4th Edition
I've DMed two parties to second level and one to third level so far, and I have to admit that 4th edition Dungeons & Dragons isn't exactly like I expected. I was expecting change to be bad. The first thing I had to realize was that the rules no longer try to simulate realistic fantasy. Instead, 4th edition tries to emulate a fantasy film
( Read more... )
The system was reengineered to be fun around the table. In order to do that, the rules had to change, but to be honest, I can think of very few highlights of play from previous editions that you can't experience in 4e.
The system was reengineered to be fun around the table. In order to do that, the rules had to change, but to be honest, I can think of very few highlights of play from previous editions that you can't experience in 4e.
This seems like a bit of a contradiction to me. And I do think there are kinds of games 4e doesn't allow. There is something 4e that missing that the earlier editions had. Even though it's going to be a really fun game, I don't think it will allow some of the kinds of games we've played before. To me 2e, with its kits, and large spell, skill and secondary skill lists, allowed a sort of game which isn't entirely possible with 4e.
On the art direction:
I'm not a fan. I was originally a fan of 3e's look and style, but I don't think I am any more. This 'dungeonpunk' look doesn't really do it for me. I wasn't a fan of WAR or Lockwood then, and I'm still not. For straight fantasy I much prefer the high fantasy look of Larry Elmore and Jeff Easley. Nothing can capture the sheer excitement and sense of the fantastic of it. For something less traditional DiTerlizzi and Brom stand out, but neither of them are as straight up D&D as Elmore or Easley.
Reply
Leave a comment