MadMaligor wrote:I will risk a little fuel on the fire and say that as one of the few "old school" 4E lovers who lurks here from time to time, I think two misconceptions keep popping up. I will preface this by saying nothing, and I mean nothing, replaces 1st Edition or earlier D&D gaming systems.1. There is no roleplay in 4E.2. Old people, especially old school 1st Ed (or earlier) peeps wont like it.There is a ton of roleplay in 4E and its supported, and you can remove the entire debate that is the skill challenge/check system if you want to (I kept it but have changed a number of things to accomodate a much more communicative approach than relying on dice entirely after we found the dice approach a bit too gamey about 6 or 7 sessions in). Please take your least prized 1st Ed DMG out and whack the next person that says changing game rules or mechanics to suit your experience is a bad thing, tell them Mal said hello.
MadMaligor wrote:I can see why one might say that, and I respect your views Ser. However, I think it really comes down to play style and your DM. If the DM is a student of the mechanic and can adjust on the run during combat, once your players get to know their abilities and begin coordinating with each other, combat time is halved (easily) and becomes very quick paced. But there is definately a learning curve.Our battles now are fast. At the start of H1 we were sloooooow, 1 hour plus easy a battle, now its under a half hour and we are well into H2...which btw...is a decent module, tons of room for fleshy bits and I did a good bit of tweaking on the storyline that can really be spiced up with some minimal DM homework. I cant wait for H3 though.The best way to describe it is a very complex game of speed chess. The only thing that bogs us down is the actual set up (map/drawing, miniatures, any extra encounter log I might have to do on the fly), and roleplay during combat (which no one minds because those are usually the best parts).Now I put the roleplay bit in bold for a reason. I have seen three out of four gaming sessions now as a spectator where combat was way to dice heavy for my taste. By that I mean the participants got way to bogged down in specifics (like I used to before the six second rule...thanks to members of this forum btw...talk about changing our game!!!) It seemed like all they did was talk and think about what they were going to do and hold their hands on miniatures unwilling to release like a slow chess game, while considering all the options. Then boom rolling dice and finding out if their well laid plans went good or bad. While they all seemed to be having fun, it was more like a symphony than combat. Everyone playing different notes and instruments in the hopes that it harmonized into something beautiful.If your the kind of guy or gal who likes board games, then that type of play might suit you just fine, but its not really my D&D cup of tea....now if we were playing Stratego??!! With the advent of the six second rule we found that a few things happened. First, players became much more aware of what other people were doing, and where they were on the mat, so they could react when it was their turn. Second, it forced them all to memorize what they could and could not do instead of looking at character sheets. Last but not least, it made combat very hectic and people started shouting (or I should say talk very fast and very loud)...which in an odd way actually made sense as I came up with the "In character" speech rule during the 6 seconds, so players would not table talk but react in form.That darn rule should be in every edition as D&D RAW, period....in my humble opinion anyway.So our combat board games turned into something much more akin to 1st edition than we had imagined. In fact, we often comment outside of game that the only true differences are healing surges and character/monster survivability. Those are just our experiences though, because like I said up front, its really about play style and your DM.=)Mal
JasonZavoda wrote:All this "Any version of D&D can be roleplayed" or even more "any version of D&D is as good as another" is very egalitarian but not true.
JasonZavoda wrote: The worst thing about 4e is that an entire generation of newbies is going to think that this emasculated version of an RPG is what roleplaying actually is and not a sad and pathetic monstrosity, like some 4th generation hillbilly nightmare out of Deliverance.4e can be roleplayed as the gaudy chrome plated pimp-daddy of a game that it is or simply played as a heroquest style boardgame which it should have been in the first place.Have fun with it by all means, but I can hear those banjos playing.
MadMaligor wrote:I know my opinion may be in the minority, but I think its more our fault than TSR's or WotC's that roleplay is being lost to the Pokemon style gameplay. By "our" I mean adult roleplayers as a whole.
