 Goto [ Index ] |
Positives
+ Two out of the three new races are pretty interesting. Dragonborn are dragon-like humanoids. They’re big and strong, they have breath weapons, and they have a strong sense of honor. Tieflings are demonic humanoids. They‘re smart and sneaky, they have horns, and everyone thinks they‘re evil. As a minor quibble, it would have been nice to include the Aasimar (angelic humanoids) to balance the Tieflings.
+ One out of the two new classes is rather cool. Warlocks are arcane magic-users who gain their powers by making pacts with supernatural entities like demons and fey spirits. Their magic is based mainly on Charisma and Constitution. There are three distinct types of Warlocks and many of their spells are pretty awesome. They’re probably the closest thing to Sorcerers we’re going to get in this edition.
+ The main goal of the new class advancement system seems to be to make the classes more balanced and to give players more options for customizing their characters. To some extent, this has been successful. However, there are serious problems attached to this, as will be seen below.
+ The combat system is improved slightly. There are three main changes. First, characters can now take a standard action, move action, and minor action each round. Standard actions can be traded for move actions, etc. In addition, all characters have action points that they can spend to take extra actions. These changes allow characters to get more done each turn and help combat to move a bit more quickly. Second, saving “throws” (Reflex, etc.) are now static numbers and many attacks target them rather than AC. This introduces more variety into combat, but also makes things more complicated, as you have to keep track of what each attack targets. Third, all characters have healing surges that they can spend to heal themselves. This makes characters less dependant on magical healing, but it’s one more thing you have to keep track of. On the whole, combat is a little quicker, but more complicated. In our playtest, we had to look things up in the book many times (more on this below). Otherwise, the combat system hasn‘t changed very much, We still have “attacks of opportunity,“ now called opportunity attacks. We still have rules for flanking, partial cover, being stunned, etc. The rules require miniatures and battle grids even more than in 3.5. I found combat to be too slow and complicated in 3.5, and I still do. If you liked combat in 3.5, you’ll probably still like it.
Negatives
- The following 3.5 races and classes are missing: Gnome, Half-Orc, Barbarian, Bard, Druid, Monk, and Sorcerer. They will be missed. Seriously, these were some of my favorite character options. It seems likely that many of these will be included in future releases, but, even if they are, forcing players to buy multiple books just to get the all of “core” races and classes is a pretty cheap move. Half-Elves, while still present, have been reconceived in such a way that they have little similarity to elves or humans. The designers might as well have left them out or called them something different. As for elves, see directly below.
- One of the new races is rather disappointing. Eldarin are related to Elves. They look like elves and they‘re both high in Dexterity, but while elves are gifted in Wisdom and nature related abilities, eldarin are gifted in Intelligence and magical abilities. The designers seem to have split 3.5 elves into two races embodying two different aspects of the elf concept: elves as woodland beings (perfect rangers) and elves as magical beings (perfect wizards). Maybe this was for game balance purposes, but the result is two races that feel rather narrow and restricted. Why reduce this classic race’s flexibility?
- One of the new classes is fairly lacking. Warlords are warriors, but they focus on leadership and teamwork. While this sounds like a somewhat interesting concept, in practice, it looks like they are only really effective if they have at least one other character fighting nearby them, ready to immediately take advantage of the opportunities the warlord sets up (see further below for examples). During the playtest, the warlord didn’t get a chance to take advantage of most of his special powers until the fight was nearly over. The whole thing seems more complicated than it’s worth.
- The biggest change to the game is the new class advancement system, and this is also the biggest problem. Do you enjoy choosing one option from a list of three or four very similar options? If so, then you’ll love 4th edition. All of the classes now follow the same advancement chart. At each level, characters gain class abilities, feats, or other improvements. Wizards’ spells, fighters’ special moves, etc. are all now treated as powers. These are chosen from each class’s list, which are divided up into levels. You gain a level, you choose a new power, or a feat, or something. Some powers can be used at-will, others once per encounter, and others daily. “Utility” powers may fall into any of these categories.
There are several problems here. First, many of the powers for each class are very repetitive. The spell-casting classes have a better variety, but combat-focused classes are saddled with endless minor variations on the same basic powers. For example, consider the following (abbreviated) fighter powers ([W] mean “weapon damage“):
* Cleave: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage, and an adjacent enemy takes Str mod damage.
* Passing Strike: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage, and you can move one square and attack a second target. Secondary attack: Str +2 vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage.
* Rain of Blows: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage, and you can attack the same or a different target. Secondary attack: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage.
* Tide of Iron: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage, and you push the target one square.
* Spinning Sweep: Str vs. AC; 1[W] + Str mod damage, and you knock the target prone.
* Steel Serpent Strike: Str vs. AC; 2[W] + Str mod damage, and target is slowed.
Or consider some of the powers of the above mentioned warlord class:
* Furious Smash: Str vs. Fort; Str mod damage, and one adjacent ally applies your Cha mod as a bonus to their next attack and damage rolls against the target.
* Warlord’s Favor: Str vs. AC; 2[W] + Str mod damage, and one ally within 5 squares gains a +2 bonus to attacks against the target until the end of your next turn.
* Lead the Attack: Str vs. AC; 3[W] + Str mod damage, and you and an ally within 5 squares gain a bonus, equal to 1 + your Int mod, to attacks against the target until the end of the encounter.
Yes, these powers are different from each other, but not much. Is it worth the time and trouble to choose from among these powers and to keep track of how exactly they work and which ones I’ve used in that fight? Not for me.
Second, in making the classes more uniform, some classes are more complex than they need to be and some are too simple. This is particularly true in the contrast between magic-using classes and combat-focused classes. In previous editions, magic-users chose from long lists of spells, while combatants focused more on weapons and armor, and simply attacked during combat. Were people really complaining about this? The folks I game with weren’t. Those who liked complexity chose magic-users and those who didn’t chose combatants. In 4th, all classes are based on the same model. As a result, magic users have much less choice and flexibility, while combatants have to choose from lists of repetitive moves. Playing a wizard doesn’t feel very different from playing a fighter or a cleric or a rogue. In an effort to make the classes more consistent and balanced, they’ve lost much of what made the classes distinct, and made the whole system more complex.
The new system has particularly hurt the spell-casters. Clerics do not “pray” or otherwise choose among spells. Their spells work the same way as a fighter’s special moves. On the other hand, wizards choose two spells for each daily or utility power when they level up, and select which one they want to use each day. Meanwhile, sorcerers, as mentioned above, are simply gone. Thus, clerics now barely count as “spell casters” while wizards are an awkward mishmash. The designers have managed to combine the worst parts of wizards and sorcerers. If we have to memorize spells ahead of time, like a wizard, we should at least get a good selection of spells to choose from. Or, if we get a small selection of spells, like a sorcerer, we should at least be able to cast them on the fly. Instead, we get a tiny selection of spells and we have to memorize them. Weak. (By the way, ability scores, like Int and Wis, no longer provide bonus spells for any classes.). Consider the following comparison:
A 4th level wizard in 3.5 could know an unlimited number of spells and could cast at least nine per day, memorized in advance. A 4th level sorcerer in 3.5 knew ten spells and could cast at least fifteen per day, without memorizing in advance. A 4th level cleric in 3.5 could know an unlimited number of spells and could cast twelve per day, prepared in advance. A 4th level wizard in 4th edition knows eight spells (plus four “cantrips“) and can cast two spells at will, two spells once per encounter, one spell daily, and one utility spell, prepared in advance. A 4th level cleric or warlock in 4th edition knows only six spells (plus three preset spells for clerics) and can cast with the same frequency as the wizard.
To illustrate the shift in complexity, compare the page counts between 3.5 and 4th. 3.5 described eleven classes in 38 pages (about three pages each), plus 108 pages of spells that only spell-casters needed to worry about. 4th describes eight classes in 120 pages, each class taking about fifteen pages. Whether these numbers sound good or bad or to you probably indicates how much you’ll like this new direction. On the one hand, this much space does give more detail and options for most of the class. On the other hand, it requires a lot more reading, planning, and bookkeeping. Do the benefits justify the costs? For some, maybe, but for me, no.
In playtest, we constantly had to look up the various powers in the book. Ordinarily, I would assume that this would happen less often with a little experience. However, because each class has so many powers and because they share none of these in common, this seems like a long-term problem unless you memorize the book, or always play the same class, or write down all the details about all of your powers. As a quick complaint, the character sheet provided does not give nearly enough room to write in all of the information you’ll need for the powers.
If the designers wanted to give players the freedom to customize their characters, they could have moved to a classless system that would allow players to combine whatever powers they want. Or, they could have given us tools for creating our own powers, rather than endless lists of predetermined powers. Of course, this would probably be too radical a departure. After all, it wouldn’t be D&D without classes. That being the case, the main advantage of any class-based system is that character creation is simple and quick. You choose a class, make a few choices, copy down your abilities, and your ready to go. With 4th, they’ve managed to combine the worst of both worlds; the confusion and time-requirements of a classless system and the restrictedness of a class-based system. We have to read a lot of text and make a lot of decisions, but they all lead to pretty much the same end result. You still won’t be able to make the character you really want, unless he or she fits neatly into one of the predetermined classes
The paragon paths, the replacement for prestige classes, add some flexibility to the classes by allowing you to choose a specialty as you level up. However, each paragon path is tied to a specific basic class. It seems inevitable that most members of each paragon path will be quite similar to each other.
The new multi-classing system doesn’t solve any problems either. It’s confusing and very limited. You can use a handful of feats to get a handful of powers from other classes. However, every character still belongs to one class, and can only dabble a bit in any others. You cannot create evenly split characters, like a fighter/rogue. Once again, the game feels more restrictive.
- The whole game feels even more combat oriented than 3.5. For example, powers are classified as attack powers (combat oriented) or utility powers (everything else). Attack powers outnumber utility by a large margin, and characters don’t even get utility powers until second level. One result of this is that clerics can’t cast Cure Light Wounds until second level. Many non-combat spells have been changed into rituals, which take much longer to cast and cost money. Thus, all spell-casters, even clerics, are focused on doing damage.
- There are several other unfortunate changes to specific classes. Rangers have lost all religious or magical elements. They don’t get any nature spells, animal companions, or even favored enemies. In contrast, Paladins now only get magical abilities. They’re like clerics with better armor and weapons. There are no more specialist wizards (further homogenizing the class) or familiars. Clerics still choose a deity, but this has almost no impact on what spells they gain. There are no spell domains (or schools, for that matter). This makes the cleric class much less diverse and interesting. Whereas a cleric’s deity used to largely define the character and his or her role in the party, now, it feels like a minor detail.
- The books offers three different methods for generating ability scores: assigning numbers from a standard array, spending points, or rolling dice. However, unless you roll for stats, there is no way to start with more than one ability of eight or nine, or any abilities lower than eight. This may sound like a good thing, but it means you can’t “get credit” for having any major weaknesses, and it makes characters that much more uniform. Low ability scores, especially when balanced by high ones, created some interesting and unique characters. No more.
- Alignment has changed for no apparent reason. The only alignments are new Good, Lawful Good, Evil, Chaotic Evil, and Unaligned. This provides fewer options for characters, and skews the whole concept of Good vs. Evil and Law vs. Order, with no clear benefit.
- Skills have been simplified in the new edition. Whether this is good or bad is up to you, but it further reinforces the fact that the new edition is even more combat focused than the previous. In 3.5, there were 45 skills, and all characters improved and learned more as they advanced. In 4th, there are 17 skills. Some groups of skills have been lumped together into one skill, such as Thievery, which covers Disable Device, Open Lock, and Slight of Hand. Many skills without combat applications, like Craft and Perform, have been removed entirely. A character is now either trained (+5) or untrained; there are no degrees of training. And the only way to improve or to learn new skills, or to have skills outside of your class at character creation, is by taking feats.
- The book’s organization leaves much to be desired. Powers, the bulk of the book, are listed by class and level. This is fine for when you’re building a character. However, if you have to look up a power in the middle of play, it’s almost impossible to find it unless you already know what class and level it’s assigned to. And the one page index does not help.
- There are no guidelines for converting characters, transitioning existing campaigns, or understanding the differences in the new edition. The book is written as if no previous editions of D&D existed. This may be because 4th is so radically different from previous editions that any older material would have to be rebuilt from the ground up.
- A glaring omission is the absence of sample characters or a complete example of combat. In several cases, I’m not really sure that I understand the rules because I haven’t seen them applied.
Conclusion
3.5 wasn’t perfect, but it certainly wasn’t broken. Heck, 3.0 was just fine. Did we really need a 4th edition? I don’t think so. Consider the time between editions over the years. Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition came out in 1978, 2nd edition in 1989 (eleven years later), and 3rd edition in 2000 (again, eleven years later). For all those years, players enjoyed themselves just fine with the published rules and their own house rules. 3.5 came out in 2003, only three years later. 3.5 was so similar to 3.0 that I wouldn’t even mention it, except that it changed just enough that players had to repurchase a lot of material. Now 4th edition comes out in 2008, just five years later. How much money have players already invested in 3.0 and 3.5? Was anyone crying out for a new edition? Does this edition radically improve the gaming experience? Answers: a lot, no, and no.
If D&D is the only game you want to play, if you really have to use the most up-to-date material, and if you don’t mind spending a lot of money, then pick up D&D 4th edition. If any of the above don’t apply to you, then don’t bother.
