Am I all alone?


4th Edition

51 to 100 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Sebastian wrote:
Had you asked me prior to the launch of e-Dragon and e-Dungeon, I would have been excited with you... Now, I am cautiously optimistic at best... But then there was e-Dragon and e-Dungeon...

What has me really worried about 4/e is what I perceive as WotC's nearly complete disconnect from customer opinions and desires (as evidenced by things Sebastian, and many others, have pointed out).

IMO, 4/e is nothing more than a thinly-veiled ploy to separate us from our money. I wouldn't mind if the designers appeared to care what we like or want.


I'd like to join in the "dislike playing a slot" party myself, actually. I realize that the "roles" of "leader, striker, controller" etc. have always pretty much been there just without the nomenclature, but I don't like the way they seem to becoming what everything's about. Even at my crunchiest, I want to be playing a character, not a chess piece. Just because you can describe Arshan of the Desert as a "striker" (because as a fighter/barbarian his primary activity in combat is dealing damage), in many ways that's the -LEAST- important thing about him to me. What's important about him to me is that he carouses in rowdy taverns, answers any insult, and gives the wizard grief.

It may be that the rules of 4E will still support "building my character" instead of "filling my role," but from the sound of the previews, that's more likely to be a side-effect than a design priority, and that irritates me and frankly feels like a step backward into the days of "of course you can't wield a sword, you're a wizard" -- except in this case it's "of course you shouldn't do crowd control, you're a healer."

I'm hoping to be proven wrong on this score.

-The Gneech


I am curiously looking forward to 4th ed; I am not mad at Hasbro/Wizards for wanting to get a profit from selling product, I have found each new edition of the game to be superior to the last, and I trust that smart DMs/players will create wonderful adventures no matter what the specifics of the ruleset are.


QXL99 wrote:
I am curiously looking forward to 4th ed; I am not mad at Hasbro/Wizards for wanting to get a profit from selling product, I have found each new edition of the game to be superior to the last, and I trust that smart DMs/players will create wonderful adventures no matter what the specifics of the ruleset are.

I don't think there are too msny of us anti-4th Edition people that hate WotC/Hasbro for "wanting to get a profit from selling product."

It may be splitting the hair a bit thinly, but I think most of the people that might be classified like that, are angry/hate WotC/Hasbro for being so obviously greedy about it. Almost to the point where it doesn't even look like they (as a company) even care about putting out a product that people want.


I'm excited about 4e. So you are not alone. Now to get my gaming group excited about 4e. At this point the rest of my game group justt don't like what they hear about 4e. Most have only played 3rd edition and love it.

The Exchange

Evil War God wrote:


Why are you guys so upset?

While it is true that some people who were die hard fans of 2nd ed cried like babies over 3rd ed coming out, many of use had lost interest in DnD until 3rd ed or 3.5 came out, and while the new rules may warrent some justification becuase even with the 3.5 revamp not everything flowed smoothly, the concept that we HAVE to have a new set of rules every 3 to 5 years and that the price is going up just leaves most of us to wonder what is the point. I only played 2nd edition in one campign that in truth didnt last to long and I foudn it wanting. rd edition brought back the wonder and the feel in many ways of what was missing in second, it also did it smoother and cleaner with a large amount of borrowing of other ruels from other games that many people were doing in thier home brews anyway. I'm not saying I will hate 4th edition I just don't see a point in it a this time. I am also very leary when i am treated in all the reviews as an idiot who wants to buy this just because of who is making it. I will buy paizo goods as long as they are well good and when they stop being good or seem rushed or forced they will no longer get my money and I feel the same about Wizards who in the last year have not given me a single book that was worth my money.


Heaven's Agent wrote:
I've developed a strong distaste for WotC,...

The WotC staff isn't as friendly or responsive as the Paizo staff. That makes the whole community friendlier here. We're spoiled on these message boards(personal opinion, of course).

Heaven's Agent wrote:
...but I like the looks of 4E; the more I see, the more it seems it will successfully improve the game (personal opinion, of course).

I'm with you on that point. I'm excited about the changes in 4e; although I will miss those exciting do or die saving throws.


Disenchanter wrote:
QXL99 wrote:
.... Almost to the point where it doesn't even look like they (as a company) even care about putting out a product that people want.

I want fourth edition. SO thats a product at least one person wants from WotC.

My big complaint about WotC, is they put a stop to the printing of Dungeon and Dragon Magazines. I grew up with those magazines. Those who have been lurking about Paizo for a while, have grown accustomed to the Paizo staff being responsive and friendly. Erik Mona and others at Paizo have actually asked the consumers what they want and deliver. Paizo acctually care about there customers and it shows on these message boards. WotC just doesn't seem to have that caring feeling you get from Paizo. That and Paizo produces better game adventures than WotC, with color graphics between the covers and all.


Evil War God wrote:


Why are you guys so upset?

Threadjack:

I want a T-Shirt that says:
"Evil War God said: Why are you guys so upset?"

We return you to your regularly scheduled 4.0 rant/war.

GGG

PS I for one am just waiting to see what the rules look like. The release format and OGL whispers though look mighty interesting. Also I kinda hate the whole chess board game D&D has evolved into in 3.x. 'Course I didn't like 2nd edition's mechanics either, or 1st's.... Hmmm, did TSR or WotC ever put out DC Heroes, Vampire: the Masquerade, or Middle-Earth Role-Playing? Oh I know, the little colored boxes in the 80's those were cool.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'm not so much hating 4E as a whole presently, as I'm completely and utterly unimpressed by what little information we've been given on it.

When I heard about the impending release of 3E, and read the Dragon preview articles, I got interested, and saw many things that mad me excited to take a look at the new version of the game.

Despite having 10+ years of 2E (or maybe because of), I was interested in how the 3E game would look, feel, and run. There wasn't much talk about the "flavor", which I didn't mind as I can (and have) come up with my own if I need it.

All of the 4E info, in sharp contrast, isn't impressing me, and couldn't be making me less excited than if they were to tell me the game was being discontinued.

Sure, I've seen a few interesting bits, but for the most part, I'm only academically interested in 4E. I don't have this burning desire to make a 4E character, or run a 4E game.

It's still too early to tell how the game will actually be, but WotC has done a smash-up job so far of killing any interest I have in 4E, or any intentions of actually switching whole-heartedly to the new edition.


QXL99 wrote:
I am not mad at Hasbro/Wizards for wanting to get a profit from selling product

It's not the fact that they want to make money with this (every company wants to make money. That includes Paizo), but the way they want to make this money. Instead of rising above the competition, they prevent competition.

Plus, I find their customer relations more than lacking.


The problem isn't Tieflings and Warlocks. It's when they chose to release Tieflings and Warlocks.

Follow through with me here.

You have a long running game. It's in the Forgotten Realms. (I know, I know, but this is made to demonstrate a point) Among your players are a druid and a bard. You also have a character who worships...hmmm...Helm.

DM to players:

I'd like to switch to fourth edition, but there are going to have to be some changes.

Players...uhh...okay.

George: What are they?

DM: Well, unfortunately, you made a bard. You turn into a pumpkin, or you can be this...uhm...warlord thing...or you can make a new character...

George: But I've played Talandar for years! You can't do this! !@#$%%! you!

DM: I'm sorry George, but that's the way the ball bounces in 4th edition. Frank, I'm sorry about your druid, too.

Frank: What's that supposed to mean?

DM: Well, now he's a cleric with a little bit of Ranger who worships a Nature Deity. It makes sense, right? Oh, and don't worry about changing into animals. That's not important anymore.

Frank: I think I'm in hell. Borondyr was my favorite PC. How can you DO this to me?

DM: Don't worry. It's not so bad. Andy, you're going to have to choose a new diety.

Andy: You've gotta be kidding me! What the hell could have prompted this?

DM: Andy...(Reaches out and pats him on the shoulder.) Helm's dead. He fought a duel with Tyr over Tymora, and Tyr killed him. If you don't pick a new god, your character won't be able to cast any spells.

Andy: !#$%! This! I'm picking Hoar the Doombringer, god of Revenge! Then I'll smash Tyr's church into...

DM: I'm sorry, you can't. You see, Hoar was really just another aspect of Torm, so if you do that, you'll lose your spellcasting abilities forever.

Andy, Frank, George: THIS GAME SUCKS!!!!!!!

DM: How about a Tiefling Warlock? Or a Dragonborn Warlord.

PCs: A what of who? What about PLOT? What about STORY? Say it ain't so!

Dark Archive

This is why they want to to start a new campaign in 4th edition instead of continuing your current campaigns. It's to keep players from rebelling and stringing up their DM's when they realize half of their favorite characters are unplayable in 4th edition.


Lathiira wrote:
At this point, much of the material we've seen has been like a movie trailer: lots of action, cute scenes, and explosions to entice you into seeing the movie. The problem is that we've all seen a cool trailer that made us go see a movie-to find that the scenes in the trailer were the only good scenes of the movie. I think that we've got some fears this is the case here as well, since we don't have the whole product (or really any product) to look at for the whole picture.

In my and my gaming group's opinions, what we have seen is like a movie trailer that is mostly bad scenes, where we are thinking, "Why would we want to see this movie if these are the best scenes in the movie?"


Uh, Mr. Stafford, this assumes you haven't been running the same gameworld for 20 years. It doesn't function for one large FR world with multiple groups running around in it.

You CAN just start a new campaign with new characters. I will get outrage and player hate if I try this. I don't think this new edition has any net benefit for my group, and while I could stick with 3.5, I'm not particularly happy with the Flavor changes for 4th.

Halflings are FOUR feet tall? Is this even logical?

So now a halfling is the height of a dwarf? How in GOD's name does that even function?

Dragonborn? This is ludicrous. Where's my classic half-elf?

Why are they bringing in new material nobody liked, like warlock, before things like druid and bard? This is inept!


I'm really into 4e and have been rapidly converting my group to it over the last few weeks. There's a lot of stuff in it that's pretty exciting. One of the things that has me so excited is the complete reimagining the game is getting, a huge change in the game that's really freed me to run 4e and 3.0 games simultaneously. I'm not looking at chucking any of my books, but am pretty much welcoming in the new edition as a completely new take on the classic game--some desperately needed fresh blood to reinvigorate the game and reframe a lot of the old chestnut arguments I've had against 3.0 from the beginning.

Mostly I'm just glad to be done with Pseudo-Greyhawk as the core setting. It raised so many more problems than it fixed over the years and has gradually turned into a massive continuity train-wreck. The idea that they're going to create a whole new setting, starting fresh on a big map with no boundaries is just great by me. I love the whole Points of Light approach to the core setting and the history and cosmological changes they've come up with so far. I've been following the playtests and have been pretty pleased (the only stinker is a pretty cruddy Eberron game with players and a DM who couldn't be bothered with actually running a 4e game and so instead turned it into a grotesque hybrid.)

Yeah, I was madder than most about the loss of the magazines. Sure some of the new mechanics are a bit more video-gamey than I'd like. But there's nothing I've seen so far that I can't come up with solid patch houserules for, and the fresh new approach is something I think is worth adapting or ignoring some of the more irritating game-mechaniky clunk. Heck, I've been ignoring or rewriting clunk for years.


Balabanto wrote:

Uh, Mr. Stafford, this assumes you haven't been running the same gameworld for 20 years. It doesn't function for one large FR world with multiple groups running around in it.

You CAN just start a new campaign with new characters. I will get outrage and player hate if I try this. I don't think this new edition has any net benefit for my group, and while I could stick with 3.5, I'm not particularly happy with the Flavor changes for 4th.

Halflings are FOUR feet tall? Is this even logical?

So now a halfling is the height of a dwarf? How in GOD's name does that even function?

Dragonborn? This is ludicrous. Where's my classic half-elf?

Why are they bringing in new material nobody liked, like warlock, before things like druid and bard? This is inept!

They are brining the warlock in because they decided to include the tiefling. Basically what happened was WoTC saw the concept art for the tiefling and felt that it needed to be included in the PHB. That led to the question of what class the tiefling would typically be and so they decided warlock. So the inclusion of the warlock class and tiefling had nothing to do with game mechanics or balance but simply a cool looking picture. The article where they talked about the warlock and how it got included is in the spoiler below.

Note: emphasis is mine

Spoiler:
Your Scary New Friend
The Warlock
by Rob Heinsoo
10/12/2007
Design & Development Archive

The Design & Development article series premiered on the D&D website back in September 2005, and has been a staple ever since. With the approach of 4th Edition, and our designers and developers focused on the new edition, this column will be the primary vehicle for 4th Edition coverage. We’ll not only give you peeks at what’s forthcoming, but also the “how” and “why.”

Keep in mind that the game is still in a state of flux, as refinements are made by our design and development staff. You’re getting a look behind the curtain at game design in progress, so enjoy, and feel free to send your comments to dndinsider@wizards.com.

The warlock wasn't part of the adventuring party we originally pictured stepping out of the first 4th Edition Players Handbook. As you might expect, the original party included most all the incumbents, with sorcerers and bards alongside wizards and monks.

But the warlock was in our thoughts. Coming out of Complete Arcane, the class's chief innovation had been its eldritch blast ability, which provided unlimited arcane firepower round after round after round. After some initial shock, everyone admitted that the warlock's eldritch blast didn't break the game. The class's ability to maintain relevant arcane attack power, instead of running out of finite resources like a wizard, had a great deal of influence on our early thoughts about 4th Edition. We understood that the warlock didn't have to be the exception. All of our classes might be improved by having abilities they could count on all day long.

Fast forward a couple of drafts into the future. We'd started understanding that our power-rich approach to the classes meant that we almost certainly wouldn't be launching with every class we might want to. Our understanding of the party roles indicates that the sorcerer and the wizard might very well be standing on each other's toes and pointy hats. Then, once we saw the concept art Bill O'Connor provided for tieflings, we knew that we had to commit to including tieflings as a PC race, rather than just hopeful it would work out (more on that in a future Design & Development column).

And what class would tieflings naturally gravitate to? A class that acquired scary powers by negotiating , pacts with shadowy, infenral, or feral patrons? That worked for us. But what we didn't know at the time was how dramatically the warlock class would improve as we progressed through design. Of all the classes, the warlock has made the greatest strides from its initial concept to its final execution. In truth, we've been aided by the fact that the class doesn't have a weighty existing legacy. There aren't thousands of D&D players who have a solid and well-reasoned idea of exactly what a warlock's powers should accomplish. Whenever we came up with something cool and flavorful, we felt entirely free to try it out -- instead of qualifiedly free, as we often felt with several other classes.

Tieflings begin with a backstory of splintering betrayals and stolen power. Warlocks carry on with a fundamental choice of a pact with one of three varieties of supernatural patron. I'm leaving the specific pacts out of this, but I will say that the pacts provide direct benefits when you send an enemy you've marked to their afterlife reward; your patrons show their gratitude by giving you a Boon of Souls. And when you play a warlock, you have the tools to put your enemies away. Rather than relying only on eldritch blast, you'll also have an arsenal of curses (send enemy directly to hell for a round, then bring them back in more pieces), conjurations (maws -- connected to beings that remain thankfully off-screen -- materialize to chew your enemies), and movement powers (teleport and turn invisible, anyone?) to get you out of the trouble you're surely going to get yourself into.

From the perspective of lead designer, it's easy to see when a class is working out. I just have to notice the ease with which the designers and developers create cool mechanics for it. The warlock is feeling no pain, in contrast to her future enemies.

Scarab Sages

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

To start off, I can understand why Hasbro decided they needed a new edition. It makes more money, and it's been in the works (presumably) for 8 years. I have no ill will there.

I can even understand that there was a opportunity cost for killing the magazines (NOTE! I don't like it, and feel that the backlash will eradicate this cost, but this isn't the board to discuss that subject).

Some of the crunch in the new system seems to make the game go quicker (even thought they recently admitted fights will be longer). What truly bothers me is the same thing that bothers most people. The change of the chew. Why did they do this? So people HAD to buy new FR books, New Eberron books etc. Heck, until fans got really angry, Eberron was being fast forwarded 100 years, making all Eberron chew books obsolete or history tombs. I don't even know what they are doing about Zilargo...

As well, and I don't mean to demean or attack anyone who likes 4e, it's been held up like a banner for any problems that anyone has had with the game, even if it doesn't solve these problems. In the past few months, I have read and heard people say the following:

"My fights go too long. In 4e, they'll be shorter." (Recent playtest shows that one fight went for 20 some odd rounds.)

"Fighters suck, and only have one option in a fight. Other abilities are never used. No more grapping, disarming or anything like that in 4e" (One of the first things brought up in playtests was the fact that all the characters had magic, and magic was still dominating the fight)

"Fighter's are broken. I'll be glad when they lessen the abilities" (Do I even have to answer this?)

"4e will make healing perfect. No longer do you need a cleric" (Except cleric's boost everyone's healing... which means that eventually, printed adventures will compensate for this boost and require it)

Yet again, I don't mean to be a downer on all this, but I really don't feel a need for 4e. Yeah, Pseudo Greyhawk was a waste. Doesn't mean you have to throw the baby out with the bath water.


I'm excited about 4E and the ENWorld news items have got me even more interested.

re: 20 rounds of combat - we don't know how long those rounds took in real time, so even though there were a lot of rounds it might not have taken as long as 20 rounds would in 3E.


Modera wrote:


Some of the crunch in the new system seems to make the game go quicker (even thought they recently admitted fights will be longer). ...

"My fights go too long. In 4e, they'll be shorter." (Recent playtest shows that one fight went for 20 some odd rounds.)

This, for me, is the very reason not to switch to 4th Edition. I like third, but I get fed up with it at the same time. I detest that combats have the potential for eating up (role)play time. I hate the sheer length of prep time it takes to stat up NPC's and variant monsters in 3rd. So you would think that 4th edition would appeal to me on that level, with the claim of shorter prep time.

It doesn't.

Because, from everything I've read, the flexibility is going to be gone. (Particularly from the way their new encounter model is described). I may gripe that it took me two hours to stat up an encounter using various templates, classes, and hit dice adjustments for the monsters. But that fact that I can do that, create monsters and NPC's that are uniquely different from what Bob the DM next door is doing, is still very appealing to me.

And combat... combat that goes to 10 rounds is too long for my tastes. Sadly it happens frequently enough to frustrate me. 20 rounds? No thank you! I understand that D&D comes from table top wargaming, but it's become so much more than combat in the last 30+ years. Do we really need a throw back to it's beginning?

I won't lie and say there aren't indicators that 4th edition won't be a fun game: HerosQuest, WarhammerQuest and Descent are all fun games. Something to do on an off night, or an occasional lazy Sunday afternoon. Yes, 4th edition has about the appeal that the aforementioned games have.

So there are too many things that do not appeal to me about 4th. While I have a great many issues with 3rd edition, I'd much rather stick with it, knowing already where my personal issues with it lie, than switch to a new system that has very little to attract me to it.

Dark Archive

Balabanto wrote:

Uh, Mr. Stafford, this assumes you haven't been running the same gameworld for 20 years. It doesn't function for one large FR world with multiple groups running around in it.

You CAN just start a new campaign with new characters. I will get outrage and player hate if I try this. I don't think this new edition has any net benefit for my group, and while I could stick with 3.5, I'm not particularly happy with the Flavor changes for 4th.

Halflings are FOUR feet tall? Is this even logical?

So now a halfling is the height of a dwarf? How in GOD's name does that even function?

Dragonborn? This is ludicrous. Where's my classic half-elf?

Why are they bringing in new material nobody liked, like warlock, before things like druid and bard? This is inept!

Maybe you didn't catch it, but I was being very sarcastic. Trying to convert a longrunning FR campaign to 4th edition, especially with PC classes and races that won't have offical versions for some time, would be an exercise in futility.


Balabanto wrote:

DM: Andy...(Reaches out and pats him on the shoulder.) Helm's dead. He fought a duel with Tyr over Tymora, and Tyr killed him. If you don't pick a new god, your character won't be able to cast any spells.

Andy: !#$%! This! I'm picking Hoar the Doombringer, god of Revenge! Then I'll smash Tyr's church into...

DM: I'm sorry, you can't. You see, Hoar was really just another aspect of Torm, so if you do that, you'll lose your spellcasting abilities forever.

Well, if it makes the player feel any better...Tyr's dead now, too.


Balabanto wrote:
Why are they bringing in new material nobody liked, like warlock, before things like druid and bard? This is inept!

Actually, a lot of people did like the warlock. While I'm indifferent to 'em myself, there was squee-ing a-plenty over them on ENWorld and other places.

Although now that I put some thought into it, I notice that Tieflings and warlocks were added to NWN 2 ... I wonder if that was done because they were popular, or by an edict from WotC to help pave the way. My guess is, we'll never know!

-The Gneech


Grimcleaver wrote:
I'm really into 4e and have been rapidly converting my group to it over the last few weeks. ...

How are you doing that at this point without the rules?

More importantly how are you selling the idea of a new edition to your gaing group?

My group doesn't check Enworld, Paizo are WotC message boards or web sites. So all they know about 4e is from me. Yet still, as enthusiastic I am for 4e, my gaming group just doesn't want to hear about it.


Cheddar Bearer wrote:
My personal biggest gripe is with their new approach to monsters. The description about being able to mix and match monster to get a good encounter and that all monster will have a set role to help you out really irritated me. This kind of encounter design seems to not take into account any idea of story telling. The way they described it makes it sound as if it will be" Half a dozen orcs as brutes, two nagas as artillery and a mind flayer as a controller".

Or in other words, a lot like a Miniatures encounter, eh? Much like the class roles are being "innovated" to correspond to their Miniatures equivalent? Notice that Miniatures gets a banner on the D&D homepage the same level as Dragon and Dungeon, etc. Miniatures is nothing more than a CCG thinly disguised as a wargame, and I for one will have nothing to do with it. And then there's all the other crap they've pulled out of their collective corporate arses.


Evil War God wrote:

Am I all alone when I say that I'm excited about 4th edition? I read the posts and watched the videos, and I'm still excited. I know that people cried and complained when third edition came out too..."man now I have too buy all new books"..."these new rules suck"...and my favorite..."This isn't DND!!!". But when I look around most of these people are playing 3rd edition, dispite all of their complaining.

I was hearing all of the changes and I was getting excited, I can't wait to try it out. I'm jockying for position to try to be first in line.

Just because you have a bunch of books from 3.5 doesn't mean you won't use them, I still use 1st edition books.

Why are you guys so upset?

Who cares??! D&D is for dorks.


Many of the flavor changes I've seen turn me off, but I've never really been into the flavor of the default setting. Overall, I'm really looking forward to 4E.


wizard wrote:

Who cares??! D&D is for dorks.

HEY!!! I resemble that statement!


I'm excited about 4e, a bit anxious as well.

I'm not so much angry about it, more than I have fear that 4e will have issues and thus lead to 4.5e And if I re-invest now, will I be pissed later?

But, I'm a creature of change, 3.5 has issues. I'm not so stubborn to realize that change has the potential for improvement. I'm also not so ignorant to see potential for disaster.


yes, yes you are; all alone is a black box with no doors
am curious why that black box is so exciting to you; hmm, dont see anything exciting about 4e at all.

Evil War God wrote:

Am I all alone when I say that I'm excited about 4th edition? I read the posts and watched the videos, and I'm still excited. I know that people cried and complained when third edition came out too..."man now I have too buy all new books"..."these new rules suck"...and my favorite..."This isn't DND!!!". But when I look around most of these people are playing 3rd edition, dispite all of their complaining.

I was hearing all of the changes and I was getting excited, I can't wait to try it out. I'm jockying for position to try to be first in line.

Just because you have a bunch of books from 3.5 doesn't mean you won't use them, I still use 1st edition books.

Why are you guys so upset?


At least he's not in a twisty maze of passages, all exactly alike.

-The Gneech, likely to be eaten by a grue


Soulkeeper wrote:

I'm excited about 4e, a bit anxious as well.

I'm not so much angry about it, more than I have fear that 4e will have issues and thus lead to 4.5e And if I re-invest now, will I be pissed later?
.

Nah, they won't do 4.5 for a long while...

Next year you'll see 4.0.
A year later 4.1
then 4.2
4.3
4.4
You won't see 4.5 until 2013... :D


Blaaarrrrppphhh

Liberty's Edge

I think I am ready for a new edition. That being said I am unsure if 4e is what I am waiting for. So I am on the fence. Some of the previews are exciting, some are a bit disconcerting, and quite a few of the changes I find odd but I think I can get used to them. So I want 4e to be great but I am still reserving judgement.


Vomit Guy wrote:
Blaaarrrrppphhh

As alway Vomit Guy, your well thought out statements add a significant amount to conversation... unfortunately it also leaves a huge mess on the floor.

Jon Brazer Enterprises

CEBrown wrote:

Nah, they won't do 4.5 for a long while...

Next year you'll see 4.0.
A year later 4.1
then 4.2
4.3
4.4
You won't see 4.5 until 2013... :D

You forgot 4.14159265


DMcCoy1693 wrote:
CEBrown wrote:

Nah, they won't do 4.5 for a long while...

Next year you'll see 4.0.
A year later 4.1
then 4.2
4.3
4.4
You won't see 4.5 until 2013... :D
You forgot 4.14159265

That's what they'll post on line, the DI version...


Soulkeeper wrote:

I'm excited about 4e, a bit anxious as well.

I'm not so much angry about it, more than I have fear that 4e will have issues and thus lead to 4.5e And if I re-invest now, will I be pissed later?

But, I'm a creature of change, 3.5 has issues. I'm not so stubborn to realize that change has the potential for improvement. I'm also not so ignorant to see potential for disaster.

4E wouldn't be half as bad if it were just rules changes.

But fluff and flavor changes? What gives? You're ruining D&D itself when you touch what was left in stone! It doesn't make it D&D anymore, just a kid's board game, miniatures, and dice.

Devils&demons face lift, magic schools gone, Wish spell gone, alignment system gone, Vancian-magic 75% gone, prestige classes gone, cosmology altered unrecognizably, Forgotten Realms being destroyed from the inside-out, saving throws gone, eladrins no longer a celestial race, no arcane spell failure for wizards...I can go on.

It's just all so stupid and ignorant. The rules changes should revolve around the flavor of the game, not the other way around. Now D&D is just a non-visual MMORPG wanna-be...oh wait, DI offers online play! It has become and MMORPG!

Sad times...this is indeed the Dark Ages of D&D

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Razz wrote:


Devils&demons face lift, magic schools gone, Wish spell gone, alignment system gone, Vancian-magic 75% gone, prestige classes gone, cosmology altered unrecognizably, Forgotten Realms being destroyed from the inside-out, saving throws gone, eladrins no longer a celestial race, no arcane spell failure for wizards...I can go on.

Huh. When you put it like that, it sounds much better to me.

Scarab Sages

CEBrown wrote:
DMcCoy1693 wrote:
CEBrown wrote:

Nah, they won't do 4.5 for a long while...

Next year you'll see 4.0.
A year later 4.1
then 4.2
4.3
4.4
You won't see 4.5 until 2013... :D
You forgot 4.14159265
That's what they'll post on line, the DI version...

And they'll leave a permanent "alpha" graphic on it, just in case it works just as poorly as Gleemax is they can say "well it's just alpha, people!"

Sorry. I just despise Gleemax. Worst social forum I've ever had the displeasure of wandering through. ANyway, back to your regularly scheduled thread... :)

The Exchange

Razz wrote:

4E wouldn't be half as bad if it were just rules changes.

But fluff and flavor changes? What gives? You're ruining D&D itself when you touch what was left in stone! It doesn't make it D&D anymore, just a kid's board game, miniatures, and dice.

How can imaginary fluff be "left in stone". If you don't like it then imagine new and different fluff for yourself.

Razz wrote:
Devils&demons face lift, magic schools gone, Wish spell gone, alignment system gone, Vancian-magic 75% gone, prestige classes gone,

Why should any of this be "left in stone"? Heck, prestige classes are so new that they can hardly be considered essential to the game.

Razz wrote:
cosmology altered unrecognizably, Forgotten Realms being destroyed from the inside-out,

So ignore it. Besides the cosmology of D&D changed many times through the years.

Razz wrote:
saving throws gone, eladrins no longer a celestial race, no arcane spell failure for wizards...I can go on.

All of those sound fine to me. Saving throes may be a tough one - i'll admit that - but who cares about spell failure. Most people just ignored it unless the mage was in plate.

Razz wrote:

It's just all so stupid and ignorant. The rules changes should revolve around the flavor of the game, not the other way around. Now D&D is just a non-visual MMORPG wanna-be...oh wait, DI offers online play! It has become and MMORPG!

Sad times...this is indeed the Dark Ages of D&D

Or a new dawn ... any change was bound to rile some and energize others. No change may have meant stagnation and a decrease in players. If this new edition ends with a net gain in sales and new players then that is a good thing for the hobby even if its bad for some established players that want to keep things "left in stone".

Scarab Sages

crosswiredmind wrote:
but who cares about spell failure. Most people just ignored it unless the mage was in plate.

Your games don't represent "most people" quite obviously. Neither do mine, I'm sure... which is why I don't make such statements. However, I would find it very difficult to believe that "most people" ignored this heavy limiter on arcane casters.

I can see, however, how you can be an early fan of 4e - it doesn't seem like you really played by the 3.x rules anyway. That's fine, of course - every group probably has a house rule or two. It's probably not appropriate to assume your experiences are what "most people" have encountered, though, given the deviations you've seemed to make from the 3.x rules.

My initial question is always "why did they change this?" If the only response is "why not?" then there was no reason to change it in the first place.


Yah, I'm looking forward to it, too.

In fact, I think it's downright cool that I will have two versions of my favorite game to choose from. And personally I think a radical change is better than an incremental change for this exact reason.

crosswiredmind wrote:


Or a new dawn ... any change was bound to rile some and energize others. No change may have meant stagnation and a decrease in players. If this new edition ends with a net gain in sales and new players then that is a good thing for the hobby even if its bad for some established players that want to keep things "left in stone".

Oh my God! I totally agree with you about that.

But I never ignored spell failure. Hey I thought you were a judge who always followed the rules?

Sovereign Court

In general;

The more 4e fluff i see, the less i like it.

The more 4e crunch i see, the more i like it.

So as long as there's some cool third-party fluff coming out (Paizo, to the rescue) i'm not too worried about 4e.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Evil War God wrote:
Am I all alone when I say that I'm excited about 4th edition?

Yes. You're all alone.

And I'm all alone too. I realize it pretty much any day that I come to the Paizo forums and see anti-4th-edition folks try to explain to us 4th-edition-optimists that we're idiots, and we never played the game right anyway, and the new game is going to be so much worse...

It wears on me. I love Paizo, but the attitude here on the boards is tainting my ability to appreciate Paizo products.

I go over to ENWorld and they have the latest info on 4th Edition. They debunk the hysteria. People over there have strong opinions, but overall, it seems pretty balanced to me. I come back here, and feel like I'm under attack for my beliefs. I can't glance at the 10 most recent threads list without seeing at least one anti-4E topic - or worse, one like this where someone was trying to find 4E-optimists, and has hordes of folks coming it to tell him why he's wrong - why he's alone.

I feel like I don't belong here anymore. Like two thirds of the community here would much rather I go somewhere else and never return, rather than hang out here.

I was telling my husband last night that I'm not sure I want to keep getting Pathfinder after my "free credits" from our subscription transfer. He pointed out that I'm just exhausted from trying to stat up stuff to run 3.5 every week, and tired of the anti-4E crowd here, and that I'm still enjoying Pathfinder itself.

But folks, you need to realize, if you're spending all this time trying to convince the rest of us that your 4E-hatred is the only right way, you're probably driving customers away. Paizo doesn't need that. Paizo doesn't deserve that. They go out of their way to be welcoming to people, to remind everyone that the employees at Wizards aren't bad guys, that friendly is better than arch-superiority. Please, learn from their example, and trim back the rhetoric. Please.

Because I want to stay a part of this community - and right now, I can't say that I feel like I am.

Dark Archive

I want to like 4th edition. But the more I glimpse of what it will be, the more I see that this edition will not do it for me.

I will play it if I have the chance, but I won't DM it.
Also I will not invest so much in this edition as I did in 3.0 and 3.5. I will buy the PHB and maybe the DMG but not the MM or the following PHBs and DMGs and MMs. I will probably buy adventures to mine them for cool ideas.

Anyway, I have so much 3rd Edition Stuff that I can play for years before I run out of new material.


Sir Kaikillah wrote:

How are you doing that at this point without the rules?

More importantly how are you selling the idea of a new edition to your gaming group?

My group doesn't check Enworld, Paizo are WotC message boards or web sites. So all they know about 4e is from me. Yet still, as enthusiastic I am for 4e, my gaming group just doesn't want to hear about it.

Sorry. Didn't catch this until tonight. Really it's me talking over stuff that's being added to 4e that's stuff they like:


    - Little special abilities at every level

    - A more gradual 30 level growth curve rather than 20 with the claim that the high and low end will be better balanced against the middle "sweet spot"

    - More love to favorite classes like the Paladin with the new smites.

    - Powerscaling the feats so they aren't so uneven

    - Character abilities that work all the time, like the Warlock, so cool stuff doesn't "run out".

    - The "Points of Light" as used in the new core setting, to give a home to all the formerly irritating "generic" D&D elements without having to cram stuff into settings where it doesn't belong.

    - New flavor twists on creatures like the deathknight and zombie.

My group has always had their quibbles with 3rd edition, but were really hostile toward the idea of a 4th. They hated the changes to the storyline, hated the WoW imported ideas, and hated the thought that favorite game settings like Planescape were gonna' get axed. As I found out more I've been turning them around. Now they're just about as excited for 4e as I am--which is pretty tough, cause I'm really pretty jazzed.

Liberty's Edge

Cintra Bristol wrote:
Evil War God wrote:
Am I all alone when I say that I'm excited about 4th edition?

Yes. You're all alone...

And I'm all alone too...

It wears on me. I love Paizo, but the attitude here on the boards is tainting my ability to appreciate Paizo products...

I feel like I don't belong here anymore. Like two thirds of the community here would much rather I go somewhere else and never return, rather than hang out here...

Because I want to stay a part of this community - and right now, I can't say...

Posts like this are my biggest regret concerning 4E/3.xE. The fact that the hobby we share is driving the various communities apart kills me...

To be fair, people on both sides have gone over the "decency" line in various places. When added to accusations of board censoring in favor of one side or another, it becomes a very nasty picture of humanity.

Why is that? Because people react strongly when something happens to things they hold dear. For a lot of gamers, the game itself is important. It makes sense (to me) that people have strong feelings regarding big changes to the game, some for, some against. People have the right to express their opinions. I firmly believe that.

I also firmly believe that people should think about how they are go about it. It's one thing to express yourself, it's a much better thing to do so wisely and effectively. That's something that often gets lost when emotions get high. I am as guilty about it as anyone else, but I do try to temper my own gut reactions.

Personally, I am very unlikely to switch to 4E for a number of reasons. I'd like to use the 3.x stuff I have, I'm moving/starting a job in August/September so I want to keep expenses to a minimum, I'm not crazy about the fluff/crunch changes, etc.

But I will never look down on anyone who wants to play 4E. If 4E gives you what you want, or brings you closer to playing the game you want, then I happily, honestly wish you many wonderful gaming sessions with your friends/family. I'd feel the same way about a pro-4E person who mocked me for not converting, which they do.

As for Paizo products, please don't let the posts drive you away from good products. I like Paizo, its staff, and their products. They have always treated me kindly/professionally. To my knowledge, Paizo has not expressed statements to which you objected earlier. To stop buying from them JUST because of the boards is the equivalent of me not buying from WOTC JUST because of Gleemax (instead of my other reasons). I think your husband has the right idea.

My first rule of DMing is that everyone at my table is here to have fun. If you're not having fun, then there is something wrong. If you are going to have fun playing 4E, then by all means go out and play 4E. If you're sticking with 3.xE, then by all means keep playing 3.xE. If you're going to do both, then have fund doing so.

For love of the game, have fun!

Scarab Sages

Cintra Bristol wrote:
I go over to ENWorld and they have the latest info on 4th Edition. They debunk the hysteria.

(The following is quite long, so I'll preface it by saying this is not intended as an attack on Cintra, or on her excitement for a new edition. I myself am curious to know what 4E will be like, though I am not convinced of WOTC ability to deliver a play-tested product to deadline).

Isn't the above statement merely illustrating the problem?

You have to go to ENWorld to find info on 4E, which should be freely available on WOTC own site?

Instead of which, they restrict access to members only. OK, so it costs nothing to register, except for time. Time which the casual browser doesn't care to spend. Therefore failing to bring new players into the hobby, which is supposedly what this whole exercise is meant to be about, no?

Once registered (and that registration is mis-used to show Hasbro bosses how many people are emphatically pro-4E), we find a Dragon magazine with zero content, and half an issue of Dungeon, padded out to look twice the size via the use of the Delve Format, which reprints the encounter information, along with rules for opening doors, etc, which any DM should either know, have on his DM screen, or know where to find in the DMG/PHB.

All of which has taken them the same length of time that Paizo used, to create four 96-page Pathfinder mega-modules, several Gamesmastery modules, Item Cards, Crit Deck, Stonehenge, Planet Stories, and much more, as real, physical products, with printing and shipping considerations accounted for.

Our questions about 4E are ignored, or used as an excuse to discuss a totally off-topic subject.
The official playtesters do not want to playtest 4E, but prefer to play their existing campaign as a modified 3.5E.
After decades of ignoring Greyhawk, or insulting it, or co-opting parts of it into a half-realised default setting, refusing to allow a Gazetteer to be released to non-RPGA members, we are treated to a book which delights in telling us all how great the Greyhawk adventures were, and how WOTC is continuing the great tradition set by TSR (hah!) of supporting the setting of Tomb of Horrors, White Plume Mountain, Frost Giant's Rift, etc.
We are now told that if we want to know what is in store for 4E, we have to buy a book of previews.

BUY a book of previews.

I'll repeat that, since most will be sure they did not hear that right.

BUY a book of previews.

BUY an advert.

Adverts are not something the customer pays for. Adverts are part of a company's operating costs, spent in the belief that they generate enough interest and increased sales to offset their cost.

I can hear the cries; "Oh, but it has to cost something, to make up for the cost of printing it!". To which the obvious response is; why does it need printing at all?

This is information that has been deliberately witheld from the WOTC website, from the Gleemax forums, and from the (MIA) Digital Initiative.
If WOTC wish to prevent it being delivered to the people who have continually asked for it, and choose to use the out of date, and quite frankly un-kewl medium of print, then firstly, they should foot the bill themselves, and secondly, why did they kill the magazines?

Whilst this may appear to have no bearing on the quality of the 4E rules or the tone of the 4E setting, which could be the best game ever invented in the history of gaming, it does in fact affect the product. It is quite apparent that the WOTC staff are unable to keep to a deadline, and are constantly moving those deadlines, while announcing that the new deadline had 'always been the case'. Armies of Winston Smiths are beavering away at the Ministry of Truth, attempting to alter or remove all references to these products that might prove the promises had been broken, instead of getting on with the job of producing what was promised.
Digital Dragon/Dungeon were monthly replacements for the print magazines. Then they failed to appear.
It was then announced that the first issues had 'always' been intended to be released in October. Then they failed to appear.
It was then announced that the monthly issues had 'always' been intended to be part of a bi-monthly release (eh?), and that the 'October' issue would be released with the 'November' issue as a larger product.

November is now over. I haven't been to the WOTC site for some weeks (why would I?). Anyone care to spare me a wasted trip by confirming my suspicions that we have yet to see a single complete issue?

51 to 100 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / Am I all alone? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.