities that move around, and more advantages to doing so.
- Diagonal moves are always 1’s rule. Seriously, this might be my favorite change, and one that makes me angry when people say “it’s not hard!” No, it’s not hard to do 1-2-1-2, but it’s ANNOYING, and easy to get wrong. It’s a memory condition that makes it take longer for someone with high movement to take their turn. Good riddance! (Same goes for reach giving opportunity attacks.)
- Combinations and emergent properties. I feel like in 3.x, the powerful combinations came from abusing feat/class combinations, often by ignoring the spirit of the rule. In 4e, the way the different powers in different classes interact gives a good amount of synergy and creates powerful combinations on purpose. As a really minor example, Danny used a power to push a goblin back into a room. This put the goblin within range of the other goblins so that the Wizard could use sleep on all of them. There’s nothing devastating about that combo, but it felt really, really fun, and made me want to seek out more of those situations.
- Durations are so much better now. I’d be willing to bet I haven’t played a game of D&D 3e where someone didn’t ask once per combat, “How many rounds do you think it’s been since I cast this?” Don’t tell me it’s the player’s and DM’s job to keep track… that’s just paperwork, and it’s annoying. Last for the day/for the encounter/until saved/one round is much, much cleaner.
- As far as being like the game that the media portrays it as, D&D is a lot closer now. To explain, if you watch a tv show with an evil wizard, you’ll see him firing energy blasts every round, with heroes ducking behind rocks or deflecting them, or being knocked back. Previously in D&D, that didn’t happen… the wizard would talk about re-memorizing his spells, and warriors would just charge it and start wailing on him. D&D 4e gives that experience for the first time.
Critical Misses:
- Marks and similar mechanics. These are abilities that let you designate a certain foe that has certain effects. This is fine in theory. However, the paladin and fighter’s marks counteract each other, while the ranger’s and warlock’s don’t. Paladin, Fighter, and Ranger can only have one mark at a time, but the Warlock can have many. Ranger and Warlock can only affect the closest enemy, others can only mark certain people. What should be one consistent mechanic not only does a different thing for each class, but acts different in play.
- Easily forgettable bonuses are still in full force. There’s still plenty of “I give you an AC bonus this round”, then “Oh wait, I forgot his AC bonus, it actually misses. Wait, was that this round or last round?”
- The character sheets had a really nicely formatted set of powers BUT there were pieces on the front that I needed that acted like powers. (In fact, in one game, I missed a key ability because it was on the front of my sheet.) I really wanted my “charge attack” to be a power instead of rules elsewhere, my “run” to be a power, my “Second Wind” to be a power, and my “opportunity attack” to be a power. Instead, I became annoyed that I had to flip the sheet over for those things.
- Not sure I like 50/50 saving throws. There are abilities that modify it, but generally, it doesn’t matter how powerful you are, it’s going to be 50/50 to shake off an effect.
- The first level pregen character did not have Cure Light Wounds. Is the spell still in? Was it a casualty of finally declaring (rightly) that Hit Points are abstract? Not sure, but I was disappointed at its absence. (Especially with the Wizard still having plenty of classic power names.)
- I don’t like “milestones” and the way action points are given out. I love the new action point rule- so simple and yet an agonizing decision. But the milestone system feels very much like a “patch” on the 15 minute adventuring day, a way to encourage players to keep going by an entirely OOC reward. Then there’s this whole system where APs are restricted to one a combat, and they get reset? There goes some of the interesting management and tense feeling.
- It could just be that I suck at rolling, but first level felt very swingy. Lots of luck on both sides. I don’t think I can judge that fully until I see later levels, though.
Critical Misc:
- If every DMG came with Mike Mearls to DM for you, everyone would play 4e. He ran by far the most fun session I played, AND looked like he enjoyed every minute he was playing.
- Warlock powers are still hilarious. “I unleash my Curse of the Dark Dream… with bats, snakes, and blood!”
- As I mentioned in an earlier comment, I see nothing to indicate that this edition will be any worse or better for roleplaying than any previous edition of D&D. I will come right out and say that rules can contribute to roleplaying- the two are not independent. But 4e does not change the essential atmosphere of D&D for roleplaying.
- It really is a paradigm shift for D&D in most ways. Some people prefer more simulation in their games, and 4e really isn’t built for it. For me, D&D4e supports the type of play I like. Your mileage may vary, but I keep coming back to one point: there are lots of RPG systems out there that support different styles of play, and if you prefer something that “makes more sense” then I highly suggest checking out one of the many excellent options. For me, I’m going to 4e.
Loading ...
32 Responses to “First (Level) Impressions: D&D 4e”
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 pm
So the transition from Fantasy Roleplayng to Fantasy Action Roleplaying that was started in 3e continues in 4e.
I hope they’ll fix the mark thing otherwise I’m really looking forward to all this.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Thanks for the review!!
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 5:45 pm
Wow. Thank you for this. While I’ve been among the pro-4E crowd since the beginning, I find reviews that show positive and negative views the best, because they show someone can still be for the new edition but not blinded by it to the point of ignoring potential flaws. You’ve helped reinforce my beliefs that 4E will definitely be a system worth using. ^_^
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:07 pm
4E still sucks. Boo. Down with WotC, you evil megalomaniac corporation! You killed D&D’s spirit and you’re brainwashing a bunch of WoW morons to play it too.
I’ll stick with the best edition ever, 3rd Edition, thank you. Screw playing side by side with 4rons.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:09 pm
What a well-crafted critical response!
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:14 pm
I vote for this Anonymous guy!
Seriously though… for a lot of players, D&D it never was about all fun all the time.
I’ll try to post about this but many of us grew attached to some of the warts of D&D and this transformation from stern often incoherent taskmaster to Sexy Soccer mom is going to be too much for some.
4e is perfect for the Rule of Cool addicts like you, I and Graham, but the simulationists and grognards will stay away I think.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Yeah, see, different tastes are fine (as I point out in the review) but calling the company megalomaniac and people who happen to like another game morons doesn’t fly with me.
(Not that it matters, but I don’t even play WoW.)
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
“Warlock powers are still hilarious. ‘I unleash my Curse of the Dark Dream… with bats, snakes, and blood!’”
OMG I can’t wait to see those and use a warlock again. You should scan in and post that professional piece of artwork I created to demonstrate how warlock powers work.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Oh no…
I don’t want to know where the bats come in…
As for WoW, I tried it, and decided that, well, Hell is other WoW players. It made me missed Guild Wars, the single-player MMO, where everything is instanced.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Gotta say I love the review. I find your comments usually quite insightful.
But I just don’t think this 4e thing will be for me….several powers/abilities just sound “goofy”/dumb….Shielding Smite- I hit a foe and an ally nearby gets +3 ac bonus….too goofy for me…
but I do like some of the ideas and may steal them for my 3.x game.
But for all you 4e fans…I really do hope it is to your satisfaction.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I like the term ‘4rons’ even if I don’t agree with the sentiment. I just hope that the different powers you can choose from in character creation/development actually are a choice. It would be a shame to see virtually every ranger/fighter/whatever with a slightly competent player pan out close to the same way. Nothing so far indicates it will be that way, but then again nothing so far indicates that it won’t be that way.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 9:41 pm
I started developing house rules for my 3.5e campaign, and then previews for 4e came along. I like what I see so far. It looks like 4e is what I’ve been trying to do to 3.5e. I want combat to be more ‘fantasy’ and less ‘realistic.’
Still, I am disappointed that the long-standing Druid is out while the splat-book Warlock is in. Guess I will also buy the PHB2.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 9:44 pm
TheMainEvent - They have said each class will take about 15 pages, so I don’t think we have to worry about lack of significant choice.
And I believe “4rons” has been stolen from 4chan, though I could be wrong.
Now, then, to think up a combination of “three” and “grognard” or “luddite”.
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Still mixed about 4e…gonna discuss with my group back home over spring break whilst playing some d20 modern…
Also, anonymous is omniopinionated…there’s another version of him that will say the exact opposite…and be just as offensive…
Ah, good times…
Posted: Mar 3rd, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Oh!
“3tards”
That one works!
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 4:10 am
can I have a mountain dew?
Where are they?
Do I see him?
Ok then Im going to get drunk.. are there girls here?, if there are girls here Im gonna hit on them!
..thats all I gotta say to that!
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Opinionated is fine, disagreeing is fine (though I doubt he even read my review), but insults on my site are not. Thanks to everyone else for keeping it civil and for the kind words about the review (whether you’re going to 4e or not.)
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Does that mean that Ad hominem argumnents are off?
And here I was getting geared up with references to Horses asses and inbreeding…
Awwwwww..
Seriously, I’m the greatest defender of civil discourse and debate.
You are doing a stellar job and I’m 100% behind you guys!
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 10:37 am
I had the opportunity to sit with Dave Chalker at one of the Forgotten Realms tables (Escape from Sembia… and die anyways…).
Although the mechanics work as presented, it does not feel like D&D at all. If you’re an idiot at resource management, this game is for you. I can only hope that seeing more of the rules changes my opinion otherwise.
Dave - I wish I could have done more against the hobgoblin archers. - The Paladin
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Although the mechanics work as presented, it does not feel like D&D at all.
May I ask why, specifically?
“If you’re an idiot at resource management, this game is for you.
…oh…kay…
Why can it not be that someone (read: me) is not an idiot at resource management, but doesn’t like it getting in the way of playing a game? There’s a reason that, when playing a spellcaster, I will always pick sorcerer, and it has nothing to do with my ability to manage resources.
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Ironwood: We would have faired better using the -actual- 4th Ed. dying rules (stabilize once you save, no need to keep rolling until you die or roll a 20), and perhaps I (as the Cleric) would have had a far better shot at healing the party.
Again, this is not intended to be a slight in any way to RPGA or their DM’s, it’s completely understandable that rules would be confused or incorrect as the game is still in development and was taught relatively quickly.
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
One thing I noticed about 3.x was that when my gaming group started to get really precise with the combat rules (as opposed to earlier days when things were ‘fudged’ a bit more) we found it beneficial to use a board to track everything that was going on. Over time this ‘benefit’ of using a board became a ‘necessity’, to the point where the DM would not arrange to have any combat unless one was present.
Given the increased movement around the battlefield in 4e, and the increased importance of movement in combat, would you feel that having a battle map or battle board to be more of a necessity in 4e even than it was in 3.x?
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
This is the most balanced review I’ve read so far. I’ll certainly save my final opinion for after I read the new books. The impression I’m getting right now though is 4e is trying to simulate a low-budget made-for-TV series. I’m more likely to be inspired by something closer to reality.
Of course, D&D has always been easily modified. The snip-its of new rules we see all are easy to modify or replace. I suppose the critical part of a decision to run 4e is determining how much of the system to change to suite your tastes.
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Zee: “I’m more likely to be inspired by something closer to reality.”
So wait, you play D&D?
OriginalSultan: I’d say it’s no more or less a necessity to have a battlemat set up for 4th than it is with 3rd.
Posted: Mar 4th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Heck yeah! Great photo!
I was playing the ranger that is in the foreground of this picture. Mearls was an incredible DM with great descriptions of everything that was going on. Misses weren’t described as just “Meh, you didn’t get him”. Instead it was a glancing blow that cleaved off a chunk of rotting zombie flesh, however it appears to have not been a structural piece of the zombie… Man that guy really had some great descriptions for everything.
Posted: Mar 5th, 2008 at 8:36 am
Ogre1000: Are you the guy we gave our extra tokens to?
That picture is actually not of the game Mearls ran, but of the very first delve Dave and I went through at the same table / dungeon. Agreed on everything about how good Mearls was though, what a pleasure that game was to play in.
Posted: Mar 5th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Yup I was the token receiver, thanks to your gift I was able to get the Shadar Kai Sojourner RPGA card, now I just need to wait on the Monster Manual to find out if I have chosen poorly.
Posted: Mar 6th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
The saving throw thing strikes me as rather lame. Making most saves nearly a coin flip seems to take some of the glory out of having a dwarf with a high constitution…in a bar!
Posted: Mar 7th, 2008 at 12:18 am
Trask - I see your point. But Dwarves will get a +5 on saves against poison (according the the D&DXP sheets). Plus the Con bonus applies to your Fortitude Defense, making it less likely that you’ll be subject to those effects in any case.
As an aside, it’s never made much sense to me that a Dwarf is somehow stronger against being lit on fire, anyways.
Posted: Mar 7th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Dwarves are made of stone, much the same way Elves are made of wood. Therefore, Elves should take EXTRA fire damage…
Posted: Mar 7th, 2008 at 8:41 am
Heh. That is one way to look at it, I suppose.
Posted: Mar 7th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Since Dwarves are made of stone… they can’t float… so they are heavier than a duck… Therefore there are no dwarf witches.
Post a Comment