People hate 4e and the books get dumped for cheap on ebay. Why do people hate it again?

  • PTR_K@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    But stepping away from my own gripes as a DM and player, to get back to many of the more general complaints about 4E:

    All the other earlier editions had certain things in common: Spells tended to work a certain way. Power increased in a certain way. Weapons and attacks worked a certain way.

    Sure, there were differences. Some of the other editions were simpler than others, focused on different things, or had a different “power curve”. But looked at over all, you could kind of see trends, how elements of one edition had inspired similar elements of another. And, you could kind of convert them with a little twiddling if you held them at a distance and squinted.

    But 4E was different.

    Folks who though the 3/3.5E power curve was a little much would find the 4E power curve EXTREME. Even those who didn’t mind the 3E power curve might find that 4E had gone too far.

    Characters in 4E had massive piles of hit points to wittle down, and those points kept coming back. So combats tended to be on the long side, and also more plentiful.

    Weapon damage in 4E was nominally similar to previous editions, but a large number of combat specializations in 4E revolved around somehow changing or tweaking how that damage was applied, multiplying it, giving it conditions, etc.

    In fact most of a character’s talents in general seemed to be about combat in a very tactical way. And, sure, previous editions did have tactical combat, but it had never been quite so innately integrated as with 4E.

    • PTR_K@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There were other differences too: Elves were kind of different. Magic item creation worked a lot different. Treasure was obligatorily passed out in power level appropriate Schrodinger’s loot drops, where it would wave function collapse into whatever thing appropriate for exact class combination present.

      In some ways 4E was REALLY balanced in combat if you played it the right way, but it almost became hard to lose and combat didn’t offer as many twists, close calls, or surprises.

      Converting from previous editions would not just involve a little tweaking, but major changes. The material just was not easily compatible. It was like they were trying to appeal to a completely different audience (some said MMO players, though tactical wargames also might be a close fit).

      Some folks really liked 4E, but there was a lot of complaint, and some folks started the OSR and sought out retroclones or just kept playing their previous editions. Pathfinder came about as basically an edition 3.75 for folks who didn’t want 4E.

      So with 5E they learned some lessons form all the dissenters. They kept a couple bits from 4E, but tried to switch a lot of things closer to the way they worked in 3E, and took some inspiration from earlier editions as well. The 5E game again became a bit more compatible with earlier work, so it was easier to discuss in a similar manner.

      There’s also the fact that 3E, 3.5E, Pathfinder, 5E and a bunch of retroclones all use the Open Gaming Licence which originally came out with 3E. This made sharing parts of these works or combining them much easier to do without perceived risk of lawsuit. But 4E had a more restrictive license that made some folks less eager to try and work with it.