So, I've wanted to get into D&D for a while now but I've never been able to get into an established group because most people don't want new players slowing down their campaigns and my friends haven't had an interest in trying it out. That is until now.
So a friend of mine asked if we should try out D&D and I obviously said yes, we dragged the only other friend who is nerdy enough to consider D&D and we went and bought a 4th edition D&D Essentials Dungeon Master's kit and a 4th edition players handbook.
Now this was just at late night yesterday so I haven't had to check it yet but I have had the time to read reviews online and the general census seems to be this...

"This is not D&D, it's a pen and paper video-game for Warcraft kiddies"

Yeah... well it's no lie I've played WoW but I wanted to get into the classical spirit of D&D having only played it once before with 3.5 rules which I enjoyed (for the short while it lasted).
So here is my question to those that may know more about 4th edition D&D.

Did I just spend money on something that is truly bad or even worthless as some would say, or am I just reading a lot of gripe from old D&D players who hate the changes so much that they are not even giving them a chance ? As a new player do you think I would enjoy trying out 4th edition or should I just go scouring for previous editions which by now I've found are hard to come by as stores have replaced the old books with the new ones.

Also as it is my group is quite small, it's just me who will most likely end up being the DM most of the time and my two friends and perhaps one of said friends sister who we did manage to get interested in Magic: The gathering but I have no idea if she would enjoy D&D or not. So with only 3 people (4 with luck) do we need to find more before we can even attempt to start playing or should we try to run a campaign with only 1 DM and 2 players ?

What little knowledge I have to DnD, 4th edition is considered to be dumped down version of 3.5 and earlier versions. But I wouldn't say it is useless purchase for someone
who is just getting into DnD. And that is how 4th is marketed, to get more new people into DnD. Old farts will still play by their own rules and complain about new releases.

Hell, I use my own RPG ruleset/fantasy setting, and my group is having good time.


You could try first with only two players. Make short 2-3 session campaign, learn the rules. Then bring more people in if they are interested.

I've only played 4th Edition, but I've played games like NWN which do base themselves on older rulesets. I can definitely see how things were simplified. From what my DM has said, 4e seems to be the "easier to get into" version, as older rules were (I gather) much more complex. Hell, even alignment pretty much goes out the window.

As for number of players, my group is only 3 players, so its definitely playable with a small group, but more players are always nice.

I've played D&D since Basic. You can have fun with 4e. 4e is the only book under WotC that encourages roleplaying and describing your character.

The classic D&D mods Temple of Elemental Evil, Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, A Night Below, Undermountain, are all dungeon crawling mods that emphasize solving problems with common sense rather than exploiting rules. Anything that came after WotC are rulebook boardgames. More so in 4e, but at least in 4e, you can actually have better normalized powers and abilities. You can make up your own style anyway you want without sacrificing survivability. All classes are well balanced, at least much better than 3.5e.

The classic thing in D&D is dungeon crawl, strong story is surprisingly enough, less important. Casting spells, overcoming obstecles as a group. Play as a group, contribute as a group is one of the most enjoyable experience.

I noticed that after reading the first two chapters of the players handbook. They only mentioned four alignments, lawful good, good, evil and chaotic evil. Do you think it is a bad idea for me to try and incorporate the other 5 alignments into my gaming right away or should I start the first campaigns with only those 4 alignments ? And even later on with 4th edition is it not feasible for an experienced DM to incorporate the other 5 alignments when it comes to things such as deities ?

I absolutely love 4th addition, I actually just started a group that met on sunday and we are playing a campagn that I've written (I'm obviously DMing). I see no problem with it, its very enjoyable and roleplaying is still a major part, but now battles are more interesting in my opinion. However, the only other addition besides 4th that I've played is 3.5, and I don't remember much. But I don't know why 4th edition gets hit so hard, I guess people can't deal with change (It doesn't change very much from what I can tell). In the end, its still a Pen and paper game where people can change the rules to thier liking.

But I love DMing my group Its so much fun. I had them fight a level 3 solo dragon on the first day, and they are close to leveling now.

@Ellert To be honest you can do whatever you want. It would make it difficut but its not impossible.

I really do believe its just a bunch of people that won't give change a try. My former DM played with us using 3.5 and he told us how terrible 4 was when it was released. The next year he told us he spoke way too soon and he wanted to switch, so we did. It was great

4th ed definitely took a lot of hints from the videogame world, and isn't quite the pure P&P RPG experience you seem to be looking for. Its still a good game despite this. It was made by the best game designers in the world, and they did a very fine job at it. It's not my cup of tea, but it certainly wasn't a waste of money.

The system doesn't matter as long as you have a good DM.

clearly you've never tried to play rolemaster.

Latest version had already reduced the number of tables down to around 2 to 3 for each roll and let's not talk about Anima.

@Ellert. Alignment system in unimportant in 4e. I simply do not use them in my gaming group. Old D&Ds alignment determines a lot of spell and curse effects, but in 4e they've no alignment dependency for any ruleset they published. What you want to apply is consequences for their actions.

3rd edition lifer here...(I will play 3.5 as well)
I "accidentally," (yes accidentally) bought the 4th edition ruleset without knowing it. :facepalm: I was getting a group together, and a couple of the guys didn't have any books. I was DM'ing, so I felt it was wise to get at least another player's handbook or two they could share. I also had lent my DM guide to a friend, so I wanted to pick up one of those as well. When I got to the game shop, the shelf was pretty worked over, but I got one player's guide, DM guide, and a new Monster Manual (ooh new pretty monsters!... or so I thought) Well, needless to say, when I got home and started running through the books, my jaw hit the floor. Coincidentally, the local paper decided to run a story on the new ruleset the day after I went to buy them. I honestly had no idea a new ruleset was coming out, and as such, I thought they had just updated the cover art. It's totally my fault, but here sits on my book shelf three brand new D&D books that I'll never use. Don't get me wrong, the system is great for a "pick-up" round, (I shudder to think of D&D in those terms) or for those more comfortable with "video game" style RPG's, but you have to understand, I have been playing the 3rd edition rules for almost twenty years now. Old habits die hard, and to me the 4th edition rules are not a "pure" D&D experience, it's a new game in and of itself. Again, it has it's merits, and I won't knock anyone for liking it, I just prefer the system I'm used to.

I play 3e with some concepts from 3.5e, but from what I've heard, 4e is easier to get into. At least the events of the various DnD settings are reflected by how much more simple 4e is...

How should freedom in a campaign be handled. Like let's say I'm running a campaign that starts out in a village that gets raided by orcs on a regular basis that hang out in caves in a nearby mountain. Around the village there is a forest which is not particularly important for the setting and the theme of the campaign and is only partially fleshed out.

So let's say a player decides to ignore the obvious hint of direction I've given by setting up the whole "orcs raiding the local town" scenario, and he decides he just wants to walk into the forest. Deeper, and deeper, and deeper, and deeper, and deeper. Just endlessly further into the forest.

How would you handle that ? (Not ready yet to run campaigns or any, so this isn't something I've had to deal with but it is something I suspect one of my more chaotic neutral friends may decide to try)

3rd edition only came out in 1998 after WotC took over...



One of the way is to railroading. Force them to that path by certain event, but that should be left as last resort.

This only happens from lack of preparation, so you want to be quite prepared for the world settings. Literally, you may ask the players to be patient and tell them that since you are just a beginning gaming group, the world you participate in will be quite limited, until you guys started playing more, and the world expands along with their adventures.

Preset a scenario for them, until you have very good grasp of their surroundings, how much freedom is available for them. Start with a mission assigned by some organization and they are already beginning with the journey. Tell them why and let them know if they don't go down that path, they will meet some miserable ends. Branch out your possibility from there. Plan ahead. I shall be blunt here, 80% of your efforts could easily go down the drain. Players never like holding hands and they can always think of some very creative ways to tackle obstacles. Apply common sense, don't hammer down their wish, but route them to a branch, improvise the possibility, which will at the same time help expand your world.
e.g: Player wanted to find a sage in the village to expand his ritual book, which you don't have. Instead of telling him straight away no, tell him yes there's a sage here, he may provide a certain degree of information and possible some low level rituals. Then viola you got a new sage for your village in the future.
e.g: They are entering the road to bandit camp, but decided to branch out. Instead of giving them monsters to kill, perhap place a hut there with a hermit that could give them clue of direction of the camp. If they decided to kill the hermit and loot his house than left off to join the bandit, why not just give them a rob the merchant quest? Of course this could lead to pvp for different player may hold different ideal in the game.

Another way is to preset an NPC to adventure with them. Don't provide too much information, but instead give the NPC a strong reason to stay with the mission, who will be trying to convince others to follow his route. Common sense applies with this NPC.

Put down notes on what they've done and the impact of their actions to the world. Slowly give them away so they know they had accomplished something that affects their environment.

PS: Btw, 4e is best ran with hex maps instead of square maps.

I've played both, and enjoyed them both.

I personally prefer 3.5 over 4e, largely because it's whats familiar, but also because of the sense of danger at low levels.

In 4e, a level one character feels quite powerful, and the combat is more action-y. I'll also say that there are a lot less graphs in 4e, and having power cards really speeds turns along, especially for spell-casters.

Anyone who says that you can't roleplay in 4e as well as in previous editions is simply wrong, the current 4e campaign that I'm in has some of the heaviest RPing that I've ever come across in a game of D&D. It all boils down to the players (DM included).

Basically it all boils down to personal preference. There's nothing wrong with 4e, it's just a different style of game.

I pretty much hale 3.5 as the best Pen and Paper RPG of all time. I haven't tried 4th edition, although I did pick up the handbooks and read into it quite a bit.

Since you've already got the set, I would go ahead and just give 4th edition a try. It's not as flexible, but nevertheless I assume that it still feels like DnD. I still highly recommend 3.5 over anything though, as there are a thousand books for it, and Pathfinder is still coming out with new material.

I would have the orcs raid the village, and be successful because the players weren't there to help (they won't know this of course unless they decide to go back to the village).

I would then try to think of an adventure that could happen in the forest. Maybe the players can stumble upon a mysterious ruin, and start their first dungeon crawl. Perhaps they'll encounter a group of elves who are concerned about a dark ritual that is being prepared deep in the woods. You could try to think of any adventures that you've seen on tv or in a movie, or read in a book, and try to adapt it to fit your game.

Having lists of ideas helps for when players decide to go off the beaten path, but you shouldn't spend too much time preparing for this, because it can be a huge time sink, and is often not completely necessary. Eventually you should try to lead the players back onto the set path.

I find it's important for it to seem like the world is alive, so I try to have events occur regardless of player actions, and if the players happen to be at a location when an event is happening, they can be a major influence on the outcome.

Of course, you should also always have interesting things happening close to where the players are, so that they don't feel like their adventures are dull compared to the rest of the world.

I've started playing some D&D, fourth edition, and for me it's more about the experience of deciding what to do than all the rules behind the combat and whatnot. I play D&D for the social aspect more than the playing - whereas the complete opposite goes for video games.

Aye, bad math and wording on my part... I meant to say I've been playing for nearly twenty years, and a good majority of it was playing 3rd ed. This, children, is why you shouldn't drink and post. :hehe:

First, be prepared. I've never run a long RPG campaign, just some short one or two shots, but I've found that I never regretted having a vague idea of what's around every corner. So, when you're coming up with ideas for your setting, give a second of two of thought to the residents of Forest Alpha. Perhaps some elves live there.

Second, be willing to make stuff up. I know that, as a player, there's nothing I dread more than hearing someone say, "no, you just can't do that. Because I said so" Let's say the player in question is completely insane, and decides to set fire to the forest. There's no way you could have foreseen that, so what do you do? Whatever pops into your head. If nothing occurs to you right away, send your players out to fetch some snacks and use the spare time to brainstorm. Even if the idea you come up with for this scenario is objectively inferior, they'll enjoy it more than railroading because seventy five percent of the fun of Role-Playing Games is the total freedom of choice, and interactivity. A mediocre idea that incorporates player input is usually better than a good idea that does not incorporate player input.

Third, get good at recycling your stuff. If the players go into the forest, they encounter some elven druids, who are attacked by orcs. The leader of the elven druids is a lot like the leader of the village elder, except he uses more nature metaphors. If the players get into a fight somehow, see if you can substitute a fight you already prepared (hint: players usually can't tell the difference between two different sorts of physical fighters, unless you tell them). If your players walk past some cool story idea you had, save it for another day.