What do you consider complex about 4e combat? I would wager your biggest sticking point is the need for a combat grid and tokens or miniatures and I'll admit that it'd be more trouble than it's worth to try to play 4e without one. OTOH, aside from that I think 4e combat runs fairly simply.
Combat grids and miniatures are a 100% turn-off for me. As soon as those are present, my imagination gets hi-jacked and replaced with a chess-like game (and I don't like chess). That's not for me. At all.
In my 30 years of playing D&D, I've always essentially ran combats according to the 4-page combat section in the Holmes rulebook (though we usually use initiative--1d6, high roll wins). Regardless of one's opinion of 4E's combat, it is certainly more complex and more time-consuming than Holmses's combat. I am a lazy old cuss, and I have zero interest in anything more complex, time-consuming, "realistic", "fun", etc. than combat in Holmes or in, say, 1st edition Gamma World.
I hope I'm not coming across as nasty. That is certainly not my intent. It's just that I am completely baffled by WotC's inability after 10 years of owning D&D to make a simple (yet complete) D&D game that normal people can understand and will want to understand. Look at the B/X D&D rulebooks. Look at 1st edition Gamma World. Look at Star Frontiers. Look at Marvel Super Heroes. Etc. Each of these games fit in a single box, and each had no more than 128 (and usually 64 or fewer) pages of rules. Yet each of these games is a stand-alone game that one could play all by itself for decades on end. None of them was a 1- or 2-level wonder, like all of WotC's intoductory D&D boxed sets. All of WotC's intro D&D sets are essentially advertisements for their "core" D&D rules that are several hundreds of pages long. Ugh. No thanks.
I'm not one of those "I hate WotC no matter what." I want to like the current edition of D&D. I want them to make a $20 boxed set that's all I would ever need to play for decades. WotC is ignoring the casual gamer, the person who might like to play D&D for 2 or 3 hours per month, then forget about it until the urge to play returns a month or so later. What about people who just want to play D&D and not make a hobby of it? I think that's the single biggest part of D&D's "image" problem: People (with some justification) think that D&D isn't a casual game like Monopoly, but rather a way of life.
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #16 on Sept 13, 2010, 2:58pm »
No, you're totally fine! Like I said, if you don't like using a grid and minis, then 4e combat probably isn't for you. And again, part of why I like these forums so much is that people here seem to understand that the difference between the different editions of D&D are more matters of taste and preference than objectively being better or worse.
One thing I specifically agree with you about is that 4e is missing a "sweet spot" of rules from say level 1-5 or so that'd be more manageable than the full-on game, but still more fulfilling than any of the more recent intro sets.
Another thing I think could be interesting is if someone could convert some of the more precise movement and placement rules of 4e into something less concrete and more fluid. Maybe use more verbally descriptive ranges like Melee, Second Rank, and Ranged.
themattjon Level 5 Thaumaturgist member is offline
Frank Frazetta's The Silver Warrior (1972)
Joined: Jul 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 296 Location: Midcoast Region, Maine (USA) Karma: 9
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #17 on Sept 13, 2010, 3:55pm »
Grids and minis don't bother me at all. In fact, that's one of the few things I DO like about 4E. What I don't get is why you need a dozen classes where just two or three will do. Why all the Powers, Feats and Skills when all you need are Saving Throws and Abilities? Your character sheet shouldn't look like a shipping/receiving form with attached punch cards, but rather everything should be able to fit on a single index card. COMPLEX. That's what I get from 4E. If they'd just cut the rules down to, say, 96 pages for the WHOLE game, instead of half a dozen 200 page books, I'd be happier with it Still haven't given up yet! Just don't have time right now to figure out all the formulas and get used to several phases per adventure. I just wanna play.
Finarvyn Administrator Dungeon Master member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 4,674 Location: Near Chicago Karma: 178
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #18 on Sept 13, 2010, 4:59pm »
I never played miniatures-based D&D until Milton Bradley's HeroQuest came out in the 80's, but I'm having fun with moving little dudes around the battleboard. Kind of neat, actually. What I don't like are all of the rules for "pushes" or "slides" or things like that. Maybe I'll get the hang of that stuff, maybe not.
And I agree that it's odd that WotC has never figured out that just reprinting some of the old classics (which are already written for them) would make a large slice of the old-timers a lot happier. It's like they just throw it in our faces and try to tell us that our game isn't cool anymore.
Still, I'm finding that I don't hate 4E like I thought I might. I would prefer a much thinner set of rules, but the game does have some good parts. My players never liked 1st level characters but 4E 1st level characters are more like 3rd or so in an older edition, and they get to do more during a battle and they like that part. I can't really improvise an adventure yet, and I'll be darned if I can figure out whether an encounter is balanced or not, but it has been kind of fun playing 4E so far.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
themattjon Level 5 Thaumaturgist member is offline
Frank Frazetta's The Silver Warrior (1972)
Joined: Jul 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 296 Location: Midcoast Region, Maine (USA) Karma: 9
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #19 on Sept 13, 2010, 5:07pm »
As has been shown with Pathfinder, 3E and 4E are great games in their own right. But not "really" D&D, which is where most old folks have their issues, I think. D&D should be like Monopoly or Texas Hold 'em or Chess: don't keep changing the rules, just present them in updated ways and with updated graphics/packaging. D&D, IMHO, has become a failure as a game, because too many people are trying to make it different than it was when it was first published in '74. Just leave it alone and let it stand on it's own. Then call 4E something else and market it as the "video gamer's D&D" or something. Unfortunately, it's all about the brand name and the benjamins. I'm hoping to get back into playing more of this Starter Set towards the weekend and will post my thoughts when I can.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
I never played miniatures-based D&D until Milton Bradley's HeroQuest came out in the 80's, but I'm having fun with moving little dudes around the battleboard. Kind of neat, actually. What I don't like are all of the rules for "pushes" or "slides" or things like that. Maybe I'll get the hang of that stuff, maybe not.
Face-to-face, my players *want* the little dudes to move around. Personally, as a DM, I'd just as soon keep everything in our imaginations, but that ship has sailed with my group.
I'm a bit strange, in that all I have are a bunch of unpainted Martian Metals 15mm mini's from back in the 70's and early 80's. My players have no, no, desire to buy any minis of their own, just use mine. You simply can't find 15 mm figures any more so they couldn't buy any way. 15mm mini's work with 1/2" squares or 5/8" hexes so all of my "battle maps" are on that scale, and that means everything has to be custom drawn by me...or scanned and reduced by 50%.
Recently, I've used really scaled back Castles & Crusades and online 3rd edition SRD, and I mean really scaled back. Ascending AC, weapon damage as written, standard prices and advancement, but without most everything else rules-wise. Mostly DM rulings and "try it and see if it works." [As an aside, I had a youngster playing a wizard who got really creative with utility type low level spells and I let him run with it...the better he described what he wanted to do the lower I'd set a challenge (I didn't tell him what the number needed was of course) and tell him to "roll that d20!" He pulled off things like using Prestidigitation to cause a vase on a mantelpiece to fall onto a Goblin's head (stunned the monster for a round and gave him time to run and one of his fighter companions to cover his retreat).]
As for the slides and moves...I've been doing that since the 70's...but not as RULES. I'd never do that with rules! A fighter describes what they are doing, "I bash the Orc with my sword while trying to shove it back with my shield." If the player hits, they can do damage and move their opponent...if I decide it is reasonable...and of course the monsters are doing it too! The "thief" character might say, "Julio, dives between the Giant's legs, somersaulting to his feet behind him ready to deliver a back stab!", and I decide, on the fly, what it takes for him to do it, tell him to roll and see what happens.
I guess I've been running an almost completely Page 42 game all along! I highly recommend it it one and all!
Quote:
Still, I'm finding that I don't hate 4E like I thought I might. I would prefer a much thinner set of rules, but the game does have some good parts. My players never liked 1st level characters but 4E 1st level characters are more like 3rd or so in an older edition, and they get to do more during a battle and they like that part. I can't really improvise an adventure yet, and I'll be darned if I can figure out whether an encounter is balanced or not, but it has been kind of fun playing 4E so far.
Yeah, my one big take away from 4E is more capable 1st level characters with a much flatter rise in power as they go up in levels. As for planning encounters and such, I had hopes, but like 3 before it, 4 is a disappointment to me.
BTW, I did buy the 4E Red Box on Saturday, but "real life" has intervened and I haven't had a chance to do anything but take the plastic wrap off and look inside yet. The tokens gave me some interesting thoughts, but I don't know if I want to go to 1" squares or to stay with our 1/2" ones. Hum, maybe use the MapTools token maker utility, scale the images down to 1/2", cut them out and mount them on metal washers...that might be a good way to get a bunch of monsters to use with my old MM 15's. I am also intrigued with the concept of Power Cards (or spell cards really as I'll stick with old school Vancian magic) and have used them before (give a Wizard a few index cards with their spells on them, as they cast their spells, they "play" their cards, and they go off the table when the spells effects are used up, when the wizard rests and studies they get cards back...so that's not new. The maps on that poster sized sheet are...meh!...to me anyway, and I haven't had a chance to dig into the books yet. Hopefully this coming weekend.
Kelmult Dwarven Fgt-2 Olaf, the very lucky...so far! Human Fgt-2 Yusuf Kamal(Chainmail & Shield: AC 4, MV 6, HD 1, XP: 0, hp 6. #AT 1. 1d8 Sword, 1d6 Bow, 1d4 dagger x 2. Lucky Amulet, rations, waterskin x 2. GP: 0. [gold necklace & jewelry case with a few silver rings & bracelets...est. 70 gp])
Kyrel Level 6 Magician Defender vs Spam member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 488 Location: Florida Suncoast Karma: 13
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #24 on Sept 15, 2010, 9:53am »
I too picked up the new starter set last week, along with "Heroes of the Fallen Lands" & the "Rules Compendium." I'm currently doing my d**nedest to learn the ins & outs of the system, & finding it more difficult for my brain to grasp than I originally anticipated. Once I do get it down, however, I have plans to tweak it for a more "rules-lite" game. I'll keep everyone posted on my ongoing experiment. Please be patient with me - this might take awhile...
I'm not one of those "I hate WotC no matter what." I want to like the current edition of D&D. I want them to make a $20 boxed set that's all I would ever need to play for decades. WotC is ignoring the casual gamer, the person who might like to play D&D for 2 or 3 hours per month, then forget about it until the urge to play returns a month or so later. What about people who just want to play D&D and not make a hobby of it? I think that's the single biggest part of D&D's "image" problem: People (with some justification) think that D&D isn't a casual game like Monopoly, but rather a way of life.
Yes! This is what I can't figure out why wouldn't they want to market a game for everyone rather than create a niche subculture?
I'm not one of those "I hate WotC no matter what." I want to like the current edition of D&D. I want them to make a $20 boxed set that's all I would ever need to play for decades. WotC is ignoring the casual gamer, the person who might like to play D&D for 2 or 3 hours per month, then forget about it until the urge to play returns a month or so later. What about people who just want to play D&D and not make a hobby of it? I think that's the single biggest part of D&D's "image" problem: People (with some justification) think that D&D isn't a casual game like Monopoly, but rather a way of life.
Yes! This is what I can't figure out why wouldn't they want to market a game for everyone rather than create a niche subculture?
Maybe they think that only a niche subculture will buy their game supplements and won't be happy with just the core 3.
Maybe they think that only a niche subculture will buy their game supplements and won't be happy with just the core 3.
You're probably right, but WotC doesn't have to treat it as an either-or. They could have two things:
1) The $20 complete-in-one-box (like 1st edition Gamma World, Star Frontiers, B/X together, etc.) D&D game that people could play on its own for decades. This would be for most people, including those with a casual and occasional interest in playing a game of D&D for a couple of hours.
2) The plethora of books, modules, supplements, novels, miniatures, internet stuff, etc. for those who make a hobby out of D&D.
The two would be at least as compatible as, say, B/X D&D is with AD&D.
Falconer Level 9 Sorcerer Cleric of OD&D member is offline
OD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 1,340 Location: Chicago, IL Karma: 51
Re: [4E] D&D Starter Set « Reply #28 on Sept 27, 2010, 11:43am »
Yes, I have long thought that a the model of the Basic/boxed/toy-store/perennial/casual/Monopoly style game plus the Advanced/hardcover/hobby-store/expandable/Starfleet Battles style game is the way to go. BUT, it is the former that should be the focus of the business, as a lite and accessible but nonetheless complete game, i.e. not just as a gateway into the latter. I say it should be the focus, because the Monopoly model, where every household has one whether they play it once a month or once a year, seems more financially and culturally satisfying. Even if it fell from favor, Monopoly will not die out completely, not for hundreds of years or more. Can you say that of Dungeons & Dragons?
Where I don’t agree with you is that I insist that the mass-market Dungeons & Dragons boxed game should actually should be the classic game that everyone knows and remembers and likes how it was. Tweaks over time are inevitable, but something of similar scope and approach as the ’81 Basic + Expert sets, or the White Box + Greyhawk, is definitely what I have in mind.
A man may do both. For not we but those who come after will make the legends of our time. The green earth, say you? That is a mighty matter of legend, though you tread it under the light of day! —J.R.R. Tolkien
Yes, I have long thought that a the model of the Basic/boxed/toy-store/perennial/casual/Monopoly style game plus the Advanced/hardcover/hobby-store/expandable/Starfleet Battles style game is the way to go.
I'm not so sure about that. I think the Basic-Advanced dichotomy proved problematic, since it essentially created two different games with two different rulesets. In some instances I scratch my head when I see stuff in "Basic" which are more advanced than "Advanced" D&D.
Core rules which can be found in a single book or a single box is perhaps the best way to go and everything on top of that can be optional. But the optional book will only supplement never substitute the "core".
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
Author
![[avatar]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_lpL870wV2A4/SSi3dCn1SZI/AAAAAAAACl4/XuB-bD4_W4Q/s400/carcosa.png "[avatar]")
Logged![[avatar]](http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/themattjon/TheSilverWarrior.jpg "[avatar]")
![[yim]](http://images.proboards.com/yim.gif "[yim]")
![[aim]](http://images.proboards.com/aim.gif "[aim]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/finarvyn/avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
![[avatar]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4qI6i7wKX1c/SdZoRveimpI/AAAAAAAAADI/N5Grto0YRg4/S220/Mage.JPG "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://content.turbine.com/sites/compendium.ddo.com/images/uploaded/a/ac/Mindflayer.png "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.artistsuk.co.uk/acatalog/frank_frazetta_atlantis.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://mux.net/~ulmo/ThorinII.jpg "[avatar]")
![[icq]](http://images.proboards.com/icq.gif "[icq]")