d20 Fourth Edition Review

   OK: I’ve read through d20 Fourth Edition – or at least the Player’s Handbook, Dungeon Master’s Guide, and a fair chunk of the Monster Manual – a couple of times now, played around a bit with making some characters, and tried it out. Ergo, it’s time for a bit of a review. There are a thousand other reviews out there, but here’s mine – and I may spread it around the net a bit to help provoke some comments. If there are any major elements I missed, I’d like to hear about them and revise this bit appropriately:

   Fourth edition looks like a decent game system for tactical skirmishes and a semi-satisfactory one for noncombat encounter mechanics – although that end suffers badly from the limited number of skills available and the fact that the one or two characters who are good at any particular skill can be expected to have quite similar scores. Expect each character in a group to find a quick excuse to use their two or three best skills during any skill-based encounter. The stock excuse list won’t take long to compile.

   Sadly, it’s essentially crippled as far as anything else goes. With everything – including the damage from environmental effects and exotic maneuvers – tied to level, only the special abilities and skill selections really distinguish characters – and there really aren’t very many of either. The game handles world development by ignoring it: none of the parts of the world really interact, there “aren’t very many adventurer’s about” (except when someone wants to bring in a new character, in which case anything and everything is instantly available) and thus the impact of their abilities on the setting need not be considered. Even death is no real penalty, so combat carries no real risk – and combat without real risk is only exciting for so long.

   For their part, the monsters are not supposed to attack anyone who goes down – despite the fact that the healers in the group are almost certain to get them back up again momentarily. Evidently their goal is to make sure that the player characters all get to fight – not to win or even to survive.

   There’s no trace of a mechanism for researching or balancing new abilities, no origin suggested for the ones that exist, no lost secrets of particular items to quest after, no training to seek out, no ecology, no economy, few or no special abilities of use in day-to-day life, NPC’s are virtually ignored, and – for example – you can’t try to grab a handful of dirt and throw it in someone’s eyes without the appropriate special ability. Heaven forbid I should be looking for strategic planning or – horror of horrors – a flexible magic system. I certainly can’t afford to let the players go off anywhere they feel like when I need to make sure I have an appropriately detailed encounter map ready in advance.

   This is a world of magic. My character should have MORE options and abilities than I do in a fight and in their lives. What in the game world STOPS me from throwing dirt in someone’s eyes?

   You can’t even readily add such options: given the stress on “budgeting” encounters, you (1) cannot make a character less focused on combat without unbalancing the encounters, (2) cannot make a character more focused on skills without unbalancing the non-combat encounters, (3) cannot make a character who controls or influences creatures or NPC’s since this will – again – unbalance BOTH kinds of encounters, and (4) cannot even add breadth to a character’s abilities by adding noncombat abilities. After all, since the number of abilities is fixed, and you can’t reduce a characters effectiveness in encounters without unbalancing the system, adding powers that were useful outside the encounter system would require upping the effectiveness of their remaining encounter abilities – meaning that (1) their abilities would be notably better than those available to other characters (annoying every other player) and (2) that they could opt to focus on those improved combat or skill-encounter abilities and thus overshadow the other characters.

   Given the reliance on encounter budgeting, I just don’t see any way to make anything but variations on combat builds work. If you see a good way, let me know; I’d be pleased, but surprised.

   Overall, if I want a few throwaway encounters, and a good fight or two, Fourth Edition is a good choice for an evenings gaming – but I can’t see it becoming much more than that, or much chance of keeping the players interested in a fourth edition game for very long. Given the lack of clear guidelines for letting the players come up with their own new material, adding more character individualization for the players will either mean enormous amounts of work from the game master or constantly spending more money on new books – and I’ve got plenty of other good games which don’t require either.

   What made Dungeons and Dragons – in several different incarnations – appealing to many gamers was the way in which it lent itself to the creation of fantasy worlds. The background and depth of those worlds made them fascinating, and the players lent them vitality. Fourth Edition is a nice tactical system, good for small-scale combats and dungeon-crawling, and specified encounters – and I may use it that way – but I really was hoping for a lot more than that.

Advertisements

3 Responses

  1. Oh how the mighty have fallen. In a genre that in many ways is known to the world only through D&D, this is sad. This is part of why I started playing this kind of thing over computer games, in these types of games I could come up with solutions the creators didn’t consider and get rewarded for it.

    Sadly this seems to be a mentality that Wizards of the Coast is intent on stamping out. Why reward creativity? It just makes the uncreative feel bad. Better to reward mediocrity and then complain about everyone’s lack of interest.

  2. This is where the word “fantasy” as in “imagination” comes to play.

    I’ve been DMing a 4th edition campaign for my group since June. We are playing KotS along with its sidetrecks and a few encounters and backstories of my making. Both me and the players have thoroughly enjoyed the game in many aspects.

    Fights last longer. The players have far more “energy”. They move around trying to make the best use of the environment. They develop tactics. Each one has a specific role and the PCs are specializing in their specific role (in both combat and non-combat skills).

    As a DM I enjoy it more. It is far easier to organize my thoughts and what I want to do with the new rules. I can now focus on playing the game than trying to organize it.

    PCs have found many unique tactics while fighting monsters. I tend to reward intelligence and creativity and punish crazy ideas. A PC can throw dirt at an opponents eyes. With the new rules it is completely easy to put it in words: Range attack, Range 1, Provokes Attacks of Opportunity, Dex vs. Reflex, Effect: If hit then target is blinded (save ends).

    To conclude, the oldest and strongest rule that made D&D what it is (from 1st to 4th edition) is that: the DM has final saying. He can bend the rules, he can make the rules funnier, easier, more flexible, more strict, more anything he and his group wants.

    My wife started playing D&D with 4th edition. In just a couple of sessions she is playing her Eladrin Wizard to full effect (she still has some trouble recognizing the different types of die, but that is another issue).

    All things accounted for, I believe that the 4th edition is a far more rigid system of rules with the added value of really opening the game to imagination.

  3. Well lets see… There has now been considerably more playtesting, so:

    “Fights last longer”. What are the assumptions here? (1) Fight scenes are the focus of the game, (2) Low-risk fight scenes – which they have to be if there are a lot of them – will remain exciting once the players realize that they are low-risk, (3) that you couldn’t exploit the environment in earlier editions, (4) that characters could not specialize and fulfill specific roles in earlier editions. (5) that you couldn’t use tactics in earlier editions, and that (6) that fight scenes lasting longer is a good thing – rather than a detraction from the mysteries, exploration, exotic cultures, and discovery that make up the center of many campaigns. It isn’t necessarily true to start with either, but that’s another issue.

    “As a DM I enjoy it more”. That’s quite possible. It’s easier if you don’t think about it. For example, the Eladrin have a short-range teleport as a “per encounter” power. What effect does this have on the design of their cities? What effect does this have on their early childhood? Cribs won’t work, do they have to keep their kids in boxes or small rooms with airlock-style double doors? What do you do when your players start wanting to know how the world works?

    “PC’s have found many unique tactics”: have they designed new spells to meet specific situations? Gone on quests to find the ingredients for creating the weapon that they need? Simply hired people with the specialized talents that they needed? Now, it is true that you can summarize some things more easily – but you can’t step on class special abilities. The Rogue has some abilities for temporarily blinding people, if you let people do it without those abilities, you’ve just told the rogue “those abilities are useless”. Either way, a rules hole.

    “The oldest and strongest rule…” Yes indeed – but if the rules system is a good one, you shouldn’t have to house-rule the system to run it or explain the actions of the characters in terms of the world they live in rather than a rules system. In fourth edition, you do have to.

    “My wife started playing…”. Yes. In just a few sessions, she has mastered a major aspect of the system. Not much complexity or depth there.

    “All things accounted for, I believe that the 4th edition is a far more rigid system of rules with the added value of really opening the game to imagination.” Lets see now, it’s more rigid AND more open to imagination? That’s a bit self-contradictory isn’t it?

    Rather more importantly, you haven’t even bothered trying to address anything but small-scale tactical aspects – and I had already concluded by noting that “Fourth Edition is a nice tactical system, good for small-scale combats and dungeon-crawling, and specified encounters – and I may use it that way – but I really was hoping for a lot more than that.”. Given that, I suppose it’s nice that you agree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: