|
Windows XP to Vista = many problems
3e/3.5e to 4e = many problems.
What really bugs me about 4e is:
1) Races get more abilities/powers as they level up. Are you serious? Shouldnt your race have all its powers/abilities cuz its part of your race?
2) They say less die rolling speeds up play. Ok that seems reasonable enough, but now you are going to have the DM roll an attack roll and damage for a fireball instead of just having the DM roll damage and the PC's roll a save...
3) The Wheel is gone.
4) Devils and demons are now one big happy family...
5) 30 levels?
6) Non-spellcasting classes now have the ability to work magic by doing special tricks with their weapons....
7) Not compatable with earlier editions (this wouldnt bug me as much if they even bothered to post 3.5 materials online...i'm not asking for hardcopys, but a printable PDF would make me more than happy)
8) Hero points are standard in the game now. Might as well give everyone a trophy no matter where they finish cuz they are all winners.
I think the thing that really irritates me has to deal with the interview that Heisoo did. I wish I could find a link for it now, but basically it sounded like Hasbro didnt tell them to create a new system, but more to the effect that him and the other two eggheads got together at lunch and said, "hey, lets make this game more fun for us and not bother to see what everyone else has to say and then we'll pitch it to Hasbro."
If someone can help me with that youtube link I would appreciate it.
Something else to bring up, besides that combat doesn't really seem to run much smoother is that Dragon battle they posted excerpts from.
While I understand certain abilities (like Raging) can operate when a monster reaches a certain HP or less, I really don't like it when other stuff does this. Like in that Dragon battle, what was it, an extra free Breath weapon attack or something (if anyone wants to clarify please do, I am not going to read that article again).
This sort of thing used this way is WAY to video gamish.
I will say this, if Wizards starts labelling certain monsters as "Boss"
"Mid-Boss" etc...or begins printing the books with Leet references or internet lingo lexicons, we really need to worry.
|
|
What SPECIFIC changes are bothering you?
I'd like to take a different tack on answering this question. One that may be tangential, but 'oh well.'
I can't comment on the specific changes to 4e that are bothersome to me. The stuff I've seen at the Wizards site sounds intriguing to me, and I'm really looking forward to seeing how it flies.
I also don't really care much about what classes/races they will include or not include. If they leave something out that I really like, I'm sure some hungry third-party company will do a great job of providing that content a la the OGL or the d20 system, or whatever the heck it is.
If they (Wizards) can make adjudicating combat faster and easier, I'd plunk down money for that alone. Especially for new players. I'm holding my breath on that as they seem to be incorporating a lot of the stuff that came out in the Bo7S with regards to martial classes having spell-comparable powers, and I'd like to see how they include all that stuff and make things easier.
I also see things on the Wizards site written about certain combinations improving this-and-such power so that fighters are no longer envious of wizards, and vice-versa (I'm not bothering to look up specifics, can you tell?). I don't get it, personally, but I'm open to seeing what it all means and how it all works.
Speaking for myself, I think the thing that I fear the most with 4e is that Wizards, despite their best intentions, is going to trash the game that I've grown up loving. I know, I know! Everyone at Wizards has grown up loving the game as well. I'm not saying that my fear is rational! I've invested a lot of time and emotional energy (not to mention money) into this game over the last couple decades, and to have someone change all that (again) is scary. I think, if people are honest, that's the scariest thing about 4e.
On a different note...
A wonderful manta by necromancer games is "3rd edition rules, 1st edition feel". Why is that such a powerful statement? Because what people want with D&D is that 1st edition tradition, that "feel". The crunch, the settings are second place to that.
This, for me, is both true and not true. I love Necromancer games. I love Goodman Games. Nostalgia is where it's at for an old dude (34) like me who played the game when he was in elementary school. The cool blue maps in a Goodman Game's module, the Erol Otus illustrations, they all make me feel like I'm fourteen, standing in line at Riverside Hobbies with my latest TSR this-or-that again. And, I--like many--love T1-4. I still own it. Go back and read it, it's great stuff.
But, if you haven't read T1-4 in a while, I wonder if you'll have the same experience I had when I went back and re-read it. It's great. But, it's also not that great. What made it great was that my DM (oh-so-long-ago) took the time to connect all the dots. Otherwise, it's not all that clearly written.
Nostalgia has its place. Tradition has its place. I'm all for both, believe me! But, in terms of clarity and ease of implementation, the stuff that is being published now--especially by Paizo--is, at worst, far superior than any 1e product that I own, hands down.
So, I guess I've not really answered Erik's question, but I am open for good discussion!
I second a number of the posters, that I don't like the superhero creep or fluff changes. If the rules are smoother and faster (something their PR has not convinced me of) and Paizo keeps the feeling of Golarion I'm fine with 4E. The one first level playtest they did explained seemed to have a high number of special rules.
So hypothetically, if gnomes are no longer a core race, but there will be gnomes in Golarion, and the new edition features this new race-feature level progression-thingy, does it follow that Paizo will publish a race-feature level progression-thingy for Golarion gnomes? Do you think that would be something to appear in the pages of Pathfinder? Or some other publication?
It does stand to reason that we would do so, yes. Most likely in a big hardcover campaign setting book to be delivered some time next summer, rather than within the context of Pathfinder itself. We want to keep Pathfinder focused on the campaign, so extra stuff will probably show up in other sources.
--Erik
I'm not sure if you can answer this, but has wizards explained 4e's OGL? Is it as open? It seems if they are leaving out the bard/gnome/monsters till PHBII/MMII they may try to block 3rd party publishers from filling in those gaps.
They also seem to say core is all PHB/DMG/MM books. Does that mean that the new OGL will allow use of all of those future books, or just the initial set?
In a way that sums up my biggest problem with 4E, they aren'y really telling us anything concrete.
|
|
Well here are my concerns about 4E.
1) It's simpler, faster, and easier to learn. Really?
The only two things we know that may make the game simpler and quicker to play are: 1) Elimination of the full attack action, and 2) simpler stat blocks
But we also have: 1) 25 (maybe more) spell levels, 2) The fighter has BO9S type maneuvers (so much for playing fighter to keep it simple)
3)Everyone has at will, per encounter , and per day abilities. This souds like a lot of bookkeeping to me. 4) Some abilities can only be used when you or your opponent are at certain hit point levels. Yeah, that's going to be easy to keep track of. It sounds like it will be closer to "fiendishly complex" than the streamlined system they are touting. So what was the point again?
2)Too many things are being eliminated or changed simply to justify more books. There aren't going to be bards, barbarians, druids, or sorcerers in the PHB. Also no gnomes. If you want those, you have to buy PHB II next year. The classic, iconic monsters are going to be spread out through several monster manuals. Talk about naked greed. I have to buy a bunch of books just to have all of the "core" material. Of course there are also the moronic cosmology changes, and the nuking of the Forgotten Realms.
So in a nutshell, I am worried that it will no longer feel like D&D and I have to shell out tons of money jsut to get the basic stuff that shoudl be in the 3 core books. That sums up my feelings
|
I will say this, if Wizards starts labelling certain monsters as "Boss"
"Mid-Boss" etc...or begins printing the books with Leet references or internet lingo lexicons, we really need to worry.
True, though I would point out that the game has always featured boss monster encounters, even if it hasn't called them that. If you get through the Tomb of Horrors, you fight
In this regard, the video game industry has borrowed more from D&D than the other way around--it has simply added new terminology to the mix and called out those climactic encounters as the special event they usually are.
I, of course, would be upset if they start using "leetspeak" in D&D products, since the game has always been a wonderful avenue towards developing better language skills, and leetspeak would take it in the opposite direction. I really can't imagine them trying to "dumb down" the game in a linguistic way, though, so I'm not worried about it. :)
leetspeak?
Leet speak courtesy of wikipedia
Yes, I do realize that there are essentially 'Boss' monsters already in D&D. There is however, a difference in the manner of implementation, at least a far as most DMs I know.
I guess that particular rant was my way of also expressing my disappointment and dismay at this trend towards emulation of Video Games and MMORPGs. Its the MMORPG part that bugs me the most. I really am frightened about any Unearthed Arcana/Alternative Rules book that WotC puts out for 4th edition. I just see all kinds of even more blatant exploitation of the MMORPG thing for a book of that sort.
Before I keep going off on a tangent, its the feel of the game that is changing. Sure, mechanics have changed in the past. We dealt with a relatively major change with the 2nd-3rd transition, but the feel of the game didn't really change. This time I am not expecting things to remain the same, partially because WotC is saying they are not.
|
|
My biggest problem Mr. Mona...Saving throws being tossed out the door. I polled all my gamers. And not a one thinks removing saving throws is a good idea.
Wotc made the comment in there Rules article about how they were changing saving throws that "saving throws are drama that players don't need or want" this the biggest load of BS I have ever heard. it takes that power out of the players hands and puts it in the dm's and the min/maxer's. streamlined my butt....sounds more like dumbed down
For those of you who "die a little inside" every time WotC posts a 4e preview, what are you worried about losing with the new edition?
We're still building our world and are largely ignorant of WotC's plans beyond what's been posted online. The world we build will be one that would work just great with 1st, 2nd, or 3rd edition, and my hope is that it will also work great with 4.0.
So what worries you? My sense is that the smart move is to convert to 4.0 but to keep alive certain assumptions and traditions that WotC seems to be dumping. We can take the elements of 3.5 that we like and retain them, pretty much whatever Wizards of the Coast decides to do.
But I need to know what worries you guys about 4.0 and what we can do to retain you even if we do make the switch.
Honestly, I'm not so much worried about what's being lost, as what's being added. Specifically, I don't want to see tieflings all over the freakin' place. As a rare "group requisite monster-player" option, I can see it, but one of the basic choices for any Genericworld right out of the box? No, no, no. Ugh. There's too many half-fiend / half-dragon / half-whatever things floating around anyway thanks to template mania, on top of which we've already got half-orcs in that slot, even though they get the shaft. :-`
Just say NO to tieflings!
-The Gneech
PS: Ditto for warforged and shifters. Great for setting-specific creatures, pure poison for "core choices".
As a rare "group requisite monster-player" option, I can see it, but one of the basic choices for any and Genericworld right out of the box?
The thing a lot of people are going to need to realize is that 4E's biggest shift from previous editions is not in its rules -- though those will obviously be quite different and (to my mind anyway) have a negative impact on the game's overall "feel" -- but in its meta-setting.
Previous editions had what could be called an "implied" setting. That is, there were very few specific details about almost anything but, by reading through the PHB, DMG, and MM, certain vague details would coalesce in your mind about the society and culture of a typical D&D world and its relationship to the wider multiverse, etc.
4E, from even the little we've seen so far, seems instead to have a "meta-setting" rather than an implied setting. This is a step further along the continuum that leads to an actual setting, like the Forgotten Realms or Eberron. A meta-setting makes specific choices for the DM, such as that tieflings are the byblows of an ancient human empire that trafficked with infernal powers and fell, bringing about the current darkness. While it's possible to ignore a meta-setting entirely (James Wyatt totally chucked tieflings from his "Dungeoncraft" sample setting), doing carries greater implications than in an implied setting, not least of which being that a player who reads only the 4E PHB might expect what it says there about tieflings to be gospel.
The long and short of it is that 4E seems geared even more specifically toward a type of fantasy setting than previous editions had been. "Points of light" is a perfectly valid D&D setting archetype but it's not the only one. By highlighting it and writing the PHB I, DMG I, and MM I (at least) in accordance with it, it's giving it a pride of place that will, I think, shift most D&D campaigns toward it. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it's a factor to consider and a way that 4E looks to differ most markedly from its predecessors.
Eric:
I've been playing almost all of my D&D years in Greyhawk because I like it. I recognize that it is very unlikely that WOTC will do anything with the setting nor allow others the right. I went from 1st edition to skipping 2nd edition, to 3rd edition (3.5) and spent a large sum of money for a library of books. You asked what bothers us about 4th edition well here it is...
1. It makes no sense what-so-ever to start a collection of books all over, thereby minimizing the amount of use I will get out of the ones I have acquired.
2. Investing in 4th edition seems foolish because WOTC is likely to create 5th edition in another 6-8 years (my guess) anyway. Again, why spend the money when I already have given it to them.
3. Over the years I have learned the D&D cosmology, all the ins and outs of the game in regards to planes, races, rules, world buliding, etc. I have no interest in relearning these things. I'm not about to start remailiarizing myself with new terms, rules, etc. Why should I?
4. I don't like the way WOTC treats their customers or markets their products. I feel they are creating a new game and slapping the D&D logo on to it in order to sell more books.
5. I think they are taking the game into computer/superhero mode, a trait which I don't find the least bit appealing for D&D. I like superhero games, but D&D isn't one of them. In my book, D&D is a pen and paper game not a quasi computer oriented game. Yes I know I don't need DI to play. But will I need it with 5th edition in a few years? uite possibly. I don't like this trend so why should I support it.
6. I am a Greyhawk fan. Other than giving you the opportunity to write the Expedition book and put some Greyhawk stuff in Dungeon and Dragon, they have done nothing for the world. Why should I support them when they don't support my game world.
7. They are taking the game in a different direction in regards of a family wholesome concept I think it should be. The art, the language, not for me. These are reflections of the company ane the type of folks who run it. Again not for me.
8. They killed dungeon and dragon. Their electronic versions are jokes. I have collected every issue from #74 on up, most of which was a subscription. I have countless older issues I picked up elsewhere so my entire collection starts in the 30's and goes to the end, with scattered issues going back to the single digits. Again, why should I support them?
9. They are printing the core books and intentionally leaving out classic things such as gnomes, frost giants, and so on in order to sell more books later on. No. Unacceptable business practice!
10. Their prices are too high.
Essentially, as a company they are not supporting my gaming needs so I no longer support them as a company. Bottom line. This post is meant as an answer to your question. I am trying to get past the WOTC slamming thing so hopefully your readers don't interpret things I say to harshly.
|
They are printing the core books and intentionally leaving out classic things such as gnomes ...
I know people will miss gnomes in the PHB. But to call them "classic"? Gnomes were added late in D&D history.
Besides - WotC has said that you can have gnome PCs. The rules for them will be in the MM. They will get more depth later on.
They are printing the core books and intentionally leaving out classic things such as gnomes ...I know people will miss gnomes in the PHB. But to call them "classic"? Gnoms were added late in D&D history.
Ah, well, they were included as a PC race in the AD&D 1st Ed. PH, which was published IIRC in 1979. So, they were not included in the OD&D stuff, but still early enough that folks who started gaming around 1980 would have them always in their games.
Besides - WotC has said that you can have gnome PCs. The rules for them will be in the MM. They will get more depth later on.
If they are meant as a PC race, they belong in the PH. More depth later on could mean that you have to buy yet another book - what is exactly one point I critizise. I want a game system that is complete within three books, tops.
Stefan
Specific issues I have with 4th edition:
1] No druids, bards or barbarians in the PHB, yet there is room for new core classes like the Warlord. Why?!?
2] No gnomes in the PHB, yet there is room for new core races like eladrin, warforged, tieflings, etc. Once again, why?!?
3] Racial abilities that are spread out over time/built into "Talent Trees". That's no way to simplify a game.
3] Yearly releases of new core books (PHB, MM and DMG). If these books are truly core, then players will have to buy them in order to use pre-published materials that reference them.
If they are not truly core then elements left out of the initial core books (i.e. druids) won't be available to 3rd-party publishers.
4] Faster level advancement. It was too fast in 3rd edition, now advancement will be ridiculously quick.
5] Iron Heroes-esque gameplay. I like Iron Heroes but D&D isn't Iron Heroes. 1st level characters shouldn't be uber-powerful. Casters should have to manage their spellcasting resources.
6] All around death of sacred cows... (i.e. the death of Greyhawk, the mucking up of Forgotten Realms, ditching Vancian magic, no more Great Wheel cosmology).
7] Iconic monsters spread out over several Monster Manuals.
D&D is trying to stay relevant by appealing to the WOW crowd. It won't work and, when all's said and done, D&D will not resemble the game I've enjoyed for 26 years.
I'm hoping Hasbro sells off the license because they are ruining the game for me and those I game with. At least they should sell off the Greyhawk license so that some other company can DO SOMETHING with the setting.
I think the thing that really irritates me has to deal with the interview that Heisoo did. I wish I could find a link for it now, but basically it sounded like Hasbro didnt tell them to create a new system, but more to the effect that him and the other two eggheads got together at lunch and said, "hey, lets make this game more fun for us and not bother to see what everyone else has to say and then we'll pitch it to Hasbro."If someone can help me with that youtube link I would appreciate it.
I think this is what you were looking for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtd1qAwGVeUYes, I find his presumptuousness to be annoying, especially as I grumble over the changes that are being made in 4th edition. Their assumptions were WAY off base with most of the guys I game with.
Stebehil, Yep, you understood exactly what I meant.
What information I want to see in the core three books are the monsters, classes, races, planes, rules, etc. that I have associated with D&D for the last 28 years. I realize that some things will change, but there is a point in which I am no longer comfortable with removing/changing certain aspects of the game. I know that many of these things will end up being published in another book down the road but that is something I don't agree with as well. Certain things (at least for me) need to be in the core three books in order to receive my support. WOTC felt these things were not popular enough, important enough, won't be missed, needed to make room for new things, whatever their reasons were, either way it's not for me. I'll miss the barbarian, druid, bard, and half orc, as well should they not make the first books.
If I hadn't purchased as much 3.5 material I would be grumbling but may have chosen to accept some of these temporary omissions. I have a lot of books, paid for all of them, they need use. I see no reason to change editions for me.
Eric wanted specifics of why I won't go 4th edition, so I game him some. What is on my list may differ from someone elses. If Joe the fighter feels that he won't buy 4th edition because they made changes to the fighter class, that's ok. Joe's not wrong, he chose not to buy it because it no longer works for him and it isn't something he is willing to work with in order to make it the way he wants.
When making a list of why you will or won't accept 4th edition, no one is wrong. You select the standards it must meet for yourself. If it meets them great, if it exceeds them, even better. If it falls short, time to rethink things. If it falls off the cliff in your opinon, that's ok, it is no longer a purchase consideration for that individual.
WOTC is changing to many things, it doesn't work for Eileen any more. Fortunetly, I have a big supply of 3.5 books, I also have other games I enjoy.
EileenProphetofIstus' post about 8 or so above mine is perfect. All of her examples of why I dont like 4th edition are spot on...especially the first two.
You say there will be no Warforged and that Eladrin will be outsiders and not a PC race and Succubi will still be demons and Gnomes and Druids and Bards will still exist and all of these 3rd editon concepts will live on.
If so...THEN WHY SWITCH?
If you want everything in Golarion to keep on having that 3rd edition flavor and feel, then why not just keep using 3rd edition?
There are SO MANY people who are saying they will stay 3.5..Theres also tons of people who are telling you they will stick with you no matter what. So if you stay 3.5 they will stick around.
Lets not forget monsters that are in the 3.5 edition SRD that will not be in the 4th editon SRD like Frost Giants. Are you allowed to use them anymore? Lets say you can. They arent in the 4th editon MM so you will have to stat them out yourself. Then the 4th edition MM2 comes along and your stats dont match. Do you ret-con the stats? This goes for Gnome PCs too.
The only people you are in danger of losing are 2 groups:
1 - Those who are saying they will convert to 4th edition as soon as the core books come out they will not buy any more 3rd edition stuff as of May 08. They seem to be a very small minority (based on these boards and the Poll at least).
2 - Those who are brand new to D&D and will begin their gaming experiance with 4th edition. I dont think you are going to be getting much of their money. They will look through your stuff and see they cannot play as warforged or Eladrin yet gnomes are being treated like a core race and other things that will be odd or strange and not what they are used to.
Not to mention that the anal compleatists among them will not want to jump onboard with issue 13 knowing that the first 12 issues have a lot of "worthless" material in them.
I hate to say it..It makes me very upset and I dont want to say it...But once Pathfinder goes 4th edition I will say goodby.
I pray that you at least make the 3rd adventure path 3.5 and wait it out.
Okay Erik, Here are the things I don't like:
1) Paladins of Any Alignment: Say it ain't so! I am not entertained by hearing the words "Paladin of Asmodeus" or "Paladin of Bane." This cheapens the profession, and removes the simple expedient of looking in the dictionary to discover what a word means. Reverse engineering logic does apply here. This creates real-world morons. Can you imagine referring to Osama Bin Laden or Adolf Hitler as a Paladin? You couldn't before, but now, it's possible, just because someone read a D+D rulebook and not the dictionary.
2) Randomly assorted extraplanar logic: "Hi...I'm Tina. That's short for Velinterpertina, and I'm a Succubus. For over thirty thousand years, I was a demon, toiling in the blood war, seducing Pit Fiends, licking the ear of friendly Mariliths, and contributing to evil. But recently...some of my friends got too barbaric...so I switched...
Now I do all the same stuff, only I lick the ears of mortal creatures without spell resistance. I'm a whiz at social combat, and all I have to do is smile prettily at you in normal combat, and you become my special friend. And all it took was Richard Baker, and kapow! I became so much more effective, I get way more downtime to play with my holdings, and my sister, the succubus paladin? Now, she can stay evil!
So make the switch! Only the mortals need to be confused!"
3) Social Combat: WHAT? That pretty much says it all. The moment that you need to roll initiative to have a conversation, the game is done, period, it's no longer a roleplaying game.
4) Deity Swapouts: Pelor and Bane? In the same pantheon? Was Heironeous and Hextor too complicated for people? I really don't want to roleplay in a game world made for people for whom rocks are smarter. It's not the MECHANICS that piss me off, Erik. It's the fluff and the mechanical choices they're making.
Maybe I'm only speaking for myself here, but I die a little inside every time someone cites the "fluff" (which usually means cosmology, setting, pantheon, etc.) as a reason to hate 4th edition. Who cares? If you want to keep Heironeous and Hextor in your 4th edition game, buy a 4.0 PH and hack out the "Religion" pages. If you want to run the Great Wheel in 4.0, buy a DMG and hack out the planar description pages. The only important changes about 4th edition will be the mechanics- I'm betting the effects of fluff on the mechanics will be negligible. Unless you're running RPGA games, who cares if WotC wants to call succubi devils now? Call 'em demons if you want. Call 'em shibboleths if you're feeling frisky.
To sum up, the only way the so-called "sacred cows" of D&D are dead is if WotC comes around and sets fire to all your old books after 4.0 comes out. I personally was more upset when Dragon told me that St. Cuthbert was an LG deity (but we've already GOT one of those...!).
That said, I have yet to hear anything really persuasive about 4th ed. mechanics. Use my CON to swing a hammer, you say? Dragons can crit on breath weapons now, you say? Whatever...
Eric:
I've been playing almost all of my D&D years in Greyhawk because I like it. I recognize that it is very unlikely that WOTC will do anything with the setting nor allow others the right. I went from 1st edition to skipping 2nd edition, to 3rd edition (3.5) and spent a large sum of money for a library of books. You asked what bothers us about 4th edition well here it is...
Eileen...will you marry me?!? That was the best post I've read since 4e was announced. I've printed it up and posted it on my wall as my future talking points on all forums.
Paizo - I discovered you guys late. It wasn't until Dragon and Dungeon were taken from you that I found out how good your work was. Since then, I've gone back and bought all your back issues and subscribed to Pathfinder (which I love). However, when you fully convert to 4e...I'll be done buying your products. It's too hard to keep converting everything to a prior system. There is no one in the four roleplaying circles I'm in that is converting...no one (about 16 folks). This could possibly be the worst selling edition of D&D of all time. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
To sum up, the only way the so-called "sacred cows" of D&D are dead is if WotC comes around and sets fire to all your old books after 4.0 comes out.
Not exactly...sure we still have our old books, but we want more NEW books for Greyhawk too! Sure I can leave it up to my DM to fill in what's going on, but I vastly enjoyed official material too.
What I would buy however is consolidated 3.5 (3.75) stuff.
Examples:
* A book of Skills: That contains all skills with their alternate uses, skill tricks, equipment to improve skill checks, etc..
* A book of Feats: All feats listed as general, racial, metamagic, etc.
* 3.75 rules. Compatible with the tons of existing stuff out there, but consolidated, and some new ideas in it. I liked the Class Act series very much. Especially the last ones, where every class was polished and things clearead out.
* A complete enviromental book much like the dungeon survival guide and the wilderness survival guide
* A complete equipement book (again with skill uses, cool racial stuff like the elven bow usable as a club in melee and other racial stuff)
*
Amen, brother! Though I should note there is a complete list of Feats on the WotC website. You better run and download it before it's gone forever.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats&tablesort=1
Amen, brother! Though I should note there is a complete list of Feats on the WotC website. You better run and download it before it's gone forever.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/lists/feats&tablesort=1
A goodly chunk of them are also on DM Tools.
Eric:
I've been playing almost all of my D&D years in Greyhawk because I like it. I recognize that it is very unlikely that WOTC will do anything with the setting nor allow others the right. I went from 1st edition to skipping 2nd edition, to 3rd edition (3.5) and spent a large sum of money for a library of books. You asked what bothers us about 4th edition well here it is...
<snip>
I tend to agree with a lot of things that you have said. I personally do not totally object to a new edition. But a new edition for the new edition's sake is not what I want. I also have no objection to WotC making money. That is what they are there for. However, to have a profitable company, you need to respect the customer. So far I have seen very little respect. If the edition changed, but they had left Dragon and Dungeon alone as well as a few other things, I doubt I would be as upset. But WotC has doen a lot to make me say "No.". Right now I have over $800 worth of 3.5 edition stuff. I am really not in the mood to buy new stuff. I would much rather fill the holes that I have in my 3.5 stuff.
P.S. - Eileen, welcome to the boards.
Aristodeimos:
Hmmm....I bet you say that to all the girls. Are you sure your not just after my big....collection of D&D books? I hope this doesn't make me a pin up girl?
Sharoth...Thank You!
For those of you who "die a little inside" every time WotC posts a 4e preview, what are you worried about losing with the new edition? . . . So what worries you? . . . But I need to know what worries you guys about 4.0 and what we can do to retain you even if we do make the switch.
Well, for me (I've only been gaming really since the advent of 3rd edition) it's not that there's a rules change, whether fluff or crunch, it's attitude that WotC has had with the whole thing.
They say "You are going to think fourth edition is going to be wonderful, fantastic, and think every other gaming system is crap after you see fourth edition. and guess what, we are the one's who are creating it, and therefore we are like gods to you. Trust us, believe us when we say it's good and show you no proof. Let us continue to tell you it's good and not show you so you can form your own opinion. You aren't allowed to form your opinion because you're a lowly gamer, and not someone awesome and fantastic like us."
It's not that there's going to be an edition change. It's their whole approach it it. I just don't understand why they can't give us some actual info on it so we can form our own opinions, or at least turn down the ego dial.
Are you sure your not just after my big....collection of D&D books? I hope this doesn't make me a pin up girl?
Perhaps, but you'll be equally impressed by my very large...collection of painted D&D minis. ;-)
So make the switch! Only the mortals need to be confused!"
ROTFLMAO - there are about 10 people in the Pentagon right now popping their heads up over their cubicles to see who's laughing.
What alignment are you Aristodeimus? Can't rush into these things you know!
Are you wondering what Alignment, level, etc. I am or just referring to the space between my ears?
There is a lot of stuff I DESPISE about 4E. It's destroying a lot of the "soul" D&D has and a lot of the fluff:
---Alignment system changing...to the point where Paladins aren't required to be Lawful Good. Some of the fun and feel of D&D is arguing over alignment LOL
---Demons&Devils and cosmology face-lift...there was nothing wrong it it originally. It's just WotC's way of dumbing crap down for the WoW kids they want to get playing D&D. Where is the Abyss!? Elemental Chaos!? Get out of my D&D, WotC! It's not yours!
---Vancian magic being axed almost completely
---What!? Fireball doesn' do 1d6 damage/level? Wish is gone?! I WISH WotC would just collapse, personally...
---It's a HUGE change and it's TOO early. No conversions can be done. We have to wait another 10 years to see them re-hash what we want to return from 1E, 2E, and 3E...and by then (if not earlier) they'll just release 5th Edition
---The fact that the Forgotten Realms got smashed to pieces and Eberron stayed untouched mostly...
---The fact that, once we get neck deep into 4E (which will be about 5 years), they're going to release 5E...
Well here are my concerns about 4E.
1) It's simpler, faster, and easier to learn. Really?
The only two things we know that may make the game simpler and quicker to play are: 1) Elimination of the full attack action, and 2) simpler stat blocks
But we also have: 1) 25 (maybe more) spell levels, 2) The fighter has BO9S type maneuvers (so much for playing fighter to keep it simple)
3)Everyone has at will, per encounter , and per day abilities. This souds like a lot of bookkeeping to me. 4) Some abilities can only be used when you or your opponent are at certain hit point levels. Yeah, that's going to be easy to keep track of. It sounds like it will be closer to "fiendishly complex" than the streamlined system they are touting. So what was the point again?2)Too many things are being eliminated or changed simply to justify more books. There aren't going to be bards, barbarians, druids, or sorcerers in the PHB. Also no gnomes. If you want those, you have to buy PHB II next year. The classic, iconic monsters are going to be spread out through several monster manuals. Talk about naked greed. I have to buy a bunch of books just to have all of the "core" material. Of course there are also the moronic cosmology changes, and the nuking of the Forgotten Realms.
So in a nutshell, I am worried that it will no longer feel like D&D and I have to shell out tons of money jsut to get the basic stuff that shoudl be in the 3 core books. That sums up my feelings
Dude, you summed up my feelings with that perfectly.
Funny thing, didn't WotC also state from the first information we began receiving about 3E was "Faster, easier, simpler rules?" I will stake my life they said that, I remember reading that specific statement in Dragon Magazine on one of the "Countdown" issues.
Now they're saying 4E will be "Faster, easier, simpler rules"...for the MMORPG gamer that is...and until 4E gets so loaded with new material that WotC goes,"Time for 5E instead of just spicening up 4E!"
Im probably a complete blank because I am new to the forum and haven't found the archives section yet.
|
Contributor
|
Are you wondering what Alignment, level, etc. I am or just referring to the space between my ears?
They're wondering about your measurements.
*digs himself a hole*
Gamestat wise, I mean! Like your Charisma bonus and breastplate size...
*digs deeper*
Ah geez...
*hopes his girlfriend doesn't see this post*
;D
Inquisitive minds need to know....
Str 8
Dex 13
Con 12
Int 14
Wis 20
Cha 18
wears +3 mitheral chain shirt
tons of ranks in diplomacy
Very Spoiled
|
|
Im probably a complete blank because I am new to the forum and haven't found the archives section yet.
Click these words to go to your own blank space in the Cosmic Archives. Click any poster's name to find their own information.
Given that I have no telepathic abilities, I am not qualified to comment about the space between anyone's ears except my own, which is a very noisy place indeed with a great deal of highly bizarre behavioral patterns.
...I'd probably give the gnomes of Golarion a run for their money on 'weird'...
Thank you for the link, now I have something to do.
Actaully, when you compare the archive entry to the character sheet/background, what you read is the short version.
|
|
Actaully, when you compare the archive entry to the character sheet/background, what you read is the short version.
Nice work, then.
...Mine is essentially abbreviated cliff's notes because any more detail would wind up needing to reference other material and I'd likely hit a buffer limit long before finishing... Which sounds amazingly egotistical, I think.
If your telling me that you put a lot of work into your character because you enjoyed it and it gives a lot in return when you play, no it isn't egotistical. I put a lot of work into characters as well because what you get out of it is greatly based on what you put into it.
...
But I need to know what worries you guys about 4.0 and what we can do to retain you even if we do make the switch.
...delete...
This started out as a much longer post...too long
I don't like the feel of the new game from the concepts I've seen. I feel like things like miniatures are driving the game, rather than the other way around. I've never bought a miniature from WotC and I never will--I refuse to support the "buy at your own risk" mentality.
I feel like the game is pandering to the video game generation. I don't like wire-fu fighters in core D&D. Don't get me wrong, I have a vast library of wire-fu flicks, some of which would put King Fu Theatre to shame in their cheesiness. In some campaigns, this might work great.
I feel like 4E is being low-browed. That substance is being displaced by kewl factor. D&D emerged from the world of wargaming, and I guess I'm old enough to appreciate those roots. Can't tell you how many new words I learned from Gary Gygax when I was a kid growing up on D&D. And maybe that's the difference right there: the Old School D&D didn't pander. It might be silly at times, and wholly unrealistic in many ways, but there was a verisimilitude which appealed. Not that EGG couldn't have used some constructive criticism from a competent editor, but his meandering, eclectic style had a certain charm.
4e seems like some shiny, new trinket, a sugar-coated gewgaw, a painted trollop selling herself for a few shiny coins when compared to the grungy, utilitarian feel of its predecessors (even the sanitized 3.x version we most recently had).
Frankly, 4e makes my stomach churn. I know I'm old. I have little use for a cell phone. I don't text. I'll have a MySpace page when Hell freezes over. Maybe it's simply a matter of generation values then, and the D&D will be a hit with the next gen gamers. But I don't see WotC/Hasborg getting much in the way of my dollars with this new edition. It's known as voting with your wallet and I intend to exercise my franchise.
(edit) And I loathe anime. Even more than halflings.
|
|
Erik,
Good questions. Now let's see if I have some good answers.
1) I do not want D&D to play like a video game. I want it to be a F2F role playing game, with an old school feel. The "feel" of D&D is important. I do recognize that this is a hard one to nail down, as there will be different opinions on the definition of "feel."
2) I wish they would stick with the original settings, and expand upon them. I am disappointed that Greyhawk is being kicked to the curb.
3) Uber-powerful first level characters???? First level characters should be first level characters.
4) Some of the fluff stuff has me scratching my head, but this is not a make or break thing. I can change the fluff as long as the game mechanics are solid.
5) If 4th ed is really faster to set up, well that's goodness. Designing 3rd ed stats for a full adventure are a pain.
6) I am all about reducing the number of feats and skills.
7) I am ok with the points of light concept as long as they keep it simple, and do not create super heroes. I have always felt that characters were a cut above the ordinary, but they should not be over-powerful. Hero points should be an optional rule.
8) Tradition is important. Fireballs should do 1d6/level. A succubus is a demon.
9) Its ok to add classes and races, as long as you keep the basics, and the basics should be in the core books. I am ok with fine tuning the classes, and even breaking out character abilities to create options. But, you have to keep the basics. This is back to point number 8. Tradition is important.
10) There has to be a fear of loss. It makes the game more interesting to know that your character could die in the next encounter. If there is no fear of loss, the victories do not mean as much.
11) Resource management is part of the game. Options are good, but there has to be balance. Characters need to feel useful, but the powerful attack options need to be of limited usage. I actually like some of the things I am hearing. A wizard using a crossbow instead of using spells (because he is out of spells) does not feel right. A wizard should be able to do something, but not necessarily cast fireball every round.
Now I have not seen the rules, and I know that the game designers are fans of the game too. I just hope that 4th ed is being created for the right reasons. I will reserve final judgement for when I see the finished rule set.
For Paizo, as long as they are making quality products, they will have customers. I have faith in Erik and the rest of the team.
Let me start by saying I love Saga Star Wars to death. It is the best star Wars ever, inclduing old WEg d6, runing it in GURPS, and all previous editions of the d20 version. It is fast, cinematic, simple, and fiarly wahoo. For Star Wars, a cinematic setting where loigc takes a back seat to starfighters that fight like WWII airplanes and fencing with laser swords, it's beautiful.
It is not DnD.
There are no rules for crafting. None. Nothing can ever get made, except maybe with amMechanics check.
There are no rules for being able to perform a job. Gambling is a freaking Widom check. No professional skill. No perform skill. No craft skill.
Equipment is simplified. Broad categories with major game differences only. Not even a nod to the idea of a galaxy of different manufacturers doing similar but slightly different things.
Most of the things that got fics (Droids as PCs, decent starsjip rules, jedi aren't gods compared to everyone else) have no bearing on DnD.
And, there's not much support for figuring out how to write up your own stuff as a DM. (That's Death-star Master for those of you wondering, a local in joke).
Now, Saga is a "preview" of DnD. It's a preview written mostly by freelancers, more than a year ago, that had to go through Luicasfilm approvals. IOn other words, I suspect DnD is going to see a lot more differences that Star Wars saga did, and Saga is right of the edge of what i can take and not feel like I'm looking at a new game.
So what do we know about the people writing 4e? We know they wrote the Dragon Shaman, who -only- got enough abilities to cover his levels. All 20th level dagons hamans had the same power set, the only question was what order they got them in. It took Dragon magic to fix that and it was written by (Surprise!) the freelnacers who did Saga.
We know the 4e designers masterminded the Magic Item Compendium. This thing has at least hundreds of new items, and not one is a fun item deisgned for roleplaying. Ever new item is a combat ite,. Most of them have boring charges that come back every day, that you can spend in 1,2 or 3 charge bursts for one of 3 levels of Leet Roxor Kombat Powerz.
Everything I am seeing and hearing tells me 4e is going to have a: much more emphasis on combat. Game balance is going to mean combat balance. ever class will be just as good at a fight. There are only 3 power sorces and a fewroles we have been told about, and I suspect every character will fall into those. No class will be more useful in social situations, and slightly less kick-ass in a fight.
In short, I think they are building a game that plays like a MMORG, feels like a MMORG, and is designed to compete with a MMORG.
I cant run my games as a MMORG without the graphics, and I think that's what they want to sell me.
I'll look at the core books. I may buy them. But I am never giving up my ability to have games where swords are swiung infrequently, you can focus you character on social or economic abilities, and the DM is clearly given the power to make their own versions of everything. I *want* magic item pricing guidelines. I want classes with focuses *other* than combat. I *want* support for the quirky, odd, and unusal things 3,5 allows.
If I don't get it, I *can't* run my exisitng games in 4e. And I won't want to run pathfinder in a system like that either.
No one change we've heard about scares me. The idea DnD is going to become a combat emulation does.