|
Over the last three years I have run an on again, off again game for the boys and girls in my neighborhood. There's 9 kids who cycle into and out of my game. For the last two years we've been playing 4E. Last weekened, a delegation of three of the "hard core" players headed up by my oldest, who is 12, came to me and asked that we start playing Pathfinder and that they do not want to play D&D anymore.
I run Pathfinder for a group of adults on a bi-weekly basis and play 4E with another group on about the same schedule. I DM for the kids every spare available second during summer vacation and during other vacations, and about once a month when school is in.
When I asked why they wanted to stop playing 4E, I got he following responses:
"If we want to play cards, we'll play Pokemon."
"All the D&D classes work the same. It's gotten boring."
"The Big Pathfinger book makes all the classes special, not the same."
"Every new D&D book swells up the game like a balloon. It's gonna pop."
"We play on Golarion anyways, let's use the rules written for there."
"Book games (what they call RPGs) should just try to be book games. D&D tries to be Free Realms. It fails."
These folks are, arguably, the target demo for 4E. They've rejected it, for a bunch of reasons. Granted, they've been exposed to the back and forth of my gaming community, which is split 60/40 4E/PFRPG, but these opinions are authentically their own.
I intend to keep playing both systems as I enjoy both. I imagine they'll waffle back and forth too, especially as there are several fledgling DMs in the group. The gaming table in the great room no longer truly belongs to my wife and me. However, their rejection is fierce in its tone, and reminds me of how they acted when they left Dora and Diego behind for Ben 10, Star Wars and Teen Titans.
They talk like they've outgrown it. Food for thought folks.
They're kids, of course they're acting like they grew out of 4e. Besides, they're not going to burn all your 4e books because it's an inferior system. (It isn't, to quell any potential flame bait.) Just run whatever system they want to play.
I'm really tempted to say that this is very much a direct effect of their exposure to the back and forth the rest of your local community has had over the issue; I'm skeptical that some of these claims (especially those about PFRPG) are ones that they actually know to be true; rather, I suspect that they are simply talking points they've latched onto from the other side, which they've taken for some other reason. In short, I don't think this says anything about 4e of PFRPG, but is a reflection about how kids make decisions about what is cool and what is not.
Regardless, you should treat this like any other group of gamers; run what they want to play unless it's not what you want to run, and if the latter is the case then try to work on a compromise. If they end up playing PFRPG, maybe they'll like it, or maybe they'll go back to 4e.
4e is really, really doing fine, especially among this younger demographic.
I'm not sure that bodes ill at all. It just sounds like a group of young players that have made a pretty well reasoned collective decision regarding the game system they want to play.
Well-reasoned decisions are not made collectively by children, nor do they include "logic" such as "If we want to play cards, we'll play Pokemon."
|
I have some IRL friends who I haven't seen in forever other than on facebook.
I intercepted their transmissions on my newsfeed bandying about their likes/dislikes concerning 4e vs. Pathfinder.
A few years ago they were going 4e, and now they're pretty much done with it, going Pathfinder, never had an edition war back-and-forth with them yadda yadda.
I was actually bummed cos I picked up the 3 core 4e used in contemplation of the Dark Sun release...
I'm sure that 4e is on stable financial footing, but I'm pleasantly surprised with just how awesome Pathfinder is doing. I thought a Pathfinder player was going to be some sort of oddity, which is seeming less and less likely as time goes by.
I have some IRL friends who I haven't seen in forever other than on facebook.
I intercepted their transmissions on my newsfeed bandying about their likes/dislikes concerning 4e vs. Pathfinder.
A few years ago they were going 4e, and now they're pretty much done with it, going Pathfinder, never had an edition war back-and-forth with them yadda yadda.
I was actually bummed cos I picked up the 3 core 4e used in contemplation of the Dark Sun release...
I'm sure that 4e is on stable financial footing, but I'm pleasantly surprised with just how awesome Pathfinder is doing. I thought a Pathfinder player was going to be some sort of oddity, which is seeming less and less likely as time goes by.
I think it's awesome that both games are doing well, and I feel that the better they both do, the more options available to us. It provides a nice alternative, as I find I enjoy both games immensely. Now if only 4e would write some excellent adventures like the Pathfinder AP's...sigh. I don't view anything between the two as a "I win, i chose the 'right' game!" kinda thing. Those kind of thoughts lead to the dark side...
... and wars...horrid horrid wars.
Part of me doubts that this is less a reflection of kids as a whole and more a representation of how they make decisions to not be associated with things they have outgrown or are not cool. I would say that it could have been easily them saying no to Pathfinder with other "talking points" like, "it's a poor revision to a poor system," and "if I play D&D, I will play D&D. Not some a version stolen by another company."
I believe that while they could, as a group, decide not to play 4e and, just as easily, another group of kids could all get drawn into the game. Even if it even, I think that it would still be in the favor of the game in the long run because years down the road, these opinions might have changed and all of them will still have a stronger awareness of D&D than if they had never played at all.
Part of me doubts that this is less a reflection of kids as a whole and more a representation of how they make decisions to not be associated with things they have outgrown or are not cool. I would say that it could have been easily them saying no to Pathfinder with other "talking points" like, "it's a poor revision to a poor system," and "if I play D&D, I will play D&D. Not some a version stolen by another company."
I believe that while they could, as a group, decide not to play 4e and, just as easily, another group of kids could all get drawn into the game. Even if it even, I think that it would still be in the favor of the game in the long run because years down the road, these opinions might have changed and all of them will still have a stronger awareness of D&D than if they had never played at all.
I think this is spot on.
I think the tell is this:
his son sees him playing it.
his son wants to play it.
NORMALLY, a son will rebel, become a Vampire Goth Larper, and make fun of the son of the Vampire Goth Larper who plays D&D just to make his father cry in shame.
This is not the case though.
The son does not rebel against the father.
How does that bode ill? They are tired of a game. The world is not ending.
Of course, many want to think that they've been spoon-fed those lines, say they're just kids and parrot things, but lets try not to be condescending to the kids and let them play PF.
Maybe you're lucky (I infer from the thread title that you are very distraught by the kids' rejection of 4e) and they turn out not to like Pathfinder and go back to Book Pokemon (assuming it hasn't popped by then ;-P).
Maybe your son knows you rather well, knew how you'd react, and decided to wind you up a bit. :D
These folks are, arguably, the target demo for 4E.
I think 4E is an excellent system for introducing new people to RPGs but am not so sure it really has much of an edge once one starts dealing with 'hard core' players. 12 year olds are certainly old enough to grasp complex systems after spending years with the basics of RPGs and they have the time for it. Certainly by 12 I was reasonably versed in 1st edition AD&D.
In some ways the 4E systems target audience might be new players & overworked 30 something DMs. Not saying thats WotCs intended target market (though it might be) but I do suspect that this is the group most likely to find 4E's design choices line up for them.
The bigger issue I see would not be these 3 core players - its the 6 other 'sometimes' players that might find grasping the intricacies of Pathfinder more of a leap then 4E in a situation where they are here a week and then miss the next session, rinse and repeat. Pathfinder rewards rules mastery far more then 4E and teens and preteens tend to have far less tolerance for significant imbalances in character power.
|
|
I'm not sure that bodes ill at all. It just sounds like a group of young players that have made a pretty well reasoned collective decision regarding the game system they want to play. I applaud them for speaking up. Hopefully you will go along with their wishes and not try to talk them out of it.
I'll DM whatever they want me too. I am about telling a story, and not limited by any one system.
How does that bode ill? They are tired of a game. The world is not ending.
Of course, many want to think that they've been spoon-fed those lines, say they're just kids and parrot things, but lets try not to be condescending to the kids and let them play PF.
We are saying that (assuming tadkil is cool with running it), but we're also saying that this is not indicative of any sort of trend, except the well-known trend that children tend to be fickle when it comes to what they think is cool, and how they react to the new and shiny. It's clear from the children's comments that they are not acting on a well-informed collective opinion, but rather a set of loose rationales. I'm pretty sure that this situation is a product of circumstances, rather than the game systems themselves.
We are saying that (assuming tadkil is cool with running it), but we're also saying that this is not indicative of any sort of trend, except the well-known trend that children tend to be fickle when it comes to what they think is cool, and how they react to the new and shiny. It's clear from the children's comments that they are not acting on a well-informed collective opinion, but rather a set of loose rationales. I'm pretty sure that this situation is a product of circumstances, rather than the game systems themselves.How does that bode ill? They are tired of a game. The world is not ending.
Of course, many want to think that they've been spoon-fed those lines, say they're just kids and parrot things, but lets try not to be condescending to the kids and let them play PF.
Of course. They're just children. They cannot really dislike 4e.
Whatever lets you sleep at night! :D
Ugh. Just please stop with the flame-bait, peeps.
|
|
I would suggest that 4e is better for DMs (prep time) whereas PF is probably better for players (due to the steeper power curve you get cooler quicker). If the kids haven't experienced both games from both sides of the screen they may not appreciate that aspect. If there is room for two version of D&D, then great. I doubt the PF is seriously cannibalising 4e, and I suspect there is traffic in both directions.
Of course. They're just children. They cannot really dislike 4e.
Whatever lets you sleep at night! :D
Don't.
I would suggest that 4e is better for DMs (prep time) whereas PF is probably better for players (due to the steeper power curve you get cooler quicker). If the kids haven't experienced both games from both sides of the screen they may not appreciate that aspect.
Aubury makes a good point. In an environment where the Kids could be comparing their 12th level characters with Pathfinder characters of 12th level the Pathfinder Characters are going to be way more awesome.
4E Character - "I can teleport anywhere I can see."
3.P Character - "Me and all my friends can teleport to anywhere in the world we have ever seen."
4E Character "I can fly for two full rounds"
3.P Character "I can leap into the air and fly up to the Dragon and wrestle it back to the ground."
Etc.
Certainly if one is appealing to 12 year olds on the basis of what cool s~%% ones character can do - well 3.P characters, by 12th can do a lot more impressive cool s+@~ then 4E characters, they are simply far more powerful.
I think Mighty Mouse could wup Superman's arse. (lol)
Kids effin rule.
Certainly if one is appealing to 12 year olds on the basis of what cool s@&~ ones character can do - well 3.P characters, by 12th can do a lot more impressive cool s@&~ then 4E characters, they are simply far more powerful.
And this is why, of course, the DM needs to have a hand in deciding what they end up playing.
Certainly if one is appealing to 12 year olds on the basis of what cool s*@% ones character can do - well 3.P characters, by 12th can do a lot more impressive cool s*@% then 4E characters, they are simply far more powerful.
I worked at a kid's camp that provided LARPing. I noticed two trends, depending on the children:
1. Kids liked powerful abilities, but they didn't always know how to use them.
2. Kids don't like complications to figure out what their powers do.
These are generalizations of course. I'm not sure which edition I'd play with kids - 4e seems like the easiest example, but the kids may not be into figuring out the various conditions, etc. If I did play 4e, I'd probably give all kids the ability to perform rituals and amp up what they can do at any given level. If I played 3e/PF with the kids, it would be less rules intensive and more "spirit-of-the-game" oriented.
I'm not sure if 4e is geared toward kids, so much as "young adults." 14-18 might be the ideal introductory age for 4e.
Certainly if one is appealing to 12 year olds on the basis of what cool s*@% ones character can do - well 3.P characters, by 12th can do a lot more impressive cool s*@% then 4E characters, they are simply far more powerful.I worked at a kid's camp that provided LARPing. I noticed two trends, depending on the children:
1. Kids liked powerful abilities, but they didn't always know how to use them.
2. Kids don't like complications to figure out what their powers do.These are generalizations of course. I'm not sure which edition I'd play with kids - 4e seems like the easiest example, but the kids may not be into figuring out the various conditions, etc. If I did play 4e, I'd probably give all kids the ability to perform rituals and amp up what they can do at any given level. If I played 3e/PF with the kids, it would be less rules intensive and more "spirit-of-the-game" oriented.
I'm not sure if 4e is geared toward kids, so much as "young adults." 14-18 might be the ideal introductory age for 4e.
Oh even the younger ones would be fine with 4E. Usually their powers are pretty simple. The younger ones will totally forget that they can do stuff other then their powers I suspect but the game will run fine, grappling or bull rushing outside of power use is more for the older players who are going to question why the rules don't allow one to grab without some actual power that says grab.
Its pretty easy to strip 4E down to a fairly easy game - that's not something that necessarily appeals to a 'hardcore' 12 year old though. Your Larpers probably did not have 100+ hours of RPing under their belts while Tadkills core kids probably do.
Admittedly they might more clearly understand the difference when they actually get to the part where they leap into the air, fly up to a (smallish) dragon, try and grab it and deal with both plummeting to the ground. I have no doubt 3.P can handle that scenario but its going to be dealing with a fair series of complex rules (rules for flying, rules for grappling, rules for grappling while flying and for falling). There will be a lot of page turning to figure out how to do this - the price for that kind of power is complexity.
I don't even think you need to make the rituals into powers. 4E characters are built like Jackie Chan - they can do cool stuff, but Jackie Chan can't leap into the air or teleport anywhere in the world.
Its in the comparison with 3.x that 4E characters loose out in terms of ability to do awesomeness. Once per encounter being able to leap into the air and do a spinning kick that hits everyone around you is awesome...unless your comparing it to a half giant that can hit everyone within 3 spaces of them with a spiked chain every single round.
The only thing that would bode ill if I was in this situation, is spending the extra time preparing for Pathfinder to DM. That is just the price to pay for a more complex system. If you can use an adventure path, then no problem, and let them have fun.
I went the full circle from the original 1E > 2E > 3E > 4E, which is like a bell curve in complexity.
But I will say providing a solid option for computer programs to run a game have more sway on my purchasing power these days, versus the complexity of the game, or whether it supports a specific mechanic. Of course this is not absolute, but I have no problems running any version of D&D.
If I had a three year run playing one game, then I consider that a success, and look forward to the next thing that comes out. But that is the same reason I don't go hog wild and by every supplment for a particular game.
I realize preferences change over time.
|
|
I'm really tempted to say that this is very much a direct effect of their exposure to the back and forth the rest of your local community has had over the issue; I'm skeptical that some of these claims (especially those about PFRPG) are ones that they actually know to be true; rather, I suspect that they are simply talking points they've latched onto from the other side, which they've taken for some other reason. In short, I don't think this says anything about 4e of PFRPG, but is a reflection about how kids make decisions about what is cool and what is not.
Regardless, you should treat this like any other group of gamers; run what they want to play unless it's not what you want to run, and if the latter is the case then try to work on a compromise. If they end up playing PFRPG, maybe they'll like it, or maybe they'll go back to 4e.
4e is really, really doing fine, especially among this younger demographic.
No they are intelligent kids, all honor students and capable of making their own decisions about their likes and aethetics. They have been exposed to some banter about the merits of the systems, but these three guys are the DMs of their group. This is a studied decisions based on what they value in the game.
As to it doing fine with the younger demo, who knows? I don't have the market research and neither do you. I imagine it is, but this group of kids gave it a thumbs down. In the grand scheme of things this is more focus group than market survey. All I know is they have rejected D&D in favor of another system. This is just one brand among many to them.
|
|
Well-reasoned decisions are not made collectively by children, nor do they include "logic" such as "If we want to play cards, we'll play Pokemon."
I did them a disservice by quoting this out of context.
These kids consume ALOT of media be that fiction, movies, video games, MMORPGs or TV. They know what they like.
They want to be transformed and lose themselves in the experience. They really get down on each other when they get too focused on mechanics. To them, the power cards distract from their favorite part of the game, the human interaction of it. They can only get that from RPGs. All their other media are less personal and less human.
As my oldest puts it, "It rocks to be heroes and it is boner to do it together."
translation
From Boomer into Millenial
Boner = B~&+%in'
from Boner into GenX/Y
Boner = Narley
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.
So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
|
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*Hops over to the WotC 4ed CharOp forum*
*notices 303 pages of threads*
Riiiight ...
|
|
Part of me doubts that this is less a reflection of kids as a whole and more a representation of how they make decisions to not be associated with things they have outgrown or are not cool. I would say that it could have been easily them saying no to Pathfinder with other "talking points" like, "it's a poor revision to a poor system," and "if I play D&D, I will play D&D. Not some a version stolen by another company."
I believe that while they could, as a group, decide not to play 4e and, just as easily, another group of kids could all get drawn into the game. Even if it even, I think that it would still be in the favor of the game in the long run because years down the road, these opinions might have changed and all of them will still have a stronger awareness of D&D than if they had never played at all.
While it could be some sort of cyclical evolution and reflect a developemental rejection of the status quo, I am more inclined to take them at their words. They have reasons for what they think and ask for.
If anything, they may have felt they needed to make a formal case to me about switching systems because they know my prep time increases in PFRPG. Scott has made it so dang easy to pirate his conversion blogs for material that my prep is really easy for 4E. Great work scott and thanks!
Bodes ill is a really poor choice for this thread though. This really bodes well for the hobby. These kids care about RPGs and make informed decisions about what they want to play and why.
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*Hops over to the WotC 4ed CharOp forum*
*notices 303 pages of threads*
Riiiight ...
...and of the majority of the builds presented on those pages are illegal builds and the ones that arn't illegal are not much more powerful than a quick gen character made with DDI.
|
|
I would suggest that 4e is better for DMs (prep time) whereas PF is probably better for players (due to the steeper power curve you get cooler quicker). If the kids haven't experienced both games from both sides of the screen they may not appreciate that aspect.Aubury makes a good point. In an environment where the Kids could be comparing their 12th level characters with Pathfinder characters of 12th level the Pathfinder Characters are going to be way more awesome.
4E Character - "I can teleport anywhere I can see."
3.P Character - "Me and all my friends can teleport to anywhere in the world we have ever seen."4E Character "I can fly for two full rounds"
3.P Character "I can leap into the air and fly up to the Dragon and wrestle it back to the ground."Etc.
Certainly if one is appealing to 12 year olds on the basis of what cool s~@@ ones character can do - well 3.P characters, by 12th can do a lot more impressive cool s~@@ then 4E characters, they are simply far more powerful.
These kids are not into it for UBER powers. One of their complaints is the 4E books are "blowing up the game like a balloon." A bunch of their arguments are about the classes being more differentiated in PFRPG and they are interested in morew broadly differentiated classes.
|
|
...and of the majority of the builds presented on those pages are illegal builds and the ones that arn't illegal are not much more powerful than a quick gen character made with DDI.IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*Hops over to the WotC 4ed CharOp forum*
*notices 303 pages of threads*
Riiiight ...
I think you are generalizing a bit here. And if you're not then hooray for kids coming back from CharOp with illegal builds, because every GM knows that the worst thing you can do to a player is to tell him "No, that won't go because ...".
Which makes 4ed look pretty much the same as 3.5ed. The more things change ...
|
|
I'm not sure if 4e is geared toward kids, so much as "young adults." 14-18 might be the ideal introductory age for 4e.
4E was a great platform to teach tehse kids RPGs. The cards that they disparage now, were an effective and simple ways for them o learn and understand the mechanics.
I'd had a much harder time with them with 3.5.
Although I do have to say when my 7 year old said, "I power attack for full. Bring it Daddy!" that may have been one of the best moments of my life.
The issue they reject now, were central to their introduction to the hobby.
My sons have been watching us play D&D since before they could read. My wife is a hard core gamer too, so they've had a balanced education!
Your Larpers probably did not have 100+ hours of RPing under their belts while Tadkills core kids probably do.
Actually, since we played 4-6 hr. a day, 5 days a week, some of them very quickly boosted their playtime. Kids, just like adults, have their own interests, but my overall generalization is that kids don't necessarily want to do math during the game. Of course, we were LARPing, so it is different than sitting down at a tabletop.
Usually their powers are pretty simple [in 4e].
They are until they stack. I doubt most kids would want to do the math of +2 for flanking, -2 for this condition, +1 from this power, etc. all for one attack. Of course, this gets worse the higher the level. That is to me the main drawback for 4e's appeal to kids.
I guess my main point, for any edition, is that I would focus on flavor more than rules. If the kids read, "Close burst 3; targets are knocked prone," I don't think most will care. However, if they are told that they have stomped the ground hard enough to cause the entire room to shake and the nearby giants to fall down, they are more likely to get excited. If I played Pathfinder and the kids wanted to grapple, I'd just tell them what to roll, rather than look it up in the book. Same with spells and so on - I'd focus more on the flavorful effect than the specifics of this or that rule.
To me, it is not until they are 14 or so that they start to get interested in the specific mechanics. Once again, I'm generalizing, but the majority of kids are not going to grow up to be roleplayers; imagination and the heroic persona is more important to the younger kids than how the rules are stated.
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*Hops over to the WotC 4ed CharOp forum*
*notices 303 pages of threads*
Riiiight ...
It really is pretty much impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters. The page count of the CharOp board doesn't make that any less true.
|
|
Your Larpers probably did not have 100+ hours of RPing under their belts while Tadkills core kids probably do.Actually, since we played 4-6 hr. a day, 5 days a week, some of them very quickly boosted their playtime. Kids, just like adults, have their own interests, but my overall generalization is that kids don't necessarily want to do math during the game. Of course, we were LARPing, so it is different than sitting down at a tabletop.
Usually their powers are pretty simple [in 4e].They are until they stack. I doubt most kids would want to do the math of +2 for flanking, -2 for this condition, +1 from this power, etc. all for one attack. Of course, this gets worse the higher the level. That is to me the main drawback for 4e's appeal to kids.
I guess my main point, for any edition, is that I would focus on flavor more than rules. If the kids read, "Close burst 3; targets are knocked prone," I don't think most will care. However, if they are told that they have stomped the ground hard enough to cause the entire room to shake and the nearby giants to fall down, they are more likely to get excited. If I played Pathfinder and the kids wanted to grapple, I'd just tell them what to roll, rather than look it up in the book. Same with spells and so on - I'd focus more on the flavorful effect than the specifics of this or that rule.
To me, it is not until they are 14 or so that they start to get interested in the specific mechanics. Once again, I'm generalizing, but the majority of kids are not going to grow up to be roleplayers; imagination and the heroic persona is more important to the younger kids than how the rules are stated.
You've described my narrative style.
These kids are engaging the rules in the way you describe, but at 12, instead of 14. They are, however, more concerned with being told/making a good story than anything else.
While it could be some sort of cyclical evolution and reflect a developemental rejection of the status quo, I am more inclined to take them at their words. They have reasons for what they think and ask for.
I really do trust your judgement over mine in this case, even just for the fact that you know them and I do not. I appreciate the nice response even after the initial reaction the thread got.
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*raises eyebrow*
*waits to see which regular posters treat this as they would treat a similar attack on 4th edition and which, sadly, do not*
|
|
Keeping this on topic and as edition war neutral as possible ...
Some personal, real world experience: my son is 15. There are a pretty large number of kids his age that play and many tried 4e at one point or another. Currently, none play 4e - they all play Pathfinder. I've heard a number of kids say similar things to what the OP quoted (4e is too simple, it's too much like playing a card game etc) Essentially the feeling seems to be that 4e is kind of a " starting" game and Pathfinder is what you graduate to.
Like I said, this is just my personal observation but it is interesting and seems similar to what th OP experienced
These kids are engaging the rules in the way you describe, but at 12, instead of 14. They are, however, more concerned with being told/making a good story than anything else.
It sounds like the kids you describe are heavily invested in gaming in general, whether computers, CCGs, or tabletop, and more apt than most kids to be interested in the specifics of their powers. I would still guess, however, that your kids are less interested in the area of a spell's effects (such as 3 squares by 3 squares) than the general effects a spell has on the entire scene.
Roleplaying with kids is the most fun I've had roleplaying. Their openness to different ideas and ways of doing things, their unfettered love of talking with dragons and such, and their joy of victory, not just of battles but achieving their goals, make them ideal players in many ways. Regardless of edition, I'm sure you've had a blast!
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*raises eyebrow*
*waits to see which regular posters treat this as they would treat a similar attack on 4th edition and which, sadly, do not*
Apologies if any flames were included.
IMO kids like power gaming and don't care much about game balance.
3.5 and PF allow them to play the most powerfully broken characters that they can get their DM to allow while in 4e it's impossible to create a character that completely overshadows all others and monsters.So of course they want to play the game where they can be better than everyone else over a game where they can't.
*Hops over to the WotC 4ed CharOp forum*
*notices 303 pages of threads*
Riiiight ...
Depends on what your optimizing to build. There are a handful of truly broken builds in 4E but not many, one thing you don't see much on the 4E forums (here anyway) is DMs complaining that their players have a build that is just trashing the adventure - its hard to make such a build.
300 threads of Character optimization does not mean there are 300 examples of builds that bust the game. You can make better or worse builds for sure but its often a case, in 4E, of squeezing out an upgrade in die of damage type thing - so the standard build might do d6's for damage but with the new optimized build it does a d8, and does not even give up any accuracy except in opportunity attacks - a better build sure but the DM probably won't notice.
|
|
I'm sure that the 4ed is better balanced than 3ed, but the player interest in optimization remains the same. Hence, somebody after power builds *will* dig thru CharOp forums anyway. If there would be no optimization and no power builds, that forum would be empty. Instead, it has 303 pages. So powergaming is alive and well, and tying it to 3.5 is kinda derogatory.
I'm sure that the 4ed is better balanced than 3ed, but the player interest in optimization remains the same. Hence, somebody after power builds *will* dig thru CharOp forums anyway. If there would be no optimization and no power builds, that forum would be empty. Instead, it has 303 pages. So powergaming is alive and well, and tying it to 3.5 is kinda derogatory.
Which is fine - a lot of players like optimizing their characters and there is nothing really wrong with that except when it starts to make the DMs job a nightmare or causes there to be a significant imbalance at teh table between characters. What WotC has handled fairly well )in particular by nerfing overpowered material via errata's) in this regards is in making sure that the optimizers are not usually really that much better then anyone else and making sure that these guys can't build a character that forces the DM to restate the whole adventure in order to challenge them.
Keeping this on topic and as edition war neutral as possible ...
Some personal, real world experience: my son is 15. There are a pretty large number of kids his age that play and many tried 4e at one point or another. Currently, none play 4e - they all play Pathfinder. I've heard a number of kids say similar things to what the OP quoted (4e is too simple, it's too much like playing a card game etc) Essentially the feeling seems to be that 4e is kind of a " starting" game and Pathfinder is what you graduate to.
Like I said, this is just my personal observation but it is interesting and seems similar to what th OP experienced
In the end this does not really surprise me. Lisa Stevens mentioned some while back that she hoped that WotCs plans to bring in massive numbers of new young players succeeded like gang busters - she new some of those players would eventually find Pathfinder and fall in love.
I mentioned above that I kind of felt that 4E was really aimed at kids and busy 30+ year olds. These are the two groups that are most likely to appreciate the design goals of 4E. Pathfinder is excellent at simulating high powered fantasy and can handle a huge array of complex events via the rules but to do so means having more complex and robust rules for flying or grappling or handling world changing spells and requires that the DM put in more time to deal with the fact that the players have access to things like potent long range scrying and teleportation effects.
|
|
I can see the problem of many books vs one books (i.e. 4e vs PF). I'm going to generalise and say that under 16's tend to have a short attention span and the idea of needing to read 3 or 4 books compared with just one section in one book would seem a hurdle. I think getting the kids to make there characters using the 4e character builder may appeal more - meaing hide the 4e books? This may also be as some have said an age thing.
I mean no offense by this to either game but PF seems more "adult". I play 4e because it's hell-fun and doesn't require much effort, it is a "pick up game", PF I find I invest more in terms of "taking it seriously". This means as it turns out when life is very busy I play more 4e and when I have more free time I'm looking for a PF game.
At the end of the day I wouldn't worry, what counters is that you are doing a great job entertaining some kids - there choice of game is slightly irrelevant.
Good on you,
S.
EDIT: Wow what Jeremy said 30+ and all that!