Sorry for the noobishness of this question, but I'm curious:
Is 4th Edition D&D still considered d20? Or did the mechanic of the game change to something else with the new license? And if it's still a d20 system, why are so many publishers dumping their source books? Wouldn't a d20 source book for an earlier edition still work with 4e, albeit with some necessary conversion?
Thanks!
|
That depends on what you mean.
Most of the basic assumptions that define 'd20' are present in 4e (most checks are 1d20, add modifiers, higher roll is better).
But 4e is not compatible with the d20 SRD, which is what most people mean when they talk about a 'd20' game. So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.
|
Sorry for the noobishness of this question, but I'm curious:
Is 4th Edition D&D still considered d20? Or did the mechanic of the game change to something else with the new license? And if it's still a d20 system, why are so many publishers dumping their source books? Wouldn't a d20 source book for an earlier edition still work with 4e, albeit with some necessary conversion?
Thanks!
Your question should have been "Is 4th Edition D&D still considered D&D"?
Answer is BIG NO!
The mechanic of the game definitly changed to something else, it's called "D&D mini-role game" wich means D&D mini skirmish with some roleplay between fight if you're still nostalgic!
Sorry for the noobishness of this question, but I'm curious:
Is 4th Edition D&D still considered d20? Or did the mechanic of the game change to something else with the new license? And if it's still a d20 system, why are so many publishers dumping their source books? Wouldn't a d20 source book for an earlier edition still work with 4e, albeit with some necessary conversion?
Thanks!
This brings up an interesting point. 4th Ed. is Dungeons and Dragons, it's what the game has evolved into (for better or worse, take your pick). But it is not a 'd20' as coined by 3rd and 3.5 system.
Pathfinder is a d20 game, but it is not D&D. Technically, as a Pathfinder player, I can't say I play D&D anymore, I play a D20 gaming system (or Pathfinder for short).
That depends on what you mean.
Most of the basic assumptions that define 'd20' are present in 4e (most checks are 1d20, add modifiers, higher roll is better).
But 4e is not compatible with the d20 SRD, which is what most people mean when they talk about a 'd20' game. So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.
Thanks, that sums it up nicely.
|
Interestingly enough, the 4E books (at least, the PH I have) actually have a "d20 System" logo on the back. Not the same d20 System logo as was used before, for the "3.5 era" system, but it says d20. So, technically, it is d20 System.
That said, (as others have mentioned) while it does use the fundamental "roll a d20 and add modifiers" mechanic, it is different enough from the OGL d20 system that books for one don't really work with the other (without conversion).
(Edit: grammar)
|
Thanks, that sums it up nicely.That depends on what you mean.
Most of the basic assumptions that define 'd20' are present in 4e (most checks are 1d20, add modifiers, higher roll is better).
But 4e is not compatible with the d20 SRD, which is what most people mean when they talk about a 'd20' game. So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.
Though to be fair to both 4E and 3E, materials from both can be adapted with some work. When I read Kobold Quarterly I don't just discount interesting articles because they're labeled 4E; I read them and look at them for adaptability. Sometimes it's easy (when they're based on stats which have the same kinds of ranges), sometimes they're not (when they're based on character powers).
They are certainly not backwards-compatible in the truest sense, but I think the work that's been going on converting the APs to 4E does indicate that some material can be converted if you're willing to put work into it.
|
Though to be fair to both 4E and 3E, materials from both can be adapted with some work.Thanks, that sums it up nicely.That depends on what you mean.
Most of the basic assumptions that define 'd20' are present in 4e (most checks are 1d20, add modifiers, higher roll is better).
But 4e is not compatible with the d20 SRD, which is what most people mean when they talk about a 'd20' game. So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.
True enough. I have a thread going which started out converting some of the new drgons from 4E to PFRPG. I hae also converted stuff From th APs and other sources like Tome of Horrors or the Creature Collection Revised to 4E. And I hae found that cnverting mosts from 2E to 4E is easier than converting thm to 3.5.
As others stated you will have to convert prior material, i.e. 3.0 and 3.5, or even pathfinder to 4E. The system is very easy to grasp once you start playing it and like any new system, it will force you to change some of your play style and preferences from earlier editions.
Once you have the mechanics mastered, it is pretty easy to convert overall content, although you will find it difficult to replicate exact spells or abilities, so your judgement will have to come into play.
I still prefer 4E, over previous editions, because as a DM it is easier to manage (except for tracking conditions), and after roleplaying for 20 plus years, having a family, etc. my time spent devoted to understanding each niche and crevasse of older editions is slowly waning.
4-3-2-1...
I think the answer really depends on the intent of your question.
On one hand, 4E is d20. Ihe books even have the d20 logo on 'em.
However, if you're asking if 4E is compatible with the 3.5 SRD, then the answer is no.
As far as why many publishers have been dumping their books: It is no longer possible to product anything under the d20 license; One must use the new GSL.
fluff is fluff.
if you see something that catches your eye, is cheap, the fluff can be used. such as the dragonlance stuff thats on sale now. you can use the story, the npcs (with some modification) and port that stuff into 4e. monsters you can take the existing 4e monsters and use them instead, or convert them into 4e monsters.
before i get flamed, npcs in 4e dont have to be this fully stated player character. you dont have to do any calculas proffs to make an npc. you decide on some flavor, you give him some powers equal to challenge rating, and your done. you dont have to go through all that stuff to make him up.
stat blocks are much more easily managed.
use the fluff from anywhere. i use fluff from early 1980s grayhawk
As far as why many publishers have been dumping their books: It is no longer possible to product anything under the d20 license; One must use the new GSL.
That answers the other question I had. Thank you.
But it brings rise to a new one, lol --
Is Pathfinder d20? Does it fall under the auspices of the GSL?
Well, it's gotten some answers on the Inner Gygax thread, for those who want to pop back and forth.
|
Is Pathfinder d20? Does it fall under the auspices of the GSL?
Pathfinder is d20, but it uses the older and much more open OGL license as opposed to 4Es GSL. It is much closer to the d20 SRD/D&D 3.5 than 4E is, so it's more compatible with all that material. Not that you can't convert 3rd Edition stuff to 4E, but it is considerably easier with Pathfinder.
Is Pathfinder d20? Does it fall under the auspices of the GSL?
Pathfinder uses the same system as D&D 3.5, but it wasn't released under the d20 license; rather, it was released as an OGL product. It has nothing to do with the GSL.
I believe the confusion stems from WotC's unfortunate choice to use the label "d20" for both a license and a game system. The d20 license is no more, but d20 products live on under the OGL, even if they can't legally be called "d20." Further muddyng the waters, there is a d20 logo on 4E books, even though 4E is neither compatible with products released under the d20 license, nor was it released under that license. In fact, I'm not really sure what the d20 logo on 4E books is supposed to mean to consumers.
Yes, it is really that confusing. :P
I removed some posts. Be adults, please.
That depends on what you mean.
Most of the basic assumptions that define 'd20' are present in 4e (most checks are 1d20, add modifiers, higher roll is better).
But 4e is not compatible with the d20 SRD, which is what most people mean when they talk about a 'd20' game. So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.
Clear, concise and spot on.
|
|
So it is not backwards-compatible and doesn't work with existing third-party d20 sourcebooks.Well it's not plug and play, but it can be compatable if you are willing to deal with some assembley required.
True, I should have been more clear.
What I should have said was: Mechanical elements from 3.X sourcebooks are generally not compatible with 4e right out of the box, and will require some adaptation to work within the 4e system.
Sorry for the noobishness of this question, but I'm curious:
Is 4th Edition D&D still considered d20? Or did the mechanic of the game change to something else with the new license? And if it's still a d20 system, why are so many publishers dumping their source books? Wouldn't a d20 source book for an earlier edition still work with 4e, albeit with some necessary conversion?
Thanks!
Your question should have been "Is 4th Edition D&D still considered D&D"?
Answer is BIG NO!
The mechanic of the game definitly changed to something else, it's called "D&D mini-role game" wich means D&D mini skirmish with some roleplay between fight if you're still nostalgic!
A number of things said in the above post are not true.
Chief Technical Officer
|
As far as why many publishers have been dumping their books: It is no longer possible to product anything under the d20 license; One must use the new GSL.
Though Wizards said in an interview published by a third party that the d20 license would be discontinued, and though many publishers treated statements from that interview as though it were official, I've still never seen an actual official announcement that the d20 license ever became unavailable. Certainly, there's nothing to indicate that it's *not* still an available option on the d20 license page on wizards.com.
That said, I think most publishers realized that the d20 license didn't actually offer any significant value over using the OGL alone.
By the way, that interview contains a bunch of information about how Wizards views the d20 logo that is quite pertinent to the original poster's question.
Thanks! Very helpful, indeed!