I never Player 3 or 3.5ed I only played 4 and it does tent to drag on a bit. I enjoyed it but i agree if the battles can be more streamlined that would be a bonus. Thanks for this video
It took you 2 hours to make some 4e characters? Using the DDI character creator you can make unique characters in literally minutes and print out the sheets. yeah it sucks that you have to pay for it, but as far as streamlined character creation goes I don't think they need to change much for the next edition.
I kind of disagree with the idea of making encounters and custom monsters being easier in 4th edition, and I think you may have put too much thought into monster stat blocks in 3rd edition. For 3rd I never saw the point in allocating skill points, calculating grapple ect... for a monster unless it was specific to the situation or the monster's fighting tactics (Giant Anaconda that grapples opponents frequently, turtlemen that use guerrilla swimming tactics, ect.)
I vaguely remember being warned of these times as a child...
"There will be changes, and rumors of changes... see that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For GM shall rise against GM, and player against player. And there will be late-releases, rule inconsistencies, and ret-cons in various supplements. All these are the beginning of birth pains."
1:00 i hear ya, theres to many people with a "in the now mentality". They feel that past editions are inferior since they are "in the past". I have to remind people from time to time that b/c something is old doesn't by default, make it obsolete or even inferior. We stick to 1st-2nd meld (even after trying each 3e-4e for 2 years each), it meets all our needs with a challenging system.
4th edition came and went without me ever playing it once. I liked some of the core class changes they did, like dropping dead levels, and better defining the role certain classes had in a party, but I never liked the weird name rules, the attack powers and daily powers and all that. I never switched to Pathfinder, but to me it was always more viable than 4e as an alternative. Even playing 3/3.5 my group never touched the grapple/swim/flight rules or all the esoteric rule subsystems.
Agreed! I hadn't played D&D since the 80s/90s. And then, only as a player. Not a DM. Then last year I got into a conversation about Skyrim with some folks & we ended up talking about which role-playing games we grew up playing (yes, I'm a developer, so this kind of talk is standard fare among my geek colleagues). Then one of us said "So, since we had so much fun with it, why did we ever stop?" :-) Then we decided we'd get back into it and started up a group using the Essentials Red Box
Continued -- dang character limit: And it was great. It really reminded us of what we loved, but with the streamlined Essentials approach, it was really easy for us to get started again, since we hadn't even thought of D&D for so long we were basically starting over again as noobs. I'll probably pick up the 5e books, but only if they really do make them in a way that'll support all editions -- including 4e.
'Not especially quick...' - 4e combat is as slow as an asthmatic ant carrying heavy shopping. :-)
I think wotc should man up and actually attack the core absurdities of D&D - Levels. Classes. Armour Class & Hit Points. They have so badly damaged their customer loyalty by now, they have the perfect excuse/reason to actually correct the parts of D&D that need to be corrected/removed.
I hate Vancian casting as well and in other systems I like playing magic users but my dislike of it has turned me off from D&D for 20 years. Though I think that D&D 4th edition simplified casters a little too much and removed a lot of their flavor. I think that I would like to see a system somewhere in between.
Maybe using spell points, a mechanic that has been around for years and was often used in D&D unofficially. They could recharge between encounters.
@ArcoFlagellant I would be in favor of a spell-point system for 5E. In 3.5, I preferred psionics over spellcasting for exactly that reason (and reflavored it as spellcasting).
My setting's cosmology jives better with a "mana" system anyways. I've had multiple story elements in my campaigns that had to do with mana and its relationship to magic, spellcasters, and life in general. A system which specifically supports that concept of magic would be a boon for me.
@Saibrock I've been using spell points for D&D for years, since back when it was an optional rule in 2nd edition. I think that it meshes more with the setting I have run too.
I also think its neat to have powers that a magic user can use over and over again. For years D&D has seemed to be afraid of repeatable magic powers, at least until 4th edition came up around. I don't think that repeatable powers are that bad, power gamers can already abuse Vancian spell slots anyway.
@ArcoFlagellant I've been opposed to Vancian spellcasting since before I knew what it was called. It's an antiquated and inherently clunky system that I would love to see disappear entirely in the future.
@Saibrock I find, personally speaking, that after 25 years of gaming my vote would be no spell-point system. It may seem "clunky" by comparison but thats its inherent advantage. You actually have to "plan" your spell lineup for the day...it builds a stronger player in my experience, while "points" creates an inherant crutch by basically having "everything" ready. Planning also promotes actually listening to story content & writing some notes for later reference.
I'm definitely with you on how easy 4e is to DM compared to 3.5. Prep time is very little for modules and making encounters is really easy. I love that because you can focus more on story. Also, I'm more in favor for the essentials format.
@willquestion I agree. I tend to prefer Essentials material over their classic counterparts (not always, but in general). I think the primary failing of Essentials is that it seemed tacked-on to the class system, making everything more complicated than it could have been if the Essentials classes were the default.
Very good ideas and I do agree with your premise of wait and see concerning anger or excitement over the game. As a counterpoint to the character creation idea, using the initial Player's Handbook and limiting the choices of the characters, creation is easier mechanically.
I never Player 3 or 3.5ed I only played 4 and it does tent to drag on a bit. I enjoyed it but i agree if the battles can be more streamlined that would be a bonus. Thanks for this video
chieftanzzz 1 month ago
It took you 2 hours to make some 4e characters? Using the DDI character creator you can make unique characters in literally minutes and print out the sheets. yeah it sucks that you have to pay for it, but as far as streamlined character creation goes I don't think they need to change much for the next edition.
JDizzleton1 1 month ago
I kind of disagree with the idea of making encounters and custom monsters being easier in 4th edition, and I think you may have put too much thought into monster stat blocks in 3rd edition. For 3rd I never saw the point in allocating skill points, calculating grapple ect... for a monster unless it was specific to the situation or the monster's fighting tactics (Giant Anaconda that grapples opponents frequently, turtlemen that use guerrilla swimming tactics, ect.)
NVLUTZ007 1 month ago
I vaguely remember being warned of these times as a child...
"There will be changes, and rumors of changes... see that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For GM shall rise against GM, and player against player. And there will be late-releases, rule inconsistencies, and ret-cons in various supplements. All these are the beginning of birth pains."
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
I like the idea of limiting the number of hitpoints. Each combat should consist of a few interesting choices.
anotherelvis 1 month ago
1:00 i hear ya, theres to many people with a "in the now mentality". They feel that past editions are inferior since they are "in the past". I have to remind people from time to time that b/c something is old doesn't by default, make it obsolete or even inferior. We stick to 1st-2nd meld (even after trying each 3e-4e for 2 years each), it meets all our needs with a challenging system.
hexusziggurat 1 month ago
4th edition came and went without me ever playing it once. I liked some of the core class changes they did, like dropping dead levels, and better defining the role certain classes had in a party, but I never liked the weird name rules, the attack powers and daily powers and all that. I never switched to Pathfinder, but to me it was always more viable than 4e as an alternative. Even playing 3/3.5 my group never touched the grapple/swim/flight rules or all the esoteric rule subsystems.
LetoWeapon 1 month ago
maybe a old style minitures with the game stat card
nordatnature 1 month ago
Agreed! I hadn't played D&D since the 80s/90s. And then, only as a player. Not a DM. Then last year I got into a conversation about Skyrim with some folks & we ended up talking about which role-playing games we grew up playing (yes, I'm a developer, so this kind of talk is standard fare among my geek colleagues). Then one of us said "So, since we had so much fun with it, why did we ever stop?" :-) Then we decided we'd get back into it and started up a group using the Essentials Red Box
dannomagic 1 month ago
Continued -- dang character limit: And it was great. It really reminded us of what we loved, but with the streamlined Essentials approach, it was really easy for us to get started again, since we hadn't even thought of D&D for so long we were basically starting over again as noobs. I'll probably pick up the 5e books, but only if they really do make them in a way that'll support all editions -- including 4e.
dannomagic 1 month ago
'Not especially quick...' - 4e combat is as slow as an asthmatic ant carrying heavy shopping. :-)
I think wotc should man up and actually attack the core absurdities of D&D - Levels. Classes. Armour Class & Hit Points. They have so badly damaged their customer loyalty by now, they have the perfect excuse/reason to actually correct the parts of D&D that need to be corrected/removed.
rockheimr 1 month ago
I hate Vancian casting as well and in other systems I like playing magic users but my dislike of it has turned me off from D&D for 20 years. Though I think that D&D 4th edition simplified casters a little too much and removed a lot of their flavor. I think that I would like to see a system somewhere in between.
Maybe using spell points, a mechanic that has been around for years and was often used in D&D unofficially. They could recharge between encounters.
ArcoFlagellant 1 month ago
@ArcoFlagellant I would be in favor of a spell-point system for 5E. In 3.5, I preferred psionics over spellcasting for exactly that reason (and reflavored it as spellcasting).
My setting's cosmology jives better with a "mana" system anyways. I've had multiple story elements in my campaigns that had to do with mana and its relationship to magic, spellcasters, and life in general. A system which specifically supports that concept of magic would be a boon for me.
Saibrock 1 month ago
@Saibrock I've been using spell points for D&D for years, since back when it was an optional rule in 2nd edition. I think that it meshes more with the setting I have run too.
I also think its neat to have powers that a magic user can use over and over again. For years D&D has seemed to be afraid of repeatable magic powers, at least until 4th edition came up around. I don't think that repeatable powers are that bad, power gamers can already abuse Vancian spell slots anyway.
ArcoFlagellant 1 month ago
@ArcoFlagellant I've been opposed to Vancian spellcasting since before I knew what it was called. It's an antiquated and inherently clunky system that I would love to see disappear entirely in the future.
Saibrock 1 month ago
@Saibrock I find, personally speaking, that after 25 years of gaming my vote would be no spell-point system. It may seem "clunky" by comparison but thats its inherent advantage. You actually have to "plan" your spell lineup for the day...it builds a stronger player in my experience, while "points" creates an inherant crutch by basically having "everything" ready. Planning also promotes actually listening to story content & writing some notes for later reference.
hexusziggurat 1 month ago
@Sailbrock. Yeah Essentials should have come out first then the others released as Advanced D&D 4e.
willquestion 1 month ago
I'm definitely with you on how easy 4e is to DM compared to 3.5. Prep time is very little for modules and making encounters is really easy. I love that because you can focus more on story. Also, I'm more in favor for the essentials format.
willquestion 1 month ago
@willquestion I agree. I tend to prefer Essentials material over their classic counterparts (not always, but in general). I think the primary failing of Essentials is that it seemed tacked-on to the class system, making everything more complicated than it could have been if the Essentials classes were the default.
Saibrock 1 month ago
I have entirely too much to say! Good vid!
blackbarnz 1 month ago
I agree with most of your thoughts. Maybe enough other people will for WotC to take notice.
nstiles42 1 month ago
Not bad.
LMK what you think of my most recent vid (5E). Thanks!
azirk83 2 months ago
You have some good points. If you made a channel that was dedicated to RPGs then I would subscribe :)
anotherelvis 2 months ago
am just hoping its the death of 4th edition...
nozzer2002 2 months ago
Very good ideas and I do agree with your premise of wait and see concerning anger or excitement over the game. As a counterpoint to the character creation idea, using the initial Player's Handbook and limiting the choices of the characters, creation is easier mechanically.
bbhares 2 months ago