D&D 4e was a game || Memories from an older D&D edition

  Views 1,597,675

Puffin Forest

Year ago

This is a fairly long video where I talk about memories from playing Dungeons and Dragons 4e. That edition was very not popular and not as many people played it. I mostly talk about the mechanics, what it was like being introduced to RPGs through that game, and my memories playing the game. Enjoy!
Credits:
Adan- Art BirdCyclops
Pau- Art suzukiPCArt
Dartsy- Art Dartsy_Art
Puffin- Art, Story, Voice
Music and Sound Credits:
"Sunshine Samba" by Chris Haugen from the USshow Audio Library.

Comments
BabyzDevil
BabyzDevil 3 days ago
TBH 4e wasn't that bad. There was actually a variety of ways to build your characters. But i do admit some powers were main stay (like the twin shoot thing rangers had). i really enjoyed my time playing it, but i do appreciate how 5e plays too. a different playstyle which is alot less combat heavy, and more RP focused. Also i resent the fact u said that there was no multiclassing. It was in the base game, just not how it works in 5e or pathfinder.
Jeremy Main
Jeremy Main 4 days ago
Literally no one has been able to explain to me what Marking was. No one.
SunshineToTheMax
SunshineToTheMax 6 days ago
Holy shit, this video is 1 year old
Andrew Lockwood
Andrew Lockwood 8 days ago
Funny, part of the reason I started playing D&D in general, and 5e specifically, was because I was looking for inspiration for my stories. Of course, didn't want to spend $50+ for a game I wasn't into - funny how that turned out - got $300+ worth of books (got all the player-related ones up to Theros), and a lot of dice (like $100 for just that, along with $40 for the Crown Royal Regal Apple - wanted the green bag, but the whiskey was good when mixed with apple juice, and was useful for "medicinal" purposes - lol!). Anyways, there's a guy I go horseback riding with, and he too likes D&D, being a veteran of 3.5e, although he's trying to get into 5e. Turns out, he has the 3.5PHB, and he let me borrow it. Been a little bit, and perhaps it was because the type was smaller, but I had issues with it. One issue I had was how everyone had some sort of racial penalty (don't get that much in 5e, and with the revised Volo's, no one gets it), with certain weapons meant for specific races (I can understand racial Martial Training as a culture thing, to have the ability to use certain armor/weapons regardless of class) and how certain races "should" be "certain" classes and not others (granted, given that certain races have bonuses to certain stats, still got a mild bit of that, but there's no real issue making "sub-optimal" race/class combos), and I might even argue about rolling for stats without an alternative stat array for those who just want to make a character real quick (but I know that's just Tradition). Of course, I like to talk to him about the different races and their abilities. For instance, I mentioned the Aarakocra and Winged Tiefling, who can be above the main action. He was like, "Sounds a bit unfair to the DM." I point out, "Yes, goblins can't use melee weapons against flying PCs, but every creature tends to have access to some sort of ranged weapon, and since goblins are at least smart enough to recognize a flying threat to be dangerous, some leader will go 'You two, use bows. Bring down bird-lady. She taste good!' so a good DM will will set at least one or two dedicated to such foes." I also point this out about any other PCs that might just run over an encounter, like using a minor fiend to mess up a Yuan-Ti Paladin or a good Bruiser-type to mess with a satyr (I know how to work around magic resistance.)
Juniper Mystic Vlogs
Juniper Mystic Vlogs 10 days ago
ああああ 保w doリー stop talkings ぃけ ティs
Lynry Barkly
Lynry Barkly 11 days ago
4E sounds like it would have been a good system to use as the backbone for a video game. Making players do all those calculations themselves is just evil.
knuckles5451
knuckles5451 13 days ago
I played an ungodly amount of 4e, enough that I recognize how deeply flawed it is. But there were several times in this video that made me unreasonably upset. Because 4e always gets shit on. It's the red headed step child of D&D. And that's sad to me cause it genuinely has alot to offer, if you avoid it's pitfalls.
Wepped
Wepped 14 days ago
Yeah, component magic is terrible without some pouch that gives infinite components or some vender town shop that always sells so you can just say 'yeah I was in town so I restocked' let me mark down the gold spent on my character sheet.
Ray Hickey III
Ray Hickey III 14 days ago
I loved 4th edition.
J. C.
J. C. 15 days ago
4e was the first edition I gave a complete pass. Trying to make a ttrpg into an MMO was a massive mistake.
Renato Vieira
Renato Vieira 16 days ago
Wow, you had a shitty DM introducing you to 4th Edition.
princecharon
princecharon 17 days ago
Well, you've reinforced my intention to never play D&D 4e. I mean, apart from you, the only person that I know liked D&D's 4th edition was a roll-player rather than a role-player - id est, he was lacking in imagination, disdained the actual role-playing part of the game (e.g. he considered characters that weren't totally combat-focused 'weak'), and preferred games that stayed on the rails. This made him a uninteresting player (though at least he was willing to try other games, he just couldn't understand why the rest of us wouldn't play 4e), and a very poor GM.
upinarms79
upinarms79 17 days ago
4th edition wasn't popular because everyone who already played moved to Pathfinder and new players were being brought with them. 4th was pretty much the equivalence of Hasbro taking a shit on a plate and then telling us we'd better eat it up because their marketing team assures us that it's actually the most delicious chocolate and anyone who disagrees, which was most of the experienced players who tried it, is just a big ol' meany poopiehead who just wanted to hate it because it was new. No need to actually play test it or listen to all of those people who had actually been buying the products for years... no, no, let's instead alienate all of them because the boys over in the wankateering department assure us that the best way to promote a brand is to piss on everyone who is actually buying it and then market to a consumer base that has no interest in it. True corporate brilliance.
Egrith
Egrith 18 days ago
I started with a 4E starters kit, I didnt play for forever until I started playing some 5e now
DyrianLightbringer
DyrianLightbringer 18 days ago
I have a love/hate relationship with 4th. There's some wonkiness, for sure, but I can see what WotC was trying to do with it, and I just kind of think of it as its own thing instead of trying to compare it to 3.5 or 5th. I've been playing D&D since 3rd edition was released, then spent the majority of my gaming life in 3.5, and I quickly figured out what I was doing in 4th. My warlord and our party's fighter set up a wonderful combo. The fighter would attack and mark his target. His combat challenge ability allowed him to make an attack of op if a marked target attacked anyone other than him. I would run up on the same target and use denying smite, which allowed me to choose an ally and forced my target to be unable to attack that ally on their next turn. With no one else in melee other than me and the fighter, and not being allowed to attack the fighter, the enemy attacked me (with a -2 penalty due to the fighter's mark). Because it attacked me, the fighter makes an attack of op. I then use vengeance is mine as an immediate reaction to attack it because it attacked me, and vengeance also lets me choose an ally in melee who gets to attack it as well... So, in one round, our fighter got to attack three times, I attacked twice, and we dealt about 150 damage. We killed this creature in two rounds. When you know what you're doing and you pick the right powers to synergize with your team, the fights can actually go pretty quickly.
Bower Power
Bower Power 18 days ago
Most people either started with 3.5 or 5th? Come on man you gotta give love and acknowledgement to us old bastards that have been playing since the TSR days! I wet my feet w/ 1st, and started Dming and playing regular with 2nd, and there were people playing long before that.
god slayer
god slayer 20 days ago
So play a different game...
Seiaeka
Seiaeka 20 days ago
My first edition of D&D was... well, 1st ed. XD We do not speak of 4th.
Lleanlleawrg
Lleanlleawrg 22 days ago
Me and a group of friends played a few 4E games, and our rogue just got super tired of it due to the combat being too tedious to calculate. Not good when none of us were really tabletop rpg veterans, so we were basically murderhobos with incredibly boring combat hahaha.
TheAnon03
TheAnon03 22 days ago
Sadly 4e was the first time I was able to actually go out a buy the books (found a place nearby that sold them), I remember getting more and more disappointed with each book. I was able to have some fun playing with friends online (via Steam chat) but that was more in spite of the rules. The books were pretty and interesting to read though.
Just Noob
Just Noob 22 days ago
Your animation on how 4E combat work is reminding me of how most video game work :|
AntiVirus 9055
AntiVirus 9055 23 days ago
Ngl sounds really complicated like Magic the Gathering.
Ian Ingold
Ian Ingold 24 days ago
i listen to you when im very moist and wet all over. cause i like listening to you in the shower.
Drewcif3r
Drewcif3r 24 days ago
Come on now. There is soooo much factually wrong with this video...like...honestly don't want to be rude but did you read the rules at any point? No multiclassing?? There is extensive multiclassing in 4th, and hybrids are admittedly tricky to get right, but there are a ton of synergies between classes if you look. The two basic builds per class thing is a jumping off point, there's a ton of different ways to build each one - you can make a Paladin striker, controller, defender or leader for example, that all play totally differently depending on the powers and items you choose. Thievery and Dungeoneering to get rid of ghosts? What the hell? I know of no rule at all that says that, it's up to the DM to decide which skills are applicable. Why didn't your DM ask for Religion, Intimidation or Diplomacy? How does it make combat *less* interesting to have actual powers that have specific effects that synergise with other players' powers, rather than just swinging to hit 2x a round and that being your sole option? Also why was your DM running skill challenges that could be ignored? You're supposed to only use them when you need to work out if the party succeed or fail at something as a group. And there are loads of rituals with quick cast times (Animate Rope, for example has a 1min casting time and 5gp component cost, why did all your rituals cost so much??). Like... I know the "everyone hates 4e" meme but I've played it and DMd it for 3 years now and none of this is right. At all. If you're gonna slam it at least try to be accurate in your criticism. Sorry if I'm coming across hostile, I really don't intend it but I've had some truly excellent times playing 4e and this was a frustrating video to watch. It's one thing to have an opinion but it's another to publish a video full of things that are actually incorrect - it's not fair to blame the system so much when this sounds much more like you were just inexperienced and didn't really learn the rules properly! Anyway I'm sorry this was your experience and I hope you're having more fun with 5e :(
Clumsy Ninja
Clumsy Ninja 24 days ago
I actually also started on fourth addition and Iv felt myself how long the fights can last
Tech Mean
Tech Mean 27 days ago
I cut my teeth on 2e. All I remember is you never played a wizard and THAC0 was confusing until you realize it was a reverse scale.
Jake Pullman
Jake Pullman Month ago
Yeah, I think you covered the what I remember about 4E. People I played with would say over and over again, "it's still a new system, just wait til a few more books come out and it'll get better."
Jacob Dawsley
Jacob Dawsley Month ago
@Puffen Forest Still patiently waiting for the review of 4e.
Daxter D
Daxter D Month ago
I feel like this is why people played pathfinder during the times of 4e....
Philippe Poupart
Philippe Poupart Month ago
I agree with a lot of the stuff you say here... but honestly, I don't recall fight being that complicated. Possibly because me and my group come from a background of wargaming, but it felt pretty good once things got rolling. Fight were long mainly because 4e was all about monsters being huge damage sponge and high AC. Also had the 'everybody is falling asleep during a fight' moment happen in 3.5 for what it's worth.
GodzillasaurusJr
GodzillasaurusJr Month ago
Skill challenges are appropriate... sometimes, but definitely not for every situation, and not as they were usually written in 4th. We use them sparingly in both 5th and 2nd, and it's also in Savage Worlds but under a different name.
Craig Bryant
Craig Bryant Month ago
As far as I can see, 4e tried to make everyone as much fun as magic users. Also, yeah, tried to put World of Warcraft on the tabletop for reasons. In the end, it smoothed out too much distinctiveness. It killed theater of the mind--and I am ride or die TOTM. But its best impulses carried forward into 5e. Look at those fighters! Used to be dull as rocks, especially once the party leveled up. Now? You have a game where it makes sense for a fighter to really be an epic hero, like Beowulf or Siegfried. I like a LOT of 5e, except perhaps how generous it is with recharge times.
Griffen Spellblade
Griffen Spellblade Month ago
I would be less pissed at 4th edition if they had left the campaign settings alone. It was the death of the novels as they had to retcon a lot of new things into the Forgotten Realms that annoyed me. I has waiting for promised squeals and the only thing that survived with Drizzt. He needs to die already.
Shaggy Satyr
Shaggy Satyr Month ago
D&D 3.5E was perfect IMO. D&D 4E was a cardgame. Not a tabletop RPG. D&D 5E is baby's first dungeon.
Daniel Bazinga
Daniel Bazinga Month ago
I always thought like 4e was trying to emulate World of Warcraft. It did not work. I hated it. Games always consisted of 10 minutes of introduction and 5 hours of trying to resolve one single combat encounter.
Pagus Onease
Pagus Onease Month ago
Cookie cutter characters. I can't believe I spent money on this game.
Rosti Vana
Rosti Vana Month ago
I started with AD&D 2nd edition. I love 5E by comparison. No THAC0! But so many of the ad&d books were awesome and converting is a pain.
Eiran Keating
Eiran Keating Month ago
3:13 - 3:50 the decent into madness was masterful
Nmccarville
Nmccarville Month ago
are salutation for Oh I forgot that I had this ability an my answer yes you did an so did your character in the heat of the moment
Nmccarville
Nmccarville Month ago
my group just stopped at 3.5 an never went any further LOL
SupaDanteX
SupaDanteX Month ago
Puffin: "I like 4th edition. I'm going to talk about it for a while, and I'm going to try not to be negative because I know a lot of people don't like 4th edition for some reason, and I don't want to feed into that." Puffin by the end of the (almost completely negative) video: "I re-read the book. I understand why a lot of people don't like 4th edition." Puffin, I think you also may not like 4th edition. And this is coming from someone who also started with 4th, was sad that there was no multiclassing, the powers were repetitive, and combat would take us hours and hours, sometimes multiple sessions, and every time I had what I thought was a really cool idea I'd ask the DM "Can I do X?" and he'd say "No! But you could in 3.5!" And he was not a good DM so he'd always say it like a snide asshole like "Yea but 3.5 is old so no one is playing that anymore." But I didn't care about the way he said it. 5 or 6 "You could have in 3.5!"'s later, I left that 4e game and found at least 3 different groups of people still playing 3.5 and played that for a decade until 5e came out.
John Hoyt
John Hoyt Month ago
Wait 2008 to 2014 was 4e. Does that mean that fifth edition is going to end soon?
Gho5tRUN3R
Gho5tRUN3R Month ago
Skill challenges are great... in 5th edition. If done right, it makes roleplay into a combat which really makes things exciting. My players have really enjoyed it because they feel really unique with their proficiencies and features and roleplay has always been the thing they want to do the most.
Thomas Johansson
Thomas Johansson Month ago
Now I know why it wasn't popular and why it was hated. It simply wasn't an improvement over 3.5.
TheOriginalBoman
TheOriginalBoman Month ago
I'm all for criticising different editions, especially 4th edition's skill challenge system, but I have some issue with some of your complaints. 1: Multiclassing does exist in 4th edition, and does not require a supplement. It is in the players handbook. You do not have to choose to be a multiclass character at level 1. The bard class even encourages you to multiclass repeatedly. 2: All your ability scores in 4th edition matter for something. Dexterity affects your initiative and reflex defence. Constitution affects your hit points and fortitude defence. Each ability score also affects a skill such as perception or thievery. While your attacks may only come off of a certain stat, I don't see how that differs from other editions. As far as I am aware, fighters use strength to wield an axe in every edition of Dungeons and Dragons 3: Tenser's floating disc costs 10 gold to cast in 4th edition. If your party had to pool your resources to scrape together 10 gold, then that is an issue with your dm, not 4th edition.
Will Dazey
Will Dazey Month ago
Never played 4th edition, but it sounds like someone took the basic way a computer based RPG would work (scripted tasks, hundreds of simultaneous AOE effects, scripted class builds) and turned them in to DnD rules. I bet you could take the rules for 4th edition and turn them into a generic platform for a computer RPG.
Sam Pearman
Sam Pearman Month ago
Skill challenges don't use turn order unless they're embedded in a combat encounter.
Jan Sitkowski
Jan Sitkowski Month ago
Reasons why People always tend to play 3rd and 5th edition, but no one plays 4th edition?
Matthew Martin
Matthew Martin Month ago
My first edition was Advanced dungeon and dragons lmao
Nicholas Knudson
Nicholas Knudson Month ago
The more I learn about 4e, the more I love 5e
Guess Who
Guess Who Month ago
So, THIS is the D&D WOW retail was inspired by... amazing.
Mitchell Slate
Mitchell Slate Month ago
What was the emergency with Tensor's Disk? I do want to hear on that one...
Zamrod
Zamrod Month ago
Maybe I can add some context to this. 4e did a lot of what it did in an attempt to fix problems in previous editions. Most of the problems were with 3.5e. For instance: In 3.5e it was common to stack 10-15 different spells and abilities together. Feats would give you really small bonuses that would only apply a very small amount of time. So people were used to constantly thinking: (not all these examples are real things but things LIKE them existed) Ok, my Mailman feat gives me +1 to strength checks when attempting to pick up bags that have mail in them. Also, I have Bless, Divine Might, Owl's Wisdom, Boots of the Badger, a Hat of the Lemming, Gloves of Loopholes, and I get a circumstance modifier because it is night out right now. And since it is after 3 am, that bonus gets bigger. So, when he is talking about all of the things you need to keep track of, most of that is actually dramatically reduced from 3.5e. The designers made an effort to make most of the effects standardized so they were easier to remember.
ericb31
ericb31 Month ago
that part about character creation reminds me of the online game Rift by Trion software: the advertisements make a big deal about the ability to pick various abilities from various "souls" to make truly unique characters... BUT... first, you can only pick THREE out of like, 9 possibilities. AND... all "soul" abilities have varying powers, based mostly on HOW MANY POINTS YOU HAVE IN THAT SOUL... so the BEST way to play is to pick ONE soul, and put 60 point into it to MAX it, leaving 15 point for the other 2 souls... yeah. result, everyone specializes on just one. well, actually it's possible to set up several "builds" and swap between them, and easy to re-arrange them, so it's not QUITE that bad. oh, and four main classes. warrior, cleric, ranger and mage. and in dungeons, 5 roles: tank, healer, damage dealer, flanker, and support. my favorite class was a type of mage called a "chloromancer". weak attacks, but some interesting Healing abilities, including one skill that makes the entire team recover a little health every time the chloromancer attacks ANY enemy! it's considered a support role by the auto-match mode.
Ryan Lesner
Ryan Lesner Month ago
I photo copied the skill list and powers list. I ignored the system completely. My system is a mix of nine different systems
lostlune
lostlune Month ago
most of your story’s problems are bad players and or bad DMing. you could play the most unplayable game and still have fun with the right group.
Roy Kay
Roy Kay Month ago
I only played 4E once, but that character was my favorite. He was a High Elf wizard/functioning alcoholic that was harassed by Astral Stalkers. Eventually the harassment got so bad that he snapped and turned into a priest of Gruumsh so he could gain more power and defeat the stalkers. Eventually he proved himself powerful (for an elf) and was offered the High Priesthood of his chapter. To do this, he had to pass 3 Fort saves to keep from screaming in pain while removing his own eye.. without any booze. Now, functioning alcoholics feel everything normally while drunk, but sober... they might as well be out of their mind drunk. My wizard passed, even after losing a Sense Motive check against other priest's attempts to make him fail (ending up shoving the wooden spoon back into the now empty socket), and ended up killing the Stalker that irritated him so.
Roy Kay
Roy Kay Month ago
Then again we were all experienced players
Jake And
Jake And Month ago
I'm so old I can remember when AD&D 2E came out....
RectalDiscourse
RectalDiscourse Month ago
i got into dnd from dndcember. bought all the 5th edition books, studied them relentlessly, bought minifigs, maps, dm tools, all kinda pf neat dice sets, dry erase board, notw books for loot, quests, dialogue, graph papers etc... then i realized you need friends to play it. ive never once played dnd. :(
Ryli Reback
Ryli Reback Month ago
The only reason he likes it is stockholm syndrome
William Lewis
William Lewis Month ago
My "fondest" memory of 4e unfortunately just highlights how dreadfully boring the combat was. We're going down a loooong corridor 10ft wide and 10ft tall. Some of you _already_ know where this is going. Wow surprise Gelatinous Cubes drop onto either end of the party! My wizard and the rogue took out the back one. Took a while and used up almost all my resources except one daily which didn't fit the fight, but nimble rogue + reactionary teleports on wizard meant it wasn't actually hard. Meanwhile, the other three characters still haven't killed theirs up front. The sorcerer got trapped multiple times, and is currently still stuck in the cube. Somehow. When the tank and healer (I honestly can't remember their class names) are both melee, the sorcerer got trapped? I was so fed up with the encounter I just said screw it and dropped Flame Wall (Fire Wall? w/e) down the entire part of the corridor and let it burn the cube and sorcerer dead. I know that doesn't sound good, it doesn't feel great in retrospect in some ways, but man it was cathartic. The sorcerer had repeatedly been a nuisance to my wizard (oh I'll use fire spells in the magic library oops no scrolls or spellbooks survived) and was generally useless. So in a fit of pique I killed her in order to be DONE with the fight sooner. Not my finest moment, and honestly the only thing I really remember well from a year+ long campaign of 4e.
Property Stuff
Property Stuff Month ago
First encounter with D&D was a 5th level homebrew 3.5 adventure. (As I found out later, many a gaming group simply ignore the first four levels of 3.5 as too painful to play.) I was a full plate paladin. Our quest was to investigate the island at the center of the lake. There was no boat to cross. We saw something big swimming around in the water. "You could always try swimming across," the DM suggested with a chuckle. "Um... no. Not when I've got -8 to swimming from all this heavy armor." The players started discussing options. DM kept laughing. "The longer you take to act, the more of this monster's abilities I read." I left the game store to get on with life. Later learned that the monster was an aboleth, an aquatic monster intended for a team of 7th level characters that makes you unable to breathe if you get close enough to stab it. No problem for the flying elf crossbow monk in the team. 3.5 was to me a terrible experience. That same game store hosted low level 4e games. They were super fun! You could survive combat with classic characters! But the more I played 4e, the more I experienced the problems Puffin pointed out. But at least I never had a DM laughing at my paladin that took hours to learn how to create and telling him to jump into the lake with an aboleth to see what happens. 5e playtest came along. I was a stock first level dwarven cleric with 1 cure spell for the entire day. A whopping d8 HP. Woo. The playtest module was an enormous dungeon crawl. My 1 cure spell saved someone in the very first fight, but then all the players kept going and got themselves killed. When I complained that even 3.5 wasn't so horrible as this, the DM answered, "You just should have been smarter with your spell casting," and later claimed that I praised 5e in his podcast. 5e at the time was a very terrible experience. (It has since matured, but many groups have reverted back to the practice of ignoring the first couple levels as too painful to play. I was even verbally assaulted by a player for trying to run a 1st level 5e game using vanilla rules.) D&D has a very long and rocky history, and my own personal history with it is long and rocky. But I've found that if you find yourself the right group, you can have fun with any of the versions of D&D in spite of themselves. Mostly through heavy homebrewing.
Coinshot Skimmer
Coinshot Skimmer Month ago
4e has it's good points too!Like......uuuhhhhhhh.....
Mark Dobbins
Mark Dobbins Month ago
One of the things I tried to do with the 5e rules mod I was working on was to make sure every character type is dependent on most of the ability scores: Strength - HP, Melee and Thrown damage for all weapons, What equipment can you use Dexterity - Attack bonus for all weapons, most physical skills Constitution - HP, Resistance to poison, disease, exhaustion, Recovery Intelligence - Number of spells known or prepared for all spell casting classes, Spell attack bonus for all classes, A bunch of skills including Deception Wisdom - Number of spells per day for all spell casting classes, A bunch of skills Charisma - Spell save DC for all classes, A bunch of skills including Concentration, Initiative, and all mental saves That way every character has strengths and weaknesses depending on their stats. If anyone is interested here's the documents. I haven't worked on the system itself for a while, but I've been using all the rules mods for a campaign and it's been pretty positive so far. drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B9IPVeoJdTYiaGs2R1p1S181djQ
Gekko
Gekko Month ago
And the comments are full of yes men ave lemmings. Sounds about right for a puffin video
Undying Zombie
Undying Zombie Month ago
So who is holding you hostage, forcing you to say you like 4th edition despite the fact that you clearly did not with everything you have said about it...
sinned6us
sinned6us Month ago
I liked how some powerful enemies had "interrupt" attacks that they can use out of turn but that was it
Noblebork
Noblebork Month ago
You started with 4E too?
Kevin Duteau
Kevin Duteau Month ago
What dnd 4e where you running. Never seemed this bad to me. It was hard to customize or be special but that was about it
Rae Black
Rae Black Month ago
Wow, I started with 4e. I guess I was lucky enough to have a DM that was running a home brew campaign, rather than a module, and must have been fudging quite a bit of the system, because I don't remember a whole lot of these flaws. I had a fantastic 18 months or so on that campaign and it really got me into D&D. I like 5e a whole lot more now, but I have fond memories of that first group.
Dragon Unity
Dragon Unity Month ago
My first game was 3.5e, we used Warcraft3 as our dnd table, and THAT WAS AWESOME... Too bad on dnd 5 i have only negative emotions... At last, i can be Dragon Knight that time...slowly turning into dragon and have polymorf at lvl 10
PEANUTHEADNINJAFINK
PEANUTHEADNINJAFINK Month ago
I started with 4e, and I really miss the great character builder the most. It made every class have something interesting about them, and even with the roles thing, you can easily use your utility skills to have some fun. Outside of combat, roleplay was great, but we had a dm who would make us do it instead of let us be murder hobos.
AberrationG
AberrationG Month ago
Sooo D&D the capitalism edition.
Remy Militello
Remy Militello Month ago
Forth edition sounds a lot like a game of commander in magic the gathering.
etherraichu
etherraichu Month ago
Call of Cthulhu is a Homebrew version of AD&D 2nd edition. The people who made it were all "You know, giving a wizard 1d4 hit points and one spell at level 1 is pretty bad... but we could make it way less fair than that."
James Wygle
James Wygle Month ago
A lot of valid criticism, but a few things: 1. The game DID have multiclassing, not just hybrid classes, and it was in the original PHB. Instead of taking levels in that other class, though, you took a special multiclass feat for that class, which gave you a watered down version of a class feature from that class. Then, you can take additional feats that let you swap powers from your main class with powers from your additional class. Additionally, you could also opt to not take a Paragon Path, and instead pick up additional powers from your second class. 2. I strongly disagree with all the classes in a role being just reskins of each other, such that there are really only four classes. The example you cite, the Leader's twice/encounter heal, is one of the core features of what makes a Leader a Leader, but they all do it differently. A cleric's class features allow them to add their Wisdom modifier to the healing, a Warlord lets the target shift, and the Artificer heals the target without them spending a healing surge, but requires someone (not necessarily the person healed) to expend a healing surge later to regain the use of the power. Likewise, while all Defenders have an ability that applies the Marked condition to an enemy and have a power to punish Marked enemies that make attacks that don't include the Defender, the mechanics of each differ. These are just the basic framework of those roles. What makes them different is their OTHER class features, and what their powers focus on. The best example that comes to mind is the Warlord; although it's a Leader, it focuses on making other players make attacks. As a friend of mine put it, the fighter attacks using his longsword, the warlord attacks using his fighter. No other class in the game does this. 3. I have no idea where you came up with the idea that skill challenges are done in initiative order. I DM'd a LOT of Living Forgotten Realms, which featured skill challenges in most of their adventures; initiative has nothing to do with it. Also, skill challenges were just a mechanic to try to engineer non-combat encounters that grant XP in a formal way that they can commit to the rules. They were intended to be a simple matter of making so many successful skill checks (usually 4) before too many failures (usually 3). While the published skill challenges would write down the expected skills to use, players were supposed to be free to get creative, and it was perfectly fine to use other skills to contribute to success. 4. The Warpriest was from the D&D Essentials line, which featured cut-down classes, and were meant to be super-simple introductions to the game, and that's why you basically only got to choose your domain. The Warpriest was actually a cut-down Cleric. Whereas the PHB Cleric got to choose their at will and encounter attack powers normally, the Warpriest's were determined by their domain, and they only got to pick their daily attack powers. The Essentials line made variants of other classes, too, that diverged from the standard class design, like two different fighters (one a Defender, one a Striker) and rogues, all three based around making basic attacks, with encounter powers to augment said basic attacks, and no daily attack powers; also a Leader version of the Druid that got an animal companion, versus the PHB2 Druid that was a Controller and got Wild Shape. Also, a variant of human that got an encounter power that gave a retroactive +4 to a save or attack you just failed (because not all Essentials classes had at will attack powers, and the original Human granted an additional one of those).
DoomOtter
DoomOtter Month ago
I started in 3.5, and prefer 5e. Apparently that's really strange. All of my friends who started pre 4e still prefer 3.5/pathfinder. I remember when 4e came out and I read a review. The reviewer was the DM and talked about how much fun they had. They actually said that the larty never got to combat, but they still had fun. In other words they had fun despite never actually playing the system
Grey Acumen
Grey Acumen Month ago
My first proper intro to D&D was Baldur's Gate, based on a heavily modified 2e ruleset. Then everything went 3e and it was 3D graphics for neverwinter nights, but the thing I noticed, even way back when, was that EVERYTHING was modular. Originally it was just the graphics that bugged me, but I realized as I was putting together a spreadsheet to figure out character leveling progress that the rules were just as bad. I remembered thinking "man, there's so many stats going on here, I can't even imagine how much of a pain it would be to have to keep track of this while rolling dice and computing and tracking everything manually" and at the same time I was also thinking "man, the options I'm being presented with are boring. I wish I had a live DM that could roll with my unorthodox choices" While playing NWN, and even when NWN2 was released, there were STILL fan mods being made for additional content for the Baldur's Gate series, and plenty of fan modules for NWN and NWN2. Internet forums were getting big, online gameplay was hitting its silver age, and you were hearing less about couch/splitscreen multiplayer and more about lan parties and/or online coop/vs options: Counter Strike and Team Fortress 2 were huge. It was actually an incredibly forward thinking strategy to try to capitalize on a platform where the vast majority of the target demographic (gamers) got their fix; video games. Hence 4e revolved around functionally writing lines of game code on paper and calling it a game engine, that could then be used for the REAL content of creating a game engine. All moves were boiled down to what a computer could understand, player choices went from "fill in the blank" to "multiple choice" and everything was modularly designed to be able to fit in the same boxes. It's just speculation with absolutely nothing to support it, but it is my suspicion that D&D designers at the time thought that the potential "new demographic" that would be available to them on this platform was more scifi than fantasy, and so they hoped that by having a "post-apocalyptic setting" it would not only provide an in-game reason for mechanic changes, but they would appeal to this new base in the same move, essentially trying to bring in the Fallout 3 fanbase (though that would come out a year later, so... fallout 2 fanbase?) Heck, maybe they were even going after the half life fans; the relationship between dragonborn and dragons was actually a lot like the Vortigons and the Combine. Either way, as much as the mechanics issues, this setting concept was also riddled with similar problems. Just as the engine made everything about combat, the apocalyptic setting made EVERY story basically HAVE to involve the apocalypse or the results of the apocalypse in some manner. Not everyone wanted that, and those that didn't... simply didn't. It's not like 3.5e stopped working.
Tobias Pause
Tobias Pause Month ago
I had a pretty broken Cleric/Ranger in 4th Edition. Dealing over 700 dmg in one Turn Daily , over 100 each encounter. And 80 at will. He had the highest AC of the Group had Tank abilities and was the Main Healer. Lvl 22 by the way. My Friend had an Barbarian Sorcerer Who was a Flying Insubstantional Monster. Honestely, i only wanted to make an DD wo is good in Melee and Ranged Combat, but since that wasnt Possible, i made my Full fledged DD/Healer/Tank. Instead. Long story short, SOME Multiclassing was still possible.
AdamaGeist
AdamaGeist Month ago
First. Edition. And Red Box D&D. Old School gamer.
Loren Helgeson
Loren Helgeson Month ago
And people say THAC0 was complicated.
Robert Wilkinson
Robert Wilkinson Month ago
Our D&D group dont actually allow multi classing, we really dont like it hehe
Schwarzer Ritter
Schwarzer Ritter Month ago
Apparently falling to sleep and waking up on command is an important skill when playing Fourth Edition.
Cathartic Cathexis
Cathartic Cathexis Month ago
4th edition had amazing lore and splat. But the mechanics... god...
Fektthis
Fektthis Month ago
3.5 wasn't a very good fit for video games. (not sure why) so they made 4e.. and never used it to make any video games... go figure.
Coolio
Coolio Month ago
usshow.info/watch/_rEhZgB3BSI/video.html
1 Keller
1 Keller Month ago
I like how when you simplify a characters attacks in 4th edition combat it just sounds like playing wow. ( hit 1,2,3,4 switch 3 for 6 if its a caster, switch 4 for 8 if you need aoe). i put years into wow so i am not sure how to feel about that.
Lee Bennett
Lee Bennett Month ago
Now I am glad I never played 4th edition
GamerBear
GamerBear Month ago
I still liked the idea of everyone having attacks/moves/spells so playing a fighter isn't just "I move here, I attack. Next." like it felt before it.
Scrw
Scrw Month ago
Wow, they really designed 4e like a video game on paper, huh. All these tiny bonuses that would automatically be handled by the system are instead written out on paper for everyone to keep track of. The human brain can only do a couple things at a time (not even at the same time) and WotC expected people to do ALL of that.
Pink Lion Gaming
Pink Lion Gaming Month ago
Started at 5e
Kaelan Ward
Kaelan Ward Month ago
Puffin: **Complains for 18 minutes** I... STILL LIKE.... FOURTH EDITION... Me: That's the definition of stockholm syndrome
Randolph Tiangco
Randolph Tiangco Month ago
Pathfinder....
DeathDontWait4NoOne
DeathDontWait4NoOne Month ago
If 4e is your old D&D then fuck im ancient
KittyEvangeline
KittyEvangeline Month ago
Ben, I want to thank you so much for making this video. If it wasn't for this video, I might have burnt out on 4E, and have absolutely hated DnD by now. My group of friends got into 4th Edition cause it was hot shit when it came out, and that's the edition they sunk money into, so that's the edition they played. They played on and off over the years, until they finally met me, and convinced me to learn how to play, and DM for them. I had never played DnD before, and so 4th was my first edition, and I was supposed to DM lmao. Luckily, like you said in a previous video, I had one of those friends who knew a lot about the game, and he guided me the first few months of DMing, and slowly faded away the better I got at handling the game. I too DMed 4th Edition for over a year and a half, and maybe once or twice every 3 or 4 months I would actually enjoy DMing. It was like you said, I had fun just hanging out with my friends and stuff, but the game almost had nothing to do with it. I saw that moment at 7:53 and was like "Omg, that's us right there..." I showed it to my friends, and they too were shocked. I bit the bullet and bought the books to 5th Edition...ON OCTOBER OF 2019. THE ONE THING I'M NOT GRATEFUL FOR BEN, IS THAT IT TOOK YOU SO LONG TO MAKE THIS VIDEO XD I've been DMing 5th Edition weekly since then, and every week my friends and I are actually genuinely having fun now. But, you know, I love the fact my background as a DM and player starts in 4E, cause 4E taught me how to be a damn good DM. Cause, I didn't start 4E with some kinda module or campaign setting. I homebrewed it. Yeah, my first DnD, and I was a DM, and I decided to homebrew my own world... I can homebrew 5E with such ease, cause I've spent my time in hell homebrewing 4E to make it work, which as you said in your video was impossible to you. I too read through 5E books and modules with slight frustration, having been spoiled in 4E's wording and formatting. 4E was easy to understand in theory, but hard to keep up with in actual play. Later, I played with a different group of friends who only knew 5E, and I volunteered to co DM since I had a crap ton of experience DMing. Everyone was worried when I told them that I DMed 4E for over a year and a half, that I would be too rigid, harsh, and a rules lawyer, etc etc. But I was the one everyone loved playing with, cause I was fair, and balanced with everything that I did. Surprisingly, everyone hated how the other DM was unfair, arbitrary, and random. That DMing style just wouldn't fly with 4E.
SebastienPatriote
SebastienPatriote Month ago
I liked the healing surge mechanic.
Tiny Toybox Films
Tiny Toybox Films Month ago
It’s like when you think back to a girl you broke up with and you’re thinking about all the good times you had; then you read your journal and letters and posts from that time and you suddenly realize WHY YOU BROKE UP IN THE FIRST PLACE. Then you have to go and eat a pint of ice cream just to get back into a good enough mood to deal with people again.
Ryan Pawelko
Ryan Pawelko Month ago
4e was my first TRPG too. After a couple attempts, we switched to Pathfinder and didn't look back. Until 5e.
Daniel Martín Ontiveros Vizcarra
Daniel Martín Ontiveros Vizcarra Month ago
Pathfinder is d&d 3.5
BlueBasNeue Tube
BlueBasNeue Tube Month ago
Started with 5E, no intention to touch 4E, although 3.5E sounds a lot of fun. If 3.5E exists, where the hell is 3E.
Algeyr
Algeyr Month ago
Your Contra list sounds a lot like my Pro list :) * What baffled me the most is your impression of Hybrid classes and character building. Being a hybrid from level 1... I was like "Oh, yess!", no more suddenly gaining proficiencies / spellcasting over night and having weird power curves compared to single classed party members. And then being able to also multiclass (dip into some other classes' powers) with feats... All those opportunities to find your own synergies and customize your character further with each level. Whereas in 5e MC is an optional rule with little regards to balance... just dip into front loaded classes to gain a power spike at any level. And some classes literally only pick a subclass and that's it for relevant character building choices. Lots of power choices with lots of class features, races , themes, feats, paragon paths and epic destinies in 4e add up to unique characters that can be customized in detail, even when comparing option A to option B don't have much differences. Those differences add up and become significant when combined with other options. There are some recommended (or obvious) power "sets" aka suggested builds but you don't have to stick with them... e.g. with the cleric example in the video, couldn't it also be a good idea to combine any range power with any mace power to be prepared for both circumstances? Different combinations with different feats, hybrids or multiclasses mean making other power choices more viable. Yes, there are some options I wouldn't even consider for a certain character... but it's more interesting to have a choice of say 2 of 10, where seriously consider 5 of them, than a choice of 1 of 3 were you consider 2. * Character roles: if you generalize all classes to just the basic roles that's a very very rough distinction. Likewise you could say 5e only has casters and non-casters. * Combat is more intricate... but I find I can vary my playstyle more in 4e, there's always something else viable in my kit. In 5e only casters get that feeling. It's slower but 4e with people knowing what they're doing still runs faster than 5e with people not knowing what they're doing. It's more effort but I find it to be worth it because it's more interesting. Being able to react at multiple points keeps players engaged - when players don't have to do anything off turn they are more likely to zone out. If you don't get what's going on / have a problem managing the combat it might just not be the right type of combat system for you. * About the system being more rigid and powers only doing what the description says they do... it's similar in 5e (and 3.5 I think). E.g. Flame Strike in 5e doesn't set anything ablaze (description doesn't say it does, compared to Fire Bolt or other Fire spells). 4e tried to differentiate more between in combat and out of combat usages - but for me that is also a plus. Having the mechanics clearly defined as the mechanics and not combined with flavor lets you reflavor abilities much easier. And you don't have to argue if some text is only flavor or should have mechanical implications. * Out of combat casting... if you play in a low gold setting and prefer to save for magic items, then for that setting the prices are too high. I think this "homebrew economy" worsened your experience with this part of the game. In general, I like having some cost attached to magical problem solving - otherwise it often seems too easy and trivializes what would be an interesting problem to work around without magic. At least this way one has to consider the cost (of time and money). * Magic items only being able to be used once a day is just wrong. There's a variety of items and their effects have different usage types (at will / encounter / daily). Generally a 4e is also meant to have more magic items than a character in 5e (more limited due to attunement) so one of them likely does have less effects because otherwise it might become too much. * I am also confused about what you mention around monsters having powers - it makes it complicated and you feel less special as PC because they have them, but at the same time the combat is repetitive? How does the monsters having those kinds of powers not make the fight more interesting and varied compared to them just having an auto attack? * Similar thing with the overly complex combat situation you describe in the beginning - lots of different effects keying off each other, abilities being triggered by certain circumstances, movement, not being able to tell what's going on with the plethora of interaction between effects. Then later: tactics are easy, don't waste daily attacks on minions, don't stand in damage areas - that's everything you need to know. The combat being complex is what makes it interesting - and what makes you have to think more about it to play and coordinate well with your party members. The video is an entertaining rant, and some shortcomings of the edition are just that. But a lot it's design choices actually make it more enjoyable to play for other people. There's another side to the coin to most of the aspects you mention.
Pathfinder 2nd Edition Review and Thoughts
47:33
RPG Story: Chadwick Strongpants
13:10
Puffin Forest
Views 2.6M
The Downfall Of My Channel...
34:47
PopularMMOs
Views 1.3M
AMONG US with CUSTOM SKIN (epic)
11:11
🔴 Live Among Us with Friends Stream
1:6:16