I'm a 4E fan, and one thing I will admit is that 4E isn't really supportive of you doing your own thing with it. This contrasts with 3.x D&D and editions prior to 3E. 3.x D&D was flexible in that it tried to cover almost everything in RPGdo between the actual D&D rules and the OGL. It truly tried to be the RPG for everything and everybody. Previous editions were the opposite, as D&D was flexible not for trying to support everything, but because D&D was vague and fairly open to interpretation. One thing I do see are people disgruntled that they aren't represented under 4E D&D. I've been playing since 2E, and I don't remember seeing that sort of entitlement, specified as the right to have D&D be able to accomodate things outside of its stereotypical sphere of influence, prior 3E. You didn't see much of it during the 3E era, but that was because people took it for granted.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;326231I'm a 4E fan, and one thing I will admit is that 4E isn't really supportive of you doing your own thing with it.

Really? That's interesting. I feel just the opposite. 4e seems quite supportive of me creating my own monsters, NPCs, magic items, spells, etc. 3e gave us a very codified system to do a lot of that, which was great, but I have to admit that I felt rather constrained. As soon as I saw 4e and its philosophy on creating monsters and NPCs (a big thing for me as a DM), I was hooked. I like having a less rigidly defined system. This is not to knock 3e, which is still great. I'm just saying that I haven't felt more enthusiastic about creating monsters for D&D since I was doing so in 1e. YMMV

Quote from: ColonelHardisson;326249Really? That's interesting. I feel just the opposite. 4e seems quite supportive of me creating my own monsters, NPCs, magic items, spells, etc. 3e gave us a very codified system to do a lot of that, which was great, but I have to admit that I felt rather constrained. As soon as I saw 4e and its philosophy on creating monsters and NPCs (a big thing for me as a DM), I was hooked. I like having a less rigidly defined system. This is not to knock 3e, which is still great. I'm just saying that I haven't felt more enthusiastic about creating monsters for D&D since I was doing so in 1e. YMMV

This isn't exactly what I meant. What you are describing is taking 4E's framework and making something new within that framework. What I was talking about was going outside 4E's framework, or changing the framework itself. Taking D&D and doing something different with it. Some things you can do, like going RP heavy using freeform roleplaying and DM fiat, but the game isn't really kind to going against 4E's core designs and assumptions.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;326251This isn't exactly what I meant. What you are describing is taking 4E's framework and making something new within that framework. What I was talking about was going outside 4E's framework, or changing the framework itself. Taking D&D and doing something different with it. Some things you can do, like going RP heavy using freeform roleplaying and DM fiat, but the game isn't really kind to going against 4E's core designs and assumptions.

That's what I understood you meant, and I'm glad you brought it up.
4e has more of a schtick than any previous edition of D&D. It's trying to be "more D&D than D&D", the pure gamist Forgist expression of the game it can be (while at the same time biting into story-telling bullshit, but that's another topic altogether).
It does its thing arguably very well. It does not do much of anything else.

You know, for a game that's essentially Pretend (and yes, that includes skill challenges) outside of sphere of combat, I disagree.

If I were to describe 4E in Forge terms, I would describe it as "focused on a well running enjoyable game, crapping on simulationism and trusting players to take care of the narrativism on their own without it being hardwired into the system".

Quote from: DeadUematsu;326253You know, for a game that's essentially Pretend (and yes, that includes skill challenges) outside of sphere of combat, I disagree.

I disagree as well, but some people can't "Pretend" without their simulationism or having descriptive traits encoded into the character sheet.

Please don't use Forge terms. Please explain what you mean in english.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;326254If I were to describe 4E in Forge terms, I would describe it as "focused on a well running enjoyable game, crapping on simulationism and trusting players to take care of the narrativism on their own without it being hardwired into the system".

Focused on making game play as smooth running and enjoyable as possible(and willing to sacrifice other details to achieve this), not giving a crap about realism or people who want realism in their game, and leaving the roleplaying to the Dm and players instead of the rules.

Only played it for a few systems but it is by far the most rigid and restricting version of D&D ever.  It might be liberating for the DM, I have no idea having not looked at the DMG but for a player its the worst sort of straight jacket.

They have taken all hard decision out of the game.  No longer do you have to weigh up bonuses and penalties of race selection as they have taken all the penalties away.  Same with assigning stats.  The fact that a paladin can swing his sword using his charisma score means that you never have to worry about hard choices like strength or charisma.  Every class has effectively 3 dump stats out of 6!

Character builds are even more disgusting.  Its like they have gone ahead and decided what the optimal build for a character is and presented it as a fait accompli.  There is very little choice beyond choosing a class (sorry role).

And speaking of roles.  Good luck choosing say the fighter class and trying something off the wall with it.  The rules say you are a defender and by golly, that game is designed system wide to force you into that role.

Then there is the fact that in terms of game balance, everyone is nearly exactly the same. Everyone has the daily power that does 3d8 plus x ability bonus.  Everyone has a basic attack that does 2d6 plus best stat.

Continuting my rant you also have utterly random powers assigned that seem to have nothing to do with logic or fantasy D&D.  Want and example.  A warlock has a daily that creates a sphere of cold that does damage to any enemy starting their turn next to him.  So far so good. I can picture that and it does seem kind of cool, a field of intense cold enveloping the warlock. BUT any allies that start next to the warlock?  They are fine. Come again?  Thats right, the cold somehow mystically doesn't affect them.  Its that whole taking away the hard decisions again.  In any other edition of D&D if you had a freeze effect you would be weighing up the benefit against the damage it does to your allies.  Not here, your golden.

4E is also intrinsically dishonest. It makes you think your players are superpowered when actually they are heavily nerfed.  They start with a lot but they don't really ever get much better because magic items suck so much. I mean I don't know how you can stuff up magic items but 4E have done it by making the bonuses they give so infinitesimal they are barely worth bothering with at all.

Don't even get me started on what they did to interesting things like teleportation, invisibility, flying and the like.

Quote from: Fiasco;326269Only played it for a few systems but it is by far the most rigid and restricting version of D&D ever.  It might be liberating for the DM, I have no idea having not looked at the DMG but for a player its the worst sort of straight jacket.

They have taken all hard decision out of the game.  No longer do you have to weigh up bonuses and penalties of race selection as they have taken all the penalties away.  Same with assigning stats.  The fact that a paladin can swing his sword using his charisma score means that you never have to worry about hard choices like strength or charisma.  Every class has effectively 3 dump stats out of 6!

Character builds are even more disgusting.  Its like they have gone ahead and decided what the optimal build for a character is and presented it as a fait accompli.  There is very little choice beyond choosing a class (sorry role).

And speaking of roles.  Good luck choosing say the fighter class and trying something off the wall with it.  The rules say you are a defender and by golly, that game is designed system wide to force you into that role.

Then there is the fact that in terms of game balance, everyone is nearly exactly the same. Everyone has the daily power that does 3d8 plus x ability bonus.  Everyone has a basic attack that does 2d6 plus best stat.

Continuting my rant you also have utterly random powers assigned that seem to have nothing to do with logic or fantasy D&D.  Want and example.  A warlock has a daily that creates a sphere of cold that does damage to any enemy starting their turn next to him.  So far so good. I can picture that and it does seem kind of cool, a field of intense cold enveloping the warlock. BUT any allies that start next to the warlock?  They are fine. Come again?  Thats right, the cold somehow mystically doesn't affect them.  Its that whole taking away the hard decisions again.  In any other edition of D&D if you had a freeze effect you would be weighing up the benefit against the damage it does to your allies.  Not here, your golden.

4E is also intrinsically dishonest. It makes you think your players are superpowered when actually they are heavily nerfed.  They start with a lot but they don't really ever get much better because magic items suck so much. I mean I don't know how you can stuff up magic items but 4E have done it by making the bonuses they give so infinitesimal they are barely worth bothering with at all.

Don't even get me started on what they did to interesting things like teleportation, invisibility, flying and the like.

There is almost nothing worth responding to in this quote.

I've been playing since 2E, and I don't remember seeing that sort of entitlement, specified as the right to have D&D be able to accomodate things outside of its stereotypical sphere of influence, prior 3E.

What in your little cunt brain makes you think they aren't so entitled?

Quote from: Imp;326274I've been playing since 2E, and I don't remember seeing that sort of entitlement, specified as the right to have D&D be able to accomodate things outside of its stereotypical sphere of influence, prior 3E.

What in your little cunt brain makes you think they aren't so entitled?

Now that is worth responding to.

Because they're spoiled. Things are what they are, and you have to deal with it or be a whining little baby.

Quote from: Fiasco;326269Only played it for a few systems but it is by far the most rigid and restricting version of D&D ever...

As a seasoned 4E ranter, I'm giving that tirade 7/10.  I'm not being sarcastic.

I think the entitlement aspect can be summed up as 4E catering to gamers who cannot tolerate any sort of loss within a game, and feel cheated if their PC is worse at something than someone else's.  Now they all do the same thing with a different name.

I don't think there are more of those players now; WotC just turned D&D into a game that appeals to them.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;326272There is almost nothing worth responding to in this quote.

How enlightening.  Successfully defending 4E is probably beyond you anyway.  Enjoy D&D, The Nerfing.