4th Ed
- Thread starter daniel_gudman
- Start date
I just got the core books boxed set in the mail, and I'm reading it now, so if any of you have any questions about something specific that would be covered in the core books, feel free to ask.
I'm on page twenty of the PH, and to be quite honest, I'm not liking what I'm seeing. A few of the changes I like, but I get the uncomfortable feeling that I'm being spoon-fed instructions on how I'm "supposed" to play the game, rather than being given a general set of guidelines and suggestions and told "go wild".
I'm also getting the vibe that the "play testers" may have taken their job a bit too far. The information in the books has a ridged, beaten-to-death feel about it, which I don't find all that appealing.
Soo. From what I've read right now:
Alignments: Yes, I know they nerfed the alignments, but I personally like the fact that alignments are no longer wholly connected to what classes you can be. A paladin can be Evil if they want to, or not. It's their choice.
Now, what I don't like is the fact that they've cut the alignments down and made them little more than an accessory. There are only five alignments now, and if you get technical, there are only four. Why? Because apparently, "Unaligned" is now a viable option.
Good: Freedom and kindness.
"Protecting the weak from those who would dominate or kill them is just the right thing to do."
Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
"An ordered society protects us from evil."
Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
"It is my right to claim what others possess."
Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction.
"I don't care what I have to do to get what I want."
Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
"Just let me go about my business."
I'm sorry, but no. While I support the idea of alignments being less restrictive on what a character can be or do, I strongly disagree with the way they're being presented. Now, they have more in common with religion than anything else. What happened to Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil? What happened to the Neutral alignments, like Lawful Neutral? They've all been deemed obsolete.
Also. . . since when can you be "Unaligned"? Last time I checked, it was literally impossible to not have an alignment. Even animals and creatures not intelligent enough to make moral and ethical decisions, and constructs incapable of independent thought have alignments (usually Neutral). I'm sorry, but you can't just choose not to have an alignment. An alignment is a key part of defining who and what you are. The only things that should be "Unaligned" are lifeless, inanimate objects, and even then there are numerous exceptions to that.
So no. As far as alignments are concerned, I like the fact that they're less restrictive, but I can't stand the fact that they've been turned into some sort of pseudo-spiritual pledge, let alone the concept of Unaligned and the destruction of over half the alignments.
Three Basic Rules: This is something I don't like at all. From what I've read, the Three Basic Rules are taken directly from 3.5, but they apparently don't really matter.
That is to say, the sourcebook breaks its own stated rules. The first (and to me, most important) of the three rules are Simple Rules, Many Exceptions.
The problem, though, is that what I've read so far isn't about the exceptions. In 3.5, the general attitude was "Here, this is what you can do, and how the rules and mechanics work. Feel free to add on to, bend, or break the rules as necessary for your story and campaign."
Basically, the SRME rule is all about freedom. You have a small number of basic rules and mechanics to follow, and everything else is up to you, including violating said rules as you see fit. As long as you can balance it out in terms of power and gameplay, you can do whatever you want (and the only reason balance was a concern was because it usually wasn't as fun to play when things are unbalanced).
What I've read so far, however, isn't at all like that. Instead of telling you what you can do, 4.0 seems determined to tell you what you can't. I'm barely through the introduction of the PH, and I'm already being told what I can't do as a player, and how so-and-so restrictions apply to me.
And as both a player and a DM, that fails. Not only is it annoying on a personal level, but it goes against the entire point of D&D. It's supposed to be about freedom of the player to do whatever they want, with the DM keeping things fair and balanced. Instead, 4.0 decides to do the complete opposite. Sure, you can do whatever you want. Within these rules, strictures, and guidelines, of course.
What's that? Your vision of your character doesn't translate into the game? Well, sucks to be you then, doesn't it?
No. Just, no. There isn't a silver lining to this one. It's Fail all around.
Encounters: I'll be honest with you. Some of the stuff in 4.0 I like. Others, however, scare me as a RPer and as a DM. This is one of them.
And I quote:
Notice what's missing?
Role playing.
In the 4.0 breakdown of "How Do You Play", it goes on and on about fighting and making skill checks, but doesn't once mention role playing.
I'm sorry, but isn't D&D classified as a Tabletop Role Playing Game? Because it was last time I checked.
What's with the lack of role playing? It isn't even mentioned in the What's In a D&D Game or How To Play Sections.
This isn't a Players Handbook. It's an instruction manual. I don't feel like I'm reading TRPG rulebook so much as a video game walkthrough. This is how you do this, this is how you do that. You must choose to be this, this or this. This isn't an option. Why? Because we say so.
I say it in bold, capital letters. FAIL.
As both a DM and a player, I want the freedom to do what I want. The D&D franchise (and indeed the TRPG industry as a whole) is supposed to provide structure and purpose to an otherwise purely imaginary exercise. Instead, it's locking down my choices, decisions, and preferences into one tiny, narrow field from which there can be no deviation whatsoever.
4.0 isn't focusing, forming, and directing my imagination, it's choking it and stuffing it into a premade hole that I must conform to, no ifs, ands, or buts.
This is not the 3.5 that I joined the D&D scene with, nor is it the AD&D I explored under recommendation from others who'd been playing longer than I had. This is D&D trying to be something it is not while simultaneously being what it already is, and as a result, failing at both.
Race: Now this is downright galling.
The Dragonborn are unnecessary IMO, what with the Savage Races and Half-Dragon rules in place. They're an interesting choice, but in any normal campaign that I've played, dragons don't interbreed with humanoid races nearly often enough to warrant making those with strong draconic ancestry one of the Main Races. Half-Dragons and those with prominent draconic ancestry are meant to be oddities. That's what lends them their allure and exotic feel. Making them common cheapens their overall concept in a way that I'm not at all a fan of.
The Eladrin transcend the realm of unnecessary into the realm of Really Bad Idea. Not only are they superior to the Elves in the same way Elves are superior to Humans, but they're just as common as all the other Main Races, Elves included. Not only does that cheapen the concept of the Elves, but it screams "overpowered Mary Sues" at the top of its lungs.
And worst of all, Tieflings. Yes, you heard me. Tieflings are now one of the Main Races. But guess what? There isn't an equivalent opposite to check them. Aasimars no longer exist, and there isn't another race to take their place. Not one. It's Tieflings, and. . . that's it. Just them.
And you know why? Because the person who lead the racial revamping said, and I quote:
Telling me what kind of races and heroes I like? Telling me what I have to choose to play as, just because you didn't pay attention in High School vocabulary and can't remember it's "Aasimar", and not "Assimar?
Let alone the Fail that is not even bothering to replace them with an equivalent race?
Fuck you, sirrah. Fuck you.
I haven't finished the Players Handbook, let along the other two core books. I've only just started, really. But I can tell you right now, I'm not going to be playing 4.0. I'll probably take the ideas, concepts, and rules from 4.0 that I like and implement them into my campaigns as I see fit, but I'm not going to play pure 4.0. Not a chance. I'll stick to 3.5 and earlier, and use 4.0 as a supplement.
Sorry, Rule Nazis. You Fail. You're just lucky Gary isn't around to see what you've done, or heÆd go Elminster on your asses.
And of course, the "any questions, feel free to ask" thing still applies. I'll be more than happy to skip ahead of my reading and answer questions.
I'm on page twenty of the PH, and to be quite honest, I'm not liking what I'm seeing. A few of the changes I like, but I get the uncomfortable feeling that I'm being spoon-fed instructions on how I'm "supposed" to play the game, rather than being given a general set of guidelines and suggestions and told "go wild".
I'm also getting the vibe that the "play testers" may have taken their job a bit too far. The information in the books has a ridged, beaten-to-death feel about it, which I don't find all that appealing.
Soo. From what I've read right now:
Alignments: Yes, I know they nerfed the alignments, but I personally like the fact that alignments are no longer wholly connected to what classes you can be. A paladin can be Evil if they want to, or not. It's their choice.
Now, what I don't like is the fact that they've cut the alignments down and made them little more than an accessory. There are only five alignments now, and if you get technical, there are only four. Why? Because apparently, "Unaligned" is now a viable option.
Good: Freedom and kindness.
"Protecting the weak from those who would dominate or kill them is just the right thing to do."
Lawful Good: Civilization and order.
"An ordered society protects us from evil."
Evil: Tyranny and hatred.
"It is my right to claim what others possess."
Chaotic Evil: Entropy and destruction.
"I don't care what I have to do to get what I want."
Unaligned: Having no alignment; not taking a stand.
"Just let me go about my business."
I'm sorry, but no. While I support the idea of alignments being less restrictive on what a character can be or do, I strongly disagree with the way they're being presented. Now, they have more in common with religion than anything else. What happened to Chaotic Good and Lawful Evil? What happened to the Neutral alignments, like Lawful Neutral? They've all been deemed obsolete.
Also. . . since when can you be "Unaligned"? Last time I checked, it was literally impossible to not have an alignment. Even animals and creatures not intelligent enough to make moral and ethical decisions, and constructs incapable of independent thought have alignments (usually Neutral). I'm sorry, but you can't just choose not to have an alignment. An alignment is a key part of defining who and what you are. The only things that should be "Unaligned" are lifeless, inanimate objects, and even then there are numerous exceptions to that.
So no. As far as alignments are concerned, I like the fact that they're less restrictive, but I can't stand the fact that they've been turned into some sort of pseudo-spiritual pledge, let alone the concept of Unaligned and the destruction of over half the alignments.
Three Basic Rules: This is something I don't like at all. From what I've read, the Three Basic Rules are taken directly from 3.5, but they apparently don't really matter.
That is to say, the sourcebook breaks its own stated rules. The first (and to me, most important) of the three rules are Simple Rules, Many Exceptions.
The problem, though, is that what I've read so far isn't about the exceptions. In 3.5, the general attitude was "Here, this is what you can do, and how the rules and mechanics work. Feel free to add on to, bend, or break the rules as necessary for your story and campaign."
Basically, the SRME rule is all about freedom. You have a small number of basic rules and mechanics to follow, and everything else is up to you, including violating said rules as you see fit. As long as you can balance it out in terms of power and gameplay, you can do whatever you want (and the only reason balance was a concern was because it usually wasn't as fun to play when things are unbalanced).
What I've read so far, however, isn't at all like that. Instead of telling you what you can do, 4.0 seems determined to tell you what you can't. I'm barely through the introduction of the PH, and I'm already being told what I can't do as a player, and how so-and-so restrictions apply to me.
And as both a player and a DM, that fails. Not only is it annoying on a personal level, but it goes against the entire point of D&D. It's supposed to be about freedom of the player to do whatever they want, with the DM keeping things fair and balanced. Instead, 4.0 decides to do the complete opposite. Sure, you can do whatever you want. Within these rules, strictures, and guidelines, of course.
What's that? Your vision of your character doesn't translate into the game? Well, sucks to be you then, doesn't it?
No. Just, no. There isn't a silver lining to this one. It's Fail all around.
Encounters: I'll be honest with you. Some of the stuff in 4.0 I like. Others, however, scare me as a RPer and as a DM. This is one of them.
And I quote:
Notice what's missing?
Role playing.
In the 4.0 breakdown of "How Do You Play", it goes on and on about fighting and making skill checks, but doesn't once mention role playing.
I'm sorry, but isn't D&D classified as a Tabletop Role Playing Game? Because it was last time I checked.
What's with the lack of role playing? It isn't even mentioned in the What's In a D&D Game or How To Play Sections.
This isn't a Players Handbook. It's an instruction manual. I don't feel like I'm reading TRPG rulebook so much as a video game walkthrough. This is how you do this, this is how you do that. You must choose to be this, this or this. This isn't an option. Why? Because we say so.
I say it in bold, capital letters. FAIL.
As both a DM and a player, I want the freedom to do what I want. The D&D franchise (and indeed the TRPG industry as a whole) is supposed to provide structure and purpose to an otherwise purely imaginary exercise. Instead, it's locking down my choices, decisions, and preferences into one tiny, narrow field from which there can be no deviation whatsoever.
4.0 isn't focusing, forming, and directing my imagination, it's choking it and stuffing it into a premade hole that I must conform to, no ifs, ands, or buts.
This is not the 3.5 that I joined the D&D scene with, nor is it the AD&D I explored under recommendation from others who'd been playing longer than I had. This is D&D trying to be something it is not while simultaneously being what it already is, and as a result, failing at both.
Race: Now this is downright galling.
The Dragonborn are unnecessary IMO, what with the Savage Races and Half-Dragon rules in place. They're an interesting choice, but in any normal campaign that I've played, dragons don't interbreed with humanoid races nearly often enough to warrant making those with strong draconic ancestry one of the Main Races. Half-Dragons and those with prominent draconic ancestry are meant to be oddities. That's what lends them their allure and exotic feel. Making them common cheapens their overall concept in a way that I'm not at all a fan of.
The Eladrin transcend the realm of unnecessary into the realm of Really Bad Idea. Not only are they superior to the Elves in the same way Elves are superior to Humans, but they're just as common as all the other Main Races, Elves included. Not only does that cheapen the concept of the Elves, but it screams "overpowered Mary Sues" at the top of its lungs.
And worst of all, Tieflings. Yes, you heard me. Tieflings are now one of the Main Races. But guess what? There isn't an equivalent opposite to check them. Aasimars no longer exist, and there isn't another race to take their place. Not one. It's Tieflings, and. . . that's it. Just them.
And you know why? Because the person who lead the racial revamping said, and I quote:
Telling me what kind of races and heroes I like? Telling me what I have to choose to play as, just because you didn't pay attention in High School vocabulary and can't remember it's "Aasimar", and not "Assimar?
Let alone the Fail that is not even bothering to replace them with an equivalent race?
Fuck you, sirrah. Fuck you.
I haven't finished the Players Handbook, let along the other two core books. I've only just started, really. But I can tell you right now, I'm not going to be playing 4.0. I'll probably take the ideas, concepts, and rules from 4.0 that I like and implement them into my campaigns as I see fit, but I'm not going to play pure 4.0. Not a chance. I'll stick to 3.5 and earlier, and use 4.0 as a supplement.
Sorry, Rule Nazis. You Fail. You're just lucky Gary isn't around to see what you've done, or heÆd go Elminster on your asses.
And of course, the "any questions, feel free to ask" thing still applies. I'll be more than happy to skip ahead of my reading and answer questions.
No, he really isn't. Pretty much everything he said showed a total lack of comprehension of what's in the books, as well as the design goals and nature of 4e.
And while I could try and explain it, I won't, because the books did so perfectly well, and he didn't get it then, so he isn't likely to now.
And while I could try and explain it, I won't, because the books did so perfectly well, and he didn't get it then, so he isn't likely to now.
Robin? In this rare case... You're wrong, he's right. I READ the books.
I stand by my INTINAL call, when I heard Baker talk about it several months ago.
"WoW on table" Sorry, but this isn't DnD. That simple. I'm ALSO NOT suprised by it. This is pretty much WoTC. Name me _one_ OFFICAL 'happy' universe that they made.
And when, A DESGINER has PRINTED INTO THE BOOKS, and it passes editing that comment, you KNOW it's not DnD. At -worst- DnD is all about the balance (FR, Greyhawk and the orginal Mystra setting) Sometimes you get the "Strugging to do right in a wrong world" (Dark Sun, Ravenloft). But it's been QUITE clear from the beginning DnD was the HEROIC game.
But... whatever floats your boat.
Just don't expect most DnD players to join you.
A.
I stand by my INTINAL call, when I heard Baker talk about it several months ago.
"WoW on table" Sorry, but this isn't DnD. That simple. I'm ALSO NOT suprised by it. This is pretty much WoTC. Name me _one_ OFFICAL 'happy' universe that they made.
And when, A DESGINER has PRINTED INTO THE BOOKS, and it passes editing that comment, you KNOW it's not DnD. At -worst- DnD is all about the balance (FR, Greyhawk and the orginal Mystra setting) Sometimes you get the "Strugging to do right in a wrong world" (Dark Sun, Ravenloft). But it's been QUITE clear from the beginning DnD was the HEROIC game.
But... whatever floats your boat.
Just don't expect most DnD players to join you.
A.
That isn't a complaint he made. So, no, still wrong. The 'WoW' issue (not one I agree with) might be one he HAS, but note it isn't not in his POST.
His first complaint was Alignment, which is invalid because he clearly did not understand that section.
His second was, I believe, Three Basic Rules, which is just... vague. There's nothing to really respond to there, as he didn't mention any specific problems.
Next is Encounters, whereupon his complaints are so misguided as to be laughable. Seriously, I can't respond to that, it's just so silly in places.
As to Races... well. I'm not sure what to say that. Or I do know what to say, I just don't want to respond to his various points because I find the complaints so odd (much like all of them) I seriously just don't understand how someone made them.
EDIT: And most D&D players WHERE? On this forum, apparently not, but I've seen plenty of support other places. Please don't act like you're some sort of majority by default. I don't KNOW if most people support 4e or not, and I'm not going to assume, for obvious reasons.
His first complaint was Alignment, which is invalid because he clearly did not understand that section.
His second was, I believe, Three Basic Rules, which is just... vague. There's nothing to really respond to there, as he didn't mention any specific problems.
Next is Encounters, whereupon his complaints are so misguided as to be laughable. Seriously, I can't respond to that, it's just so silly in places.
As to Races... well. I'm not sure what to say that. Or I do know what to say, I just don't want to respond to his various points because I find the complaints so odd (much like all of them) I seriously just don't understand how someone made them.
EDIT: And most D&D players WHERE? On this forum, apparently not, but I've seen plenty of support other places. Please don't act like you're some sort of majority by default. I don't KNOW if most people support 4e or not, and I'm not going to assume, for obvious reasons.
Um... what?
Are you on drugs or something? Drunk, maybe?
Raine specifically pointed his problem with the encounters, and it's the same thing I mentioned earlier in this thread: The Core books do not mention ROLE playing, ever. It's all ROLL playing. If a conflict doesn't involve dice, the books don't even bother with it.
Are you on drugs or something? Drunk, maybe?
Raine specifically pointed his problem with the encounters, and it's the same thing I mentioned earlier in this thread: The Core books do not mention ROLE playing, ever. It's all ROLL playing. If a conflict doesn't involve dice, the books don't even bother with it.
I've read some more, and decided to throw some more thoughts out there.
Firstly, if there was ever any doubt in your mind about the direction 4.0 is going, I give you a direct quote from p. 259 of the Players Handbook.
If you had any doubts that 4.0 wasn't destroying the most basic and fundamental concept of Tabletop Role Playing Games, you can let go of them now.
I hope I don't have to elaborate on exactly why this excerpt utterly fails.
Now, moving on to more specific things. Namely, the cosmology. To be blunt, itÆs a mess. I wasnÆt exaggerating when I said it was anything and everything rammed together, as youÆll soon (sadly) note.
The Far Realm: The Far Realm has been utterly nerfed. It used to be some sort of unknown, impossibly removed place beyond the boundaries of things like Law, Chaos, Good, or Evil. The Far Realm was a place of madness, where even the most basic and fundamental rules and laws of reality and the universe hold no sway at all. It was beyond the gods, beyond the Abominations, beyond the Princes, and possibly beyond even Ao Himself. The Far Realm, the alien godminds and primeval forces that hold sway there, and the creatures that hail from it all had a very Lovecraftian feel to them. The ôgod-minds forever lost in contemplations of madnessö and the ôlogic-defying forms of such monsters, so impossible and contradictory as to erode the very sanity of those who witness themö were all clearly inspired by Lovecrafts work, and it showed in the Lore.
Now, though, itÆs much, much different. Almost all Aberrations are now denizens of The Far Realm that immigrated to our world. Everything from Aboleth to the Gibbering Mouther are Far Realm creatures now. Also, The Far Realm is not longer ôbeyond the boundaries of time and space, ensconced between the aeons of realityö. ItÆs not even on another plane. The Far Realm is in the Material Plane in a distant part of the galaxy. ItÆs not an alternate reality or an expression of abstract impossibility and madness made physical. ItÆs just another planet (or system of planets) in space.
The Elemental Planes: The Elemental Planes no longer exist. TheyÆve all been smashed together to create ôThe Plane of Elemental Chaosö, from which all elements and elementals are spawned. The Elemental Lords wage constant war with each other, and elemental beings are the soldiers, magic users, assassins, commanders, and shock troops in this war.
One of the more important changes is that this takes away from one of the celestial races. I say that because the elemental races embroiled in the struggle are Archons. A fire elemental isnÆt a fire elemental anymore. ItÆs a Fire Archon.
Also, almost all prominent settlements and locations in the planes are now located in the Plane of Elemental Chaos. This includes the City of Brass and Sigil.
And the saddest part of all? The Hells exist, but not the Heavens.
Overall, IÆd have to say that this setting as a whole isnÆt very conductive to the concept of The Hero. ItÆs little things scattered here and there, like The Far Realm being (cosmologically speaking) right next to us, the fact that the elements are at constant war with each other, and the distinctive lack of any innately-celestial player races (we have Tieflings, but not Aasimar). But all those little things add up. Like Mageohki said, this isnÆt a very happy setting. Not at all. The concept of the hero has taken a significant hit, angels and other celestial beings have been either drastically reduced in strength or removed entirely, and there is no check to balance out the Evil races and things running amuck.
I weep for the loss of the ability to create a real, genuine Hero. It just isnÆt there anymore. Not with this setting. Unaligned is going to be the big thing now, because all æactualÆ alignments place partial restrictions on the playerÆs actions, while Unaligned lets you do whatever you want without penalty.
So not only is the setting doing everything it can to undermine the concept of role playing, but itÆs giving players a free pass out of it as far as alignment is concerned by allowing Unaligned into the equation. If you play Unaligned, you don't have to worry about such silly and distracting things as being "in-character". Not when there's fighting to do, blood to spill, and treasure to loot.
I have a feeling that the general alignment of the average adventurer is going to shift from Neutral Good/True Neutral to Unaligned, and the general attitude is going to go from in-character "I'm an adventurer, how can I help?", to fourth-wall-breaking, munchkining amorality.
Firstly, if there was ever any doubt in your mind about the direction 4.0 is going, I give you a direct quote from p. 259 of the Players Handbook.
If you had any doubts that 4.0 wasn't destroying the most basic and fundamental concept of Tabletop Role Playing Games, you can let go of them now.
I hope I don't have to elaborate on exactly why this excerpt utterly fails.
Now, moving on to more specific things. Namely, the cosmology. To be blunt, itÆs a mess. I wasnÆt exaggerating when I said it was anything and everything rammed together, as youÆll soon (sadly) note.
The Far Realm: The Far Realm has been utterly nerfed. It used to be some sort of unknown, impossibly removed place beyond the boundaries of things like Law, Chaos, Good, or Evil. The Far Realm was a place of madness, where even the most basic and fundamental rules and laws of reality and the universe hold no sway at all. It was beyond the gods, beyond the Abominations, beyond the Princes, and possibly beyond even Ao Himself. The Far Realm, the alien godminds and primeval forces that hold sway there, and the creatures that hail from it all had a very Lovecraftian feel to them. The ôgod-minds forever lost in contemplations of madnessö and the ôlogic-defying forms of such monsters, so impossible and contradictory as to erode the very sanity of those who witness themö were all clearly inspired by Lovecrafts work, and it showed in the Lore.
Now, though, itÆs much, much different. Almost all Aberrations are now denizens of The Far Realm that immigrated to our world. Everything from Aboleth to the Gibbering Mouther are Far Realm creatures now. Also, The Far Realm is not longer ôbeyond the boundaries of time and space, ensconced between the aeons of realityö. ItÆs not even on another plane. The Far Realm is in the Material Plane in a distant part of the galaxy. ItÆs not an alternate reality or an expression of abstract impossibility and madness made physical. ItÆs just another planet (or system of planets) in space.
The Elemental Planes: The Elemental Planes no longer exist. TheyÆve all been smashed together to create ôThe Plane of Elemental Chaosö, from which all elements and elementals are spawned. The Elemental Lords wage constant war with each other, and elemental beings are the soldiers, magic users, assassins, commanders, and shock troops in this war.
One of the more important changes is that this takes away from one of the celestial races. I say that because the elemental races embroiled in the struggle are Archons. A fire elemental isnÆt a fire elemental anymore. ItÆs a Fire Archon.
Also, almost all prominent settlements and locations in the planes are now located in the Plane of Elemental Chaos. This includes the City of Brass and Sigil.
And the saddest part of all? The Hells exist, but not the Heavens.
Overall, IÆd have to say that this setting as a whole isnÆt very conductive to the concept of The Hero. ItÆs little things scattered here and there, like The Far Realm being (cosmologically speaking) right next to us, the fact that the elements are at constant war with each other, and the distinctive lack of any innately-celestial player races (we have Tieflings, but not Aasimar). But all those little things add up. Like Mageohki said, this isnÆt a very happy setting. Not at all. The concept of the hero has taken a significant hit, angels and other celestial beings have been either drastically reduced in strength or removed entirely, and there is no check to balance out the Evil races and things running amuck.
I weep for the loss of the ability to create a real, genuine Hero. It just isnÆt there anymore. Not with this setting. Unaligned is going to be the big thing now, because all æactualÆ alignments place partial restrictions on the playerÆs actions, while Unaligned lets you do whatever you want without penalty.
So not only is the setting doing everything it can to undermine the concept of role playing, but itÆs giving players a free pass out of it as far as alignment is concerned by allowing Unaligned into the equation. If you play Unaligned, you don't have to worry about such silly and distracting things as being "in-character". Not when there's fighting to do, blood to spill, and treasure to loot.
I have a feeling that the general alignment of the average adventurer is going to shift from Neutral Good/True Neutral to Unaligned, and the general attitude is going to go from in-character "I'm an adventurer, how can I help?", to fourth-wall-breaking, munchkining amorality.
I... want to comment, but frankly, I'm not going to. I'm dropping out of this thread. I shouldn't have posted in the first place, since I really didn't want to argue that much, which is why my posts were fairly weak. And I'm the only one here on my side, which is just no fun anyway.
I HAVE some rebuttals sorta, but I'm not good at organizing my thoughts and setting them out, and I didn't want to break down various points anyway, so I shouldn't have started to.
Also, I want to apologize to Raine, because my original post was, well, just not very nice, although I wasn't aiming it at him specifically.
I HAVE some rebuttals sorta, but I'm not good at organizing my thoughts and setting them out, and I didn't want to break down various points anyway, so I shouldn't have started to.
Also, I want to apologize to Raine, because my original post was, well, just not very nice, although I wasn't aiming it at him specifically.
I'm convinced they waited until he was dead before releasing it. They knew he'd never let them get away with utterly rewriting the setting for no greater reason than an executive decision aimed at getting a larger market, and he has enough influence with the fanbase to utterly wreck both 4.0 and the people involved with the project. If Gary publically decryed 4.0 and threw his support behind those working on "3.75", they'd be ruined.
And I have another post sitting in word. Hopefully I'll have that done sometime tomorrow. It's about the things I like, as opposed to the things I don't. You know, just to give credit where credit is due.
And I have another post sitting in word. Hopefully I'll have that done sometime tomorrow. It's about the things I like, as opposed to the things I don't. You know, just to give credit where credit is due.
You know, this makes me wonder something about the Game World...
How are they not already dead?!
It seems that they have Evil represented, and NMeutral, but no real Good power. And given that an ancient Empire ruled by Tieflings held sway, I'm wondering how the damn thing crumbled and brought about the current states. I mean, you'd think that the Evil would have conquered everything without any real opposing force...
The milestone concept strikes me as something from MMO, but I don't mind it too much. Namely, because I'm gonna steal one. Let some other dumbasses wander around looking for a freaking rock. I'll roll it with me if I have too.
How are they not already dead?!
It seems that they have Evil represented, and NMeutral, but no real Good power. And given that an ancient Empire ruled by Tieflings held sway, I'm wondering how the damn thing crumbled and brought about the current states. I mean, you'd think that the Evil would have conquered everything without any real opposing force...
The milestone concept strikes me as something from MMO, but I don't mind it too much. Namely, because I'm gonna steal one. Let some other dumbasses wander around looking for a freaking rock. I'll roll it with me if I have too.
The most likely explanation for why the Tiefling Empire collapsed, and why the armies of the Abyss havn't taking everything over is that Evil characters are much less likely to work together than good characters. It's actually stated within the books that the various species of Baatezu and Tanar'ri are constantly at war with each other.
Evil across the spectrum doesn't work well together. But Lawful Evil works together just fine (the baatezu run a pretty damn organized Hell), and Neutral Evil isn't that bad at it either (the yugoloths always pull together in the face of outside opposition).
Likewise, good doesn't work that well together either, due to Law-Chaos differences. They're just not violent about it.
Likewise, good doesn't work that well together either, due to Law-Chaos differences. They're just not violent about it.
The fact that the Lords of the Nine have a tendency to obliterate lackies who piss them off may have something to do with it - Mephistopheles (as Molikroth) and the Dark Lord's assault on Beherit come to mind.
Ah, the 'loths...how I miss the days when they had their schemes across the planes instead of being wierd demon-things. What happened to Anthraxus, Mydianchlarus, the General and the other uniques, including the baern?
Ah, the 'loths...how I miss the days when they had their schemes across the planes instead of being wierd demon-things. What happened to Anthraxus, Mydianchlarus, the General and the other uniques, including the baern?
Scratx said:
Who cares? :huh:
Seriously, got nothing else to talk about in 4e? Whether Dragonborn have boobs?
... Man, I don't know whether one should be laughing or crying about that. I know I'm laughing... let 4e take all the immature MMO junkies and leave 3.5 to the mature players.
Seriously, got nothing else to talk about in 4e? Whether Dragonborn have boobs?
... Man, I don't know whether one should be laughing or crying about that. I know I'm laughing... let 4e take all the immature MMO junkies and leave 3.5 to the mature players.
I reserve judgment until I actually play it. Until then, let me say one thing. No one is FORCING you to play. Every DM I have played with uses the rules as guidelines, not ironclad rules.
You don't even have to use the official lore really.
From what I can see, 4th ed had to consolidate a lot. It took away a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that it cant change. Play it first before you make snap judgments.
I went a bit overboard, I admit. I was bashing the immaturity apparent in having such a discussion.
If I ever play 4e, I'll probably have to pretend it's not DnD. I don't have anything against the rules as they are, I just have something against them being DnD. In other words, they would be perfectly fine to me... if they were not being presented as the replacement to DnD 3.5.
I see it as a step forward, and a running spree backwards compared to third edition. Obviously, it's my opinion, so feel free to disregard it if you don't agree with me.
My apologies for any perceived slight.
If I ever play 4e, I'll probably have to pretend it's not DnD. I don't have anything against the rules as they are, I just have something against them being DnD. In other words, they would be perfectly fine to me... if they were not being presented as the replacement to DnD 3.5.
I see it as a step forward, and a running spree backwards compared to third edition. Obviously, it's my opinion, so feel free to disregard it if you don't agree with me.
My apologies for any perceived slight.
Nothing against you, or anyone in the thread, its just that it was starting to devolve into something I see on WoW forums, IE complaining, and nothing but complaining.
Ya know, where I read the pilot manual, I was excited about 4th ed. It sounded like there was going to be actual CHOICES in battle, not lets swing my sword and hope it hits.
I seriously want to play it, but I cant right now. *Shrugs* I could care less about the lore really, what I want to do is play a game.
Ya know, where I read the pilot manual, I was excited about 4th ed. It sounded like there was going to be actual CHOICES in battle, not lets swing my sword and hope it hits.
I seriously want to play it, but I cant right now. *Shrugs* I could care less about the lore really, what I want to do is play a game.