4th edition is such an abomination.I hate the way WotC does business in forcing players to basically buy 3 core books to be able to play the game. Whatever happened to having everything you need to play in one core book?! Thats not even mentioning how terrible and lame the 4th edition rules are. 3.5 was pretty solid and Pathfinder ,IMO, perfected that system. But in the effort to make more money ,WotC has already released a new edition less than 5 years after 3.5 was introduced.
I'm also completely tired of WotC forcing their minitures on all of the RPG's they release. Sure..I actually prefer using minitures when RPing, since I think it enhances combat, but the fact that they make the systems unplayable without the use of minitures is ridiculous. WotC is an abomination of a company..its all about forcing players to spend cash for things they shouldn't need to spend money on if they don't want to.
@GoongalaGoongala 4e is perfectly run without miniatures. It is even in the rulebook. 1 sq.= 5 feet. It is as easy to run like that as any other system. You Can not blame a company in the hobby game business for trying to sell their wares. Its not like their is an over saturation of gamers. That small group of people are not even buying the same game. As a Dm & player I deside what I want & I only need that to play & have fun.
@inlife9 D&D 4th edition is crap .There are so many other systems out there that are so much better. In Fact ,If fans want to play a real D&D 4th edition, they should pick up Pathfinder. Thats that TRUE successor to 3.5, not this abomination called 4th edition.
Pathfinder is a Hell a lot better than that abomination D&D 4th edition. I can't belive there are people out there who think this 4th edition is an improvement over 3rd edition. Terrible..terrible system. In fact, from what i can tell 4th edition feels like a cash grab by WotC. It forces you to use minitures...forces you to buy multiple Players Handbooks to get stats for rudimentary Character classes, a useless DM guide that is an advertisement for further suplements...PURE CRAP.
@GoongalaGoongala Pathfinder is ok system. I would rather play 4e for many reasons. I dont disagree that WOTC do some screwed up releases, I disagree that I need them to play and that they are the only ones who do it. 4e is a great game. With a good DM its a powerfully fun game. Its not even all that far off from other games. Instead of just the basic attack of old D&D you have power attacks (like feats) AND the old basic attack. PCs like wiz are cool at lvl1.
I think your review was still too kind! . This game would actually be BETTER, if it WASN'T called Dungeons and Dragons. If it was called something else, I think we could all look at it with a less critical and confused eye. to me, it seems like a kind of twisted combination of (old) Basic D&D and "Battle System" (remember that?) So 4th Ed is kind of a hybrid board game, more than a strict RPG. It's a confusing mix between Magic the Gathering, an MMO, and a board game.
i in general agree with him but i do like certain things about 4th and 3.5 my recomendation for you aspiring DM's is find a middle ground and run ur game tht way
Sounds like they fixed the level progression at least. In 3.x when you reach level 10 you are a superhero as long as you didn't roll a most hopeless character.
*raises a brow* Well, it was argued that from first to tenth levels you are stuck in dungeons. That isn't true, in my game the players have yet to reach 9th level and have been interacting with royalty. They got quests and interacted with a Queen. Nowhere that I saw in any of the books did it say that they couldn't do that. Nowhere did it say that they had to do anything. Stop bitching about how you have to use miniatures or whatever. The game is not WoW, it is nothing like an MMORPG.
Sounds like 4th edition drew heavily from WoW... this isn't a good thing. I love wow because it works on a computer screen, not in a pen and paper role playnig game.
I admit, I like less combat oriented systems, and the longer I've gamed, the lighter they got. First it was D&D, then Gurps, then White Wolf, then Legend of the 5 Rings, then 7th Sea, then Over the Edge, and finally Unknown Armies.
When I first read the new PHB, I HATED 4th edition. But after spending some more time learning about it, I don't think it's that bad.
Sure, it's different. But I think it's mostly different in a good way. 3E basically concentrated all of the "cool" stuff in the caster classes, but now mundane classes are more interesting. Also there is still a lot of customization available, you just have to look for it (multiclassing and hybrid class).
4e is not good for long-term gaming. However, if you're a newbie to RPG's, it's easy to pick up and play. It's much simpler than any other edition, so it's a good way to get into D&D before playing meatier systems.
i played 4th for 3 or 4 sessions. everybody was bored out of their minds. dungeon crawling, monster encounters after monster encounters, and it just kept on going. then i switched back to 3.5 and everybody was happy once again :D
if i had one wish it would be for them to recall 4th ed and put back 3.5 im really truly tired of 4th edition its so dumbed down its insane i cannot play the game anymore it bothers me so much!
I think its a good edition. But a certain edition may appeal to someone more than another. Simple... via white box or more complex and modern influenced... 4th ed.
@HatchetsNCleavers No more than 3.5 was. All D&D editions wanted to sell some sort of mini/ addons. You can play 4e with out miniatures, and it's as easy to do as 3.5/Pathfinder. 1sq = 5ft All you need to know. Also Pathfinder has a miniature line, and if they had the money of WOTC (soon they will) that line would be in your face the same.
I can't figure out why anyone would think this is an unbiased review. This guy has money riding on whether people think this game is good or not.
Kurt Wiegel: you're clearly not at all a nice guy, and what's more, you're being dishonest and manipulative. I understand that's the way the corporate world works, but it's no excuse. I can practically SEE the lawyeriness and authoritarianism radiating from your body as your speak. You know 4th edition sucks ass. Be a man and admit it.
i am just starting to play d&d, and im hearing mixxed opinions of all the editions. what are the pros and cons of em all? why is the earlier ones. i have 4e, and its great.
Really? You Seriously said if you play a warrior your job is to run in and hit things, it pigeon holes you. That's what you can do as a 3rd edition Warrior, Run up and Basic attack over and over and over but at least in 4th Edition you can use so many ability's as a warrior and move around the battlefield better so you can use tactics.
Something I've noticed: RPGers who've played any previous version of D&D hates 4e, but anyone who hasn't prefers it to any previous D&D version. The rules, like he says in part 2, are for sure more similar to modern computer RPGs than traditional table-top RPGs.
I've played AD&D 2e and D&D 3e/3.5e, and I prefer 4e. It cuts out all the crap that has been built into D&D over the years and brings it back to it's original intentions: a table-top dungeon crawling game with story and progression.
they're aren't 2,3457 different prestige classes anymore? Each with a Compendium of rules a mile long to go with them?
OMG WORST IDEA EVAR!!! EVERYTHING IS STREAMLINE DNOW AND I CAN'T ROLEPLAY 3.5 IS GOD!!
Seriously, I play with a group who are all at least a decade older than me and they loved AD&D 2, HATED 3rd, but love 4th because its not as complicated and bogged down by an encyclopedia of rules.
@hankowen99 I'll set it to ya straight, it's for kids. You can look up their sales demographics, WotC has openly admitted their desire to change their target market with the release of 4e. They covented the WoW audience. The fact that a multi millon dollar corp made millon is of no matter. MAGIC makes more than all RPG but that games sucks. Now for the 1st time D&D is being out sold in the RPG market. Go to your game shop look around you is there paizo display?
@blackbarnz it is marketed to kids but ITS NOT CHILDISH it has blood gore and deamorogon used a spell to extend storrolks AGONY to exend his agony that deosnt sound like dora the explorer
@hankowen99 If you enjoy 4e I encourage you to continue to do so. Many of the core designer's/WotC staff aare available through facebook, wizards.com and variety of sites as well as cons. Most of the designer's have worked on 3e,3.5e,4e,and pathfinder so they are not condemmed to support just one product. If you wish I can put you in contact with many core designers you can receive you answers from them and get their opinions.
@blackbarnz So you admit it's marketed to kids correct? If so are you suggesting that WotC an international corporation owned by Hasbro a larger corporation is marketing children an adult's game? The WotC Public Relations department would really hate to hear that opinion. I suggest you research the D&D 1980's controversy for further insight in to this subjuect. Also you can check out my vid on an interview with D&D artist Jeff Easley! Good day and Good gaming!
@knightofbruma Pathfinder pays better homage to D&D roots, but in essence its really just a streamlined version of D&D 3.5 at its core. Past the core rule book is when the game really start to to show off the bulk of its new tricks -although that is not to say that the core rule book is unimpressive, that would be the farthest thing from the truth. So in short yes and no, yes because it offers flexibility that 4 fazed out and no because roleplaying depends on your group and their comfort zones.
... to give my ranger some primal edge and minor druidic capabilities. and lethal hunter, since he is one of the tribe's hunters that gather food.
this is a VERY shallow look at dnd 4e. if you want a good, intelligent review, check out the review by Repsesper here on youtube. its 3 parts, but worth it.
wow. this is just an unintelligent review. people: quit bitching about min/maxing in 4e as if its unique to 4e. everyone does it in 3e, 2e, and 1e, whether it's min/maxing to fit a stereotype or (like williamcardno said) min/maxing to fit a character concept. I do the latter, a perfect example. a have a hunter ranger who basically lives in a large mountainous tribe that worship primal spirits. I made a hunter ranger and chose feats to complement that (initiate of the old faith)...
@andtheniwasphone What if you're like me and minmax a tech based entirely around your character's backstory and who he/she is? Good example, a bard that I made... he's the moneymaker and a rock star of the multiverse. Everything that he has and does is sepecifically built around what makes him perform better because, well, that's the only thing he cares about doing - being a legendary rock god.
@andtheniwasphone Let me run around right next to an enemy and flank him! Whats that??? He hit me?? Critical you say?! I'm gonna die for doing something stupid!? SECOND CHANCE! A DERP A DERP A DERP.
Thank you! I hate dungeons and dragons 4th edition and my friends love it! But they only care about having the best and strongest characters and care nothing about the story. This game is for people who love competitive video gaming and cant buy a console for themselves! Thank you Kurt! Good job!
Is WOTC trying to scrape together some some money by capitalizing on a popular product, yes. However, I think that it's a good idea to explore other options and I do believe that examining MMORPGs was a good idea, not be completely dismissed. At the end of the day, what really makes a good D&D game is the DM and how they could optimize the game for their players. 4th edition offered many suggestions and should be seen as guideline as opposed to gospel.
Glad to know that somebody still knows the difference between role-playing and roll playing .Personally I think 4th ed. is a giant step back. It lacks cinema, character interaction, story and imagination. Gygax stated that the uniqueness of D&D was that it took place in the shared imagination without figures or anything. Watching 4th ed. I get sad seeing these kids who don't know what they've lost, hunkered over laptops, not talking, no laughter.-there is a better way.
4th edition is basically an mmorpg on paper and now that they are introducing the new collectable cards they basically are given you the monthly subscription fee as well
@aznsbd okay lets play 3.5 then but first lets have the 2 hour setup and play the first encounter oh shit its 1 in the morning i welcome this. It makes my job as a dm and campaign writer a whole lot easier and by the end of the game i don't want to shoot my self. I have played every form of dnd all the way back to advance dnd so you know what i welcome this change. and hey you cant complain at least there are alot of monsters to work with. and if you are complaining of cost then get a job rtard!
Got a job actually and I prefer to buy books over cards, I already play a ccg made by wizards, its called Magic: The Gathering. All the stories I hear about 4th being so much simpler to DM seems to me like laziness, yes being a DM takes a bit more work and creativity than being a player and DMing isn't for everybody. For me the greatest challenge for dming is remaining interested, boredom on my part is the number one reason why my campaigns go unfinished not lack of preparation.
Pigeonholing? No, you clearly haven't actually played 4th edition. The way my players play, roles are suggestions, styles, but they adapt and react. As for dungeons vs. planes and levels, that's what a DM is for. Players go anywhere you let them go, just adapt material and reskin like you always should have been doing. Or go play Labyrinth Lord and just run around in an endless dungeon.
Great review , i cant stand WOTC they are such money whores.in a nut shell 4th is wow on paper (yeah i said it) me and my gameing group are still rocking it old school we play 3rd and 2nd ,but after years of burn out we are about to start AFMBE thx in part to another one of your reviews. Books should be here next week !!
Well I think they tried to take made 4the, is created (imo) to reach the everyday video game person who wants to pick up and play it like a video game. So that they dont have to dive into a real realm. its (from what I have seen) mostly dungeon crawling. I like the older version where you could have a limitless possibiliy senerios where you could comeout with 100s of diffrent results and tactics. They made the game seem 2d in the sense that a person can walk up and play a level and not go deeper
Ok so despite a few changes, I still think all around it might be good. I am used to playing AD&D 2.5 and have DMd for that format. I honestly think that as a DM it really is "you're" field. When I played, I felt as though a DM could alter a few rules before the campaign and let all players know. Thats how I used to play with all my friends and it made for a better playing experience for everyone.
Also I encourage my players to rp by telling them that no matter the outcome of their dice rolls if they say or do something stupid I will incur minuses to their dice rolls, on the other hand if they rp well and come up with something creative I add bonuses to the dice rolls. I thought the same way pugknowspro did at first that it didn't feel like the original Dnd but it's all about the DM folks as it's always been. I played shitty 1ed games and awesome ones all depends on the DMs and PCs
imagination I developed a skills challenge that took the players through a city wide race using the basic rules for SC to have them roll skills depending on what part of the race they were in... rooftop Athletic, Acrobatics....slums streewise insight...etc. Then I also place skill encounters where players were were able to use their skills and powers with a healthy dose of rp and ingenuity to proceed to the next SC. Role play is only replaced if the DM replaces it by not being creative.
My first read through the book I felt almost the same way and I'm still bleeding from the eyes about skill challenges lol. So, what I did is was what any good DM does makes a good adventure using the tools at his disposal. I succeeded in highlighting the good points and house ruling some of the other not so good points. As for the Skills Challenge... this was a bit difficult cause at first read it almost implies that you use this in place of roleplaying ...but after some thought and...
Often players too much time whining about how 1st/2nd provided character builds that made everyone generic but lost sight of the intent of the game. Use your imagination and ingenuity to make yourself different in the campaign (perhaps even through ROLEplaying!!). If 20 of us went to school & all became plumbers...we all have the exact same skillset as plumbers!!! but are any of us the same? NO!!! Don't depend on the book to illustrate how you can be different...apply imagination into action!
It doesn't feel like old D&D anymore because 4th edition realizes D&D needed to be fixed and updated badly, and it boldly tries. I think for the most part it succeeds. Why make a new edition if you are not going to make changes to the core of the game? Nostalgia is a powerful force for gamers, but 4E is the best version of D&D to this day exactly because it moves on from the past.
@landovers 1st edition & 2nd edition were broken? funny how I much prefer playing the old TSR versions of the game to anything WOTC has ever produced. 4th edition is tabletop WOW...absolute pap.
Yeah i couldn't disagree more with this guy, 4e is awesome and fun. it cuts out the bloat, and unlike what some people say, does not make every character a carbon copy of every other character of the same class. it's sooo much easier to do squares than feet, and i even made my own tokens for players and monsters to use on the tiles. awesome. and now there's between 4 and 7 different build options for each class
Gnomes are an available race. though not in PHB race, in the Monstrous Manual with rules for playing them, and full writeup in PHB 2
Warlocks have been different from Wizards since 2nd ed.
The fighter has always kept the angries off the squishies. the wizard has always (and still does) nuke the playing field from orbit. To use the example given, the Ranger can use a bow, paired melee, or animal companions all with different tactics and abilities.
Gnomes aren't included in the core books anymore, which is what this is a review of.
Warlocks were never in the 2nd ed core books.....don't remember if they were in one of those dumb "Complete Whatever" books, but again, now Warlocks are a core class. Big difference. Originally (and i'm going back to OE and B/X with my knowledge), the Magic-User was a catch-all for every type of magic user that you wanted to play!
I didn't say that either were core. I am well aware that neither of them were in 2nd ed. I said that the gnomes were available at launch for 4e, and that Warlocks were in a splat book in 2nd ed, though I do not recall which one, but have always been different from "Wizard"
I didn't say that either were core. I am well aware that neither of them were in 2nd ed. I said that the gnomes were available at launch for 4e, and that Warlocks were in a splat book in 2nd ed, though I do not recall which one, but have always been different from "Wizard"
Different things appeal to different people. Some people like 4th Edition and thats fine, but nothing can beat playing good old 1st Edition. Just started a new campeign with a GNOME illusionist. Can only get to 8th Level but it's the role playing that counts.
By printing Tolarian Academy in Magic The Gathering back in tha' day.. ya they made a powerful card that probably moved a lot of Urza's Saga product to open them. And people desired that card a lot.. but the consequence was that by continuing to print broken cards all they did was alienate the vast majority of their customer base. even if those who were left bought a lot more stuff.. there is a reason i dont see it when i walk around outside anymore. it used to be an extremely popular game..
The goal of a business is to provide a service not to make money. I don't understand why people want to operate a business only to masturbate to cash. Money has no value at all it is what you spend this money on that has value. if a company makes a lot of money only to invest it in an inferior product no one has gained anything.
I just recently played through a campaign of 4th ed and I loved it. It felt like the mechanics were geared to assist a cinematic form of story telling. It does feel a bit different though and I feel like DMs should make a conscious effort to try and ground or describe the powers of the characters in more realistic terms. That seems to really make the game shine at least for me.
Actually, from what I've seen D&D 4e takes things back way too far. It's more of a tactical war-game now, like the first few editions, and it threw away a lot of progress that AD&D and 3e made, simplifying things and streamlining them toward the marketers' view of what makes a fun D&D game: killing shit. 3e combat at its core is an extension of the skill system, everything works the same way, while in 4e the change from normal play to combat is as jarring as a random encounter in a JRPG.
If you like 4e, that's fine with me, but it's true, 4e is not very respective and doesn't pay very good homage to it's origins. Things change I guess. Doesn't matter to much personally, since I don't play, but I have researched the books enough and compared them to the previous versions, and what Kurt says is pretty true. Even the people who play 4e admit that. Can't hate Kurt for that aspect.
@pspboy7 Kurt is accurate only in the 4e is not an homage to past editions. His judgment about the other aspects of 4e are far less lucid. If you want an accurate review of 4e (one that covers the ups, the downs, and the in-betweens) the 3 part YouTube review by repsesper is far better than Kurt's review.
haha the 4e books literally spend more time discussing roleplaying than any previous edition. you are literally just making things up.
D&D measured ALL distances in inches up to 2nd edition. Why? because its an evolution of mini wargames!
just repeating "it's not an rpg" doesn't magically make it not a game where you role play. idiot.
as an anecdote, all the 4e groups i've been in have spent way more time roleplaying, because they spent less time wrestling with dumb rules for everything. owns
@ColonelAlasdair Don't bother CA. It's obvious we are the wrong ones for trying to defend Wotc and 4E. I'm through trying to convince someone who "knows" he is right and you and I and some other posters in this thread are wrong. Let him keep him keep spouting the same anit-4E nonsense that has been wrongly said about the game. I like PF and I like 4E. I'm not going to hate a company for releasing a good product and for being profitable. Funyn thing is if Wotc goes under a 5E will come out too.
getting mad about minis with 4e is hilarious, dnd was literally originally a miniatures wargame. until 2e, all distances were given in INCHES. gygax was a wargamer. it's how you can weed out all the gamers pretending to be oldschool
@ColonelAlasdair Very true and I like how much revisonist history a lot of gamers like to do when it comes to that. As I said before why let facts get in the way of hate. Makes me almost embrassed to be a gamer sometimes. The sense of entitlement in the hobby is out of control and the puroseful naviety would be funny if some where not actually serious about it. I may not like 4E as I used to but I will never jusge a company for being to succcessful or profitable. Why would I wish I owned one.
@sureshot73A But he's as wrong as you are here. I presented facts. 4E is a board game presented a la carte masquerading as a RPG. Sorry if that offends you, but it seems like you can't take this very obvious point. Unfortunately for the colonel there, he fails to understand the entire point, and where AD&D went with Dungeons and Dragons; and he calls us revisionists? Often, I find that it's the 4E defenders who don't understand their own game, most of which never read the books anyway.
@sureshot73A And by the way, I judge a company by what it produces, not by how profitable it is. 4E is a bad product, and I judge WotC on that basis. It made a bad product. Not everything it makes is a bad product, but this was was particularly bad and insulting. It bowed to populism, ignored what worked in the past and made new systems to replace the old without even considering the ramifications of what they were doing. Look what they did to Wizards and Paladins.
@MikeTMerciless Your argument is flawed because 4e is an RPG. The reason the books place such a heavy focus on combat & encounter resolution is because that is where the bulk of adjudication issues arise. WotC (and every other RPG company out there) knows that RP is just a glorified game of make-believe. We don't need to rules on how to do that. Most of us have been doing that since we were children. It's fine if you don't like 4e, but lying about it only makes you look bad.
And another thing. I have no problem with anyone disliking the 4E rules. Yet calling Wotc greedy is not a valid flaw. They are a business and all business want to make money. Wotc, Paizo everyone. Since when does having a successful and profitable company equal a bad thing. Welcome to the real world of business. It's not nice and it's not fair. Do you think the guys at Paizo are saying "were making too much money and are too successful it's a bad thing.
4 minutes ago It shows that no one has either really looked at 4E or the Essentials line. Essentials adds to 4E it does not replace it. Your 4E character still works if you decide to join a an essentials game. Your not even forced to buy Essentials if you do not want. Funny though how no one points out that despite Pathfinder being backwards compatible it really is not as advertised by Paizo. If your going to take a shopt at 4e at least get your damn facts straight.
@sureshot73A I agree with you man. So much of the criticisms of 4e are just plain false. You don't have to like 4e, but if you're going to tear something down at least do it on the basis of what is actually true
I stopped taking a lot of crticism for any rpg serioulsy along time ago when posters started saying company xyz was bad for being greedy. Apparenlty having a successful and profitable buisness is a bad thing in North america. Do you honestly think that other rpg companies like Paizo, Pinnacle and Chaosium are going "You know were doing too well and were making too much money thats a bad thing". Of course not. Every rpg company wants two things to make a quality product and to make money.
@sureshot73A I don't mind if a company does what it can to make a buck and keep people employed so long as what they produce isn't obviously made in such a way as to effectively require you to buy more and more of their product. This is what WotC did with D&D. They made a very elaborate board game where they left out the game pieces you need to play. The name was there to entice people to buy the game, and nothing more. It's cheesy, and was in very bad form.
What peices were left out? Rules on how to roleplay. Does one really need the equivalent of the gamers version of the 10 commandments to play? That they spread rules over many books. Again Wotc is not the only culprit. Take a look at Savage Worlds and Unisystem. Guilty of the same. Finally welcome to the "wonderful" world of business and capitalism that does not look after or care about the little guy. I understand what you are saying yet it has always been this way in and outside of rpgs.
@sureshot73A 4E requires a battlemat to play, preferably with miniatures or counters, all of which was sorely left out of the board game of which they created. If you're going to make a board game, make a board game. If you're going to make an RPG, make an RPG. 4E is not an RPG.
Secondly, about capitalism. You enjoy the lifestyle you have, typing away at your computer, strictly because of capitalism and it's ability to raise standards of living, enabling you to take care of yourself.
@MikeTMerciless All the things you mention needing for 4E I used in 3.5 and Pathfinder. So again how is 4E different? Funny how no one gets on Paizo case for that Nope their not selling that stuff either. Even then beyond the battlemat I used nickles for minis and paper for the larger ones for a long time. Your not forced to buy that stuff. Just because you think so does not make 4E bad or Wotc greedy. No one is forcing you to buy 4E. Funny how no one is this critical about Pathinder and Paizo.
@sureshot73A I didn't say that 3E wasn't as much a board game, but 4E is very much a board game. 4E locks characters into specific roles and overbalances everything to the point that if you run the game as per the rules you create encounters for a "balanced" party, has no instantly lethal traps, and monsters are artificially handicapped so that a party can always be able to beat them by force of arms. All it's missing is the battlemat, dice and minis, which you buy a la carte.
@MikeTMerciless I like how you just ignored that I mentioned you do need to buy minis for 4E and use cheaper alternatives. But hey why let anything resembling logic get in the way of your 4E hate. And why would anyone miss the instant kill stuff from 3E. I am not saying that it should be a cakewalk yet I really hated the save or die crap from previous editions. I have better things to do than see my character die within the first 5 minutes of a game abd have to roll up a new one.
@sureshot73A Your hatred of those who do not play 4E is showing. It demonstrates you have no coherent counter-argument. But also, I don't hate 4E. I don't care for it. It's not an RPG. It's a board-game masquerading as such. By virtue of your lack of understanding the purpose of HP and the instant death traps, you fail to understand the concept of creating real tension. But you have to resort to hyperbole and insult to make your case. Hey, whatever makes you feel good about yourself.
@sureshot73A Unlike socialism and communism, where you'd otherwise be forced to pay for other people's health care, retirement, education, etc., you have no choice. Companies like WotC may attract a certain kind of gamer, but doesn't attract me and plenty of others. That's the beauty of capitalism. Choice. I don't have to buy their product, and neither do you. Do you really care if a company cares about YOU? I only care about what they make. If I don't like it, tough.
@MikeTMerciless First off every rpg company is out to make a book. Paizo, Wotc, White wolf everyone. Just because it is a rpg company you like does not exempt them from that. Anyone who works for the company who says otherwise is trying to make points with the fans. Do you think the guys at Paizo or any of the other companies I listed are saying "were making too much money and too successful thats a bad thing". No such thing as a free lunch and never was. Their is always a catch.
@sureshot73A There is a point when it's clear that a company isn't so much interested in the quality of their product and more interested in making a buck. WotC crossed that point with 4E by making it a different game than the previous editions and designed so that you have no choice but to play it with minis and a battlemat, so that this product supports other products. Also you notice how incomplete the PHB was, or otherwise you wouldn't see a PHB 2 or 3.
@MikeTMerciless Every company imcluding Wotc wants your money. To think otherwise is being delibrately naive to the extreme. As I said other rpgs do this yet why single Wotc out. I am not saying Wotc are paragons of virute yet some in the gaming community seem to think they are the only ones in it for a buck. I repeat every company in every industry wants your money. How many non profit companies do you know espcially in the rpg industry that exist.
@sureshot73A Didn't say that they didn't, and again, you are missing my entire point. What WotC did was make an entirely different game that was incompatible with the previous editions, made it a board game to boot, and called it D&D. If they called it anything else, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it's not D&D. Whatever this is, it's a cheap and cheesy way to make a buck, ignoring what came before and insulting those who helped make the game and the industry what it is.
@sureshot73A Understand. I have problems with 3E; lots of them. Paizo fixed some, but didn't address them all. However, none of them were dealbreakers. 4E's very philosophy of contrived tension, overbalance issues (I was one who never had a problem with balance even in 2E), and mollycoddling made it a dealbreaker. If it had called itself something else, instead of masquerading as something it isn't, I would not have a problem.
@MikeTMerciless Oh please do spare me the stuff about socialism and communism. It comes down to one basic thing. People want something for nothing and as complete as possible right now or else. When they cannot get it they get angry. Reminds me of people who pirate stuff then try to rationalize that their not pirates nor cheap. Yes you are a pirate and yes your being cheap. Sure I wish rpg were cheaper and I try to get a good price on stuff.
@sureshot73A Grown ups accept the notion that everything of value costs something. It's okay to search for bargains, but ultimately it has to be paid for. Those that argue for socialism fail to grasp this very concept, believing that government money is government's money, ignoring how they get it. But this is a different topic for another time.
I dont think D&D should focus on being recognizable. Most people like the reviewer are into the RPG scene and can navigate the waters on their own. D&D is the entry game for the vast majority of table top gamers. It was for me. I think Wizards has tried to make 4th addition the "gateway drug" of RPG's. No, it won't satisfy those who played it 30 years ago, but those experienced gamers can pick up any one of a dozen more complex titles. D&D's niche, is the newbie.
Kurt is right on with this review. I really did not like Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition because the role playing aspects and customization are no longer there. It's now a linear table top game in the vein of Warhammer. I will give 4th edition some credit. If it weren't for 4th edition, I never would have gone out and discovered Hunter the Vigil.
The main problem i have with people who piss-bitch aout 4e is that they keep complaining about what the game isn't, not what the game is. Yes it's not 3.Xxxx, it's not pathfinder, it's not AD&D, or 2nd Edition. Those games have been made, and it would prolly take about all of 5 seconds of hunting on the internet to find them. they exist already and don't need to be reprinted. If you don't like the game, don't like it because it sucks, not because it's not a rehash of what you already know
Thank you for enforcing my stance on have nothing to do with 4th edition. I was the last convert from our group to switch from 1e to 3e. I grew to really enjoy 3e but saw the latter editions as nothing more then a move by WOTC to take more money from the fans of D&D. I started playing D&D with the Erol Otus covered Basic and Expert sets and plan to start my son the same way. Thanks again for an honest review of 4e.
weapons and actions you and character choose to do is what define your character, not a piece of paper, a pencil, and a few rulebooks like how DND used to be.
they are do not switch and make version 4.5 too quickly. I guess this is a game for a new generation, and its a revolutionized dungeons and dragons. So please, try not to bag too much. I thought about it, and Dungeons and Dragons, if you either actually play or watch how it should be played, is nice if played correctly. As for the topic of the character choice being limited, its as limited as you want it to be. They are releasing books that will allow you to multiclass, and the feats
Honestly, chill. Dungeons and Dragons has been changed for the better. It has become a game where you no longer need to play with a group to know how the game works. It is much easier on beginners, and in the new edition,there aren't a who load of skills to decide which one to use. Its much more organized, just less content. I'm just as upset as everyone else after they removed the old races and classes. But its okay, since they are already editing the new version. Im okay with it, as long as
Personally I don't care for the art in the books much. It looks...ah well...meh...very unrealistic. I would also agree that dragon races shouldn't be a player race.
Are you new to roleplaying in general or just D&D specifically? As Kurt says in his review it is probably a decent gateway drug if you are new to the hobby, but there is so much more and better out there. As you mature as a gamer you will find your favorite niche games. Good luck and welcome to roleplaying.
It's pretty clear that the reviewer's biggest problem (one he seems unable to overcome in this review) is that the game changed from what he was used to. Half of his review is whining about dragonborn and tieflings being included as PC races. So WotC went in a different direction with the setting. He'd probably bash them for doing nothing different if they had all his beloved races in there. One of the only things I agreed with is that 3.5 had too many elf sub-races.
@nakedmolerat43 I did listen to the review. The largest part of the reviewer's complaining (in this part of his 2 part review) was a 3min 40sec rant about the inclusion of Tieflings, Dragonborn, and the Eladrin. He spends the entire time from 2:20 to 6:00 whining that D&D doesn't look like it used to.
re: pigeonholing: The reviewer assumes all the classes have only a single possible build, & that DMs can't let you out of the dungeon below 10th level in campaigns that are created by them.
@jrm48220 nobody says that 3.5 was a good system. But most old school players want to keep in a system that they grew attached to. What would people say, if a game like...let's say Call of Ctulhu would have gone through such radical changes.
@peri2502 That's the rub though. If you enjoyed 3.5, you can still play it by playing Pathfinder (from what I'm told, they fixed a few of the flaws inherent in the old 3.5 system).
So to answer your question: If there were two concurrently produced CoC games that used different mechanics, players would go to the version that appealed most to them; which is what people have done w/ D&D. I can only hope CoC players would be more civil w/ each other than the old-school D&D die-hards have been.
@jrm48220 Well, as I said, I never really liked 3.5 either. The problem is that the old books are no longer printed so ultimately one is forced to switch to the newer systems if you can't get a hold of the old ones. But I agree, people should be more civil with each other, even when they are dissapointed.
@peri2502 That's actually the thing though. You don't have to have access to the old books. So far as I know, the SRD is still available online; and Pathfinder is almost exactly the same as D&D 3.5. There are some changes (I personally think the changes to skills are good changes), but it is by and large the same game. It's just being supported by a different company now.
i hate how every time i go to a book store looking for a WoD or Star Wars books, they've been pushed off the shelf by the massive wall of 4th ed. books
@bigjimswafflehouse WoD is barely producing and Star Wars is OOP. New stuff is going to push that stuff off the shelf, whether it 4E, Pathfinder, or whatever.
@narutofan3010 I would say, based on the complaints I've read about 4th Edition, it's probably gonna be better for you if you've never played D&D before.
Personally, I'm loving it; I've D&Ded since Basic and I had grown tired of the game. The latest edition feels invigorating and I welcome the changes. Plus it's super slick in all the right places and does away with the Gygaxian approach of having rules for every concievable action.
you liked the artwork? Really? I HATED it...it looked so...cartoonish and surrealistic, almost childish. I liked the more realistic artwork of the past.
actully i think ever since wizards of the coast bought the rights for dungeons and dragons the game has gone to crap and just been a money maker for them. il admit i didn't like the second edtion at all at first but started to like it. but still doesn't have the same feel as first edtion. and the other later edtions i think are crap. when i quit playing that game.
I visited your channel
rahamdavenp1230g 1 month ago
4th edition is such an abomination.I hate the way WotC does business in forcing players to basically buy 3 core books to be able to play the game. Whatever happened to having everything you need to play in one core book?! Thats not even mentioning how terrible and lame the 4th edition rules are. 3.5 was pretty solid and Pathfinder ,IMO, perfected that system. But in the effort to make more money ,WotC has already released a new edition less than 5 years after 3.5 was introduced.
GoongalaGoongala 1 month ago
Nerds always have this same cadence and style of talking, it's weird
kingsleykillz 1 month ago
@kingsleykillz You mean, talking like an intellectual?
LooneyLopez 1 month ago
I'm also completely tired of WotC forcing their minitures on all of the RPG's they release. Sure..I actually prefer using minitures when RPing, since I think it enhances combat, but the fact that they make the systems unplayable without the use of minitures is ridiculous. WotC is an abomination of a company..its all about forcing players to spend cash for things they shouldn't need to spend money on if they don't want to.
GoongalaGoongala 1 month ago
@GoongalaGoongala 4e is perfectly run without miniatures. It is even in the rulebook. 1 sq.= 5 feet. It is as easy to run like that as any other system. You Can not blame a company in the hobby game business for trying to sell their wares. Its not like their is an over saturation of gamers. That small group of people are not even buying the same game. As a Dm & player I deside what I want & I only need that to play & have fun.
inlife9 1 month ago
@inlife9 D&D 4th edition is crap .There are so many other systems out there that are so much better. In Fact ,If fans want to play a real D&D 4th edition, they should pick up Pathfinder. Thats that TRUE successor to 3.5, not this abomination called 4th edition.
GoongalaGoongala 1 month ago
Pathfinder is a Hell a lot better than that abomination D&D 4th edition. I can't belive there are people out there who think this 4th edition is an improvement over 3rd edition. Terrible..terrible system. In fact, from what i can tell 4th edition feels like a cash grab by WotC. It forces you to use minitures...forces you to buy multiple Players Handbooks to get stats for rudimentary Character classes, a useless DM guide that is an advertisement for further suplements...PURE CRAP.
GoongalaGoongala 1 month ago
@GoongalaGoongala Pathfinder is ok system. I would rather play 4e for many reasons. I dont disagree that WOTC do some screwed up releases, I disagree that I need them to play and that they are the only ones who do it. 4e is a great game. With a good DM its a powerfully fun game. Its not even all that far off from other games. Instead of just the basic attack of old D&D you have power attacks (like feats) AND the old basic attack. PCs like wiz are cool at lvl1.
inlife9 1 month ago 2
I think your review was still too kind! . This game would actually be BETTER, if it WASN'T called Dungeons and Dragons. If it was called something else, I think we could all look at it with a less critical and confused eye. to me, it seems like a kind of twisted combination of (old) Basic D&D and "Battle System" (remember that?) So 4th Ed is kind of a hybrid board game, more than a strict RPG. It's a confusing mix between Magic the Gathering, an MMO, and a board game.
R.I.P. D&D. U' r missed.
bratgod 2 months ago
im new to D&D i found it easy to start with and play. but i want to play 3.5 less books i have all 4.0 books (8 in total) but its your opinion
robsman1 2 months ago
i in general agree with him but i do like certain things about 4th and 3.5 my recomendation for you aspiring DM's is find a middle ground and run ur game tht way
nestalgakory 2 months ago
Sounds like they fixed the level progression at least. In 3.x when you reach level 10 you are a superhero as long as you didn't roll a most hopeless character.
babylonastronaut 2 months ago
*raises a brow* Well, it was argued that from first to tenth levels you are stuck in dungeons. That isn't true, in my game the players have yet to reach 9th level and have been interacting with royalty. They got quests and interacted with a Queen. Nowhere that I saw in any of the books did it say that they couldn't do that. Nowhere did it say that they had to do anything. Stop bitching about how you have to use miniatures or whatever. The game is not WoW, it is nothing like an MMORPG.
dnd20SI 2 months ago
Thank you for be brave enough to speak of this Abomination.
Don't get me wrong. I love D&D(3.5), I love World of Warcraft.
I FUCKING HATE WORLD OF DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS-CRAFT!!
Sunkincid 2 months ago
4:11 I was actually scratching my nose!
ShadeStar64 2 months ago
Sounds like 4th edition drew heavily from WoW... this isn't a good thing. I love wow because it works on a computer screen, not in a pen and paper role playnig game.
Sethietoes12 4 months ago
I admit, I like less combat oriented systems, and the longer I've gamed, the lighter they got. First it was D&D, then Gurps, then White Wolf, then Legend of the 5 Rings, then 7th Sea, then Over the Edge, and finally Unknown Armies.
jfridy 4 months ago
Kurt Wiegel Game Master....
mattw91alderney 4 months ago
When I first read the new PHB, I HATED 4th edition. But after spending some more time learning about it, I don't think it's that bad.
Sure, it's different. But I think it's mostly different in a good way. 3E basically concentrated all of the "cool" stuff in the caster classes, but now mundane classes are more interesting. Also there is still a lot of customization available, you just have to look for it (multiclassing and hybrid class).
My advice, give it a chance.
Creslin321 4 months ago
4e is not good for long-term gaming. However, if you're a newbie to RPG's, it's easy to pick up and play. It's much simpler than any other edition, so it's a good way to get into D&D before playing meatier systems.
legomaster00156 5 months ago
Great review! It's terrible.
Ulairi 5 months ago 2
You were doing your GM voice, right?.
ArchArturo 5 months ago
I found 4th Edition a good way to get in to D&D and I enjoy it alot
leightonkid 5 months ago
4th Edition all the way!
Wiep333 5 months ago
but i grew up and played dnd how can i turn my back on 4e Q_Q
ARS1989 5 months ago
i played 4th for 3 or 4 sessions. everybody was bored out of their minds. dungeon crawling, monster encounters after monster encounters, and it just kept on going. then i switched back to 3.5 and everybody was happy once again :D
reaver2033 5 months ago
Pathfinder
kaymanklynman 5 months ago 15
if i had one wish it would be for them to recall 4th ed and put back 3.5 im really truly tired of 4th edition its so dumbed down its insane i cannot play the game anymore it bothers me so much!
xtreme0ride 5 months ago
@xtreme0ride Great, this hobby already has enough Grognards. Please stop playing alltogether, thanks.
butterflyfurball 2 months ago
@butterflyfurball This hobby already has enough fanboys.
Proletarian1917 2 months ago
I think its a good edition. But a certain edition may appeal to someone more than another. Simple... via white box or more complex and modern influenced... 4th ed.
AustinGraggmusician 5 months ago
It's a vehicle for Hasbro to sell miniatures. It's D&D in name only.
HatchetsNCleavers 6 months ago 5
Comment removed
thereofone 2 months ago
@HatchetsNCleavers D&D was always a combat miniatures system. Pretending otherwise is willful ignorance.
thereofone 2 months ago
@HatchetsNCleavers No more than 3.5 was. All D&D editions wanted to sell some sort of mini/ addons. You can play 4e with out miniatures, and it's as easy to do as 3.5/Pathfinder. 1sq = 5ft All you need to know. Also Pathfinder has a miniature line, and if they had the money of WOTC (soon they will) that line would be in your face the same.
inlife9 1 month ago
I liked 4th ed...
notsert123 6 months ago
caves of chaos! for the win!
m4xfl4xst4r 6 months ago
i played a nome enchanter/illusionist......... :(
DemonPizzaBoy0 6 months ago
I can't figure out why anyone would think this is an unbiased review. This guy has money riding on whether people think this game is good or not.
Kurt Wiegel: you're clearly not at all a nice guy, and what's more, you're being dishonest and manipulative. I understand that's the way the corporate world works, but it's no excuse. I can practically SEE the lawyeriness and authoritarianism radiating from your body as your speak. You know 4th edition sucks ass. Be a man and admit it.
KhagarBalugrak 6 months ago
and dont get skill challenges they baseecly had them before the just didnt go HEY U NEED TO USE A SKILL NOW!
octopus9991 6 months ago
i am just starting to play d&d, and im hearing mixxed opinions of all the editions. what are the pros and cons of em all? why is the earlier ones. i have 4e, and its great.
romandtlopez 7 months ago
People hate this because of the streamlined battle system, right? Other than that, I found the roleplaying the same really.
stoolsboy 7 months ago
Really? You Seriously said if you play a warrior your job is to run in and hit things, it pigeon holes you. That's what you can do as a 3rd edition Warrior, Run up and Basic attack over and over and over but at least in 4th Edition you can use so many ability's as a warrior and move around the battlefield better so you can use tactics.
CapitalG777 7 months ago
Something I've noticed: RPGers who've played any previous version of D&D hates 4e, but anyone who hasn't prefers it to any previous D&D version. The rules, like he says in part 2, are for sure more similar to modern computer RPGs than traditional table-top RPGs.
I've played AD&D 2e and D&D 3e/3.5e, and I prefer 4e. It cuts out all the crap that has been built into D&D over the years and brings it back to it's original intentions: a table-top dungeon crawling game with story and progression.
KiwiStalk 7 months ago
@KiwiStalk
they're aren't 2,3457 different prestige classes anymore? Each with a Compendium of rules a mile long to go with them?
OMG WORST IDEA EVAR!!! EVERYTHING IS STREAMLINE DNOW AND I CAN'T ROLEPLAY 3.5 IS GOD!!
Seriously, I play with a group who are all at least a decade older than me and they loved AD&D 2, HATED 3rd, but love 4th because its not as complicated and bogged down by an encyclopedia of rules.
DrMetropolis 6 months ago
4th addition failed us. The fans
blackbarnz 7 months ago
@blackbarnz but made millions more
hankowen99 6 months ago
@hankowen99 I'll set it to ya straight, it's for kids. You can look up their sales demographics, WotC has openly admitted their desire to change their target market with the release of 4e. They covented the WoW audience. The fact that a multi millon dollar corp made millon is of no matter. MAGIC makes more than all RPG but that games sucks. Now for the 1st time D&D is being out sold in the RPG market. Go to your game shop look around you is there paizo display?
blackbarnz 6 months ago
@blackbarnz it is marketed to kids but ITS NOT CHILDISH it has blood gore and deamorogon used a spell to extend storrolks AGONY to exend his agony that deosnt sound like dora the explorer
hankowen99 6 months ago
@hankowen99 If you enjoy 4e I encourage you to continue to do so. Many of the core designer's/WotC staff aare available through facebook, wizards.com and variety of sites as well as cons. Most of the designer's have worked on 3e,3.5e,4e,and pathfinder so they are not condemmed to support just one product. If you wish I can put you in contact with many core designers you can receive you answers from them and get their opinions.
blackbarnz 6 months ago
@blackbarnz So you admit it's marketed to kids correct? If so are you suggesting that WotC an international corporation owned by Hasbro a larger corporation is marketing children an adult's game? The WotC Public Relations department would really hate to hear that opinion. I suggest you research the D&D 1980's controversy for further insight in to this subjuect. Also you can check out my vid on an interview with D&D artist Jeff Easley! Good day and Good gaming!
blackbarnz 6 months ago
4th addition failed us. The fans
blackbarnz 7 months ago
2nd edition > all
MrEriklenn 7 months ago
WOTC = Hasbro. 'nuff said...
AtomicJimmyMack 8 months ago
is pathfinder the better game for roleplaying
knightofbruma 8 months ago
@knightofbruma Pathfinder pays better homage to D&D roots, but in essence its really just a streamlined version of D&D 3.5 at its core. Past the core rule book is when the game really start to to show off the bulk of its new tricks -although that is not to say that the core rule book is unimpressive, that would be the farthest thing from the truth. So in short yes and no, yes because it offers flexibility that 4 fazed out and no because roleplaying depends on your group and their comfort zones.
ltdbassplayer 7 months ago 2
continued from last.
... to give my ranger some primal edge and minor druidic capabilities. and lethal hunter, since he is one of the tribe's hunters that gather food.
this is a VERY shallow look at dnd 4e. if you want a good, intelligent review, check out the review by Repsesper here on youtube. its 3 parts, but worth it.
TheOnlyAttrition 8 months ago
wow. this is just an unintelligent review. people: quit bitching about min/maxing in 4e as if its unique to 4e. everyone does it in 3e, 2e, and 1e, whether it's min/maxing to fit a stereotype or (like williamcardno said) min/maxing to fit a character concept. I do the latter, a perfect example. a have a hunter ranger who basically lives in a large mountainous tribe that worship primal spirits. I made a hunter ranger and chose feats to complement that (initiate of the old faith)...
TheOnlyAttrition 8 months ago
4th edition = WoW on tabletop.
Enough said.
Fuck this "min-maxing" and meta-gaming culture that's become popular recently.
People need to re-read the term; "ROLE-PLAYING GAME".
andtheniwasphone 8 months ago
@andtheniwasphone What if you're like me and minmax a tech based entirely around your character's backstory and who he/she is? Good example, a bard that I made... he's the moneymaker and a rock star of the multiverse. Everything that he has and does is sepecifically built around what makes him perform better because, well, that's the only thing he cares about doing - being a legendary rock god.
williamcardno 8 months ago
@andtheniwasphone Let me run around right next to an enemy and flank him! Whats that??? He hit me?? Critical you say?! I'm gonna die for doing something stupid!? SECOND CHANCE! A DERP A DERP A DERP.
Shyhalu 8 months ago
Thank you! I hate dungeons and dragons 4th edition and my friends love it! But they only care about having the best and strongest characters and care nothing about the story. This game is for people who love competitive video gaming and cant buy a console for themselves! Thank you Kurt! Good job!
firerods267 8 months ago
@firerods267 No, 4.e is for people who cant handle repercussions for doing something stupid or failing.
Shyhalu 8 months ago
Fuck you for destroying my eardrums, hope you rot in hell fucktard
MrGlies 8 months ago
Good video, and very reflective, thank you :)
PallysalltheWay 9 months ago
@xXDUFF475xX
DIE. 4th ed is not D&D, but a corporate logo bought and sold to idiots like you.
trpaai 9 months ago
@pugsknowpro
me= dragonborn warlord, main healer since i specced for inspiring warlord
friend 1= eladrin wizard, mainly aoe and fire ranged damage
friend 2= tiefling warlock, direct damage and curses
friend 3= drow ranger, main melee damage specced for dual wield
main reason for post is to get advice on what a fifth party member class should be based on the party we already have.
xXDUFF475xX 9 months ago
wow guy have you played 4th ed cos you dont seem to off!
Trojantnh 9 months ago
4th Edition = POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS POWERS
BeastSoulEyes 9 months ago
I was 3.5 straight down the line until I played 4th edish. Now I can't stop I love it. The choices are endless and the pre made contet=nt is rad!
coloneljade 10 months ago
Is WOTC trying to scrape together some some money by capitalizing on a popular product, yes. However, I think that it's a good idea to explore other options and I do believe that examining MMORPGs was a good idea, not be completely dismissed. At the end of the day, what really makes a good D&D game is the DM and how they could optimize the game for their players. 4th edition offered many suggestions and should be seen as guideline as opposed to gospel.
tl;dr Use house rules to fix problems.
Pogs4Fathersday 10 months ago
Thanks Kurt,
Glad to know that somebody still knows the difference between role-playing and roll playing .Personally I think 4th ed. is a giant step back. It lacks cinema, character interaction, story and imagination. Gygax stated that the uniqueness of D&D was that it took place in the shared imagination without figures or anything. Watching 4th ed. I get sad seeing these kids who don't know what they've lost, hunkered over laptops, not talking, no laughter.-there is a better way.
Brightblade471 10 months ago
I think there is only one 8000 pound gorilla sitting in the corner of the room and its not 4th edition...
YourDungeonMaster 10 months ago
Comment removed
YourDungeonMaster 10 months ago
4th edition is basically an mmorpg on paper and now that they are introducing the new collectable cards they basically are given you the monthly subscription fee as well
aznsbd 10 months ago
@aznsbd okay lets play 3.5 then but first lets have the 2 hour setup and play the first encounter oh shit its 1 in the morning i welcome this. It makes my job as a dm and campaign writer a whole lot easier and by the end of the game i don't want to shoot my self. I have played every form of dnd all the way back to advance dnd so you know what i welcome this change. and hey you cant complain at least there are alot of monsters to work with. and if you are complaining of cost then get a job rtard!
mindblogger123 10 months ago
Got a job actually and I prefer to buy books over cards, I already play a ccg made by wizards, its called Magic: The Gathering. All the stories I hear about 4th being so much simpler to DM seems to me like laziness, yes being a DM takes a bit more work and creativity than being a player and DMing isn't for everybody. For me the greatest challenge for dming is remaining interested, boredom on my part is the number one reason why my campaigns go unfinished not lack of preparation.
aznsbd 10 months ago
Pigeonholing? No, you clearly haven't actually played 4th edition. The way my players play, roles are suggestions, styles, but they adapt and react. As for dungeons vs. planes and levels, that's what a DM is for. Players go anywhere you let them go, just adapt material and reskin like you always should have been doing. Or go play Labyrinth Lord and just run around in an endless dungeon.
Kinowolf 11 months ago
Why are all D$D peeps always fat, bald and stupid looking?
Does Frito Lay include coupons for potato chips in the games?
KaiserWilhelmIV 11 months ago
Great review , i cant stand WOTC they are such money whores.in a nut shell 4th is wow on paper (yeah i said it) me and my gameing group are still rocking it old school we play 3rd and 2nd ,but after years of burn out we are about to start AFMBE thx in part to another one of your reviews. Books should be here next week !!
numbskull420 11 months ago
I don't get it. You still have limitless possibility in 4th edition. It's all about the creativity of the players and DM.
Evological 11 months ago
Well I think they tried to take made 4the, is created (imo) to reach the everyday video game person who wants to pick up and play it like a video game. So that they dont have to dive into a real realm. its (from what I have seen) mostly dungeon crawling. I like the older version where you could have a limitless possibiliy senerios where you could comeout with 100s of diffrent results and tactics. They made the game seem 2d in the sense that a person can walk up and play a level and not go deeper
guzenfox 11 months ago
New World of Darkness is just like 4.0- flavorless, boring, disrespectful of its heritage.
7j8i9m 11 months ago
If you swapped D&D with "New and Old World of Darkness" - that's exactly how I feel about WoD now ^^
YuriPRIME 1 year ago
Ok so despite a few changes, I still think all around it might be good. I am used to playing AD&D 2.5 and have DMd for that format. I honestly think that as a DM it really is "you're" field. When I played, I felt as though a DM could alter a few rules before the campaign and let all players know. Thats how I used to play with all my friends and it made for a better playing experience for everyone.
gothguy20 1 year ago
Now I hear they are making cards for the game that are collectable that you buy like magic: the gathering. I'm glad I stayed away.
aznsbd 1 year ago
I mlike this show kurt cool.
I looking for a dungeons & Dragons in Alb NM
Diablo9964 1 year ago
Also I encourage my players to rp by telling them that no matter the outcome of their dice rolls if they say or do something stupid I will incur minuses to their dice rolls, on the other hand if they rp well and come up with something creative I add bonuses to the dice rolls. I thought the same way pugknowspro did at first that it didn't feel like the original Dnd but it's all about the DM folks as it's always been. I played shitty 1ed games and awesome ones all depends on the DMs and PCs
Dracenfelz 1 year ago
imagination I developed a skills challenge that took the players through a city wide race using the basic rules for SC to have them roll skills depending on what part of the race they were in... rooftop Athletic, Acrobatics....slums streewise insight...etc. Then I also place skill encounters where players were were able to use their skills and powers with a healthy dose of rp and ingenuity to proceed to the next SC. Role play is only replaced if the DM replaces it by not being creative.
Dracenfelz 1 year ago
My first read through the book I felt almost the same way and I'm still bleeding from the eyes about skill challenges lol. So, what I did is was what any good DM does makes a good adventure using the tools at his disposal. I succeeded in highlighting the good points and house ruling some of the other not so good points. As for the Skills Challenge... this was a bit difficult cause at first read it almost implies that you use this in place of roleplaying ...but after some thought and...
Dracenfelz 1 year ago
In summary 4E technically is WOW. For shame wotc
thade86 1 year ago
Often players too much time whining about how 1st/2nd provided character builds that made everyone generic but lost sight of the intent of the game. Use your imagination and ingenuity to make yourself different in the campaign (perhaps even through ROLEplaying!!). If 20 of us went to school & all became plumbers...we all have the exact same skillset as plumbers!!! but are any of us the same? NO!!! Don't depend on the book to illustrate how you can be different...apply imagination into action!
hexusziggurat 1 year ago
The way this guy talks is hilarious.
samscuba1104 1 year ago
It doesn't feel like old D&D anymore because 4th edition realizes D&D needed to be fixed and updated badly, and it boldly tries. I think for the most part it succeeds. Why make a new edition if you are not going to make changes to the core of the game? Nostalgia is a powerful force for gamers, but 4E is the best version of D&D to this day exactly because it moves on from the past.
landovers 1 year ago
@landovers 1st edition & 2nd edition were broken? funny how I much prefer playing the old TSR versions of the game to anything WOTC has ever produced. 4th edition is tabletop WOW...absolute pap.
anvilofcrom 1 year ago
Yeah i couldn't disagree more with this guy, 4e is awesome and fun. it cuts out the bloat, and unlike what some people say, does not make every character a carbon copy of every other character of the same class. it's sooo much easier to do squares than feet, and i even made my own tokens for players and monsters to use on the tiles. awesome. and now there's between 4 and 7 different build options for each class
zerey00 1 year ago
Things this review gets wrong:
Gnomes are an available race. though not in PHB race, in the Monstrous Manual with rules for playing them, and full writeup in PHB 2
Warlocks have been different from Wizards since 2nd ed.
The fighter has always kept the angries off the squishies. the wizard has always (and still does) nuke the playing field from orbit. To use the example given, the Ranger can use a bow, paired melee, or animal companions all with different tactics and abilities.
Shalekitty 1 year ago
@Shalekitty
Not that I'm too familiar with 4E, but...
Gnomes aren't included in the core books anymore, which is what this is a review of.
Warlocks were never in the 2nd ed core books.....don't remember if they were in one of those dumb "Complete Whatever" books, but again, now Warlocks are a core class. Big difference. Originally (and i'm going back to OE and B/X with my knowledge), the Magic-User was a catch-all for every type of magic user that you wanted to play!
HelicopterHoneymoon 1 year ago
@HelicopterHoneymoon
I didn't say that either were core. I am well aware that neither of them were in 2nd ed. I said that the gnomes were available at launch for 4e, and that Warlocks were in a splat book in 2nd ed, though I do not recall which one, but have always been different from "Wizard"
Shalekitty 1 year ago
@HelicopterHoneymoon
I didn't say that either were core. I am well aware that neither of them were in 2nd ed. I said that the gnomes were available at launch for 4e, and that Warlocks were in a splat book in 2nd ed, though I do not recall which one, but have always been different from "Wizard"
Shalekitty 1 year ago
Different things appeal to different people. Some people like 4th Edition and thats fine, but nothing can beat playing good old 1st Edition. Just started a new campeign with a GNOME illusionist. Can only get to 8th Level but it's the role playing that counts.
CthulhuChan94 1 year ago
By printing Tolarian Academy in Magic The Gathering back in tha' day.. ya they made a powerful card that probably moved a lot of Urza's Saga product to open them. And people desired that card a lot.. but the consequence was that by continuing to print broken cards all they did was alienate the vast majority of their customer base. even if those who were left bought a lot more stuff.. there is a reason i dont see it when i walk around outside anymore. it used to be an extremely popular game..
TrollOvGrimness 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The goal of a business is to provide a service not to make money. I don't understand why people want to operate a business only to masturbate to cash. Money has no value at all it is what you spend this money on that has value. if a company makes a lot of money only to invest it in an inferior product no one has gained anything.
TrollOvGrimness 1 year ago
I just recently played through a campaign of 4th ed and I loved it. It felt like the mechanics were geared to assist a cinematic form of story telling. It does feel a bit different though and I feel like DMs should make a conscious effort to try and ground or describe the powers of the characters in more realistic terms. That seems to really make the game shine at least for me.
dorksplosion 1 year ago
Actually, from what I've seen D&D 4e takes things back way too far. It's more of a tactical war-game now, like the first few editions, and it threw away a lot of progress that AD&D and 3e made, simplifying things and streamlining them toward the marketers' view of what makes a fun D&D game: killing shit. 3e combat at its core is an extension of the skill system, everything works the same way, while in 4e the change from normal play to combat is as jarring as a random encounter in a JRPG.
Neoncelerity 1 year ago
Gnomes Rock =.=
UnbeltedSundew 1 year ago
If you like 4e, that's fine with me, but it's true, 4e is not very respective and doesn't pay very good homage to it's origins. Things change I guess. Doesn't matter to much personally, since I don't play, but I have researched the books enough and compared them to the previous versions, and what Kurt says is pretty true. Even the people who play 4e admit that. Can't hate Kurt for that aspect.
pspboy7 1 year ago 15
@pspboy7 Kurt is accurate only in the 4e is not an homage to past editions. His judgment about the other aspects of 4e are far less lucid. If you want an accurate review of 4e (one that covers the ups, the downs, and the in-betweens) the 3 part YouTube review by repsesper is far better than Kurt's review.
jrm48220 1 year ago
@jrm48220 I agree, repsesper has done the best review of 4e I have seen yet.
logicguy37 1 year ago
@jrm48220 Thanks for pointing out repsesper's review. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
orendo 1 year ago
am with MikeT 4th is a crappy board game thats out to grab your money !
nozzer2002 1 year ago
haha the 4e books literally spend more time discussing roleplaying than any previous edition. you are literally just making things up.
D&D measured ALL distances in inches up to 2nd edition. Why? because its an evolution of mini wargames!
just repeating "it's not an rpg" doesn't magically make it not a game where you role play. idiot.
as an anecdote, all the 4e groups i've been in have spent way more time roleplaying, because they spent less time wrestling with dumb rules for everything. owns
ColonelAlasdair 1 year ago
@ColonelAlasdair Don't bother CA. It's obvious we are the wrong ones for trying to defend Wotc and 4E. I'm through trying to convince someone who "knows" he is right and you and I and some other posters in this thread are wrong. Let him keep him keep spouting the same anit-4E nonsense that has been wrongly said about the game. I like PF and I like 4E. I'm not going to hate a company for releasing a good product and for being profitable. Funyn thing is if Wotc goes under a 5E will come out too.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
getting mad about minis with 4e is hilarious, dnd was literally originally a miniatures wargame. until 2e, all distances were given in INCHES. gygax was a wargamer. it's how you can weed out all the gamers pretending to be oldschool
ColonelAlasdair 1 year ago
@ColonelAlasdair Very true and I like how much revisonist history a lot of gamers like to do when it comes to that. As I said before why let facts get in the way of hate. Makes me almost embrassed to be a gamer sometimes. The sense of entitlement in the hobby is out of control and the puroseful naviety would be funny if some where not actually serious about it. I may not like 4E as I used to but I will never jusge a company for being to succcessful or profitable. Why would I wish I owned one.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A But he's as wrong as you are here. I presented facts. 4E is a board game presented a la carte masquerading as a RPG. Sorry if that offends you, but it seems like you can't take this very obvious point. Unfortunately for the colonel there, he fails to understand the entire point, and where AD&D went with Dungeons and Dragons; and he calls us revisionists? Often, I find that it's the 4E defenders who don't understand their own game, most of which never read the books anyway.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@sureshot73A And by the way, I judge a company by what it produces, not by how profitable it is. 4E is a bad product, and I judge WotC on that basis. It made a bad product. Not everything it makes is a bad product, but this was was particularly bad and insulting. It bowed to populism, ignored what worked in the past and made new systems to replace the old without even considering the ramifications of what they were doing. Look what they did to Wizards and Paladins.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless Your argument is flawed because 4e is an RPG. The reason the books place such a heavy focus on combat & encounter resolution is because that is where the bulk of adjudication issues arise. WotC (and every other RPG company out there) knows that RP is just a glorified game of make-believe. We don't need to rules on how to do that. Most of us have been doing that since we were children. It's fine if you don't like 4e, but lying about it only makes you look bad.
jrm48220 1 year ago
Chainmail Bikini FTW!!!! Boris Vallejo defined what I want in a woman.
TheNemesiah 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And another thing. I have no problem with anyone disliking the 4E rules. Yet calling Wotc greedy is not a valid flaw. They are a business and all business want to make money. Wotc, Paizo everyone. Since when does having a successful and profitable company equal a bad thing. Welcome to the real world of business. It's not nice and it's not fair. Do you think the guys at Paizo are saying "were making too much money and are too successful it's a bad thing.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
4 minutes ago It shows that no one has either really looked at 4E or the Essentials line. Essentials adds to 4E it does not replace it. Your 4E character still works if you decide to join a an essentials game. Your not even forced to buy Essentials if you do not want. Funny though how no one points out that despite Pathfinder being backwards compatible it really is not as advertised by Paizo. If your going to take a shopt at 4e at least get your damn facts straight.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A I agree with you man. So much of the criticisms of 4e are just plain false. You don't have to like 4e, but if you're going to tear something down at least do it on the basis of what is actually true
Jimalcoatl 1 year ago
I stopped taking a lot of crticism for any rpg serioulsy along time ago when posters started saying company xyz was bad for being greedy. Apparenlty having a successful and profitable buisness is a bad thing in North america. Do you honestly think that other rpg companies like Paizo, Pinnacle and Chaosium are going "You know were doing too well and were making too much money thats a bad thing". Of course not. Every rpg company wants two things to make a quality product and to make money.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A I don't mind if a company does what it can to make a buck and keep people employed so long as what they produce isn't obviously made in such a way as to effectively require you to buy more and more of their product. This is what WotC did with D&D. They made a very elaborate board game where they left out the game pieces you need to play. The name was there to entice people to buy the game, and nothing more. It's cheesy, and was in very bad form.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
What peices were left out? Rules on how to roleplay. Does one really need the equivalent of the gamers version of the 10 commandments to play? That they spread rules over many books. Again Wotc is not the only culprit. Take a look at Savage Worlds and Unisystem. Guilty of the same. Finally welcome to the "wonderful" world of business and capitalism that does not look after or care about the little guy. I understand what you are saying yet it has always been this way in and outside of rpgs.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A 4E requires a battlemat to play, preferably with miniatures or counters, all of which was sorely left out of the board game of which they created. If you're going to make a board game, make a board game. If you're going to make an RPG, make an RPG. 4E is not an RPG.
Secondly, about capitalism. You enjoy the lifestyle you have, typing away at your computer, strictly because of capitalism and it's ability to raise standards of living, enabling you to take care of yourself.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless All the things you mention needing for 4E I used in 3.5 and Pathfinder. So again how is 4E different? Funny how no one gets on Paizo case for that Nope their not selling that stuff either. Even then beyond the battlemat I used nickles for minis and paper for the larger ones for a long time. Your not forced to buy that stuff. Just because you think so does not make 4E bad or Wotc greedy. No one is forcing you to buy 4E. Funny how no one is this critical about Pathinder and Paizo.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A I didn't say that 3E wasn't as much a board game, but 4E is very much a board game. 4E locks characters into specific roles and overbalances everything to the point that if you run the game as per the rules you create encounters for a "balanced" party, has no instantly lethal traps, and monsters are artificially handicapped so that a party can always be able to beat them by force of arms. All it's missing is the battlemat, dice and minis, which you buy a la carte.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless I like how you just ignored that I mentioned you do need to buy minis for 4E and use cheaper alternatives. But hey why let anything resembling logic get in the way of your 4E hate. And why would anyone miss the instant kill stuff from 3E. I am not saying that it should be a cakewalk yet I really hated the save or die crap from previous editions. I have better things to do than see my character die within the first 5 minutes of a game abd have to roll up a new one.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A Your hatred of those who do not play 4E is showing. It demonstrates you have no coherent counter-argument. But also, I don't hate 4E. I don't care for it. It's not an RPG. It's a board-game masquerading as such. By virtue of your lack of understanding the purpose of HP and the instant death traps, you fail to understand the concept of creating real tension. But you have to resort to hyperbole and insult to make your case. Hey, whatever makes you feel good about yourself.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@sureshot73A Unlike socialism and communism, where you'd otherwise be forced to pay for other people's health care, retirement, education, etc., you have no choice. Companies like WotC may attract a certain kind of gamer, but doesn't attract me and plenty of others. That's the beauty of capitalism. Choice. I don't have to buy their product, and neither do you. Do you really care if a company cares about YOU? I only care about what they make. If I don't like it, tough.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless First off every rpg company is out to make a book. Paizo, Wotc, White wolf everyone. Just because it is a rpg company you like does not exempt them from that. Anyone who works for the company who says otherwise is trying to make points with the fans. Do you think the guys at Paizo or any of the other companies I listed are saying "were making too much money and too successful thats a bad thing". No such thing as a free lunch and never was. Their is always a catch.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A There is a point when it's clear that a company isn't so much interested in the quality of their product and more interested in making a buck. WotC crossed that point with 4E by making it a different game than the previous editions and designed so that you have no choice but to play it with minis and a battlemat, so that this product supports other products. Also you notice how incomplete the PHB was, or otherwise you wouldn't see a PHB 2 or 3.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless Every company imcluding Wotc wants your money. To think otherwise is being delibrately naive to the extreme. As I said other rpgs do this yet why single Wotc out. I am not saying Wotc are paragons of virute yet some in the gaming community seem to think they are the only ones in it for a buck. I repeat every company in every industry wants your money. How many non profit companies do you know espcially in the rpg industry that exist.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A Didn't say that they didn't, and again, you are missing my entire point. What WotC did was make an entirely different game that was incompatible with the previous editions, made it a board game to boot, and called it D&D. If they called it anything else, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it's not D&D. Whatever this is, it's a cheap and cheesy way to make a buck, ignoring what came before and insulting those who helped make the game and the industry what it is.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@sureshot73A Understand. I have problems with 3E; lots of them. Paizo fixed some, but didn't address them all. However, none of them were dealbreakers. 4E's very philosophy of contrived tension, overbalance issues (I was one who never had a problem with balance even in 2E), and mollycoddling made it a dealbreaker. If it had called itself something else, instead of masquerading as something it isn't, I would not have a problem.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
@MikeTMerciless Oh please do spare me the stuff about socialism and communism. It comes down to one basic thing. People want something for nothing and as complete as possible right now or else. When they cannot get it they get angry. Reminds me of people who pirate stuff then try to rationalize that their not pirates nor cheap. Yes you are a pirate and yes your being cheap. Sure I wish rpg were cheaper and I try to get a good price on stuff.
sureshot73A 1 year ago
@sureshot73A Grown ups accept the notion that everything of value costs something. It's okay to search for bargains, but ultimately it has to be paid for. Those that argue for socialism fail to grasp this very concept, believing that government money is government's money, ignoring how they get it. But this is a different topic for another time.
MikeTMerciless 1 year ago
I dont think D&D should focus on being recognizable. Most people like the reviewer are into the RPG scene and can navigate the waters on their own. D&D is the entry game for the vast majority of table top gamers. It was for me. I think Wizards has tried to make 4th addition the "gateway drug" of RPG's. No, it won't satisfy those who played it 30 years ago, but those experienced gamers can pick up any one of a dozen more complex titles. D&D's niche, is the newbie.
majinspy 1 year ago
Kurt is right on with this review. I really did not like Dungeons and Dragons 4th edition because the role playing aspects and customization are no longer there. It's now a linear table top game in the vein of Warhammer. I will give 4th edition some credit. If it weren't for 4th edition, I never would have gone out and discovered Hunter the Vigil.
physalis17 1 year ago
The main problem i have with people who piss-bitch aout 4e is that they keep complaining about what the game isn't, not what the game is. Yes it's not 3.Xxxx, it's not pathfinder, it's not AD&D, or 2nd Edition. Those games have been made, and it would prolly take about all of 5 seconds of hunting on the internet to find them. they exist already and don't need to be reprinted. If you don't like the game, don't like it because it sucks, not because it's not a rehash of what you already know
LordSathar 1 year ago
Thank you for enforcing my stance on have nothing to do with 4th edition. I was the last convert from our group to switch from 1e to 3e. I grew to really enjoy 3e but saw the latter editions as nothing more then a move by WOTC to take more money from the fans of D&D. I started playing D&D with the Erol Otus covered Basic and Expert sets and plan to start my son the same way. Thanks again for an honest review of 4e.
Decado1628 1 year ago
weapons and actions you and character choose to do is what define your character, not a piece of paper, a pencil, and a few rulebooks like how DND used to be.
dragy148816 1 year ago
they are do not switch and make version 4.5 too quickly. I guess this is a game for a new generation, and its a revolutionized dungeons and dragons. So please, try not to bag too much. I thought about it, and Dungeons and Dragons, if you either actually play or watch how it should be played, is nice if played correctly. As for the topic of the character choice being limited, its as limited as you want it to be. They are releasing books that will allow you to multiclass, and the feats
dragy148816 1 year ago
Honestly, chill. Dungeons and Dragons has been changed for the better. It has become a game where you no longer need to play with a group to know how the game works. It is much easier on beginners, and in the new edition,there aren't a who load of skills to decide which one to use. Its much more organized, just less content. I'm just as upset as everyone else after they removed the old races and classes. But its okay, since they are already editing the new version. Im okay with it, as long as
dragy148816 1 year ago
Personally I don't care for the art in the books much. It looks...ah well...meh...very unrealistic. I would also agree that dragon races shouldn't be a player race.
peri2502 1 year ago
BTW its L-Add-grrin
stiffgrain 1 year ago
Are you new to roleplaying in general or just D&D specifically? As Kurt says in his review it is probably a decent gateway drug if you are new to the hobby, but there is so much more and better out there. As you mature as a gamer you will find your favorite niche games. Good luck and welcome to roleplaying.
aznsbd 1 year ago
What is inyour opinion the best rpg game?
BLUESKULLPR0DUCTIONS 1 year ago
It's pretty clear that the reviewer's biggest problem (one he seems unable to overcome in this review) is that the game changed from what he was used to. Half of his review is whining about dragonborn and tieflings being included as PC races. So WotC went in a different direction with the setting. He'd probably bash them for doing nothing different if they had all his beloved races in there. One of the only things I agreed with is that 3.5 had too many elf sub-races.
jrm48220 1 year ago
@jrm48220 WRONG.
The biggest complaint is the pigeon-holing.
Try listening next time.
nakedmolerat43 1 year ago
@nakedmolerat43 I did listen to the review. The largest part of the reviewer's complaining (in this part of his 2 part review) was a 3min 40sec rant about the inclusion of Tieflings, Dragonborn, and the Eladrin. He spends the entire time from 2:20 to 6:00 whining that D&D doesn't look like it used to.
re: pigeonholing: The reviewer assumes all the classes have only a single possible build, & that DMs can't let you out of the dungeon below 10th level in campaigns that are created by them.
jrm48220 1 year ago
@jrm48220 nobody says that 3.5 was a good system. But most old school players want to keep in a system that they grew attached to. What would people say, if a game like...let's say Call of Ctulhu would have gone through such radical changes.
peri2502 1 year ago
@peri2502 That's the rub though. If you enjoyed 3.5, you can still play it by playing Pathfinder (from what I'm told, they fixed a few of the flaws inherent in the old 3.5 system).
So to answer your question: If there were two concurrently produced CoC games that used different mechanics, players would go to the version that appealed most to them; which is what people have done w/ D&D. I can only hope CoC players would be more civil w/ each other than the old-school D&D die-hards have been.
jrm48220 1 year ago
@jrm48220 Well, as I said, I never really liked 3.5 either. The problem is that the old books are no longer printed so ultimately one is forced to switch to the newer systems if you can't get a hold of the old ones. But I agree, people should be more civil with each other, even when they are dissapointed.
peri2502 1 year ago
@peri2502 That's actually the thing though. You don't have to have access to the old books. So far as I know, the SRD is still available online; and Pathfinder is almost exactly the same as D&D 3.5. There are some changes (I personally think the changes to skills are good changes), but it is by and large the same game. It's just being supported by a different company now.
jrm48220 1 year ago
i hate how every time i go to a book store looking for a WoD or Star Wars books, they've been pushed off the shelf by the massive wall of 4th ed. books
bigjimswafflehouse 1 year ago
@bigjimswafflehouse WoD is barely producing and Star Wars is OOP. New stuff is going to push that stuff off the shelf, whether it 4E, Pathfinder, or whatever.
azirk83 1 year ago
@azirk83 So wizards discontinued the saga edition?
bigjimswafflehouse 1 year ago
@bigjimswafflehouse Yes, as of the beginning of this month their license expired. They haven't been producing for SAGA edition since May, IIRC.
azirk83 1 year ago
@narutofan3010 I would say, based on the complaints I've read about 4th Edition, it's probably gonna be better for you if you've never played D&D before.
Personally, I'm loving it; I've D&Ded since Basic and I had grown tired of the game. The latest edition feels invigorating and I welcome the changes. Plus it's super slick in all the right places and does away with the Gygaxian approach of having rules for every concievable action.
finelerv 1 year ago
whats wrong with a chainmail bikini?? Sorry but you cant beat LARRY ELMORE when it comes to D+D art!
harveydents 1 year ago 8
@harveydents so true...
pspboy7 1 year ago
l@harveydents Respectfully disagree , Todd Lockwood is da bomb
thade86 1 year ago
@harveydents You are so correct in that hehe :)
pspboy7 9 months ago
Best review of 4th ed D&D.
elveskickass 1 year ago
you liked the artwork? Really? I HATED it...it looked so...cartoonish and surrealistic, almost childish. I liked the more realistic artwork of the past.
And I agree, 4th edition D&D is NOT D&D anymore.
peri2502 1 year ago
actully i think ever since wizards of the coast bought the rights for dungeons and dragons the game has gone to crap and just been a money maker for them. il admit i didn't like the second edtion at all at first but started to like it. but still doesn't have the same feel as first edtion. and the other later edtions i think are crap. when i quit playing that game.
ardon68 1 year ago
It's been what a good two or three years since the crap edition was released, and we still haven't gotten all the stuff players were promised lol
Andulvar 1 year ago
this guy is pigeon holing. its called outside the box. systems is based on rules. rules can be bent, and often times broken. ur 8k gorilla bong
icecreamman4eva 1 year ago