Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition Launches

darkwing_bmf writes "Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition rulebooks are now available. There's a review up at EuroGamer. Unfortunately, the online tools portion, D&D Insider, isn't ready yet."

Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil are Deprecated

[jpatters (883)]

New alignment system: Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil, Chaotic Evil.

um, no.

I would have respected the choice to get rid of alignment, but this is a boneheaded move. The problem with alignment (with bad role players anyway) is that it reinforces trite stereotypes. This just gives you fewer trite stereotypes to choose from.

Re:Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil are Deprecated

[geekoid (135745)]

Actually, it doesn't. The previously existing stereo types are gone. You would have to go out of your way to fill one.

Having played the game, I can same that it is really fun.
I can also say it is not the same game. It is completly focused on minis, and what you can do as far as moving other players and yourself has added an interesting level of tactics to the game.
The Alignment systems works very well.

from what I had heard about the game I wasn't really looking forward to it, but having actually played the mechanics and the game, I found it to be really fun.

Normally I don't participate in the 'I've been doing it for x years' circle jerk, but since I feel it is relevant to the context of the post I am going to make an exception.
I have been playing DnD for it's entire history, including pre-ADnD. I also have played all the other 'major' systems and I find Savage Worlds to be the superiour RP gaming system.

Re:Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil are Deprecated

[Actually, I do RTFA (1058596)]

. The problem with alignment (with bad role players anyway) is that it reinforces trite stereotypes. This just gives you fewer trite stereotypes to choose from.

The problem with alignment was it started moving towards this a while ago with LG - G - CG - LN - N - CN - LE- NE - CE becoming a single spectrum. It made it difficult to play a saintly Robin Hood type because for some reason respect for the law (which became confounding with one owns organizational qualities), became compounded with goodness.

While it certainly could be used as a crutch by poor roleplayers, that's not a bad thing. Everyone needs time to learn to roleplay, and the CG/LE removed variants provided nice dilemmas. And, if not that crutch, bad roleplayers will fall into character/race archeotypes anyway.

Personally, I would rather have seen the alignments expand so that you could be Goodish/Evilish/Lawfulish/Chaoticish. Not enough to get affected by spells/effects that target people with that alignment, but enough to give people a clue as to how you lean.

Big change from previous versions, but still good

[El Gigante de Justic (994299)]

I got a chance to view the books early, thanks to some leaked scans, and so far I like what I see; however, many changes may tick off long time players, especially changes to the standard races.

    From what I've read so far, the main good things about 4th edition that I've seen so far are:

• A lot less book keeping is necessary, especially for high level spell casters. DMs also have less book keeping for high level enemies, as they don't have dozens of spells or spell like abilities and minion creatures do static damage and only 1 hp). If you've ever run a high level battles against a half dozen clerics or wizards, you can see an immediate advantage.
  
• Even at first level, characters and monsters are generally tougher, so 1st level characters are living in constant fear of being killed by 1 hit. Some might complain this is lame ("why not just start at 5th-8th level?"), but really, it makes sense, and actually sets 1st level heroes apart from your average commoner.
  
• The Cleric is no longer a required party member, as everyone can self heal.
  
  The main complaints I have so far is that they haven't released rules in the Monster Manual for creating your own monsters from scratch and figuring out appopriate levels, and the death penalty is really almost too minor. Raise dead still takes 10 minutes to cast, and the cost does go up as your level goes up, but the penalty is only -1 to all rolls until you rest for 6 hours. I appreciate that they were trying to lessen death effects and other affects that take your character effectively out of game (Medusa gaze, Illithid mind blast, etc), but by having such a minimal penalty for death, you'd have to wonder why any fears death.
        Some will certainly complain that 4th edition is too MMO like (especially like WOW), but the new character building rules do admittedly enforce character balance quite well through all levels.

Re:Big change from previous versions, but still go

[El Gigante de Justic (994299)]

I don't look at the cleric only because it can heal, but the reality is that in most 3.0-3.5 campaigns, the Cleric likely spends 50% or more of his spells on various forms of healing (either HP or ability damage/drain) because players are loath to use their healing potions outside of combat, even if they barely ever use them in combat because it provokes AoO.
      The Cleric PC in the campaign I'm running even has the Touch of Healing feat (can basically heal PCs up to half HP for free) and still probably spends half or more of his spells on healing. In almost any campaign I've been in, the decision to rest is usually made because the Cleric is out of healing magic, or the wizard is >90% empty.

Re:Big change from previous versions, but still go

[DuckDodgers (541817)]

In editions before 3/3.5 the Cleric's biggest value was as a healer. If you had several of them in the party, they could play different roles but if you only had one, he was mister medic and that's basically it.

3/3.5 replaced that problem with a different one. The designers were so desperate to make the class attractive, it became the most powerful class in the game with good combat skills and hit points, healing magic, and the ability to cast a whole host of effective combat spells and "buffs".

And "destroyers of D&D"? Give me a break. Ever play any of the following RPGs: Warhammer RPG, HERO, GURPS, Rifts, Rolemaster, Vampire: the Masquerade, Middle Earth RPG, or the (original) Star Wars RPG? I believe they all came out well before Wizards of the Coast produced 3rd edition Dungeons and Dragons. Each has plenty of flaws, but if you've played a few of them it will give you enough perspective to see that all versions of Dungeons and Dragons have some ridiculous inconsistencies and poor design choices that interfere with or downright euthanize fun gameplay.

Wizards of the Coast didn't destroy Dungeons and Dragons. They just rearranged the problems, and I bet you're mostly angry because you have nostalgia for the particular set of problems you enjoyed when you first played some previous edition.

Re:Big change from previous versions, but still go

[El Gigante de Justic (994299)]

True, but a first level character really no longer as to worry every kobold or dire rat killing them in one hit (especially the minion types), or at least, being able to take off 75% of your HP in one hit since you only started with 6. The extra HP are a plus without adding the complication of a system like SDC from the Palladium systems, although that is a good system as well.

The main things I noticed book keeping wise are as follows:
  1) Effects are no longer a number of rounds, its either a) until end of next turn, b) until you save at the end of your turn or c) until end of encounter, up to 5 minutes, which are essentially the same thing.
  2) You'll no longer waste 30 minutes as the spellcasters pick their new spells for the day. True wizards still pick their daily powers, but that should go quickly.
  3) Thanks to minions, you have to track HP for less monsters at a time.

I think the effect tracking will be the most immediate increase in game speed. I just ran a 3.5 encounter last night with the following effects:
1) Players cast Haste and several invisibilities before combat started, as well as several buffing spells with durations in rounds.
2) BBEG had several defensive spells with duration in rounds.
3) Other monsters had an ability that caused slow, which would tempoarily negate haste for characters afflicted by it for a random number of rounds
4) BBEG was also a mind flayer, so there were mind blasts used at various times which caused stun for random number of rounds to each target.

      Now, if the combat is quick, this usually isn't a problem; but this fight went for 10-13 rounds, so various effects started wearing off at various times, and with 6 PCs and 3 monsters, and people using delay actions, its really easy to lose track of which round you're actually in and what round and when in each round a given effect ends.

Too much of a departure

[Samy Merchi (1297447)]

I'm probably going to pass. A lot of the changes make it "not D&D" for me. It's like learning a completely new game system, like moving on to GURPS or Rolemaster or what have you. Everybody can heal themselves? That's not D&D, you're *supposed* to have a cleric (or a druid, or a bard, or a paladin, or potions) for healing. That's the whole point of the D&D flavor. You can cast magic missile infinite times per day? That's not D&D, you're *supposed* to have a limited number of zots for blasting. That's the whole point of the D&D flavor. Now, I'm not saying these are *bad* changes. I'm fully open to the idea that they may make the game flow better and so on. I'm just saying it's like moving on to a completely different game system. And I haven't been convinced why I should do that when I'm enjoying my 3.5 games highly.

Still Using AD&D 2.5 Edition

[The Insane One (25793)]

As amazing as it sounds, our gaming group, who has been meeting for about 20 years now, still use the AD&D 2.0 edition with the Skills & Powers expansion. Some of the same customization without the lethality and long battles of RoleMaster. Since we all have extensive libraries of these older 2nd edition books, the odds are not good that we'll migrate to YAEODD (Yet Another Edition Of Dungeons & Dragons).

I remember the WotC Slashdot questions regarding the release of the 4th edition. One of the questions was why we should bother to upgrade our libraries since D&D edition 5 is probably just around the corner? The answer was, and I'll paraphrase since I'm getting old, "Because it's just better." Great logic. I read that as "We need more money."

Of course, a lot of our group play World of Warcraft between games and from all indications, 4th edition is tabletop WoW.

Re:History Repeats Itself

[GreyyGuy (91753)]

Yes. Those boys will continue to be virgins. Continuing in the tradition of their fathers, and their father's fathers.

Re:History Repeats Itself

[flyingsquid (813711)]

Not I. My girlfriend plays DnD with me. Although, she doesn't think pretending to be a wizard with a "Sexuality Wand" +3 is too exciting in bed...

Considering that the average male's wand is +5 to +6, you should be able to see why she's not getting excited.

Re:History Repeats Itself

[magical_mystery_meat (1042950)]

I bet she really gets hot when you put on your robe and wizard hat

Re:

[Gaerek (1088311)]

Let's see:

-No more wizards/clerics/etc saying, "Crap, I just blew all my spells in that one encounter, I need to rest for 8 hours!"
-Much simplified rules for DMs creating encounters and adventures, as well as putting rewards in those encounters. (This is a complete overhaul, and hard to really give too many examples)
-No more random hit point amounts every level, in addition, a larger hit point total at level 1. (No more fighters rolling a 1 at first level, etc)
-New death/dying system, that scales as you lev

Re:Rulebook?

[h4rm0ny (722443)]

The new rules are very much more elegant. They play quickly in all sorts of areas, from actual combat to monster customization and NPC creation. Character classes are very well balanced with each other and the "sweet spot" that you got in the mid-levels where you were tough enough to survive with good tactics but not so powerful the game became broken... well the game plays well at all levels now. Production values are also very high and I don't think when you read the books and grok the rules, you can really disagree with any of this. There are many well-thought out refinements to the system.

However, the game, imo, seriously suffers on the role-playing side. Non-combat skills are all but gone, character abilities are designed solely for their tactical interest in combat with little thought to justifying them in the game or whether they make the remotest sense and playing with table-top miniatures is all but compulsory now. There are also serious concerns being voiced about whether the classes are now too balanced for their own good. If you can be a wizard firing off endless Magic Missiles (they're at will now), or a ranger firing off endless arrows and both have similar range and damage, you ask yourself whether everything has become a little meaningless through nothing being better than anything else.

It's a difficult one that will only be resolved through trying it out. There's much good stuff in the new game, but there's a serious worry that it's lost it's sole as an actual role-playing game. We'll have to see.

Selling like Charm Person scrolls on a Saturday night, though.

Re:

[darkwing_bmf (178021)]

However, the game, imo, seriously suffers on the role-playing side. Non-combat skills are all but gone, character abilities are designed solely for their tactical interest in combat with little thought to justifying them in the game or whether they make the remotest sense and playing with table-top miniatures is all but compulsory now.

There still are a hand full of non-combat skills, such as diplomacy and knowledge. But I think the general feeling is the "fluff rules" for non-combat weren't really needed

Re:Rulebook?

[h4rm0ny (722443)]

We don't need rules for how much you can earn playing an instrument in a village of population X, there's no argument there. But not only have almost all non-combat skills been removed (incl. the generic catchalls you could use such as Profession), but most abilities aren't even defined except in the context of combat. Fey Pact warlocks can teleport after downing a foe. Can they teleport outside of combat? Under what circumstances? Do they carry round pockets full of bunnies so they can kill them if they ever need to teleport? We don't know, we're never told and there are numerous examples of the world just stopping at the edge of combat. Many players enjoy being able to say that they are a world class card player or whatever. The feeling you get from reading the books is very much that it's all about combat. The emphasis is bad.

Re:Rulebook?

[griffjon (14945)]

You, sir, might not remember the 1st edition rulesets and DM tables. There's always room for another table to roll against!

Re:Not a review

[SatanicPuppy (611928)]

They simplified a lot of things. All combat actions are basically the same now, mage, warrior, cleric, whatever. You declare your attack, be it weapon, spell, whatever, roll your check vs their resist check, and if yours is higher you do damage.

No more memorized spells at all...you learn, "Otlukes flaming bunghole" you can cast it every round like you were swinging a sword.

Some abilities are "per encounter" meaning you can only use it once per combat. Others are "per day", so once per day.

I don't know. I haven't finished going through the rules yet, but I'm not pleased. A lot of things that I never thought "had to be said" are now filled in for you...like the "party role" for your class...Fighters now have "tanking" abilities that "force" the monster to attack them...What the hell is that about? Didn't everyone and their mother used to role play that? Instead of being a simple framework, D&D is more like a complete game.

Some people may be pleased with that, but to me its like someone pre-chewed my dinner.

Re:Not a review

[h4rm0ny (722443)]

My pre-play evaluation of 4e is that the rules are improved muchly in terms of game-play and ease of banging out encounters. There are a lot of nice ideas in it such as Minion rules to make High Level vs. Mooks a viable encounter again. Production values are fantastic. But the role-playing side seems to have been gutted both by a lack of non-combat rules and by character and monster abilities that make no sense at all except for the metagame reason of interesting combat tactics. The latter problem undermines immersion in the setting more than the designers realised, imo. But I wont say more here as I've already posted more detailed thoughts below.

Re:Not a review

[vux984 (928602)]

Fighters now have "tanking" abilities that "force" the monster to attack them...What the hell is that about? Didn't everyone and their mother used to role play that? Instead of being a simple framework, D&D is more like a complete game.

Why should the monster do that? It should attack whoever it wants to attack. And the smarter it is the more intelligent its selection and tactics should be.

The whole MMO inspired 'all the monsters wail on the tank, while the rest of the group focuses on one target at a time and burns it down' is the most absurd thing going.

Re:

[PMuse (320639)]

So in summary, there are...

      1. New books!
      2. New art!
      3. Online tools!
    4. New prices!

There, fixed that for you.

Whether you plan to buy these books or not, remember to patronize your local independent gaming store. End of Plug.

Re:Not a review

[geekoid (135745)]

I want to say Mod up, but honestly I can't think of what any of the local game stores has done for me or my kids.
I'm not trolling here, and I usually share your sentimate but honestly the last time I went into one My main goal was to get my son out as fast as possible. What a bunch of foul mouthed SOBs.

Gaming stores aren't for people who want to run a business, they're for people who want to show off their gaming collection.

Re:

[geekoid (135745)]

Not really. All three for 65 buck, and considering 1st ED ADnD was 60 bucks for all three, not much of a price change.

Re:

[h4rm0ny (722443)]

Okay - funny joke, but it's not accurate. Have you checked the price of the new books? I don't know if it's just the US$ to UK£ exchange rate at the moment, but the new books bought together are actually cheaper than I paid for the same three core books years ago when 3.5 came out. WotC (Wizards of the Coast) are hoping to keep on selling further books each year, but right now, the cost to get into the game is really low.

The online tools are $15 a month which may or may not seem a lot depending on

Re:

[Joe Mucchiello (1030)]

Funny, I spent about $70 on new books when 3.5 came out. After about 12-15 hours of gaming, I probably broke even compared to seeing a movie with friends, buying drinks with friends, going to dinner with friends, etc. I don't play often but name something else you can do with 4-5 other people for $70 that can last hundreds of hours. I can't see how anyone could complain about their money's worth.

RPGs have always been about splatbooks. 4e really isn't any different here.