Comments on: Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Review

By: Dmxela

Dmxela — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 06:40:14 +0000

I’ve been DMing and playing for a good 15 years or so and the main attraction for me and many of the people I play with was the level of customization available to players in 3.5 (and now the pathfinder RPG which is 3.5 is all ways but name). Though I cannot claim that 4th ed is bad, I must say that there is a certain aspect of reality lost.

“Realty” you ask? Its fantasy not reality… What I mean is that non-magical persons and non-magical acts were always grounded in reality – or were intended to be. Thus, a fighter may preform special maneuvers in combat with some success, and the wizard, cleric, and rogue could attempt these same maneuvers – influenced in success by their ability score and training. Many abilities preformed (in particular from the martial power source), which are encounter/daily, have no reasonable realistic reason why a character could not preform these abilities again immediately.

Now 4th edition is simpler than 3.5 without question, the skill system is cleaner, and defensively the game is more forgiving to players. Some claim that characters are faster to make but this is only true if every player has their own PHB – or knows the powers from memory.

From a DMing position the game is very dull, monsters don’t have the variety that they used to. Designing quick random encounters is much faster – but the important battles aren’t really different from the random encounters. As a DM I find that in order to create variation, especially in battle, I have to home-brew monsters and situations – I don’t mind doing this, but I shouldn’t have to home-brew as much as I do.

Overall I’d say that the Pathfinder Role playing Game has far more potential, while still being mostly compatible to 3.5 material. Dungeons and Dragons needs to dig deep to its roots in literature and get away from pop. culture and movie influences. Make magic fantastic, not mundane.

By: stagus ulrandi

stagus ulrandi — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:49:56 +0000

I prefer the 1st and 2nd ed. rules,,, but the 3rd ed. has some very good points too,,, I’ve yet to dabble in the 4th ed. game,,, the rule books are guidelines,,, you can do what you wish with them,,, since you paid for them,,, why not use them as you see fit,,, and just have fun playing,,, isn’t that the point Gary Gygax set out with ,,, hmm?

By: Coop

Coop — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:56:19 +0000

@Saturn: Press shift on the keyboard and 3.5 befores #>%. In other words, it doesn’t actually say a lot.

By: Saturncancer

Saturncancer — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:38:37 +0000

Press shift on the keyboard and you will get $th edition instead of 4th.
That says a lot.

Ive been dming for 21 years, and ran 3.0-3.5 for most of the last decade. I bought the 4th ed triple set, played it for about 5 sessions and found out it was too different from classic D&D.

It’s like playing Rolemaster or Runequest or some other fantasy game which is 4th ed DnD is in name only.

Chasing rules changes is like chasing a rainbow – no perfect game exists.

To use another analogy
1st ed AD&D = Traditional English Cricket
2nd Ed – Australian One day Games (still Cricket)
3-3.5 ed – Indoor Cricket (still feels a little like Cricket)
4th ed – Baseball or Softball. It has balls and bats and bowlers/pitchers, etc but its just too different.

4th ed is another fantasy superhero game, like Marvel Superheroes RPG but its not real D&D.

I’ve taken my group back to 3.5 ed and its fun playing D&D again!

By: Adam Payton Covington

Adam Payton Covington — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:11:25 +0000

I like Dungeons and dragons, (Im 13 so I never played 3.5 or whatever) but I have the starter set and Im geting the core rulebooks, dungeon delves, forgotten realms (player and campaign guide), player hand book 2 and dungeon master’s guide 2, all the dungeon tiles and some pre made dungeon maps. also Im getting the “Mouse guard” rpg, and mabye some other rpgs. Im also making a paper and pen rpg. so far it hitting the 90 page mark.

By: Nef_D

Nef_D — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 01:07:58 +0000

Being a so called “purist” I dislike 4th edition for two very valid reasons. Firstly there is no point in playing anything other than the class the race you decide to play was meant for. Why play a halfling paladin when a dragonborn one works better for example, ok so humans work well in any class but that’s the point of humans, and secondly it doesn’t matter what class you play; there all the same. Do you want to play a fighter or a rogue? It doesn’t matter, there is no real difference. Ok so the wizard has easier aoe than any other class but it’s only effective against minions. It matters as to which book (PH1 or PH2) you choose to pick your class from, their styles are very different, but that’s as far as it goes.

For me, a 20 year gamer, there just isn’t enough here to spark my imagination. I’ll give it another go in a year or so when they have more out there for the game but for now I’m sticking with my 3.5 collection.

Now as a DM I love the game with a passion. An entire months worth of adventures were ready to be played in about an hour, and I include treasure and traps there!
A player even dropped out after two weeks and that didn’t matter, just recalculated the XP cost of an encounter and took out a couple of treasure packages and the game was back on track. Wonderfully simple. Just how a DM likes it and how players hate it.

By: sean connors

sean connors — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:37:35 +0000

I represent a group that has been running games for over 25 years we are big d&d fans have bought every incarnation.
However we all collectively agree that forth edition plays very dull. As an experienced designer of games myself i found it so difficult to write quality stories around this rule set because there is no magical flexibility within its rules.
I think if you do some internet digging this rule set has seriously damaged my favorite game and created a division.
Lets look at the facts how many print runs has it had two so far or to put that into context at this stage 3.5 was going into its sixth. There are approximately six million d&d players world wide and only a few hundred thousand have converted over thats shocking. As for bringing in new players dont make me laugh the whole point of a new system is to appeal to the dm first and he will find your players they have clearly forgotten this. If you look around web sites that offer players for players to hook up how many forth edition games are being run. Look around thats telling.
Anyway the big question is what happens next. For me i will be buying paizo games products because they better represent what i want.
Sorry one final thing it was clear they wanted to take forth edition on line so players from all over the world could play. What happened?

By: DM Matt

DM Matt — Fri, 22 May 2009 23:52:08 +0000

I have some similar opinions, although I prefer many parts of 3.5 to 4th. I don’t like the new magic items listings, but I especially like the new monster stats format. That said, it’s really a toss-up for me between the two.

By: Tallifer

Tallifer — Fri, 08 May 2009 22:54:48 +0000

I was able to skim through and understand the gist of the player’s book in one day. And was happy to discover that all the important rules were in that one book. Clean and consistent!

Not every class, power or race impressed me, but overall I got more and more excited as I read and the possibilities for adventure opened up to me. And because of the clear rules framework, I could easily start imagining my own changes and new classes and races.

The Dungeon Master’s Guide is terrific. I rarely ever refereed a game. I am still daunted by the prospect, but theis guide will be a tremendous help, full of detailed practical advice.

The Monster Manual has awesome art for the most part. Most importantly the glossy and evocative art made many previously ludicrous creatures like the otyough or carrot-nosed trolls look like true monsters again.

By: koboldkommando

koboldkommando — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 02:27:32 +0000

Having read the books and not liking all I saw (healing surges?, action points?) I still pressed ahead and gave it a go as soon as I could using one of the official scenarios.

Unlike 3.5 this one is actually a joy to run. Both 2nd,3.0 and 3.5 began to make me hate the game as I DMed it but 4th Ed I am happy to run games of D+D again. No more damned annoying monster data blocks, the monster manual is fun to read and give ideas. Many complain about ecologies missing but if anything I found that it restricted creation by being told what all races exactly do.

Now a lot of people complain it is for newbs but that is no bad thing as D+D needs to get another generation or it will die with the currently aging population of older gamers. My main dislike and pet peeve is the Warlord. This class should have been binned I just do not like it and players think they’re the leader because of the title. 3.5 for me was a horrible maddening experience of ever more rules sucking out the fun of actually getting on with the action. Rogues not being able to backstab rogues if so many levels higher etc. detracted and made the game stop/start. I view this edition as a positive because it rekindle the spark of gaming in me and my group.