RPG Rant - Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Part 1

[MrDreamblade]

My character was arrested, and my characters halfling groupies hired the other players to get me out while I played a lullaby to put the guards to sleep and escape. It was a great campaign

[MrDreamblade]

I agree, they make you play more of a career adventurer than a guy dragged into the story. My 3.5 dm had us all in a bar, and to get our versions of who we are he asked we describe ourselves. I was a dwarven bard who wished to spread the joy of Moradin's Mettal by playing heavy metal on a magical guitar. Hearing me say this, after everyone else basically said they sat alone with a hood on, or they were drinking and flirting with the bar maidens, he had guards come because of a noise disturbance.

[Tinoseth]

I'd like to see "roleplaying" specific powers. They could dedicate whole books to adding them.

[PrawnToucher]

I found your comments really interesting, as someone who has gotten interested in RPGs as a result of 4ed. Like other commenters (?) I was put off by earlier editions of D&D due to their perceived complexity. Surely D&D has always been a gateway game, leading to other 'purer' RPGs? Good video though, nicely balanced and very informative.

[Webhead123]

@PrawnToucher Glad you enjoyed the videos and thanks for your comment. Yes, earlier editions of D&D were a bit byzantine and obscure at times. The game has evolved toward much more linear thinking with each edition, which is a good think, I think.

It seems D&D has always been the "gateway" into the hobby for most people. It seems to eternally be one of those cases of "it's popular because it's so popular".

[KhagarBalugrak]

Perhaps in 5th edition D&D, there will be no alignment system at all. Perhaps, in 5th edition D&D, there will be only one combat roll to determine Initiative, attack, and damage. Perhaps, in 5th edition D&D, there will be only one sliding scale for all monster abilities with the possible exception of magic. I can see it now - a game so absurdly simple that even though a four year old could play it, most four year olds would quickly get tired of it, not to mention teenagers or adults.

[phaedruslive]

@KhagarBalugrak Oh, you think wotc are big bioware fans? lol.

[KhagarBalugrak]

@phaedruslive, lol, well it's clear WOTC is bent on simplifying D&D as much as is possible, regardless of what it does to the quality of their product. They have a singleminded obsession with "reaching the widest audience possible", which to them means dumbing down the game to such an extent that even retards could understand it. But like all obsessions, there will be negative consequences to this mindset. Look at what happened with FFXIV - the company lost 14 billion dollars.

[KhagarBalugrak]

@phaedruslive, what I mean to say is that D&D, like the Final Fantasy series, has for a very long time been drawing on the storehouse of goodwill built up from the earlier, better, editions. WOTC cannot continue to produce the shit they are producing without consequences. As with FFXIV, people are getting fed up with WOTC's cheap development of poor quality D&D products. It's going to bite them in the ass within the next decade, and will possibly almost bankrupt WOTC when it happens.

[KhagarBalugrak]

One last thing: the decision to turn D&D into a pale copy of World of Warcraft will come back to haunt WOTC, just as Square-Enix recently lost 14 billion dollars on the travesty known as FFXIV. Eventually, the drive toward ever-greater simplicity and lack of flavor and nuance will cause WOTC to release such an abominable pile of crap - likely with the next edition of D&D - that literally everyone will abandon it, just like FFXIV.

[KhagarBalugrak]

4th edition appeals most to people who lack imagination, literacy, focus and intelligence...or to those who are making money off of selling the product. It's not D&D. WOTC gleefully destroyed D&D and dramatically lowered the level of sophistication and nuance in the game so that Ritalin-addicted teenage boys would be more compelled to buy it.

But by butchering the game, WOTC has lost most of its original customer base. There is nothing any longer to distinguish D&D from a MMORPG.

[KhagarBalugrak]

Take the example of the label "Leader". This would imply that my "Leader" character would be dominating or at least commanding, both on and off the battlefield. What if I wanted my "Leader" to be a humble, self-denying sort of person who nevertheless has the ability to improve his allies' capabilities, not by issuing commands but by other means? The label "Leader" pigeonholes my character into being one type of person on and off the battlefield.

[KhagarBalugrak]

What I'm saying is that the labels of "Striker", "Controller", etc. shift the focus toward the most superficial aspect of a character: his role in combat. By rigidly and superficially defining characters this way, the game actively hinders roleplaying. If, for example, I wanted my "Striker" to be a kind and compassionate character, the very label of "Striker" would make such an attempt come across as something absurd and ridiculous.

[KhagarBalugrak]

It's true that the structure and flavor (or lack thereof) of a game can support or hinder efforts at roleplaying. A game like 4th edition D&D that labels character "Strikers", "Leaders", "Controllers", etc. strongly hinders roleplaying, since roleplaying is about CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT and such labels give a strong flavor of STASIS, or the absence of character development. In addition, such labels are superficial, and do not illuminate a character's motivations, personality, etc.

[Eathanskies]

I've played 1 game of d&d, first time me and my mates did any role playing game. We really enjoyed it, I never wanted to try d&d earlier because of the crazy amount of rules, seemed daunting for a first timer with no support from other gamers. Was still interesting to see why you didn't like it though.

[Webhead123]

@Eathanskies Thank you for watching and for your comments. Yes, RPGs can seem intimidating at times with all the talk about rules and things but, like anything, once you let yourself explore them, it opens up opportunities for a wonderful experience. There is also a huge spectrum of complexity in RPGs. Some have rule books that span several hundred pages and some can explain the rules for the entire game on a single index card. There's something for everyone!

[Nerfherder3]

DnD has never been about Role Playing...have you ever played a RPGA event? If you have then you know.

[Webhead123]

@Nerfherder3 A good point. That's precisely why I chose not to get involved with the RPGA. I watched/listened to an event at my (at the time) FLGS and realized that there was a level of, for lack of a better term, "politics" to the organization that influenced the game play in a manner that really did not appeal to me.

D&D can (and IMHO should) be about role playing and cooperative story-telling. I'm in the camp that believes that "system does matter" when it comes to this kind of experience.

[OsxinBraveheart]

I loved the review. Very entertaining. The thing about 4E is that it really forces you to slave over it until you near levels 15+, when your character is fully established along its track. My only issue is that I tend to lose a lot of allies when trying to power-level in custom instances, so attaining level 10 is even a difficulty. Of course, the DM is a hardass in my group. That's just my two cents. :)

[Webhead123]

@OsxinBraveheart Glad you enjoyed it. D&D4e is a fine game for what it is. Nothing wrong with that. It's not a game for me but then, I have my own odd tastes when it comes to RPGs and the "Fantasy" genre in particular.

Thanks again for watching and leaving your thoughts!

[OsxinBraveheart]

@Webhead123 Wow! Seldom do I meet someone so polite on this site. Anyway, since you seem to be into Sci-fi, I would definitely check out Eclipse Phase. You can check it out for free if you can find it- it's under a Creative Commons license. Also, after further inspection of my D&D 4E handbook, it encourages the DM to make up instances, quests, leveling, etc. Standard 4E is a bit limiting, but D&D based off of 4E playstyle is much better than is credited. Not to beat a dead horse or anything.

[Webhead123]

@OsxinBraveheart Thank you! Yes, I have downloaded the Eclipse Phase core book but haven't had a chance to really read it yet. If I had one complaint to level at it at this early stage of understanding, it looks like it is pretty "rules-intensive" (aka it has a lot of little "micro-elements" to the rules that need to be tracked and remembered, perhaps similar to GURPS in a very basic sense). That's only my initial impression though and I will reserve judgement until I've had a full read.

[OsxinBraveheart]

@Webhead123 Maybe it's just me, but I strongly prefer to use table rules for my groups (you know, using the book's rules as "suggestions" as opposed to actual solid guidelines). Myself and the other GM in my group like to use rules that way in most games. I guess that's why both 4E DD&D and Eclipse Phase seem lighter to me.

[Webhead123]

@OsxinBraveheart As do I. I believe very heavily in "GM-ownership" when playing an RPG, which is just a fancy way of saying that the input of the people playing the game is more important than a collection of formulas thrown together by the game designer. That said, a good game designer can really lay the foundation for a system of mechanics that makes the experience great. I think of it like a road. I quality, smoothly-paved road is a pleasure to drive on, wherever you decide to travel with it.

[OsxinBraveheart]

@Webhead123 Yeah. When I play (Especially when I GM) my group tends to be more in the realm of "resolution via story and decision-making" as opposed to pure brute fighting. Some of my players have even brought it up to me to be rid of the battle map and just use other, boardless methods of battle.

I say D&D should be more about roleplay than killing, but hey. I guess people like what they like. :/

[Pgaither84]

To say there is no Role Playing in 4e is an argument from ignorance, and that is why you have such a hard time supporting it.

It's very simple. The point of the PHB and DMG are to give you guidelines and rules to create characters and encounters, resolve combat, distribute XP and treasure, and to advance characters. it's just a rule set. The imagination of you and your friends are the only limits to role play... and that may very well be your real problem.

[Webhead123]

@Pgaither84 I'm not sure if my language was clear enough in this vid but I don't support the notion that "there is no role playing in 4E". Rather, I attempt to deflate the straw-man arguement that "you can role play anything" which is often used to defend 4E's design philosophy. Sure, you can role play any game. You can role play Tic Tac Toe if you really wanted to but is that a valid defense to call Tic Tac Toe a "role playing game"? I'm not convinced.

[Webhead123]

cont...I have the same objection to the term "MMORPG". I've played several MMO's. Can you "role play" within them? Sure. Does that mean WoW or Guild Wars or Tabula Rasa is a "role playing game"? I don't really think so. If people could argue that, then I could argue that Thief: The Dark Project is a role playing game because I can pretend to be Garrett. No, they are "massively multiplayer online STRATEGY games" and if you choose to pretend to have point ears while you play, that's your choice.

[Webhead123]

cont...In reality, my primary issue with 4E's design is it's opacity. My investment is often broken due to rules designed in such a way that they call attention to themselves. When I play 4E, I'm very aware that I'm playing a "game" rather than an interactive storytelling activity, which is not how I like to feel when I play an RPG. It's just personal opinion which, as always, is only as relevent as you decide it is. I bear malice toward no living 4E player. I simply do what I must to have fun.

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 I will try to say the same thing again, but in a different way as you must have missed the point.

You and I and our group of friends want to play a role playing game. So, we create characters in our imaginations. Then we use the 4th edition of D&D as a rule set to create character sheets to determine our attributes and abilities. instead of being Eric Cartman and saying "I have the power to have all the powers I want," you have to follow a rule book.

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 cont... so you have this structed balanced rule set to help you determine what you can and cannot do that we all abide by.

So we have our characters in our minds and on our character sheets. Now we start the game. In Monopoly, the entire game is you roll 2d6 and go around the board. In 4e, we start at location X and our characters exist in a sand box environment. What you do, where you go, and why are all up to you and the DM.

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 part3...If you and or your friends are not role playing, then that is YOUR fault, not the game's fault. Page 18-24 in the first PHB are all about role playing information. In PHB 2, pg.178-183 give you a bunch of hints, tips, etc about Background and additional RP advice. Then the entire Eberron and Forgotten Relms Player's Guides are books about RP in the campaign settings.

Again, if you or your friends have a hard time Role Playing, it's your fault, not the game.

[Webhead123]

@Pgaither84 Sure, that's fair. My problem with 4E then, is that the rule set only helps you determine what your character can do in either A) combat (which makes up 95% of the system) or B) non-combat conflicts (i.e. social skill challenges, etc.). Anything that is not addressed by the handful of non-combat skills, powers and feats is handwaived away as "just do whatever you want" and is defended by fans of the game with the "just role play it" sentiment. That's all well and good but it gives...

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 Okay, so what rules and rewards were/are you looking for?

You still have diplomacy, intimidate, and bluff checks for conversational skills. What is it you want to do that isn't covered in the rules? you also have streetwise, religion, nature, insight, and dungeoneering just in PHB 1 to help you gather information and help you solve/resolve puzzles and problems. PHB 2 gives you some updates, but PHB 3 gives you a LOT of updates on your skills.

Also 4e Bard is much better than 3.5/PF

[Webhead123]

@Pgaither84 I agree that the 4E Bard is a "better" (ie more capable) class than it was in prior editions. That said, my (admittedly limited) experience with the 4E Bard has demonstrated some of the major problems I have with the core of the game's design. The fact that the Bard has a ranged, damaging power which is justified as "insulting someone" really took me out of the game at the time. The Bard in our party was, in fact, a better healer than our party Cleric during levels 1 - 4.

[Webhead123]

cont...players no tools (other than reliance upon GM fiat) for understanding how their character can be expected to interact with the game world.

I supposed, ultimately, I expected more from 4E and I shouldn't have. I'm not sure where that notion came from. D&D has always been a game about combating monsters, collecting their treasure and acquiring new powers. I think 4E does what it sets out to do very well. I suppose it's that what it focuses on aren't the aspects of an RPG that I enjoy.

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 part4... Then there are the mechanics of the game, such as skill challenges.

In prior versions of D&D, things like Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy were really just mind control effects. You say something, you roll a die, and you see if the roll + modifiers were high enough to get what you want.

With skill challenges you have to make multiple checks. if you just want to roll 10 times, fine... but it gives you a chance to persuade someone over time and RP the results. Less swingy.

[Webhead123]

@Pgaither84 The concept of Skill Challenges is actually one of the ideas that I liked from 4E. I agree, it's more interesting to incorporate several skills and/or multiple tests over the course of a challenge. It's been a while since I last played and we only used Skill Challenges a few times in that game so I'm not sure about how well the mechanics for them hold up, but I am fond of the idea and, ironically, have sorta kinda used a similar style of action resolution in other RPGs.

[Pgaither84]

@Webhead123 What is it about the game that breaks the immersion for you? There is nothing any more or less immersion breaking about Skill Challenges than there is with turn based combat.

Just listen to the Pod casts WotC did with Penny Arcade that you can find and download/stream for free off of their site. Lots of role playing going on there.

There are legitimate criticisms of 4e... this bit about it not supporting Role Play isn't one of them.

[Webhead123]

@Pgaither84 The dependance upon the 5-foot grid is the immersion killer for me. This is not just 4E but also 3E/3.5, etc. I don't like to operate in those terms and a game that is written to require the use of that type of spatial structuring becomes a bit frustrating for me to interact with.

The other things that are occasionally jarring are the descriptions/justifications for some of the powers. Some of them don't seem logical diagetically and clearly exist only to maintain class balance.

[howandwhy99]

4E has an enormous amount of pattern play in the combat system, not so much in the skill system. It isn't built to be a pattern finding game however, but rather a storytelling game. The changes the focus from demonstrating recognition of what is happening in the game world to expressing one's story and personality. Pattern recognition still exists in the "crunch" of the combat system, but those rules are no longer hidden.

[Webhead123]

@howandwhy99 Interesting analysis. This may be an answer to why 4E's game play structure doesn't mesh with me. The underlying pattern recognition formula is not one that I want in a role playing game. I don't want a "rock beats scissors beats paper" interaction of game mechanics. I want a game that provides a simple structure of "this is how you roll the dice, this is how you gauge your character's competence" but leaves the actual judgements up to the GM and players...

[Webhead123]

cont...One where there is no "right" or "wrong" answer to an in-game scenario. The players are free to attempt any solution they can imagine and succeed or fail on their own decisions and based upon the circumstances of that unique situation.

[howandwhy99]

@Webhead123 In a pattern finding game, code breaking like in Mastermind, the situation is defined by the code hidden behind the screen. To say it succeeds or fails based upon the situation or circumstances is to presume those are real, existent. As this is not a computer game, they are not existent pragmatically. But we could say they are in the head of the DM, if they are attempting to express only them.

[howandwhy99]

@Webhead123 cont..Alternately, if you don't want a DM to determine the results of in game actions you can use storytelling game theory in designing resolution mechanics. These are then known to everyone and the situation is concluded by mutual agreement, but then you lose the puzzle solving aspect of the game.

[Webhead123]

@howandwhy99 True. Then again, this probably has to do with my approach to RPGs and the kinds of experiences I want from them. I generally go to RPGs to experience story-emersion and collaborative social stimulus-response interaction. I like to be challenged to think creatively in the spur of the moment. I'm not usually in it for strategy. When I want a strategic experience, I tend to turn to other types of games (video games/board games/etc) where, as you say, those elements are more implicit.

[Webhead123]

cont...But that's one of the freedoms of an RPG. Different people play them for different reasons and to get different experiences. As long as everyone is having fun, there is no "wrong" way to play.

[perrin275]

i like the flavor of Pazio's Pathfinder far better than what i havve seen from 4e. The condensing of the skills has really turned me off to 4e.

[beatboxpeej]

@perrin275 My group played 4E hardcore for a while and when I popped with Pathfinder they were? 3.75?? AWESOME!! We kind of dropped 4E when Pathfinder was released.

[lordsneek13]

Interesting review... I can see your point with the combat thing but I think 4th edition fully encourages roleplaying (just like every other RPG). In my 4th edition game I can go through whole sessions without very much combat. Last time I played I only ran 1 very short combat (and only because the players requested it). Though I fully respect and understand your viewpoint on the subject.

[Webhead123]

@lordsneek13 Thanks. I do agree that 4E can be roleplayed just like any other RPG. I just think it swings too far toward encouraging combat to be the focus of the game and preferred problem-solving method and not giving a great deal of non-combat options to help players define their characters beyond the reach of their sword-arm.

You don't *need* rules to roleplay but an RPG should inspire you to feel like your character can be good at more than just stabbing things.

[ChrisFinch87]

@Webhead123 I totally agree about the fact that D&D, in general, doesn't encourage role-playing. I know the defenders of the system will always say 'oh, but you can role-play as with every other game', but the question is whether a system encourages role-playing with its mechanic. AFAIK, D&D never did this extensively, and 4th Edition is the worst offender.

And don't tell me that 'if you need encouraging in mechanic, what kind of game are you playing'. Heard that, it's a no-argument point really

[carcinomablue]

(1) I very much enjoy the design of BoL. I've run them through a few campaigns over the years that have had absolutely no focus on looting (two WoD settings (Resources has a distinctly anti-loot flavor) and Dark Heresy (looting only serves to put clues in the hands of players.) My current campaign is BASH UE. My feeling is that their experiences with these might make them receptive to BoL.

[carcinomablue]

(2) Although, if this isn't the case, my S&S ideas may be framed in 4th edition. I like it. This isn't to say it's without it's flaws but the broadness of the skills is something that I enjoy (hence, my initial question.) While, problems could arise with the party roles structure of the game, my players not being the most teamwork oriented people during character generation, I feel that I can adequately match the combat challenges to the party dynamics...

[carcinomablue]

(3)... while non-combat skills can be managed fairly easily by treating them as broad categories (using Bluff to perform or Nature to farm, for example.)

Anyhow, thanks for the feedback. I look forward to watching more of your videos.

[perrin275]

@carcinomablue yes but the ranger may be good at finding a plant or tracking a creature, he may not know the first thing about farming. or what if my rogue never picked a pocket in his life but could juggle? or had never picked a lock but knew trapmaking and disabling? what if my rogue could flip and tumble but had a fear of heights and could climb? or just choose not to improve that skill? 4e takes away that option.

[carcinomablue]

I'm curious about your thoughts on the comparison to, say, the thievery skill in 4th edition and investing points into the thief career in Barbarians of Lemuria? Why do you feel BoL succeeds in the career system, while 4th edition fails in the skill system they've established?

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue Good question. BoL is abstract in its entirety. It conciously chooses to group skills as broad "Careers" for several reasons:

1) Because PCs in BoL begin with a broad range of experience already (4 Careers) and assumes that you're at least adequately developed in several different professions. Having to deal with the overlapping of the individual "skills" of these professions would add redundancy and an amount of troublesome complexity to an otherwise "plug-and-play" game.

[carcinomablue]

@Webhead123

Didn't expect such a timely and thorough response. I appreciate it. Your first point brings up an unrelated question that I had. While BoL is, effectively, a plug-and-play game, do you feel that it's inappropriate for long-term campaigns of the low-fantasy variety if an effective experience point system is developed in house? Do you think the majority of players find the system too vague for extended play?

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue I personally see great potential for BoL to be run long-term, even with the experience rules as written.

You do have a valid point about the game in general though, that the "majority" of players (realizing that most RPGers are attached to D&D of some edition and thus expect that level of game "crunch") will likely find it too "lite" for anything more than one-shots. I think that is terribly unfortunate because I feel the game is capable of great action and epic adventure...

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue The other thing that my prove problematic for, again, the "majority" of players is the discouragement of "item-hoarding" which is a staple of the D&D-fantasy philosophy.

The solution is to set the players' expectations up front and remind them that BoL isn't played like D&D. If they aren't interested in that, they just aren't. Not much you can do about that. But players who are interested will be able to see the game for what it is rather than what it's not. Hope that helps!

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue I'm fortunate that I'm in a group that is very open to trying games of any complexity. I happen to prefer a lot of "lighter" game systems that most of your "traditional" gamers would dismiss without a second thought. It can be really frustrating, but I'm glad to know that there are players out there more interested in a good story-experience regardless of mechanics, rather than how many ways the system will let them min/max their character. I do like some "crunchy" games though.

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue 2) Because BoL Careers are intended to be used largely circumstantially, potentially to benefit characters both in and out of combat if the player can justify why the Career would be beneficial in a given scenario. As such, there are no strict definitions for what a "skill" does or doesn't do in BoL, that is left up to the player and GM to decide based upon reason, good judgement and dramatic license. The terms of the "Thief" Career for a PC are based upon such a social contract.

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue 3) Because BoL defines characters more as a "collection of skills" in general rather than as a specific, well-defined archetype. You don't really have a "Fighter" in BoL in the same way you do in D&D. You have characters with "fighting careers" but they are also likely to know how to do other things as well.

A D&D Rogue/Thief is defined by his "thief-ly skills". They are what distinguish him from other character classes. They are the tools that lend him uniqueness...

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue Because the Rogue is already pretty specifically defined in terms of his role in the game and the expectations made of him, the only real customization the player has is about what "kind" of Rogue he is going to be. In previous editions of D&D, this was handled by having the player choose how to assign skills. One might be a lock-picker and one might be a master of sleight of hand. By reducing it to a single skill in 4E, the player loses some ability to make his character special.

[Webhead123]

@carcinomablue Rogue isn't the only class that suffers from this delineation in 4E, it just happens to be an good example.

The problem, more than anything, is the expectation of the game. Because 4E makes the Rogue class so similar from PC to PC, I expect to be allowed some slack as a player to customize my character. Because BoL allows a PC to start with a mixture of different skills, I've already been given that freedom and don't need the "Thief" Career to be more tightly defined by itself.

[nozzer2002]

it seems to me that younger gamers like 4th and older gamers are not too keen on it

[nozzer2002]

another review of 4th edition if you re interested ...theoutsiders68

[nozzer2002]

i dont like the sound of healing surges myself roleplaying is all about taking risks there doesnt seem the point in playing when you can heal yourself every 5 minutes where is the sense of danger???

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 To be fair, the game does try to impose a daily limit on Healing Surges but it's ridiculously high. I've never seen a PC run out of Surges. I've seen them come close but never go totally empty. It's based on the character's class and Constitution but even the most "fragile" classes like Wizard will have at least 5-7 Surges available per day. I had a character who had 11 Surges. This basically means that he can recover up to 275% of his total Hit Points each day without even sleeping!

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 Again, to be fair, the trade-off that 4E makes for Healing Surges is that other sources of healing (potions, Cleric spells) consume your Surges when they are used on you. If you are out of Surges, a healing potion or "cure" spell won't have any effect on you. But again, that's not even much of an obstacle when you consider how each PC is capable of significantly healing themselves during and inbetween each encounter. If anything, it kind of diminishes the Cleric's role as "healer".

[nozzer2002]

ive heard a lot about 'healing surges'....any comment on that Mr webhead?

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 I don't have a problem with the idea of Healing Surges per se. They are just an element of cinematic flair to give PCs that "second-wind" to pull through to victory just when they need it. My problem is that 4E carries it (and healing in general) a bit too far. A Healing Surge gives you back 25% of your total Hit Points if you spend your turn to do it...and you can do this once EVERY encounter. If it were just once per day (like Star Wars Saga Ed.) it wouldn't have been that bad.

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 Combine this with the fact that you can spend a Surge anytime you have a "short rest" (about 5 minutes to rest after an encounter) and always recover to full Hit Points anytime you take an extended rest (8 hours of sleep) and PCs start to feel like veritable fountains of Hit Points. My experience has been that it is very hard to drop a PC and even harder to "kill" one. That's not bad by itself but, for me, it stretches believability and eliminates any sense of tension during combat.

[Webhead123]

Correction: As I recall, you can actually spend multiple Surges during a "short rest". So, if you're PC is down to 25% of their Hit Points and have 3 Surges left, they can take 5 minutes and bounce back up to full health.

I understand what 4E is try to do with Healing Surges: make characters more independently capable and more heroic. Opening up the game so that Cleric is not a required class for every party. I just think they WAY over-shot their goal.

[nozzer2002]

thank you for your reply Mr webhead

[nozzer2002]

one important question you missed Mr webhead ..is 4th edition a pen and paper version of 'world of warcraft' i would like to hear your opinion

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 Interesting question. I see it as completing a cycle. WoW was the product of a generation of D&D gamers and evolved from the founding concepts of fantasy RPGs. What WotC has done with 4E then, is (in a rather smart move) looked at the evolution of those concepts and how they've shaped the genre and used them to evolve D&D further. It was a pretty drastic evolution for some of us, yes, but that's what I see happening. D&D inspired WoW and now WoW has, in turn, inspired D&D.

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 Do I think D&D 4E is "tabletop WoW"? I don't think that's a fair label. As I mentioned in my vids, I think 4E is still D&D at its heart but simply a version of D&D that has been built from the understanding of what kind of design appeals to the majority of the "fantasy" gamer culture today and thus chooses to be "different" where they think "different" would help it reach the largest audience possible. You can't fault WotC for that. Growing the hobby is always a good thing.

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 I don't necesserally think that 4E is a "bad" game. It may (and apparently has) proven to be a great gateway for people to enter the RPG hobby or bring people out of retirement. Just because I have issues with game system doesn't mean that there is nothing of value to it. Sure, a lot of the core design philosophies of 4E go against *my* grain but I know plenty of people who love the game. To those people, I say "more power to you". Nobody can tell you what's fun but yourself.

[nozzer2002]

good video Mr webhead...pity about the dog barking in the background though !

[Webhead123]

@nozzer2002 Thank you.

Yes, what you see before you was the 3rd attempt to record this section of the video thanks to dogs, infants and generally obnoxious background noise. It was late, I was tired and I wasn't about to start the darned thing over again!

Thanks for sticking with me though!

[kaymanklynman]

PATHFINDER

[Webhead123]

@kaymanklynman Not a fan, honestly. I lost my enthusiasm for the d20 System sometime in 2003 and was not won-over by the changes of D&D 3.5. Subsequently, I've followed along with where Pathfinder is taking the d20 system and gave the core book a read but it didn't do anything for me. I would just rather play non-d20 System RPGs and even non-D&D RPGs, to be honest. That's just a personal thing, though. It seems like a lot of D&D fans are eating up Pathfinder and have heaps of praise for it.

[GAWproductions]

You remind me too much of my dad. It's uncanny.

[Samwise7RPG]

I don't care for 4th myself much either. I thought D&D 3rd/3.5 had too much focus on miniatures, and 4th went even more in that direction. I haven't "upgraded", in fact I've "downgraded" to Labyrinth Lord, and more old school games that are less crunchy with the rules. I don't like 4th, but if people want to play it, that's fine with me. You have to play what you like. I've also found a new love for BRP and the games like it such as Runequest, Stormbringer, etc.

[Webhead123]

@Samwise7RPG Funny that you mention LL. I had a similar "regression" after my burnout on 3E and disappointment with 4E. These days though, I prefer either WFRP2E or BoL for my fantasy gaming kicks.

You are absolutely correct. You have to play what you enjoy playing. This is a hobby, not a job!

[Samwise7RPG]

@Webhead123 I've never played Warhammer. I do own a blue softcover WH book, that might be 1st edition. I'll have to check it out. BOL is great. :)

[Webhead123]

@Samwise7RPG It's important to know the difference between the Warhammer "battle game" and the Warhammer RPG. I think the "blue book" you're referencing is the battle game. You'll know the Warhammer RPGs because they'll say "Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay" on the cover.

[kytodd]

Come on! If you like the system, play it. If you don't like the system, don't play it. If you haven't tried it, try it. Doesn't sound like rocket science to me.

[Webhead123]

@kytodd Agree 100%. That's been my gaming motto from the beginning. I refused to judge D&D 4E until I had given it an honest chance. I did and I learned something in the process. A game that isn't fun is no longer a game, it's a chore.

[kytodd]

@Webhead123 It's just unfortunate that not everyone can be so level-headed about things. Nice review BTW...

[Webhead123]

@kytodd Thank you for viewing and for your comments! I'm all about bringing the community together rather than tearing it apart.

[woodwwad]

Great point about the skills too That is an area were 4e clearly fails, so generic. The lack of skill ranks hurts the feel here too. Great point.

[woodwwad]

4 e is the ballz anyone who likes it is the ballz. I really hate this game, it is the only game I hate. It's not that it doesn't support rp, but that it is a terrible game for a brand new player to learn on as it has so little flavor & rp is pushed out of the books. The game as written teaches people to play like those trash players in the back of a game store. So it hurts the hobby. I think you explained the rp point well, good vid!

[atari67]

I had hoped there was going to be an original argument here, but I don't see one ...which is a shame.

[Webhead123]

@atari67 I think I could be more focused, intelligible and effective in my discussion of the game if I had particular questions leveled at me that I could respond to in sequence. I invite you to pose any such questions you have so that I can perhaps more precisely elaborate on exactly where, why and how the game fails.

[Webhead123]

@atari67 I also wanted to be sure to warn my viewers that I didn't think I could say anything that hasn't already been said. There are people who have devoted more time to supporting/tearing down D&D 4E on the internet than I have devoted time to raising my children. Coming late to the game then, means that most of my (once potentially original) thoughts probably come off as cliches by this point. Again, I wasn't even sure I wanted to review it but it was bugging me so I just went for broke.