Ari ([info]mouseferatu) wrote,
@ 2008-01-27 21:10:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: tired

A matter of opinion
I already posted this on ENWorld, but I thought I'd do so again here. This all about D&D 4E. If you're not a gamer, feel free to skip. :-)

I've finally been told that it's okay to talk about my opinions in a little more detail.

As most of you already know, I've been both playtesting and working on 4E material. I can't say what, of course. But it does mean that I've had the rules for months now, and have been playing in an ongoing 4E campaign with a group of NDAed playtesters.

What I am about to offer are my true feelings. Anyone who feels like dismissing what I have to say because of any assumed bias is cordially invited to stop reading now.

When I first heard about 4E, I knew I'd have to learn the rules so I could keep working. But I was fully prepared to do so only for professional reasons, and keep playing 3.5 in my own campaigns.

That has, thankfully, turned out to be utterly unnecessary. I am absolutely in love with the 4E system, to the point where I'm not sure I would even be willing to play 3.5 again. Seriously; I like the system that much more.

The mechanics are more intuitive, the characters more mechanically interesting and--here's the big one--I haven't found D&D combat this exciting in years. I'm having a blast with this campaign.

Are there a few things I'd like to see done differently? I think that goes without saying. There's no such thing as a perfect system for anyone. But on a scale of 1 to 10, measuring to what extent I like and agree with all the changes, 4E easily rates an 8.5 to 9.

I'm sold--not just as a writer, but as a fan of the game who's been playing since 1983.



(47 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]d20hound
2008-01-28 03:10 am UTC (link)
I want to reach through the interwebz and kiss you, Ari.

I burned out on D&D nearly 2 years ago. The only thing I burned out on worse is (listening to / reading) people bitching about games and game companies. Glad to hear you are loving the game. Sounds like a lot of fun.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 03:21 am UTC (link)
You know, I've sort of--not completely, but in a way--put my finger on what I like so much.

It feels like they've managed to create a complete game that doesn't feel cluttered. In a way, it's a feeling I haven't had since the Red Box basic set.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that

A) 4E is as simple as Basic, or
B) That Basic didn't have a great many flaws and mechanical problems.

But I believe that Basic D&D did a good job of separating out what did and did not need hardwired mechanics. I don't need ranks in "tailor" on my character sheet, if that's never going to have a mechanical impact on gameplay.

I'm a huge believer in roleplaying. I don't want my D&D to be pure combat simulation. But I've also, after the mechanics glut of 3.5, come to realize that if something doesn't have a mechanical impact, it doesn't need to appear in the mechanics--and that doesn't make it any less real to the character. Roleplayers will roleplay because they want to; people who don't want to RP won't no matter what the rules say.

4E manages, IMO, to give you exactly the mechanics you need, without giving excessive mechanics to what you don't, in a way that no prior edition has managed.

Edited at 2008-01-28 03:25 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]goloban
2008-01-28 05:34 pm UTC (link)
Aw hell, you've been playtesting all this time??? Jeez... Rhiawolf and I have been patiently waiting for WotC to include us freelancers and finally decided that they'd forgotten us entirely. And we signed NDAs and everything. Sheesh...

That aside, everything I've heard is great and I desperately want to start playing, though I am bitterly disappointed that the OGL is going to be so restrictive and essentially limit publishers to supporting D&D and not producing anything new and innovative like M&M, Iron Heroes and the like. It's a shame and I wish they'd continued to be more open with the license. Oh well, you can't have everything...

Feel free to drop me or Rhia a line some time... It's good to see you're still in fighting trim ;)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]jdigital
2008-01-30 03:48 am UTC (link)
4E manages, IMO, to give you exactly the mechanics you need, without giving excessive mechanics to what you don't, in a way that no prior edition has managed.

This is precisely how I had hoped it would be. When I looked at the 3.5 rules to ask myself where improvements could be made, the biggest thing was that some of the rules were needlessly complicated, or didn't need to be there, to the point where as a DM I began to say, "Forget those rules."

I simplified grappling, because it didn't need to be more complicated than other fighting. I never used the crafting time rules, because I'm the Dungeon Master and I say the suit of armour takes you a month to craft.

I'm expecting 4e to be much like Team Fortress 2: they simplified the game, they made changes, they even took out significant features, but ultimately this all works to create a game that is superior to its predecessor in ways that even most hardcore players of the old game didn't expect.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mgrasso
2008-01-28 03:17 am UTC (link)
Yay! We're all very excited (and impatient) to start here as well. The D&D Minis preview has me very intrigued about powers for PCs and NPCs... oh, hell, I just want my hands on those books, soon! :)

(Reply to this)


[info]pats_quinade
2008-01-28 03:20 am UTC (link)
Sweet. There's a team of BioWareans ready and eager to start up a 4E game as soon as it comes out. If there's a way for a system to be broken, the powergamers in the Design department can usually figure it out. :)

(Reply to this)


[info]matt_m_mcelroy
2008-01-28 03:21 am UTC (link)
That is one hell of an endorsement. Your opinion is one I value quite a bit.

(Reply to this)

The Savage Sword of Meepo.
[info]grimmbear
2008-01-28 03:26 am UTC (link)
I can say that [info]wizardru and the rest of our gaming group are looking forward to 4E. I already know what I want to play. A Dragonborne Warlord or Paladin.

Yes.. I'm an obsessed geek fanboy.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: The Savage Sword of Meepo.
[info]grimmbear
2008-01-28 03:28 am UTC (link)
Oh.. and I'm Argent Silvermage on ENWorld.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]eyebeams
2008-01-28 03:35 am UTC (link)
Non-disparagement clause? I know Greenwood's signed one.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 03:38 am UTC (link)
You know something? I don't feel any need to address that question. If I don't care for something that people I know/like have worked on, I keep my mouth shut about it, rather than disparage it on a public forum. Any complaints or criticisms I have to offer them, I do in private.

If I didn't like 4E, I'd not have brought it up at all, regardless of any other considerations.

Edited at 2008-01-28 03:51 am UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]scarletboi
2008-01-28 05:49 pm UTC (link)
Why is it so much easier to believe that something sucks and/or something sinister is going on than to believe that someone is being sincere in praise?

I hate that it's just not "cool" to be positive anymore.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ghostwind
2008-01-28 03:54 am UTC (link)
Good to hear, Ari. Now if I can only see the actual license to use the game, I'd be even happier.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 03:55 am UTC (link)
Heh. 'fraid I can't help you there. Wish I could; I'm actually really curious as to how the license works myself.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]dungeon_grrrl
2008-01-28 05:37 am UTC (link)
While I still have serious concerns, you do make me a little less worried.

Also, I certainly would never accuse you of making nice comments if it wasn't how you felt. I'm sorry if anyone else has. That's... rude.

Insulting, even.

thanks for sharing what you can, and I look forwad to your work regardless of what form it's in.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 05:44 am UTC (link)
While I still have serious concerns, you do make me a little less worried.

Oh, I'd expect anyone who had concerns to still have 'em. :-) I'm not looking for anyone to buy the game solely on my word, and I'm not making anyone promises. Some people will like the game, some won't. My opinion is just that--one man's opinion. :-)

I'm sorry if anyone else has. That's... rude.

Yeah, I'm afraid it's happened more than once. Apparently, as long as I agree with everyone, my opinion is justified, but as soon as I express a liking for what some people dislike, suddenly I'm nothing but a mouthpiece, as far as they're concerned. :-/

God forbid I just happen to disagree with them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]pats_quinade
2008-01-28 06:42 pm UTC (link)
It happened in the thread P-kitty started at ENWorld. I thought that you were very mature about it.

"I'm not saying you're a corporate shill, Mouse. I'm just saying that you're being very positive, and many people who are positive are corporate shills. Please understand where I'm coming from... you corporate shill. Not that I'm accusing you of anything."

Ah, passive aggression. One of the big reasons my participation in ENWorld is more limited these days.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]evildmguy
2008-01-29 03:32 am UTC (link)
That's awful!

I used to participate a lot more on enworld but like you said, this passiave aggressive stuff is awful! I usually read a few posts, on the negative ones, and then skip the rest. I don't need it.

I am sorry that anyone has to face such harsh critism, especially when it's people that have given me thousands of hours of enjoyment!

Sorry to babble at you.

edg

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]viking_cat
2008-01-28 04:10 am UTC (link)
Ari, I linked this on EN world. Hope you don't mind.

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=4017854#post4017854

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 04:11 am UTC (link)
Not at all. If I wanted it to remain private, I'd have friends-locked it. :-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]prodigal
2008-01-28 04:17 am UTC (link)
If it's anything like Star Wars Saga Edition, I will enjoy the hell out of 4e whenever my group adopts it.

(Reply to this)


[info]fax_celestis
2008-01-28 04:50 am UTC (link)
This quells a lot of my personal fears. Not that I have many of them to begin with, but it helps.

(Reply to this)


[info]joecrow
2008-01-28 06:10 am UTC (link)
PLANT!

...oh, wait. Never mind. Heh.

Actually, while the new ruleset is looking like a vast improvement over 3.5, I'm more excited about the default worldsetting. I'm digging the hell out of the new cosmology, and the sketchy "points of light"/"endless series of shattered empires" schtick is tickling my DM bone.

As, for the new system stuff, I've been running mostly Storyteller stuff for the last couple of years; haven't run a d20 game since I picked up the new WoD system. I'm getting seriously tempted by the stuff I'm hearing about 4th, though.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 06:12 am UTC (link)
Oh, yes. I'm a huge fan of the new default setting.

(Well, it's not really a "setting" per se, any more than 2E or 3E had a true default setting. It's more like core setting assumptions.)

But yes, I'm really liking nearly all I've heard of it. I'm having the urge to run an "out of the book" campaign for the first time in ages. :-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]artbroken
2008-01-28 06:50 am UTC (link)
I await the inevitable screams of "turncoat!" and accusations of brainwashing on the ENWorld forums.

(Reply to this)


[info]richgreen01
2008-01-28 07:17 am UTC (link)
Thanks for this! It's good to hear that it plays as well as I'm hoping. I just hope it stays uncluttered after the first few sourcebooks....

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-01-28 07:20 am UTC (link)
So if 4e is an 8.5 or a 9 what is 3.5? 3.0?

Just curious. From your post it sounds like you think it's a big improvement, but liked 3.5 enough to consider continuing playing it. So it would be, what... a 6?

Just curious.

Graf

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 07:33 am UTC (link)
Well, I wasn't rating the game, so much as I was rating my feelings on the specific changes between editions.

But let's see...

3.5 is a solid game, don't get me wrong. I don't regret any of the time I spent working on it, or writing for it. But even before the announcement of 4E, I'd long come to the conclusion that the game was more cluttered and more complex than it needed to be. I had a whole mess of house rules I wanted to use to try to simplify it, but it was never worth the hassle of trying to get the group to do so.

Also, it's very hard to compare the two, if only because 3E has almost a decade of expansions and supplements, making it not only a very different game than 4E, but a very different game than it was when it first started.

But taking all that into consideration...

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd probably rate 3.5 (at this point) a 6.5 to 7 or so. Some real good, solid stuff, but a lot that I'm glad to see gone or changed.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]colecash
2008-01-28 10:53 pm UTC (link)
What other existing games would you rate above the 7 range?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]gamescribe
2008-01-28 07:21 am UTC (link)
Ah yes, the old "You're a corporate shill for liking something big and popular" critique. Hope you don't have much trouble handling it. ;)

Also: Won't it be great to be able to talk about the friggin' game in just a few short months?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]mouseferatu
2008-01-28 07:29 am UTC (link)
It'll be fantastic. :-)

Of course, I'm also waiting for the inevitable "You said you liked the game, but I didn't! Therefore you lied to us!" posts. ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]allamistako
2008-01-28 10:15 am UTC (link)
Well, a lot of the "mechanics glut" problem came from the huge amounts of suplements that WotC released - I guess that five years from now at the latest, we'll be hearing the same about 4.x, right? ;)

Be that as is, it sound's like you found yourself a good game ;) - me, I'm still drooling over my Exalted 2nd edit, and I'll be running some Warhammer tonight :)

(Reply to this)


[info]mhacdebhandia
2008-01-28 12:41 pm UTC (link)
Thanks for sharing, Ari. I respect your opinion, so I'm glad to hear you like it so much!

(Reply to this)


[info]akumadaimyo
2008-01-28 01:12 pm UTC (link)
So how are Tieflings in the new edition? I am so godamn tired of idiots saying 4th ed is geared towards powergamers when those idiots are ignorant of the fact that Tieflings and other powerfull races have been scaled down in power in that they don't get all their abilities at lvl 1 and in fact have to EARN their powers via levels or racial feats. Not every Tiefling will have Darkness anymore.

So was their any problem with the newer PHB races? I for one love Tieflings and want to play a Tiefling rogue in 4th ed. It's one of my favorite Race/Class combos.

(Reply to this)

Exciting combat
[info]thornir
2008-01-28 03:19 pm UTC (link)
I know you are probably very restricted by the NDA, but you mention that combat is exciting. That sounds great.

What I'm curious about is the pacing of combat. From the tiny crumbs us poor non-playtesters have been given, my concern has been there are a lot of "situational" modifiers (if you are within 30 feet of the elf you gain bonus X) that could cause a lot of "oh, wait!" moments. Taking into account the fact that you are still learning the game from a playtest ruleset, do you think this could be an issue, especially as other rulebooks are published and may add more of these types of modifiers?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Exciting combat
[info]agd
2008-02-13 07:08 pm UTC (link)
I'll jump in here since I'm in Mouseferatu's playtest group. I won't say anything about the game itself. What I will say is that I always play simple characters. I hate all those "oh, wait!" moments too and the rules that cause them but I love this game! I'm having so much fun.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]jonnorthwood
2008-01-28 05:11 pm UTC (link)
I nipped over here from [info]oakthorne's journal, and you've helped to set my mind a bit more at ease. I've been playing since I got my first wee set of paperbound books for my birthday in 1976 ... good heavens, I've been playing for almost thirty-two years ... and I've both loved and hated things about each edition as it comes out. Because he's been chatting with some of the developers and playtesters, I've been listening to my GM hint at all sorts of things we might see changed when it comes out. To be honest, based on his statements, I've been growing more and more confused and concerned about the changes he's mentioned, and I was fully prepared to unabashedly loathe the new system.

Thank you for giving a straightforward opinion, and not trying to be coy about what may and may not be appearing or changing. If only because I have been playing so long, I was willing to give it a shot; however, having someone who's actually working with the mechanics while they're playing the new system say that it's hands-down better than 3.5 gives me a tiny ray of hope for how well the system plays. I'm still concerned, mind you, and likely will be until I get my hands on the rules myself, but I'd be lying if I didn't say I was relieved at hearing the system doesn't gut everything that made the game fun, and pushes role-playing back into the forefront.

(Reply to this)


[info]josephbrowning
2008-01-28 06:00 pm UTC (link)
I know I don't want to work with a system I don't like, so your opinion is a positive for me. A welcome bit of good news, IMO.

(Reply to this)

Important detail missing
[info]derumi
2008-01-28 06:18 pm UTC (link)
Yes, but do the elves look beautiful once again?

(thank you for the review, btw)

(Reply to this)


[info]gmskarka
2008-01-28 09:21 pm UTC (link)
Thanks, man. Yours is the first specific opinion that I've heard that carries weight with me.

(Reply to this)


(Anonymous)
2008-01-29 03:24 am UTC (link)
Wow.

That's awesome.

I won't bore you with my details but I am back to DND3.5 recently and I absolutely cannot wait for 4E! I probably won't play it right away but I love reading the blogs of the designers. The preview books were awesome to read the excitement that everyone is feeling about it.

Thanks for sharing!

edg

(Reply to this)


[info]evildmguy
2008-01-29 03:28 am UTC (link)
Wow.

That's awesome.

I won't bore you with my details but I am back to DND3.5 recently and I absolutely cannot wait for 4E! I probably won't play it right away but I love reading the blogs of the designers. The preview books were awesome to read the excitement that everyone is feeling about it.

Thanks for sharing!

edg

(Reply to this)


[info]tharian
2008-01-29 04:32 am UTC (link)
Thank you for posting this. I've been really intrigued by the snippets that have come out in the two preview books and have recently felt so ... uninspired by 3.5 recently. Hearing this helps me look forward to 4th ed. Of course, I'm also wondering about porting previous adventures to the new ruleset, so maybe that's what is helping get me excited as well.

Again, thanks for the info.

(Reply to this)

To my Good Friend, Writer and Guy I believe in, here's to you Ari!
[info]nightfall_sage
2008-01-29 05:12 am UTC (link)
While I'm not 100% sold on doing 4th edition or even supporting WotC, I am in the business (and the belief system) of supporting those I believe in. I believe in you Ari Marmell. While I, NF, might have had doubts and still do have doubts, my initial skepticism in terms what you are saying Ari is this: I had a 10 second bout of doubt that dispelled when I thought this. "No. Ari is no shill." I know it because I have seen it in your writing style.

Do I still think 4th edition, as it stands in terms of implementation and even perhaps decision making at management levels, needs work? Yes. But that will not dissuade me in believing that if Ari thinks 4th edition is good, then it's probably true. So while I might not fully embrace 4th edition, (even now), I embrace the man that stands behind it.

Because Ari Marmell is no shill and is a man's man.

(Reply to this)


[info]jdigital
2008-01-30 02:42 am UTC (link)
That's what I was hoping to hear. There are a lot of people who say they'll hold out to 3.5, but these are the players who can't see right now how 3e could be improved upon.

That said, I managed to miss out on the playtest (despite my efforts), so unlike yourself, my faith in fourth edition is largely powered by optimism. I suppose I can wait eight months.

(Reply to this)


[info]jlasala
2008-01-30 05:30 pm UTC (link)
Appreciate sharing these insights, Ari. It definitely ups my interest a notch or two. I'm already on board 4E, but I haven't decided how nervous to be about it. :)

(Reply to this)


[info]innercaine
2008-02-01 04:29 am UTC (link)
Thanks for sharing, it's great to hear from someone who actually can speak from experience and not speculation.

(Reply to this)


(47 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…