Anyone know if some smart enterprising gamer has come up with a 4e to 3/3.5 conversion yet?
That is, I'm iffy on some of the big changes (as in: don't like them) but I like the 4E Rules set so far.
We're only to level 2 in our 4E Realms game, so we have 28 more levels to go yet.
I'm the DM in that game and so far the advancement of the timeline (and not the big changes) have given me the most to work with and been the most fun to think about and use in play.
So what don't you like about the mechanics, SwordSpider? If I had to guess I'd say the skill system. (That's the one thing my players sometimes grumble about 'cause they like the 3.5 system better.)
Have to say I'm not in that boat.
That is, I'm iffy on some of the big changes (as in: don't like them) but I like the 4E Rules set so far.
We're only to level 2 in my 4E Realms game, so we have 28 more levels to go yet.
I'm the DM in my 4E Realms game and so far the advancement of the timeline (and not the big changes) have given me the most to work with and been the most fun to think about and use in play.
So what don't you like about the mechanics, SwordSpider? If I had to guess I'd say the skill system. (That's the one thing my players sometimes grumble about 'cause they like the 3.5 system better.)
Specifically, I live in a tiny, tiny space, and have no room for the necessary miniatures to fully use all the powers. Slide this, push that, whallop with a big rubber mallet and knock them 6 spaces, flip X monster onto the moonbounce and launch them into the lake 4 spaces to the left with a triple Lindy landing etc. That and it is just so completely different. Calling this 4e D&D is like someone trying to tell me that the apple that tastes like a grape is still an apple. (Grapple, it's a real produce product, apple tastes like a grape, kinda, try one, they are... uhm, different.)
I tried playing 4e with my group. Lasted all of 2 hours before the unanimous vote (read as mutiny if I didn't agree, but I wasn't going to be stopping them) that 4e be banished to some unknown and unlooked for dungeon (my back closet, scary place in there, some of the stuff back there even I don't remember where it came from, and when) and that we continue on with 3/3.5e, except the 2 that want 1st/2nd edition play... still. They'll latch on to any opportunity to try to get those editions back, I tell ya. I've even offered to get them Hackmaster (but that's a different story).
Anywho, so, about that 4e to 3/3.5 conversion...
Cramped spaces can sure put a dent on playability, though you don't need that much table space to get things going (well, depending on what level you're playing at).
I haven't come across a 4E to 3.5 conversion myself. Anyone else out there?
That's interesting to hear.
Cramped spaces can sure put a dent on playability, though you don't need that much table space to get things going (well, depending on what level you're playing at).
I haven't come across a 4E to 3.5 conversion myself. Anyone else out there?
True, but, my place is so small, if I turn around too fast, I hit walls. Most of my place is dominated by a computer desks and furniture in the living room and bedroom with a rather large cage for my 70lb. puppy (who is, only 9, almost 10 months old). No room for any decent sized table for map play, even though some like using miniatures in my group. I suppose I could set up a table in the showerstall and use the mirror for the illusion of space.
Yeah.. that could work...
-You know, you don't need to use miniatures. I don't, and my game isn't inherently faulty or anything. If it's a problem to use them, don't use them.
-Most people posting here seem to be the opposite: generally ambivalent on the 4e rules, but disliking the changes to the setting.
Exactly.
I can understand the "lack of space" problem. Even if you decide you want to use miniatures, though, do you really need that many?
They jumped ahead by 100+ years, altered the landscape, and changed some stuff. Don't know why, maybe the devs just didn't want to add all the stuff that made the FRs what it was. Maybe the devs just wanted to dumb it down for the newbies, kinda like making easier school tests for the kids now a days. I wonder if they have heard of the DEE DEE DEE song.
But, like I said, if there is a part that I don't like with the changed FR setting, I ignore it (making it the same as it was previous to 4e FR), or change it to some way I do like it. Not really that hard to do, at least for me.
As for minis for the group, yeah, we do need a bit. There is 4-7 of us, and with all the monsters, plus players (some playing more than 1 char), it needs a decent sized area, one I do not have.
As for 4e, meh, I don't really like it. Then again, I disliked the transitions from 1 to 2, then 2 to 3/3.5. And since none of the group likes 4e, I probably won't put any more work into trying to learn a brand new system. Laziness and me are good friends when it comes to effort to learn new games, so, I guess that is the real reason why I don't like it. I'm a slacker.
After the previews of the "new" FR I was quite excited to see the whole product. But after a look into the Campaign Guide I was seriously disappointed. The new realms seem to be randomly thrown together, and the designers wasted space on a large font, a lot of empty paper, and 30 redundant pages of Loudwater. Fluff information? Nope. You'll either have to make it up yourself, or pay extra.
-You know, you don't need to use miniatures. I don't, and my game isn't inherently faulty or anything.
I didn't know you ran a 4E game.
Regardless, the 4E game is predicated on their use. Trying to play without them would just lead to headaches.
I didn't know you ran a 4E game.
Regardless, the 4E game is predicated on their use. Trying to play without them would just lead to headaches.
-I don't. That said, that has no impact on the discussion: You don't have to use miniatures in a D&D game. That's the way it was in the past, and the way it currently is.
-I don't. That said, that has no impact on the discussion:
Of course it does. We're talking about using minis in a 4E game, remember?
You don't have to use miniatures. That's the way it was, and the way it'll always be.
One can do whatever they want, with any game, with varying degress of success.
But if you want to play 4E D&D and get the most out of the 4E rules as they were designed, you need a handful of miniatures.
So.....has anybody come up with a 4E to 3.5E conversion as the OP was asking for?
As for minis for the group, yeah, we do need a bit. There is 4-7 of us, and with all the monsters, plus players (some playing more than 1 char), it needs a decent sized area, one I do not have.
Hmmm, I see. I was going to say, though, you could just use dice, coins, or other inanimate objects to represent monsters and such. Sure, it might not look as "realistic" as a figurine, but it would solve the space problem (and ultimately be cheaper, as well).
EDIT: Or use legos, as mentioned above. ;)
I've done a lot of work myself on the magic system if you ever want to discuss it. I agree with Rinonalyrna Fathomlin that the rules in 4e are good if you go in with a fresh perspective and are looking for something entirely new. However, I personally have issues with the magic system.
Cheers!
Now, I did, and still do, like the fact a lot of info. was available in previous editions, say if my group wandered aimlessly into Yaun-ti territory, or ended up in a town full of rabid, fanatical entropy worshiping mage haters. Ahh, the memories...
Anyways, I plan on doing the same, it would just be more convienent for me (since it's all about me, baby) if someone had a 4e to 3/3.5 conversion handy, so I could go about converting powers, stats - you know, all that 4e-esque stuff to something workable for 3/3.5.
I did, and still do, like the new magic system in 4e; a bag full of unlimited spell goodness, plus 1x/encounter stuff, and then daily stuff. Makes downtown between fights much less. If I could figure out a feasible way to import that into 3/3.5, that would be better than a whole stack full of analbum covers from Sean Connery.
Cheers!
The best way to do what you're talking about magic-wise is to use a spell point system or a recharge system of magic. I highly recommend the Unearthed Arcana book for rules on how to do both.
Cheers!
We tried the spell point system once like described in a Dragon I think, way back in 1st/2nd ed. time. Turns out, you get more spells sticking to spells per day. However, I'll have to check out the recharge system. I even think I got Unearthed Arcana somewhere... and not just the 1st edition one.
I like the nations, the political structures and the evil factions featured so far. It also wipes away some of the old preconceived notions. I had a group once turn their nose up at an adventure hook in Waterdeep with the mindset of "Oh an Archmage will take care of that". Of course I blew up the marketplace in a halo of black fire hours later, but I digress.
What I don't like about 4th ed rules are the long, drawn out, long, pointlessly never ending, (did I mention long?) combats. My group is very efficient and smart in combat and we were a devistatingly efficient and a fight with 5 kobolds still took 98 minutes! (Yes, I timed it) And all the conditions are never ending! This guy is stunned, that guy is bloodied, was he the one thats prone?, oh great now he's blind... etc, etc etc. By the time I (the DM) got to my turn then I had forgotten who was what and what was who. We worked out some complicated bead system (this bead means stunned, this one means he is marked, this one is a condition until the end of his next round, this one is until the end of my next round), but then we realized that we shouldn't have to work this hard to fight 5 kobolds, god forbid what will happen when we play epic levels!
We played 4th ed for 2 months (even tried an epic one shot) and gave up, reverting to 3.5 but keeping the new, darker realms.
So I'm with ya SwordSpider, keep fighting the good fight
I like the changes, I like 4E but KOTS can really sour a group on 4E. Even now after playing in 4E for a bit I am still learning the right balance but that is because part of me wants every fight to be a challenge. I need to balance things more. I am not a numbers guy though and it takes me a little while to get used to a system though.
KotS is interesting because it really is a "bridge" module, meant to introduce more of the crunch side of changes than other elements.
That said, I played KotS with a group of strangers at a gaming store (which was fun in and of itself) and it really wasn't bad - there were moments when people did the scooby doo "Huh?!" with respect to their characters and abilities, but overall it didn't sour me on the 4E ruleset. The feel and tone of magic shifted dramatically, and I think that kind of thing can grow on me, but I didn't come to dislike the new rules because of KotS.
Getting back to the original intent of the thread, I fall more into the "dislikes 4E Realms" than likes. And I will say that the effort of the 4E Rules to clearly impart a sense of balance (especially, getting rid of megamagic - and as someone else said, far less focus on magic and the archmage) was needed for the game. I hated metamagic with a holy passion, because -everything- seemed tweaked up at that point and made into special exceptions, and it wasn't necessary. But I'm not sure how well the "balance of magic with other classes" tone and feel meshes with the Realms as a whole, among other things. For the Realms which have always made magic feel special, it no longer has that feel for me; it's just another route to study. So I'm opposite of the OP's theory, because I don't mind most of the 4E rules but I have serious problems with the 4E Realms "fixes" by designers.
18DELTA
That said, I played KotS with a group of strangers at a gaming store (which was fun in and of itself)...
-Into causal, anonymous gaming with strangers, eh? ;)
:P
-Into causal, anonymous gaming with strangers, eh? ;)
:P
Only during the debut of new editions. :P
Getting back to the original intent of the thread, I fall more into the "dislikes 4E Realms" than likes. And I will say that the effort of the 4E Rules to clearly impart a sense of balance (especially, getting rid of megamagic - and as someone else said, far less focus on magic and the archmage) was needed for the game. I hated metamagic with a holy passion, because -everything- seemed tweaked up at that point and made into special exceptions, and it wasn't necessary. But I'm not sure how well the "balance of magic with other classes" tone and feel meshes with the Realms as a whole, among other things. For the Realms which have always made magic feel special, it no longer has that feel for me; it's just another route to study. So I'm opposite of the OP's theory, because I don't mind most of the 4E rules but I have serious problems with the 4E Realms "fixes" by designers.
I can count the number of times on 1 hand I have had any of my group's characters (including mine) take metamagic feats. The only time I can think of is for specific prestige class requirements. As for metamagic feats, we for the most part don't use them. I never liked them much (4th level spell just to get max dmg on Magic Missle, bleh), and I can only remember one time we found a metamagic rod that allowed us to use Extend Spell as a freebie 3x/day for up to a 5th level spell. So, for my group, metamagic feats are a non-issue.
As for the Realms not feeling special anymore, I blame 4e, which made everyone essentially the same (great for game balance, sucks for uniqueness), rather than all the unique and weird stuff Ed and others made. Where in 4e are you ever going to find Snilloc's Snowball Swarm or it's lesser known variant, Snilloc's Cream Pie.
As for 4e Realms, eh, things change. If you don't like all the changes, change the stuff you don't like.
You know what they say "I like change, especially when it's a change back to the way I liked it in the first place."
The OP has a point in that liking 4E/3E is separate from liking the old FR/new FR. To be honest, I think I would have bought into the new Realms if they were released when I was still playing 3E.
-Yeah, settings are rules are two different things. They're related, but they're hardly inherently the same thing. That's how people are able to use the setting of their choice with the rule system of their choice. That's how there's people still out there who play in Grayhawk, or Dark Sun, or whatever else.
The OP has a point in that liking 4E/3E is separate from liking the old FR/new FR.
I disagree.
Each rules changeover (2E to 3E and 3E to 4E) has involved the Realms as the "showcase" setting for how best to utilize the new rules set, which resulted in some significant changes to the setting as well.
The 3E rules certainly brought out more of the Realms via representing lore in game mechanics that 2E did (though 2E totally trumped 3E in terms of pure lore explanations for magic and all manner of things Realmsian).
Not so sure that's the case with 4E, especially with regard to magic....though the Paragon Paths in the Player's Guide to the Realms are a step in the right direction.
I only wish WotC had gone the non-RSE/Magic Television route for transitioning to 4E like they did in the transition to 3E.
Likeability (for gamers) is tied to the setting and the rules it’s bundled with. People can attempt to utilize other rules sets, but they are in the minority.
That and the fact that I hate tracking movement in battle, which is the main focus of 4e. I'd rather just say "I close in next to the troll and start hacking at it with my greatsword" or "I stand back and cast fireball at all of the trolls".
4e does have a few decent concepts though. I have taken the 3e skill system, made all skills class skills, capped it at 5 ranks, and granted a global level/2 bonus though. And I've gotten rid of xp costs. And I made a magic missile reserve feat that duplicates the 4e power. But that's the only 4e thing I've used.
I like the changes to FR in 4e because it (a) gets rid of all the metaplots (although they really need to work on changing campaigns - come on the spellplague? And only 100 years?), (b) because it's grim and gritty, and feels a lot less civilized, and (c) because I know they're not going to advance the timeline for a long time, meaning I can push the realms in the direction I want to push them, which for 4e means going from region to region bringing light to the darkness.
Anyways, I plan on doing the same, it would just be more convienent for me (since it's all about me, baby) if someone had a 4e to 3/3.5 conversion handy, so I could go about converting powers, stats - you know, all that 4e-esque stuff to something workable for 3/3.5.
Have you asked on the general 4E boards if anyone has such a conversion and would like to share it?
I like the 4e Realms changes but hate 4e, mostly because I'm a powergaming munchkin...
Well, at least you admit it.:P
I disagree.
Each rules changeover (2E to 3E and 3E to 4E) has involved the Realms as the "showcase" setting for how best to utilize the new rules set, which resulted in some significant changes to the setting as well.
The 3E rules certainly brought out more of the Realms via representing lore in game mechanics that 2E did (though 2E totally trumped 3E in terms of pure lore explanations for magic and all manner of things Realmsian).
Not so sure that's the case with 4E, especially with regard to magic....though the Paragon Paths in the Player's Guide to the Realms are a step in the right direction.
I only wish WotC had gone the non-RSE/Magic Television route for transitioning to 4E like they did in the transition to 3E.
Likeability (for gamers) is tied to the setting and the rules it’s bundled with. People can attempt to utilize other rules sets, but they are in the minority.
While they (edition changes) did bring setting changes it was from a result of edition changes. WotC could have just as easily worked all the setting changes using the 3/3.5 ed rules instead of changing to 4e.
The devs have always used a rules change to facilitate new changes to the Realms, as have they done to other worlds (Ravenloft "Great Conjunction", etc.), but, the game writers, book writers, and accessory writers could have just as easily reworked major sweeping changes into the settings without the change to 4e.
I know, I know, WotC is trying to make money since they are a business and all that, but personally, I would have bought a new FR accessory book that does the 100 year jump using 3.5 rules. I bet a lot of us would.
Have you asked on the general 4E boards if anyone has such a conversion and would like to share it?
Nope, but I will now, thanks for the suggestion.
Not so in 4th ed. There are many character concepts I simply can't make with the rules as written. Sure, I could warp and change all the class features till the idea fits, but why do that when I can just keep playing 3.5 and save alot of work, headache and debate with my DM about what is balanced.
Could I get good at 4th ed? Sure. Do I want to when 3.5 with a few changes is funner? No.
Nope, but I will now, thanks for the suggestion.
You're welcome.
I like 3.5 ed more than 4th because there isn't a character I can come up with that I can't make. An Ice Druid Lich, a swashbuckling fighter/thief, a charismatic bard, a halfling paladin of slaughter, etc.
Not so in 4th ed. There are many character concepts I simply can't make with the rules as written. Sure, I could warp and change all the class features till the idea fits, but why do that when I can just keep playing 3.5 and save alot of work, headache and debate with my DM about what is balanced.
Could I get good at 4th ed? Sure. Do I want to when 3.5 with a few changes is funner? No.
Just remember in 2000 with just the three core books you could not make that druid ice lich either. Maybe a druid lich though. ;)
In 4E as of right now you can make an Ice-Lich of a current caster class. You will have to wait a year to go the druid route.
My point is it took 3E many, many years to give us all of the options that players say are lacking in 4E. Out of the can 3E was limited as well. The more splatbooks, the more options.
This also does not mean your point is invalid. As of right now you feel that
3E gives you more options than 4E and depending on your needs and play style you might be very accurate about that. At least at this moment in time.
Another complaint in general is that the other classes are not around. This is true for now but they will be here eventually. So in some ways now I can understand people claiming that 4E can be limiting because of lack of class options.
I am not even going to touch on the 3E/4E multiclassing thing. That is a silly arguement waiting to happen and will last for 10 pages. ;)
As to the multiclassing issue, you're probably right. But I don't see it as much of an argument in the first place. They aren't really comparable much... its completely a matter of personal taste that can't really lead to a satisfying conclusion if it breaks down into superiority issues, which it inevitably will.
I am not even going to touch on the 3E/4E multiclassing thing. That is a silly arguement waiting to happen and will last for 10 pages. ;)
True enough, but I agree with what Stigger said on the subject (and I actually like 4E, as I've said before).
Yep. No need to touch on that part of it. The classes will come, just like they did in the past.
-Yeah in 5 years we will have PCB (Paragon Class Bloat), EDB (Epic Destiny Bloat), and BCB (Base Class Bloat).
18DELTA ;)