Chris Pramas ([info]freeport_pirate) wrote,
@ 2008-03-02 19:32:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:game industry, gaming

4E Test Drive
I had a chance to actually play D&D 4th edition today. A friend of mine who still works at WotC got permission to run the demo adventure from the D&D Experience at her monthly game day. Since I'm still waiting for WotC to finalize the Game System License, this was the first opportunity I've had to see something of the rules and try them out. 

Short Review
It's an interesting system that didn't so much feel like D&D in play; nonetheless, the brand power of D&D all but ensures this will be a success and it may even redefine what D&D means for the next generation.

Long Review
Since the announcement of 4E last Gen Con, a common critique of the emerging rules was that they looked more to MMOs than RPGs. My play experience suggests something else. The roots of the new rules are not in MMOs at all, but collectible card games. Building your character seems much like building a deck in Magic: the Gathering. You have a selection of powers and special abilities that are exceptions-based. Some powers you can only use once per encounter, like tapping a card in a CCG. Character turns have a very specific order, with beginning and end of turn actions used to handle bookkeeping issues. Part of character and party building revolves around power combos. In short, 4E seems to be what people feared was going to happen with 3E after WotC bought TSR, though thankfully without a collectible component.

Now one of my concerns had been that 4E would simply be a revised 3.5. I'm glad 4E is not that. I really felt that 3.5 was just more complicated than it needed to be and I hoped that 4E would simplify things. While it does fix many of the ongoing issues with 3.5, my feeling after today's session is that it's just complicated in a different way. It's not something I think experienced gamers will have a huge amount of trouble with, but it does seem that 4E may be even more unfriendly to new players than 3.5 was. It looks like 4E requires newbs to make too many choices and track too many things to make it truly accessible. Since D&D has always been the entry point for most RPG players, this is my most serious concern.

Of the current D&D players, I suspect most of them will switch over to the new edition, despite the unimpressive marketing campaign that we've seen to date. There are many options for character customization and players who like tactical combat will find a lot to work with. I understand there are some kind of social interaction rules, but I haven't seen them. The focus seems squarely on combat from what I could tell. There were interesting choices to make during fights and it wasn't just a matter of trotting out your best attack again and again. The CCG style of the rules and the changes to the IP did make the game feel a lot less like D&D though, at least to me. And since the rules seem to have been tailored to provide a very particular experience, I don't think they will make as good of a base for the variety of campaign settings D&D used to see. It's pretty clear that WotC realizes this, which explains why they felt the need to advance the timeline and have an apocalyptic event in the Forgotten Realms. I don't think many of the old campaign settings will transition over without a lot of cutting, spindling, and mutilating.

What I think WotC is going for here is what Marvel managed to pull off with their Ultimate line of comics: take the core of the IP and redefine it for a new generation. There will certainly be some longtime fans disenfranchised by this move, but I don't think there will be enough of those folks to hurt 4E. (I do think, however, that there will be enough of those for a third party company to carve out a good business for itself catering to them, but that's a topic for another day.)

All of this is, of course, based on what I've managed to glean so far from released info and today's play experience.  I would naturally like to see the new rules in their entirety and doing so may change my opinion about some things. If the GSL gets sorted out this month, maybe I'll get the chance for a more in-depth read soon. If I feel like spending 5K to do so anyway.



(Post a new comment)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-03-03 06:21 am UTC (link)
It's an interesting system that didn't so much feel like D&D in play; nonetheless, the brand power of D&D all but ensures this will be a success and it may even redefine what D&D means for the next generation.

I'm a little surprised to hear this, Chris. My experience has been that, while I agree that many of the mechanics are indeed different, the feel of the game is closer to my conception of "true D&D" than 3E ever was.

Obviously, it's going to depend primarily on what one thinks the feel of D&D is, and I'm not trying to downplay your reaction to it. Obviously, if you didn't feel like it was D&D, then to you, it's not. But to me, it feels--and I mean this in the good thematic ways, not the clunky mechanical ways--like a partial return to the good parts of the Basic-through-Master boxed sets and 1E.

That said, I'll agree that I'm a bit concerned about new players. But at worst, I don't believe 4E is any harder to learn than 3E, and may be easier for some.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]iamnikchick
2008-03-03 06:37 am UTC (link)
Define "feel of the game" please.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-03 06:56 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-03 07:03 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]rentagurkha, 2008-03-03 04:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-03 05:59 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rentagurkha, 2008-03-03 06:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-03 06:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]iamnikchick, 2008-03-03 11:35 pm UTC
Not like Basic D&D - (Anonymous), 2008-03-04 02:55 pm UTC
Re: Not like Basic D&D - (Anonymous), 2008-03-05 07:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-03 06:27 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]alzrius, 2008-03-04 03:21 am UTC
1e and basic - (Anonymous), 2008-03-04 04:26 pm UTC
Re: 1e and basic - [info]mouseferatu, 2008-03-04 05:53 pm UTC
Re: 1e and basic - (Anonymous), 2008-03-05 04:12 am UTC
Re: 1e and basic - (Anonymous), 2008-03-06 05:31 am UTC
Re: 1e and basic - (Anonymous), 2008-03-06 06:14 pm UTC
Re: 1e and basic - (Anonymous), 2008-03-08 08:41 pm UTC
Re: 1e and basic - [info]zoatebix, 2008-03-10 07:57 pm UTC
Re: 1e and basic - [info]nychold, 2008-06-12 05:36 pm UTC

[info]richgreen01
2008-03-03 07:06 am UTC (link)
Thanks for the review Chris.

We were playing 18th level 3.5 yesterday and we all agreed we were looking forward to a more streamlined game. I like most of what I've heard about 4e but I guess I'm surprised at how many changes there are. I hope it does still "feel like D&D" though.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]jdigital
2008-03-03 01:27 pm UTC (link)
Indeed. I've only been in one game that lasted properly into epic level (with a talented DM), and no game I've run has passed 15th level. Apparently this isn't uncommon, and many people dislike the very high level play.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]viktor_haag, 2008-03-03 04:55 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jdigital, 2008-03-03 08:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]viktor_haag, 2008-03-03 08:56 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]mysticalforest, 2008-03-04 03:34 am UTC
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2008-03-04 03:54 am UTC

[info]codrus
2008-03-03 08:04 am UTC (link)
What do you consider the D&D IP?

What does D&D feel like to you? I guess I understand that the powers selection feels different to you, I'm just trying to get your idea of what D&D is?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]freeport_pirate
2008-03-03 08:34 pm UTC (link)
Let me put it to you this way. Playing 4E reminded more of playing Descent than D&D.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]codrus, 2008-03-04 03:27 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]inkylj, 2008-03-04 08:26 am UTC

[info]dungeon_grrrl
2008-03-03 10:53 am UTC (link)
Here's the most important question for me, as an avid buyer of GR products (especially back when you could support 3/3.5 e);

Could you imagine GR support this edition of the game? I know you can't possibly decide yet, because there's information you lack. But surely 4e could could be so far from what you want to do that with this glimpse you *couldn't* see supporting it, and I'm wondering if it's that far gone?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]freeport_pirate
2008-03-03 07:30 pm UTC (link)
Sure, I could imagine it. It'd just be a matter of figuring out the right products to do.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]jdigital
2008-03-03 01:20 pm UTC (link)
It looks like 4E requires newbs to make too many choices and track too many things to make it truly accessible. Since D&D has always been the entry point for most RPG players, this is my most serious concern.

This would be a concern of mine. My first D&D character (joining an existing group part-way) was a fifth-level fighter, and although I got the hang of it eventually, the array of options on an advanced character was initially bewildering. Third edition only gave you multiple attacks and fighter feats gradually as you levelled up, in order to make it easy to learn.

Complexity was no problem with Iron Heroes, which was aimed squarely at existing D&D players. With a new D&D edition, I think what matters is how difficult it is to get the hang of first level with the basic classes and races. After that, everything else can be learned as you acquire it.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]mysticalforest, 2008-03-04 03:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jdigital, 2008-03-04 04:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]iamnikchick, 2008-03-04 05:40 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dungeon_grrrl, 2008-03-07 02:48 am UTC

[info]xomec
2008-03-03 01:40 pm UTC (link)
Although I haven't played 4e yet (just read previews and playtest reports online), your impressions seem to match mine, Chris. Wizards seems to have abandoned the "entry level" market (in as much as 3.0/3.5 ever had it) and seems to be aiming 4e at Magic players as "the next level" beyond the CCG. Truthfully, they could do worse than to adapt the Magic IP as a 4e setting to truly complete the transition, if this is their approach. After all, for a lot of young gamers, gaming is Serra Angels and Atogs rather than orcs and mind flayers.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]iamnikchick, 2008-03-04 07:25 am UTC

[info]wickedthought
2008-03-03 01:57 pm UTC (link)
From what I've seen so far, I anticipate the trend of me liking each subsequent edition of D&D even less will continue. ;)

(Reply to this)


[info]akaihyo
2008-03-03 02:34 pm UTC (link)
Yes, there are times when 3e has too many pieces, but sometimes I like that about it. I like having a character with a few ranks in a skill that fits into their background or represents some obscure knowledge that they have acquired. It looks like that sort of option has been "streamlined" out of 4E which disappoints me.

I am still undecided about 4E overall, need more data!

(Reply to this)


[info]hygelakthedread
2008-03-03 02:36 pm UTC (link)
What I think WotC is going for here is what Marvel managed to pull off with their Ultimate line of comics: take the core of the IP and redefine it for a new generation. There will certainly be some longtime fans disenfranchised by this move, but I don't think there will be enough of those folks to hurt 4E.

So in other words, the new D&D goes and kills off Gwen Stacy again, even though they should have know better. Go figure...

(Reply to this)


[info]maliszew
2008-03-03 02:49 pm UTC (link)
The funny thing was that, after I'd read the reports, my reaction, while similar on the score of how little 4e feels like what I consider "D&D", was: "They're not going after the MMO market, which they can't possibly hope to win; they're going after the D&D minis market, which they already have." 4e looks to be an attempt to be a "harder drug" for those already addicted to the minis game, which, by all accounts, is a huge success for WotC. In fact, I'd be amazed if the minis weren't already more profitable than the RPG by a significant amount.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]iamnikchick, 2008-03-03 04:09 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]maliszew, 2008-03-03 04:16 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]bcwalker, 2008-03-03 05:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]maliszew, 2008-03-03 05:15 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]codrus, 2008-03-04 03:31 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]gamerguy, 2008-03-04 04:42 am UTC

[info]wordwill
2008-03-03 05:18 pm UTC (link)
Everything I'm reading about 4E feels enough like D&D to me, but then the cosmology and assumed attitudes of D&D are things that I routinely scrape off — seldom do I run "D&D." Rather, I run "D&D in a twisted, occult Colonial America-Meets-Cthuloid-Crossroads setting" or "D&D in a low-magic, bloody version of Icelandic legendry" or whatever. So losing alignment and such doesn't affect my notion of D&D-ness.

What I'm seeing, though, is evidence of fewer things to track at the core, but with lots of fiddly material accumulating as powers expand and increase. I think it's interesting that spells and such no longer have durations, but are rather ended whenever the subject finally succeeds on a saving throw during the subject's own turn — not unlike some WFRP2 spells.

Encounter-based action allowances? Individual healing powers? Simplified movement? I like all of these things, but then I liked Star Wars: Saga Edition a great deal, too.

Unlike a lot of the critics I'm seeing around, though... I don't see why I can't like both 4E and True20. Right now, my opinion hovers here: I know I like True20 better than D&D v3.5, and I think I like v4 more than I like v3.5.

(Reply to this)


[info]doccross
2008-03-04 12:45 am UTC (link)
Good piece, Chris. So the vibe is not MMORPG, but CCG...hmmm. That would pretty much be the deal breaker for me, if I were really interested in any version of D&D. I never liked CCGs in the first place.

That said, I can see how this might suck in a whole bunch of MtG players looking for an RPG fix. It'll be interesting to see how this all pans out and how well 4E does versus all the RPGs spawned by D20.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]pwca, 2008-03-16 10:47 pm UTC

[info]lemuriapress
2008-03-04 03:47 am UTC (link)
Nice. Thanks for the review, Chris. It boggles my mind that prominent 3rd-party publishers have had to jump through such hoops to get a look at the game, but I'm glad to see it's finally happening.

I am really looking forward to seeing how this sucker plays.

At this point I suspect it may be when the books actually come out, but I'm still looking forward to it. :)

Edited at 2008-03-04 05:29 am UTC

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]gamescribe, 2008-03-04 07:11 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]innercaine, 2008-03-04 04:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dungeon_grrrl, 2008-03-07 02:56 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dungeon_grrrl, 2008-03-07 02:55 am UTC

(Anonymous)
2008-03-04 03:57 am UTC (link)
I'd have to disagree that 4e is more complex for new players to pick up. I say this on the basis that I used the player created adventure that used the DDXP rules and characters that are so far known about and explained the rules on the fly to two players. One hasn't played RPG's since 1st ed and even then played other systems more than D&D. The other is hopeless at picking up new rules even though he had played in 3.x games. He was constantly in need of coaching and educating and reminding of the rules.

But both picked up the rules straight away and without hesitation used their powers and we all had a good game. The rules are very logical and simple. I can't see how anyone could say they're confusing or complex.

(Reply to this)


[info]buzzmo
2008-03-04 05:05 am UTC (link)
Two things:

1. My groups are dying for 4e to come out. Almost everything we've seen so far looks like it addresses issues that, after 7-8 years now, we're really just tired of dealing with. MtG, MMO, I don't care. If it extends the sweet spot and makes DM'ing easier, I say bring it on.

2. The DM in our currently 20th-level campaign basically came up with both 4e's "points of light" and elemental chaos about 3-5 years ago. Why? Because the concepts allowed him to run some really kick-ass campaign arcs.

I've been playing since blue-book Basic, and I'm not really going to miss things like the great wheel; they never had any impact on the games I played anyway. And trading it for low-level planar adventuring in the feywild and shadowfell seems like a more than worthy trade, IMO.

Who knows? The Great Wheel could always return, in a product where it belongs... a Greyhawk setting book. :)

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-03-04 05:00 pm UTC (link)
I'm a no-one here... But like many of you, I have played Dungeons and Dragons since its "box" days. The journey has been a long one, so long in fact that I don't really remember when it started. I can tell you this though, it was the journey that was cool. Along the way I picked up a load of new friends and had some wonderful, book-worthy stories to tell.

It sounds like I'm waxing poetic here, but it's for a reason. D&D has been a fantastic vehicle for my imagination. Key words here, "my" imagination. Everyone is different when it comes to the way they imagine things and that's why we're seeing vastly differing opinions on this new arrival. (4e) I'm stating the obvious right?

Well yes, and no. I cut my fantasy teeth on The Hobbit way back in the early 70's. At that time there was really nothing out there in terms of gaming outlets for the sci-fi nerds (I'm lumping fantasy and sci-fi together here.) in the crowd, beside the odd board game.

Along comes this neat idea, Dungeons and Dragons. Pow, we had a framework with which to define our gaming need. Something we didn't even really know we needed. And this (to me) is where the "feel" originated. Archetypes are what I cut my teeth on. Those initial editions (up to AD&D) are what defined a fantasy RPG to me. And that fantasy RPG was of course Dungeons and Dragons. It was inseparable. Until now...

Granted, there was more on the table back then as well, Tunnels and Trolls being one such example, but in most cases Dungeons and Dragons was role playing. Period. Today though the choices for a fantasy role playing game are legion, and many of them are quite good. But if you were to ask a guy like me what comes to mind when "role playing game" is mentioned, I'd fire off Dungeons and Dragons without even thinking. And today's offering is Dungeons and Dragons in brand only.

It's not JUST about rules, nor content, or art. It's about the whole. And somewhere along the road it took a left while I took a right. I'm not complaining... I'll quite likely play 4e. But it's no longer Dungeons and Dragons to me. I'll keep quiet as I sit and roll my dice though. There are new comers and even a few grognards who wouldn't agree w/ my point of view. And that's fine. In fact, it's what makes the world go round. It's what makes the journey ever so enjoyable.

But I still think of Dungeons and Dragons... ;-)

(Reply to this)


[info]hida_jiremi
2008-03-05 02:27 am UTC (link)
Good review, Chris. Overall, I think this addresses my primary concerns with the game as well. It simply doesn't feel like D&D anymore. Which I think is very interesting considering that I've played D&D, AD&D1, AD&D2, D&D 3.0 and D&D 3.5 (among many other games). All of the previous iterations felt like Dungeons and Dragons, and this one just... doesn't. Count me into the "long-time players" who won't be switching over to the new system.

(Reply to this)

Combo Plates
[info]modernmyths
2008-03-06 05:15 am UTC (link)
CP-

Now that I think about it, the paradigm you describe of timing and stacking powers for maiximum munchkin-ness appears in another place, and that's what I think of as the 'epic platform' RPGs like Final Fantasy, as opposed to the MMORPGs.

Interesting. I also like the comparison to the Ultimate universe, especially as regards the 'worlds and monsters' bits.

I remain hopeful they'll show you something that wows you enough to pull the trigger, but I won't wait under water for it. : )

-Jim C.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Combo Plates - [info]evilwashu [deadjournal], 2008-06-11 02:59 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2008-03-16 03:59 am UTC (link)
Like many of you, I have been playing the game for a long, long time. Up until 2nd ed, I found I could easily (no changes whatsoever) run modules from any edition for characters made for any edition (basic and 1st ed modules for 2nd ed characters, etc.)and still have a great time. And it always felt like D&D. When 3rd came out, I bought everything and played it. I really, really wanted to like it. Sometimes I even did. But it didn't feel like D&D. 3.5 was worse. Before they even announced 4th edition, me and my group went back to AD&D and immediately started having fun again. Writing adventures is easier, playing is easier, everything goes faster and everybody uses their imaginations more. Sure, the mechanics may seem overly simple and one dimensional to some -- but, ironically, for us anyway, fewer rules seem to encourage more depth of imagination and play, not less. And for those who say thaco was confusing, I say 2 things: 1. If you can add, you can subtract; and, 2. Try explaining the 3.5 rules to a newb kid. Obviously, I will not be buying any 4th edition materials. I hope to god some good third party publisher picks up the torch and resurrects the D&D I know and love by producing quality materials but I wont hold my breath. I think it speaks volumes that Gygax disliked the new editions, but I know a lot of people think his opinions arose out of frustration at being marginalized. Lastly, I don't see why it's so hard to offer materials for more than one edition at a time -- I seem to recall having both the basic (rules cyclopedia) and advanced (2nd ed) simultaneously available once upon a time. All just my opinion, of course. Thanks for the review, Chris.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2008-06-18 06:47 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2008-03-19 12:09 am UTC (link)
Thanks for the opinions Chris.

I too have played every itteration thus far in D&D and many in the MTG CCG. I wouldn't want the two to mix however, unless it was a MTG brand RPG, and not one simply wearing a D&D disguise.

The most major reason I will still be playing this game no matter how much perversion from it's core it undergoes, is D&D insider's virtual table top gaming utilities. It is just too hard now adays to get gaming friends together, and we have tried other virtual table top utilities along with teamspeak/vent/msn for voice chat... but this one seems packaged just right from the demos I have seen on youtube. I will be shelling out that 9.95 a month with no doubts.

Also, this will no doubt make it easier for the community as a whole to form new groups. The days of putting up flyers at local comic book shops, searching for groups or players, will be over ;-)

However, we might simply use the utilities to better play virtual table top 3.5, if 4.0 turns out being a wash... but I will definately be giving it a try.. after all, it's "D&D" right? ;-)

(Reply to this)

Catering to a new generation
(Anonymous)
2008-04-02 06:57 pm UTC (link)
I like the way you put it Chris. It is catering to a new generation that has played a variety of other types of games than what DnD 1e through 3e was based upon. Having played DnD starting in 1980 I got dismayed with 3.0 and dumped it when 3.5 came out. See, while I am old, that doesn't mean I am old school. In the past two decades I've also played all of the new game types that have come out including collectable games that are exception based, video games, etc. In fact my primary hobby is historical miniatures. Back around 2000 I started to look at things like the Battlefield series of games and incorportated elements of them into my historical games to A) give a more dynamic game and B) freshen up a rather stale old format with new ideas.

I think 4e has more of a chance of getting me interested in DnD again than a refinement of 3.5e ever would have.

Keep up the good work and say hello to your Brother from another SJP alum.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: Catering to a new generation - [info]freeport_pirate, 2008-04-02 07:50 pm UTC

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…