Poll: Has news from the D&D Experience changed your mind?


4th Edition

201 to 219 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Good call, Dave! heh.

All this 3.5 versus 4.0 is making my head hurt. I voted "haven't decided". Actually I'm starting to think between playing D&D and WoW for the last 3+ years pretty much non-stop that maybe it's time to take a break from fantasy and look into some other options. I sure do miss the old World of Darkness. Or maybe some nice Sci-Fi.

Kidding.

I'm thrilled that Paizo has announced that they will take up the torch with the Pathfinder RPG. Bravo, gents! I've just begun (finally) to run the first set of your modules Rise of the Runelords and I am very much encouraged to stick with ye olde 3.5. However, my (far younger than myself) DM who runs the game I PLAY in is converting our game to 4th Edition so by late Summer I'm going to be thoroughly confused switching back and forth between games. Oh how I look forward to those particular headaches. I'm certain there will be much swearing.

Yes, the game formerly known as Dungeons and Dragons is being streamlined to suit the tastes of a new generation of gamers whose attention spans are far shorter and are suited to the video game mentality. That's what you (we) will be playing...a dice version of a video game. Sigh. Way back in the days of Second Edition when mini-maxing was just catching on I would tell these Power Gamers to leave us role-players alone and go play Battletech. It seems they wouldn't listen. Instead they got degrees, learned how to do game design and took over. Money, fellas. It's all about the money. Who ultimately makes the decisions for WOTC? Hasbro stockholders, I believe. Some genius somewhere convinced some high muckity-muck that 3.5 was spent and there was nothing left to sell so it was time for a change. There was much brainstorming. Ideas were thrown around. What was hot? Why MMOs and Console Videogaming! Heck, that stuff makes more money than Hollywood! It's as simple as that...

Make it fast, make it simple, make it bloody, make it so the kids don't get bored, make all new stuff for the parents (and us suckers who can't control ourselves with the collector mentality) to buy up and we'll continue to rake in the cash! But that's all okay. It's what capitalism is all about. I'm just not sure I'm gonna fall for it just yet. It's going to have to be something really, REALLY special to convince me.

And I ain't seen much so far.......


Vic Wertz wrote:

This weekend, the public is getting their first real glimpse of 4th Edition at Wizards of the Coast's D&D Experience 2008.

I skimmed the 201 posts but didn't see many by people who had been to the DnD Experience, and actually played the 4e preview adventures. I did. I played both of the Forgotten Realms 4e preview adventures and a "Delve" event, which also used 4e rules.

It's still DnD. Therefore, I voted that I was undecided before, but now probably will shift over. That shift will take place over time, probably in a year or so...my current campaign will be finished as a 3.5e campaign. My next campaign...probably an Eberron-based campaign...likely will be a 4e version.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16

Makes no change to me. I'm still sticking with 3.5 and more precisely Pathfinder RPG. 4e Lacks the feel I'm looking for in my games. Just doesn't feel like D&D anymore.


I'll probably go on playing 3.5 with my groups (my GMs will stick to it at least until the end of the campaigns), but as a GM I'll go 4th. I'll go on buying paizo books, because I like them, but I'll probably run them (or part of them) 4th edition.

As for PathRPG, it seems to be more complicated to create/run encounters with it, I'll probably do without.

Hyb'


Well I am glad to finally see some concrete albeit high level information of 4E. Here is my take on 4E, point by point in the DDE doc.
1 - defined roles. I think this could be quite good, though, the devil is in the details here. TBD.
2 - Powers etc...this i like. Not enough details to even hazard a guess as to how well it would work, but i think this will add a lot of flavor and variety to combat for all characters.
3 - Attacker rolls against a static defense. I am leery of this one. Static systems have the problem of also being static from an enjoyment standpoint. Yawn...beat a 16. again and again and again. If its static, then how do you work it to your advantage. Maybe I am misunderstanding this point, but i dont care for this.
4 - Actions. Seems a simplified version of what we have now. I suspect it will make decisions easier in that there will be less choices to make. Perhpas this speeds things up, at the cost of variety and creativity.
5 - Healing surge. THis is fine.
6 - Extended rest. Removes downtime. While i can see the need for this in computer / mmorpg games, I dont see this as a necessary change in a table top game where one can simply pass the time away with a couple of encounter rolls, whether or not its over-night or 6 hours. Guess this doesnt include spells?
7 - Attack...use powers, they are better. ok. so does this devalue weapons...guess that depends on how the powers are implemented or what is needed to excersize them.
8 - Action points - Seems to be a silly system. This doesnt seem to arise from anything concrete in the game or story...just a mechanism to award the occasional extra actin.
9 - Movement Diaganol is 1? this is almost enough to kill it for me right here. This means all circles are now scqures and balls will be cubes. "quick! blast em with your firecube!". I will not play in a game where standing in a corner of a square room, means you are equidistnat from all 3 other corners....bleh.
10 - So is this for ALL STs or just for ending ongoing effects? As an end of effect mechanism, i can tolerate this, but if this replaces the STs get better as you get higher level, then i am "agin it".
11 - This might be useful Would have to see how things would play out. I would miss the urgency created by having a spell wear off and tyring to get stuff done while its in effect.
12 - Reach - I think the idea is that you now wont provoke an AoO when you move into engage a creature with reach....as you move from 1 squrea away to adjacent. This is a good thing as it made engaging enemies with reach weapons very dicey.
13 - Combat advantage seems a good generalization of cases such as flanking. Shooting into melee without penalty?

Overall...on a scale of 1 to 10 (10 being most enthusiastic), I am about a 4.

I have read the Pathfinder RPG (PRPG), though not in depth yet. Cast at will level 0s...nice. Powers with schools of divine / magic. well done. good variety there. MU hit dice to 6...good.
Skill changes...no pionts, but fixed number + INT of skills. This will simplify and i REALLY like the level being applied to the skills. THis will inhigit the ability of players to dabble in skills by giving the 1 rank and at least being able to use them, even if not very effectively.
More feats for all chars...very nice. I ahve always wanted more feats and figured there could be groups of feats for casters and etc besides just fighters and all classes would have a set of feats from which to choose.
Combat Maneuvers seems an interesting idea, but willhave to try it to see how it works in the "real world".
Broken condition for items. I like this. Seems simple yet enough of a factor to make it something to consider and plan for. Repairing is about the right difficulty.
New undead rules. Interesting concept, but i dont think i care for it. The positive one is nice for healing, but the damage is low and and amount of time the undead flee is quite small. This seems to be a huge downgrade from previous turning, which was quite powerful (with a good roll) but was limited to a few times a day. Rebuking? why wouldnt i stand in the maiddle of a horde of goblins and rebuke them all to death? ANd if you are goign to rebute, then you need to right waway so that even 1 point of "healing" on them puts them above their total and thus under your command.

Its far too early and info is too sketchy on both (though already I know more about PRPG than i do about 4e) to make a solid judgement, but unless PRPG wants me to count 1 in the diaganol direction, PRPG has a leg up already.

thanks, Jeff


For me this poll didn't really have enough options. I am in the I intend to play both 3.5 and 4th edition camp, and I have been for a long time now. The D&D experience info did nothing to sway me in either direction.


The new system doesn't look at that fun to me if I wanted to play a MMORPG I would play one and skip the BS of learning a new set of rules. Yes some of the changes look like they are for the better, but not enough of them.

"this plus $1.50 might get you a cup of coffee."

Scarab Sages

I just finished reading the 4e stuff from DDXP and wow, it's actually worse sounding than I feared. I'm not going to debate it's lack of merits on this board ;)

my vote was I was planning on staying 3.5 and I still am.

Liberty's Edge

I've like the pathfinder stuff better in general than I did the stuff from 3.5. It looks like its going to be more exciting to play. I don't know enough about 4e to make a clear decision (and doesn't look like i'll get to before their release) but I really would like to keep using the books I bought, which are expensive, at the gaming table.

Besides, I don't think my friends could afford a full upgrade to 4e all at once. We know the rules for 3e and don't have to trip over the new rules for 4e for another 3 years before they release 5e.

Scarab Sages

Studpuffin wrote:

I've like the pathfinder stuff better in general than I did the stuff from 3.5. It looks like its going to be more exciting to play. I don't know enough about 4e to make a clear decision (and doesn't look like i'll get to before their release) but I really would like to keep using the books I bought, which are expensive, at the gaming table.

Besides, I don't think my friends could afford a full upgrade to 4e all at once. We know the rules for 3e and don't have to trip over the new rules for 4e for another 3 years before they release 5e.

Especially at the onset of a recession...yeah I think I'll buy hundreds of dollars of new books, my family needs to game, not eat....yeah....sure.

The Exchange

I'll need to read through the Handbooks before I consider buying them.

If they ain't 'complete works', then the game will be hurt by the inatention.

Lantern Lodge

I would have been 4E only. However, the news of the Pathfinder RPG will cause me to keep my 3.5E books and, as someone else said, I'll buy Paizo no matter what.

Liberty's Edge

I wasn't really considering coverting to 4E, but was going back to Classic D&D (Rules Compendium). The lack of OGL support concerned me, along with my perception that the playtest process was in house and not public. One of the things that I really liked about 3.0 was that huge list of playtesters in the Player's Handbook. I can no longer read that list due to the ravages of age, but I'm glad that it was there. Pathfinder is may not have that list, but it will have that extensive playtesting and I believe that this will lead to a very good game. The news from the D&D experience confirmed my misgivings...the news of Pathfinder really expanded our options. We hadn't played D&D in quite a while...in days after Pathfinder was released we played twice. Thanks Paizo!

The Exchange

revshafer wrote:
I wasn't really considering coverting to 4E, but was going back to Classic D&D (Rules Compendium).

I keep my Classic D&D in a well sealed box. From my Red, Blue, Green, Black, and Gold Boxed sets (the boxes are long gone but the books live), to the assortment of Published Adventures, to Handbound manuals consisting of photocopies of almost every Dungeon Adventure for the setting I could find.

Shadow Lodge

A review I read about 4e, I've included the quotes but not the source, I wasn't sure the rules here about linking external sites.

"Spell casters can always cast"....so that means there's no need for spell management,
"Half-Orc Rogue in 4e now works" I argue that it's always worked. There are trade offs and balance, they seem to want to move away from that.

"As has been written about, there are three stages of play now. Heroic (lvls 1-10), Paragon (lvls 11-20) and Epic (21-30.) Each stage really is its own beast." 21 - 30th level" why waste time building a system that goes to 30th level, is it even the same game?. How can you roleplay that, how can your character relate to anything or anyone.

Highest level I've ever played is 14.....so perhaps I'm not the best judge, but I think low - mid levels are much more enjoyable.

It's like playing Elder Scrolls....generic characters, that don't need a party. I might as well play a video game.

The class abilities look ludicrous...."Once per day, when you die?"

I see how there are combat improvements...but where's the improvement to the roleplay?

Diagonal movement -
So the closest distance between two points is a diagonal? sigh, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Why alter spacial reality because a few people can't understand how diagonal movement works.

This might appeal to the younger players just becoming involved in D&D, but it's not D&D anymore, it's something else with the same name.

I'll check it out completely at the book store (don't plan to give wizards a penny), but from what I've seen and heard so far it seems quite brutal.

I guess my main worry is enough people are going to jump on the Wizards "cash grab" band wagon and drive more players away from D&D. People will not endlessly keep buying these "updates" and it will water down the player base. 2e, 3e, 3.5e, 4e....whats next 4.5e 5e, 5.25e?.

IMO-they could have just came out with a completely new game (dragon dual or something), but a new game doesn't address the money issue, people will buy 4e because they'll eventually be forced to if they want to find games or players to play in the games. But new we have support here, so maybe it will be ok and 4e will quietly die...or at least I can dream ;)

Liberty's Edge

I especially like the tactic of selling new Player's Handbooks, Dungeon Master's Guides, and Monster Manuals every year. That ramps up the cost for those of us who want to have everything. It'll be like a collectible card game with hardback books.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

revshafer wrote:
I especially like the tactic of selling new Player's Handbooks, Dungeon Master's Guides, and Monster Manuals every year. That ramps up the cost for those of us who want to have everything. It'll be like a collectible card game with hardback books.

Hi, revshafer.

I still expect to stick with 3.5, but this statement --which many people have echoed here several times-- strikes me as unfair.

Every major RPG puts out rules supplements. Every edition of D&D has had multiple collections of monstrous opponents. I have seven hardcover books of 3.5 monsters on my shelf, and a bunch of AD&D 2nd Edition and 1st Edition books on the next shelf over.

Wizards is committing to a schedule of 1 monster book a year. I appreciate that.

There are also a metric buttload of books (class books, race books, special new-forms-of-magic books) that include material which would have been better if released in annual, coherent Players books. My concern is that after several years, it might be difficult for a 4th Edition D&D player to remember which annual PH had the particular class or spell she's looking for.

It looks to me like these books are going to be compilations of material from the online Dragon magazine. If so, that'll add another level of playtesting, feedback, and development to those rules, which can do nothing but good things.

I'm not switching, myself, but annual releases of players books, DM books, and Monstrous Compendia look like an unalloyed Good Thing.


Chris Mortika wrote:


I'm not switching, myself, but annual releases of players books, DM books, and Monstrous Compendia look like an unalloyed Good Thing.

I'd say it's yet another aspect we REALLY need to "wait and see" on...

If the books ARE only "eratta" and new material, then this is good - it keeps the need for supplemental books down a bit and lets them gauge which supplements might be more salable (sp?) - if the players hate a class or power source, there's no reason to push development of a relevant splatbook into the queue, but if they LOVE it, then it needs to become a priority.

Now, if the books, however, are all of the old content with a few fixes and a smal ammount of new stuff, but mostly stuff "you already own" - then it's really a money-grubbing scam...

But we really won't know which UNTIL the SECOND wave of books come out...

Scarab Sages

revshafer wrote:
I especially like the tactic of selling new Player's Handbooks, Dungeon Master's Guides, and Monster Manuals every year. That ramps up the cost for those of us who want to have everything. It'll be like a collectible card game with hardback books.

Well it is WotC afterall...progenitors of the TCG...

*DDM/RPGA bulletin* Rogue 2008 has been restricted to 1 per party in RPGA play. In addition Fighter/Cleric is banned.

(joke of course, but who knows, Role-play Collectible Game RCG)


From what I have seen, 4e is not to my tastes - not to mention the huge investment I have made in 3/3.5 materials.

First, it seems like a power-gamer's dream (nothing wrong with that - just not my taste). Also, I have more than enough material to last me for years. I see no reason to abandon that investment or do all the work to change them to 4e.

I realize 3.5 is not perfect but it basically works with some tweaks. I don't want to make the financial or time investment for learning a new system, and having to figure out what does not work and tweaking it. Face it - no way that a perfect system can be made.

I understand that WOTC is trying to get more folks playing D&D, but I am happy with what we have now.

Sovereign Court

CEBrown wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:


I'm not switching, myself, but annual releases of players books, DM books, and Monstrous Compendia look like an unalloyed Good Thing.

I'd say it's yet another aspect we REALLY need to "wait and see" on...

If the books ARE only "eratta" and new material, then this is good - it keeps the need for supplemental books down a bit and lets them gauge which supplements might be more salable (sp?) - if the players hate a class or power source, there's no reason to push development of a relevant splatbook into the queue, but if they LOVE it, then it needs to become a priority.

Now, if the books, however, are all of the old content with a few fixes and a smal ammount of new stuff, but mostly stuff "you already own" - then it's really a money-grubbing scam...

But we really won't know which UNTIL the SECOND wave of books come out...

Annual releases would be good if they stuck to that but they already have "Draconamacon:the metalics" slated for late 2008 so 2 monster books and I am sure class and race books more often then 1 per year.

Paizo has my cash, and loyalty.

Dark Archive

Kruelaid wrote:

You guys left no space for my answer.

I plan on playing both.

Me, too.


Add my name to the list for those leaving 4e on the shelf at the store. I have invested far too much time and money with the 3.x rules and system to flip into a whole new set. By Hades, many of my books haven't even had daylight on all their pages yet.


I'm in the group who'll try 'em both. To me 3.x has already busted the "classic" D&D feeling so, well 4th is only a step further in this direction ^_^
If I want to wake up the D&D memory I just have to open up my red box and start making a new party... >_<


Plageman wrote:
To me 3.x has already busted the "classic" D&D feeling so, well 4th is only a step further in this direction ^_^

More like puts a dagger in it. I just read the pdf from the first post - 4e looks to be all about combat - just look at the categories they have for PCs. They may as well have just called it a new edition of the miniatures game. I think someone wrote in an earlier post that 4e is like a book version of a video game. I agree from what I have seen to this point. I was almost curious enough about 4e to buy the PHB but I will not even waste my money now.


...still haven't seen that many comments by people who actually have played in a 4e event...

One of the folks that I game with played in the same 4e events that I did at DnD Experience. He's expressed concern to me that the non-combat parts of 4e DnD will take a back seat. I've seen this concerned expressed elsewhere, on this board and other fora. I frankly don't see how making the combat part of DnD richer, but simpler to run, adversely affects the role-playing part of the game. It seems to me that roleplaying is up to the group and the effectiveness of the DM who's telling the story. It's true that neither scenario run at DNDExp focused on role-playing, but there was some roleplaying in the Escape from Sembia scenario, and it played pretty much the same as any other DnD roleplaying (non-combat) encounter in which I've participated...particularly at a Con. The way judging a non-combat encounter worked during the 4e adventure was that the DM decided what (or if) to test a skill, set a DC, and the player rolled. If he equaled or exceeded the DC, the skill worked...if he didn't, the skill didn't work. The skills were a bit simplified, but the changes made sense to me. Difference without a distinction....

Early on, I was pretty vocal in my disgust with WoTC for making my over 3 thousand dollars worth of investment in 3.5e material useless once the new edition comes out. Pathfinder RPG doesn't do anything to help with that situation, so I'm not sure why I would go with that as a new edition. Necromancer Games and Goodman Games will be publishing 4e adventures, and they are, other than Paizo, my favorite sources of non-WoTC material, so things are looking up.

I voted that I was undecided or planning on staying with 3.5 but was moving to 4th. In reality, I'll probably play both, and DM both, at least for awhile. Eventually, though, I expect to move to 4e. My initial great deal of angst about the changes have tempered somewhat...mostly because I've now played a little in the new edition.


I´ve seen only a little bit of the new D&D but it convinces me less than the alpha playtest of Paizo. I think that this last one keeps better the spirit of the game, the new D&D looks dangerously like a MMORPG...

Dark Archive

I still plan on buying the 4th edition bundle to check it out, but after speaking with my group I believe we will be checking out Pathfinder and sticking with 3.5 for the foreseeable future


I'm sure that 4e will have some positive aspects. You can find some good in most things if you look. It just irritates me to think that if I switched to 4e I would have to enter online codes to get the full content of the books. If I've bought the book, it should be a complete product. WOTC didn't spend enough time Beta testing and developing 3.0 which was why we got 3.5 just a few years later. I'd almost be willing to lay odds that within 2 years we'll be hearing excited annoucements about D&D 4.2691.

Sczarni

Voted Yes to 4th edition. Although my players felt it was MMORPG with crappy graphics, I ,as DM, am going to give it a shot. I started with basic DND 22 years ago and did love 1st, 2nd and 2.5 (if you call it that), but noticed that the rules started gettign too involved with play. Rules lawyers had too much to argue over "grey areas" and 3.5 tried to make an effort by adding more rules to smooth out the rough only to complicate the system. I surely hope 4th edition gives paizo specifically and other 3rd party developers the same freedom as before to write great products. The sad thing is all of the online supplemts I purchased from monster cards, to character cards and such will have to be retired. Keeping some of the "cool" items I purchased over the years, we will have our work cut out for us to implement critical hit/fumble decks. Combat chart converts easily, we will probably keep basic editions mass combat rules, keep weapons of legacy in a way, and also keep 3rd editions -10 or -CON score to dead with bleeding effects in play (worst 4th edition rule of "flip a coin" 50/50 chance three failures and dead, or negative bloodied (-50) and dead rules). Did take some of paizos new rules on turn undead, broken items, and certain class skills and use those now. Probably keep those. In a sense, will not play wholly 4th edition as written but make a hybrid 4.1 Ed version for the players to match our playing skills. One rule to always keep is "have fun" 3.5 definately made that more difficult with players. Just my thoughts


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'm not going to 4e for at least two years, not with the sort of investment I've got in 3.5e. I want to get the most out of it that I can. Hell, I still play in a group that used 2nd Edition and has no plans on changing. We all enjoy 2e and it'll be around for a while yet.

Maybe I'll do the same as I'm doing with Windows Vista. Skip it and wait for the next version.


Jason Horton wrote:

I'm not going to 4e for at least two years, not with the sort of investment I've got in 3.5e. I want to get the most out of it that I can. Hell, I still play in a group that used 2nd Edition and has no plans on changing. We all enjoy 2e and it'll be around for a while yet.

Maybe I'll do the same as I'm doing with Windows Vista. Skip it and wait for the next version.

That's my opinion, too. I never buy version 1.0 of anything (if I can help it)!


Jeff Hiatt wrote:
3 - Attacker rolls against a static defense. I am leery of this one. Static systems have the problem of also being static from an enjoyment standpoint. Yawn...beat a 16. again and again and again. If its static, then how do you work it to your advantage. Maybe I am misunderstanding this point, but i dont care for this.

Now I like some of the mechanical changes in 4E, and some other I think have the potential of being good, depending on how they're implemented, but I disagreed with this as soon as I saw it.

How many players would like being hit by an effect and not getting a saving throw? It denies them a chance to decide their fate. Now, as I understand it 4E does away with instant death & incapacity spells, so at least it's 'the medusa looks as you, your fingertips grown chill as you begin to petrify' rather than 'the medusa looks at you, you're dead' but still, I can't see many players being fond of the rule.

Conversely, it makes it more difficult for DMs who like to, ah, 'finesse' their monsters' saving throws. Of course, this is often a bad thing but there are occasions when it is forgivable, either to prevent PCs being wiped out or make a boss fight memorable rather than a push-over.

As to what 4E camp I fall in, most of my objections are to do with the game's marketing and the break with D&D tradition. I plan to look through the books carefully before I decide whether they're worth a purchase. The preview information I've seen so far just hasn't been enough for me to decide.


Plageman wrote:

I'm in the group who'll try 'em both. To me 3.x has already busted the "classic" D&D feeling so, well 4th is only a step further in this direction ^_^

If I want to wake up the D&D memory I just have to open up my red box and start making a new party... >_<

Oddly enough, that's exactly what our family group is going to do as soon as our elder son comes home from college next week. I'm running a few level 1-3 adventures for several versions: OD&D, AD&D1e, 3e, my own home-brew rules and what I can gather about 4e from the demo and the fan-collected rules from enworld. We will start from scratch on each. Rolling up PCs through adventure completion. Then we'll compare notes and figure out which parts of each work best for us, and which parts don't. It might well be an interesting experiment, albeit focused on introductory material.


I also will be playin both systems. Theres room for both on the market as far as i can see. I dont really understand what all the fuss is about. Paizo have got a fantastic setting and concept with Pathfinder which we are playing now and Wizards are bringing out a new game too. So if i want to play in a dark setting of my own making with iconic features such as the Temple of Elemental Evil then i know where to look. On the other hand for something more 'historic and meaty' then Paizo have it all. I for one will be playing both!


DM Jeff wrote:
I think it's a little scary that the so-called news thus far has me only shaking my head and just as turned off about 4e without the slightest new excitement or anything.

4/e's strengths/weaknesses notwithstanding, it underscores WotC's main (IMO) failure here -- they've alienated a large part of their customer base with no plan or ability to control the damage.

While I don't think the Paizo boards are an entirely representative sample, I'm rather surprised at how strong the pro-3.5 sentiment is (61%/17% 3.5/undecided when I post this).

If I were a WotC/Hasbro executive, I'd be looking to fill names in on pink slips.

Scarab Sages

Tatterdemalion wrote:
DM Jeff wrote:
I think it's a little scary that the so-called news thus far has me only shaking my head and just as turned off about 4e without the slightest new excitement or anything.

4/e's strengths/weaknesses notwithstanding, it underscores WotC's main (IMO) failure here -- they've alienated a large part of their customer base with no plan or ability to control the damage.

While I don't think the Paizo boards are an entirely representative sample, I'm rather surprised at how strong the pro-3.5 sentiment is (61%/17% 3.5/undecided when I post this).

If I were a WotC/Hasbro executive, I'd be looking to fill names in on pink slips.

That would mean they'd have to roll heads at the top. Or find scape-goats.


The newest information about 4E has changed my mind to some extent: it made me more curious about the details of the system. So I'm going to pick up the core rulebooks (I was not inclined to do it at first, since I am totally, morally opposed to WotC's management, PR, motivations, marketing and modus operandi regarding the whole thing. But this doesn't address the system itself, which may have its own merits. Since there are aspects of the design I may be opposed to as well, I feel it is not fair to the designers to criticize without knowing what I'm talking about, i.e. reading through the system at the very least).

All the information we've got has not changed my mind about switching systems though. I will keep on playing 3.X, PRPG, whatever you want to call it.

I spent time (and efforts, and money) to master the system. Now that I do, I intend to have more fun than ever with it. I may play 4E occasionally, who knows, but I expect to run Third Edition variants for a long, long time. Not to mention that my gaming dollar goes mostly to Pathfinder these days.

Hence my vote: "No - I was planning on staying with 3.5 and still expect to".


For a while I took down the poll results regularly, wondering if any trends would become perceptible. After about a month I stopped because I saw the direction it was going. I came across these notes nearly two months later and have decided to post my findings. I'm not here to prove anything... just draw your own conclusions... or don't.

Friday, March 7
3->4: 4%
4->3: 8%
4: 20%
3: 50%
?: 16%
459 votes

Friday, March 14
3->4: 4%
4->3: 9%
4: 20%
3: 48%
?: 17%
567 votes

Thursday, March 20
3->4: 4%
4->3: 11%
4: 19%
3: 46%
?: 17%
684 votes

Friday, March 28
3->4: 4%
4->3: 13%
4: 18%
3: 45%
?: 18%
872 votes

Monday, April 7
3->4: 4%
4->3: 13%
4: 16%
3: 46%
?: 18%
1015 votes

Thursday, May 29
3->4: 4%
4->3: 15%
4: 16%
3: 46%
?: 17%
1189 votes


I am excited about 4e and am already planning my new campaign using it. My gaming group is excited as well.

I really don't know where all the negativity about 4e is coming from even though it isn't out yet. It kind of reminds me of the old BRP Call of Cthulhu vs d20 Cthulhu stuff. Personally, I love d20 Call of Cthulhu and have run some great atmospheric games with it. But if someone prefers the BRP version more power too them. But it does tick me off when they say that you cannot get the same atmosphere in a d20 COC game as compared to the BRP one. It just boggles my mind.

As for the 3.5 vs 4 debate, heck if you enjoy playing the old Chainmail rules more power to you but do you have to run down another man's game in the process? :)

Dark Archive

Kruelaid wrote:

You guys left no space for my answer.

I plan on playing both.

Ditto.

201 to 219 of 219 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / Poll: Has news from the D&D Experience changed your mind? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in 4th Edition