4e Mechanics & Rules Discussion

[Raellus]

The link works. The PDF looks like an official 4e product. Very cool.

-

[unipus]

That's from their template for Workshop publications.

[kcdusk]

I'm late to the discussion guys, but i've been reading up reviews on the new 4E rules by Free Legion. Most of the reviews i've been able to find focus on two things, only one of which is helpful.

They focus on the time line (not helpful, I'll make my own up if i don't like it thanks).

they focus on the quality of the product. Great sketches, great quality, all reasonably helpful feedback.

What they don't really get around to is if the game is any good. It sounds like a whole new rule set, and it sounds like its a reasonably good one. Are you guys enjoying the new game?

[Adm.Lee]

Originally Posted by kcdusk

What they don't really get around to is if the game is any good. It sounds like a whole new rule set, and it sounds like its a reasonably good one. Are you guys enjoying the new game?

It's fine. I only ran 2 sessions (plus chargen), without vehicles and light on the foraging & survival, so that's the grain of salt to take it with.

I'm also in an intermittent v2.2 game online, so the main comparison I will make is that v4 is faster to play. The few firefights I ran were over pretty quickly, getting shot is pretty harsh.

I think there's a bit to be uncovered (I think I mentioned this above): a GM can-- without any real work-- run NPCs in squad-like batches, further simplifying the mental paperwork for themselves. A lot of suppression of groups can happen, vice trying to pick off individual opposition.

Both combat and the rest of the rules are aimed at simplicity and speed of play. I hear it's more gritty and crunchy than Free League's other games, but it's not as heavy as GDW's rules.

[unipus]

I'd agree with all of that. I've been running a narrative-heavy game for about the last year (30 sessions or so), starting from the alpha rules. So there have been some changes in that time, some of them suggested by me! But overall the rules are pretty focused on speed but not completely at the expense of depth, and the overall results (in combat anyway) seem as plausible as any I've seen. It still takes half a session to run a decent-sized combat, which is not my favorite thing -- but at least it's not a full session!

[Heffe]

I'd agree with what's been said already regarding whether the new edition being any good or not. There's a couple of noteworthy topics and differences:

1. The older versions felt much more open-ended and narrative driven - I think the older versions just felt like you could go anywhere, do anything. The sky was the limit. I don't know if it's the rules for strategic play, the hex map, the encounter cards, or the limited knowledge about what's happening in the rest of the world, but so far it feels like the new edition is slightly restricting in that regard. As a result, I'm using the world setting and more open narratives/modules of past editions.
2. The actual game mechanics - The new edition is pretty solid and dependable in providing reliable and consistent results. Combat seems streamlined over previous editions while still feeling realistic enough. It does tend to move a little more quickly while still being fairly gritty, which is nice. 3. Char Gen is, IMO, better than previous editions. Sure you lose some attributes and skills, but the efficiency gains in gameplay are worth it, at least to me. I like the new skill resolution process as well, it's a bit more abstracted, but it works.
4. The new edition is admittedly less gritty and more abstracted in other areas as well. Encumbrance is abstracted. Gear is often abstracted. The firing of bursts and automatic fire is abstracted. I imagine this will hit differently for different players. Veterans and gearheads might not like it, but for new players and folks that don't know the difference between an AK-74 and an AKM, I think the new stuff works. And for those that prefer to dig in deep on equipment, you can swap for the old lists really, really easily.
5. Some sections of the new version, I'm not sure should have been included. For instance, the base building mechanics, and solo rules, while nice additions, feel a bit rushed and underwhelming. I would have preferred some lengthier sections on these topics if they wanted to do them well. Of course, at least the new version HAS these topics.

All in all, I'm really happy with my purchase and with the 4th edition as a product. It's different, and it's going to feel different than old editions. Some stuff isn't as good, other things are better. I do think FL did a good job of capturing the spirit of the game though, all things considered. I'd recommend it.

[unipus]

I believe the solo rules WERE a last-minute addition, as it overlapped closely with announcement of The One Ring KS, and Shawn Tomkin's involvement. I also think it's unfortunate that they're stuck way in the back and labeled "solo" as they're super useful even for fully-crewed games. I use the stuff in there more often than the encounter cards!

As for combat, I find the rules to be less crunchy and precise, but actually far more realistic in both approach and outcome. At least when it comes to infantry combat. The vehicle rules are a tiny bit half-baked, admittedly.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Heffe

1. The older versions felt much more open-ended and narrative driven - I think the older versions just felt like you could go anywhere, do anything. The sky was the limit. I don't know if it's the rules for strategic play, the hex map, the encounter cards, or the limited knowledge about what's happening in the rest of the world, but so far it feels like the new edition is slightly restricting in that regard. As a result, I'm using the world setting and more open narratives/modules of past editions.

This is my impression as well. I haven't had a chance to actually use the system yet due to other project priorities, but from reading it, it feels like the dev team had a very specific outline with a list of "game must do this" priorities, and any mode of play not on that list was not worthy of word count. It's tight design for a game that, for all its hexcrawl promise, doesn't actually seem built for true sandbox play. It's more... scripted.

- C.

[Mahatatain]

Originally Posted by Heffe

1. The older versions felt much more open-ended and narrative driven - I think the older versions just felt like you could go anywhere, do anything. The sky was the limit. I don't know if it's the rules for strategic play, the hex map, the encounter cards, or the limited knowledge about what's happening in the rest of the world, but so far it feels like the new edition is slightly restricting in that regard. As a result, I'm using the world setting and more open narratives/modules of past editions.

I believe that it's the hex crawl system and the encounter cards. If you remove that and just use the v4 system with a "normal" RPG campaign where the GM has a scenario with a plot then it works really well as a game. I'm still learning the system but it feels faster in combat than previous versions of the game so that is good for me.