The Truth About 4th Edition: Part One of Our Exclusive Interview with Wizards of the Coast

[Calatar]

But in other ways, they are also coming from a background that is short attention span, perhaps, less likely interested in reading the rules of the game before playing.

oh ok thats understandable, wait no **** you give D&D to someone else then. You obviously have no ****ing clue what D&D is about.

Apparently D&D is about preventing new players from joining because they don't know the rules yet. I thought it was about having fun in a make-believe fantasy setting. My bad.

 

[Calatar]

1. Not knowing the rules? It takes like 30min to explain at most. 2. Not knowing the rules and having a "Short attention span" are too different things. Fine make D&Dyaore. Dungeons & Dragons : Young Adults on Ritalin Edition, but don't insult the rest of us.

It does not take 30 minutes at most to explain the rules; I've explained the rules to many new players. You may THINK you've explained all the rules in 30 minutes, but they won't understand you until they've played the game.
I play 3.5 with somebody who's ADD. It just means a lot of random conversation goes on. But you seemed to be saying somebody who hasn't learned all the rules yet shouldn't be able to play, and I was disagreeing with you.

 

[Pirce]

The thing that confuses me about 4th edition is that I didn't think that Tomb of Battle: Book of Nine Swords was that popular. As for everything else, well I get why they did it. I just don't agree with the approach they took and think a middle ground could have been met between the massive well of customization and tweaking that is 3.5(which I love for the record) and the monopoly style character creation(I call Rogue! Awww I guess I'll be the car then.) and overly streamlined gameplay of 4th.

 

[i64ever]

That wasn't so much an interview as it was a advertisement for 4th edition.

 

[Fenixius]

Wow, you guys are all seeming to think that just because there's a 4th Edition set of rules, you can't play 3.5 anymore. If you feel so strongly that 4E is bad, then don't starting complaining. Just ignore it. That's a perfectly valid and reasonable option.

I enjoy it. It's helped me get my friends, who aren't so big on tabletop RPG stuff, into it. It's got lowered entry requirements. But the amazing thing about tabletop RPG games, each and every one, is that they're open source. All the rules are there for you to mod as you choose. Don't like how much 4th Edition wants you to push and pull people around, so you need a board? Then change those rules.

In my opinion, it's that flexibility that makes it the best. If you think 4th Edition is too simple, then either play something else, or just DM it yourself and mod the hell out of it.

I will agree, though, that it is a very expensive RPG to get into. Older games tend to be harder to find books for, but they're not as expensive. Mind you, I live in Australia, so -everything- is expensive for me. And, hey, if you think it's too expensive, just write your own rules. Totally within your reach.

 

[GreyWolf257]

Guys, seriously. Enough with the editions wars. I've played both, and they are both enjoyable, in different ways. 4th edition is fundamentally easier to understand, with a simpler core mechanic which makes it easier to get into, and get new people into. 3rd Edition is more open-ended and complex in what it allows players to do, which can be intimidating, but gives very experienced players a feeling of power they don't feel like giving up. 4E focuses on fun and balance, such that even poorly built characters can still contribute, and their players can still have fun in combat. 3.5 is such that there is a massive difference between what an optimizer can do and what an unfamiliar player can do. Even at 1st level, but the difference grows exponentially as levels go up. This eventually can make the game no fun for less knowledgeable players. This is a big problem for new players, as the knowledge required for fun is quite large.

So 3.5 has this added complexity, which if properly utilized can create more interesting and unique characters and ideas. It's more adaptable, but harder to use, with more significant differences between options. Eventually these differences can stack up to make certain players massively more powerful than their comrades.
4E has a simpler, more rigid system with fewer branching options available to the player, instead a lot of small choices you can make. Power levels between players can shift, but it rarely shifts enough to make it game-breaking or unfun.

If you are already familiar with 3.5 and have enough friends who are familiar, go ahead and stick with it. Trying 4E is free, if you'd like to try it, all the basic resources are available online. It is inherently more simple, and therefore requires more creativity to do the same things that could be done in 3.5. The question is: If what you want is exactly what 3.5 lets you do, why change? You set yourself up for disappointment if you come into a new game expecting to be able to do precisely the same things you used to be able to do and more. That's what splatbooks are for. They are two different games.

I've had fun with both editions, and I'm currently playing both, as a 3.5 player and a 4e DM.

By the way, have you ever noticed that the 4th Edition book is so hard to read? I mean, it just seems so disorganized, especially compared to the 3rd Edition book. I opened the 4E book and "BLAM!" face full of nothing but wall of text after wall of text. Hurt my eyes reading that thing.

No, I think you're confusing that with 3rd edition. Especially the spells in 3rd edition. 4th edition is full of shiny colors, short paragraphs and pictures. You, like many others, are suffering from a "what I learned was better" selective memory.

And another thing I go on about is how insulting the books are. I'm going to quote something directly from the text:
"Play a dragonborn if you want to look like a dragon."
That's so bloody shallow that you'd think WotC thinks we're all five-years-old. And it does something like that for every race. It just plain bugs me.

That's the trouble with trying to make something accessible to new players, the old ones complain that it's too simplistic. There's plenty of deeper fluff about all of the races if you're actually interested in learning about them, though it isn't all found in the PHB. (It wasn't found in the 3.5 PHB either.) Bullet points are made to be simple, and they were helpful for getting new players started on picking out their characters. When you're trying to make a character for somebody who's never played before, it's a lot easier to tell them the basics, then let them find out more later. It doesn't make it "made for 5-year-olds" to have it summarized simply.

Hmm, you don't quite see what I mean. Take the section on the Fighter class, for example. You have one neat picture and then "Holy crap! Eleven pages of uninteresting text and only one extra picture!" Sure, it has neat pictures every few pages, but the walls of text are horrendous! 3rd Edition had this problem with the spells lists, but how the can you get around that being boring? They both have a lot of short paragraphs, but 4E has a ton of paragraphs just one after another.

 

[IcarusPherae]

If you want something new to play (an updated 3.5) and 4th edition doesn't suit you check out Paizo's Pathfinder RPG. It is 3.5 basically with some upgrades you won't be disappointed!

 

[Cain_Zeros]

Who plays base races other than human? No, really. I've seen humans, and I've seen races pulled out of other books. Yeah, the newbie usually uses a base, but other than that, it's usually either a human, something specific like a wood elf, or something weird like a changeling. OK, halflings get used too, and dwarves. I've never even seen someone play a tiefling, and I have played evil characters. I played a wood elf, my friend played a human. We were both lawful evil, so throwing in tiefling "for the evil-curious" is just lame. There's a reason no race (and very few classes) has alignment restrictions. It's so you can do whatever you want.

If you want something new to play (an updated 3.5) and 4th edition doesn't suit you check out Paizo's Pathfinder RPG. It is 3.5 basically with some upgrades you won't be disappointed!

Also this.

 

[RJ Dalton]

That's the trouble with trying to make something accessible to new players, the old ones complain that it's too simplistic. There's plenty of deeper fluff about all of the races if you're actually interested in learning about them, though it isn't all found in the PHB. (It wasn't found in the 3.5 PHB either.) Bullet points are made to be simple, and they were helpful for getting new players started on picking out their characters. When you're trying to make a character for somebody who's never played before, it's a lot easier to tell them the basics, then let them find out more later. It doesn't make it "made for 5-year-olds" to have it summarized simply.

There is a difference between a quick summary and treating your readers like they have the brains and attention spans of goldfish. The little bullet point summaries have nothing to do with the technical details of the race and are pathetically shallow.
And I'll continue the edition wars as long as WotC keeps asking people to bend over and spread their cheeks for them. And it's not just 4E (although that is a very noticeable focus for my wrath). I've been on WotC's case for a long time. The quality of their products has been going down for a long time, with needless supplemental books that aren't worth the paper their printed on because they don't add shit to the game except for more and more prestige classes that aren't very interesting and that nobody really wants to play (except for munchkins and power players, who are the nematodes of role playing).
Of course, it's all futile really, because the best role playing system ever is really Chaosium's Call of Cthulu. Oh, and subsequent editions of *that* game don't invalidate the material of the previous editions, so people who buy a newer edition of the book can still play with people who use the old edition. In fact, now that I think about it, WotC is the only company I can think of that so radically changes the game with each edition that older versions are incompatible with new ones.

 

[Fenixius]

Hmm, you don't quite see what I mean. Take the section on the Fighter class, for example. You have one neat picture and then "Holy crap! Eleven pages of uninteresting text and only one extra picture!" Sure, it has neat pictures every few pages, but the walls of text are horrendous! 3rd Edition had this problem with the spells lists, but how the can you get around that being boring? They both have a lot of short paragraphs, but 4E has a ton of paragraphs just one after another.

"How can you get around spell lists being boring?" Well, what they've done is give -every- class a spell list. Every class now has that many options. I consider that to be a huge upgrade. And yeah, they could have used more pictures. But outside of the equipment section, which is also a little bland, the rest of the book is just -full- of pictures. Most of them are irrelevant, but plenty of pretty. It's not a hard book to read.

Also, show me the 3.5 book which is half as helpful as Dungeon Master Guide #2 for 4th Edition. That book is easy to read, and doesn't just gives you tools to DM with; it explains -how- to DM. What you should use those tools for. I've never seen a book like it.

As to depth and complexity, from what I understand, the 3rd PHB for 4th edition will allow players to have something in the realm of that sort of granular control over their characters with Hybrid classes, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

[Calatar]

Hmm, you don't quite see what I mean. Take the section on the Fighter class, for example. You have one neat picture and then "Holy crap! Eleven pages of uninteresting text and only one extra picture!" Sure, it has neat pictures every few pages, but the walls of text are horrendous! 3rd Edition had this problem with the spells lists, but how the can you get around that being boring? They both have a lot of short paragraphs, but 4E has a ton of paragraphs just one after another.

I see what you mean there.
However, I see that as compartmentalization and it doesn't bother me. I don't need to be concerned with that unless I'm making a 30th level fighter. Powers really don't bug me as a "Wall of Text" because they are organized in a clear way. I never bothered to read all of them because they're irrelevant to early-level players. You only need to deal with a few powers at a time unless you're planning out your entire character beginning to end, which I'd guess most players don't do. At 1st level, you only need to be concerned with the first page of text which describes your class and the 12 powers you can choose from. Wall-of-text implies a content overload, but since you don't need to worry about anything else until later, it shouldn't really be a problem.
The powers and feats are both organized better than the 3.5 spells and feats were, because they divided them by their class-based or level-based relevancy, rather than just alphabetically.

(On a side note, it's sort of funny how you're complaining about how there aren't enough pictures when everybody else is complaining about it being too simple and made for 5-year olds)

 

[Fenixius]

And I'll continue the edition wars as long as WotC keeps asking people to bend over and spread their cheeks for them.

You don't need to play 4th Edition if you're happy with 3.5 or Pathfinder, or even something like Call of Cthulu. That's all there is to it.

Who plays base races other than human? No, really. I've never even seen someone play a tiefling, and I have played evil characters. I played a wood elf, my friend played a human. We were both lawful evil, so throwing in tiefling "for the evil-curious" is just lame. There's a reason no race (and very few classes) has alignment restrictions. It's so you can do whatever you want.

That is correct: you can in fact be an evil anything you like. That's fine. You can be a good Tiefling, too. This is also valid. But different, for different reasons. For the record, I love to play a Tiefling. It's not as powerful as a Human, but it's more fun to roleplay. Even if I'm trying to be good, there's an inherent set of evil impulses and prejudices that come with being a Tiefling. It's more than just what feats I get and what stats there are. The roleplaying is the most important aspect, in my opinion.

 

[Cain_Zeros]

And I'll continue the edition wars as long as WotC keeps asking people to bend over and spread their cheeks for them.

You don't need to play 4th Edition if you're happy with 3.5 or Pathfinder, or even something like Call of Cthulu. That's all there is to it.

Who plays base races other than human? No, really. I've never even seen someone play a tiefling, and I have played evil characters. I played a wood elf, my friend played a human. We were both lawful evil, so throwing in tiefling "for the evil-curious" is just lame. There's a reason no race (and very few classes) has alignment restrictions. It's so you can do whatever you want.

That is correct: you can in fact be an evil anything you like. That's fine. You can be a good Tiefling, too. This is also valid. But different, for different reasons. For the record, I love to play a Tiefling. It's not as powerful as a Human, but it's more fun to roleplay. Even if I'm trying to be good, there's an inherent set of evil impulses and prejudices that come with being a Tiefling. It's more than just what feats I get and what stats there are. The roleplaying is the most important aspect, in my opinion.

I agree that the roleplaying is most important. I never start with a class in mind. I start with a concept, and build from there, occasionally using a completely different class than the one usually used for similar concepts. My latest is a wild elf duellist made using the Warblade class, wielding a katana, with a bladed cloak as back up(at least for now, I have plans to prestige to a balded cloak-oriented prestige class later). He's refined, yet sarcastic, and equates less refined socialization and a lack of diplomatic ability with idiocy, but at the same time, he can be flashy, and a bit of a show-off (which the bladed cloak totally fits).

 

[Calatar]

There is a difference between a quick summary and treating your readers like they have the brains and attention spans of goldfish. The little bullet point summaries have nothing to do with the technical details of the race and are pathetically shallow.
And I'll continue the edition wars as long as WotC keeps asking people to bend over and spread their cheeks for them. And it's not just 4E (although that is a very noticeable focus for my wrath). I've been on WotC's case for a long time. The quality of their products has been going down for a long time, with needless supplemental books that aren't worth the paper their printed on because they don't add shit to the game except for more and more prestige classes that aren't very interesting and that nobody really wants to play (except for munchkins and power players, who are the nematodes of role playing).
Of course, it's all futile really, because the best role playing system ever is really Chaosium's Call of Cthulu. Oh, and subsequent editions of *that* game don't invalidate the material of the previous editions, so people who buy a newer edition of the book can still play with people who use the old edition. In fact, now that I think about it, WotC is the only company I can think of that so radically changes the game with each edition that older versions are incompatible with new ones.

The "technical details" of the race are listed directly above the bullet points, which are intended to be very basic reasons why a player might choose to pick a race. If they are interested by the first page, then they read further and learn more about it. If they aren't, they move to the next race.

I hardly think that WotC is raping anybody just because you don't like anything new. Complaining endlessly that everything a company is doing is terrible because you prefer a different system is just... tiresome. What is it that you want out of them in terms of new content? Who says nobody wants to play those prestige classes? What about the extra feats? The regional backgrounds? The new items? The new classes entirely? Skill tricks?
They aren't doing a single thing to you if you don't buy their stuff, and you clearly aren't going to buy it because you view all their stuff as crap. Just set up your own campaign and limit the books allowed. Done.

This statement "Of course, it's all futile really, because the best role playing system ever is really..." just makes me thing that you aren't worth wasting time even talking to. It's ridiculously dismissive to say it's futile to release new material because a good game already exists.

 

[Fenixius]

Of course, it's all futile really, because the best role playing system ever is really Chaosium's Call of Cthulu. Oh, and subsequent editions of *that* game don't invalidate the material of the previous editions, so people who buy a newer edition of the book can still play with people who use the old edition

Let me know how that's going in 10 years time, yeah? When every single rulebook needs to be balanced and consistent with every other rulebook. This is a design lesson I learned when I played lots of Magic: The Gathering, and read their weekly columns. They have different tournament formats. The most popular one (T2 - Standard) is the one with the smallest cardpool, so that A) people don't need to buy as many cards to be competitive and B) because any big issues or horrendously OP stuff gets rotated out within a year or two, and we can all play again without having to fight off people abusing ludicrously insane combos that they just didn't catch because they're dealing with a thousand cards at a time.

Oh, but they did have other formats for people who liked the older stuff. Vintage and Legacy both used every card ever printed. As such, these were the most difficult, expensive, and painful formats to play in.

If they never retcon/errata/patch note anything up in your Cthulu game, have fun with powergamers breaking your shit.

 

[Fenixius]

Who plays base races other than human? No, really. I've never even seen someone play a tiefling, and I have played evil characters. I played a wood elf, my friend played a human. We were both lawful evil, so throwing in tiefling "for the evil-curious" is just lame. There's a reason no race (and very few classes) has alignment restrictions. It's so you can do whatever you want.

I agree that the roleplaying is most important. I never start with a class in mind. I start with a concept, and build from there, occasionally using a completely different class than the one usually used for similar concepts.

Awesome. So why does it surprise you so much that non-standard races like Dragonborn and Tiefling and Gnome and Warforged exist? They all allow for very interesting roleplay experiences which aren't easily possible with other classes. And, hey, they add some variety, which is nice.