D&D 4e Thoughts

[pyat]

I'd not read any reviews of D&D 4th edition before picking up the Player's Handbook. I still haven't. So, these observations may seem rather basic to people hanging out on RPG.net and the like. This is also not a play test, and it is a commentary on the PHB alone. I don't have the DMG or Monster Manual.

I'm not terribly concerned about the changes in race and class, though my first reaction is "Why bother taking some away?" Still, any reasonable DM would let you roll up a Gnome, if you really wanted one. I also wonder why there was a need for three different flavours of elf.

The spell list has been truncated greatly, or at least changed so that almost every spell is a combat spell. On a casual flip through, I found just two mostly non-combat spell on the wizard list - "Disguise Self" and "Fly." To me, the non-combat spells were often the most memorable parts of a D&D game. The use of "Leomund's Secure Shelter" or "Illusionary Terrain" creates a more memorable game experience than simply rolling for damage. Particularly now, when nearly every spell is simply a variant on rolling for damage.

I don't have any objection to the way spells are cast and apportioned. It seems fairly elegant, though fitting the non-combat spells into that framework would be hard. The lack of non-combat spells is partially covered by the list of 28 rituals, but only partially.

The skill list is reduced, which may be a good thing or a bad thing. Seriously, I don't know how I feel about that. On the one hand, it means that DMs are encouraged to make situational rulings based on roleplay, etc., rather than leaving things to the roll of a die. On the other hand... it means that DMs are encouraged to make situational rulings based on roleplay, etc., rather than leaving things to the roll of a die!

The equipment list has also been stripped to down to weapons and combat gear, with a tiny selection of things like services. I have no rational cause to think that an essential part of the D&D experience involves figuring out how many chickens you can buy for a copper piece, but I miss that information, darn it!

And really, I can't help think that, when Hackmaster has a lot more information for adjudicating social interaction and exploration than your RPG, something may have gone awry.

It can be said that the essential D&D experience is "killing things that live in a hole and taking their stuff." And this game can certainly present that. However, a lot of the bits of flavour and background presented in previous editions has disappeared, which makes it less like D&D - at least to me. The details that have been removed were not necessarily good or bad on their own - they just were. And, as any D&D fan knows, the most memorable parts of the game were often the roleplay that occurred in the between-times, when you weren't killing things in a hole.

A clumsy automotive metaphor! The 4th edition is rather like a new Austin Mini. In many ways much better than an old Austin Mini, but really sharing only a general shape and name with the original.

I close by saying that I am still very much looking forward to playing 4E, but I doubt I'll run it any time soon. The end!

Comments

[rikoshi.livejournal.com]

My biggest beef with 4E is that it basically, as you say, only presents rules for combat.

Effectively, there aren't rules for much else, and the game seems to work with the tacit assumption that the only thing you're ever going to be doing is killing things.

To employ normanrafferty's own axiom of "Rules Endorse Behavior," in the case of 4E, it seems that the only 'behavior' that's expected is killing things and taking their stuff, and to me, that's a huge step backwards for role-playing.

[waiwode.livejournal.com]

Although I can't argue that D&D4e ever tries to escape the dungeoneering paradigm, it certainly does present rules for things other than combat. Just not in the PHB.

The Skill Challenge system is a fascinating mechanic:
1) Set forth the challenge: Convincing the King of Rohan to aid the Fellowship.
2) Set a difficulty, a number (X) of success the group must attain before rolling a number (X/2) of failures. In this case, Eight success before four failures.
3) Define the appropriate skills for the challenge:
Bluff:
Primary Skills:
Diplomacy: Trying to charm Theoden and sooth his wrath, or trying to mitigate the poisonous words of Grima.
History: Reminding Theoden of the ancient alliances between the peoples of Middle Earth.
Secondary Skills:
Bluff: Try to convince Theoden that you are here to make reparations for Gandalf's transgressions in the past. If failed, can't use Bluff again.
Insight: You realize that Grima's control over Theoden is stronger than you assumed, and not entirely natural.
Arcana: After a successful Insight check, successful Arcana checks can be used to sway Theoden out from the supernatural influence of Grima.
Intimidate: Any attempt to intimidate Theoden automatically fails. However after a successful Insight check you can Intimidate Grima.

Success: Theoden heeds to your counsel.
Failure: The Riders of Rohan clap you in irons, where you await your punishment (and no doubt, a thrilling escape!)

Skill Challenges can be used for anything, from the court of the King to hunting for a Fence on the wrong side of the town, to escaping from a city (and things like the Paladin proposing to use "Religion" to convince the local priests to give him sanctuary allows you to ensure that the less "climby/sneaky" characters can still succeed).

Doug.

[oakthorne.livejournal.com]

Furthermore, since Skill Challenges are treated the same as combat challenges, in terms of XP, 4E is now the first edition of the game to hand out something other than a pittance for non-combat encounters.

Hardly the game that "is only combat," if you really think about it.

[pyat.livejournal.com]

I find that point very promising.

Though, as I say, the reduction in the skill list wasn't really what bothered me as much as the spell changes.