I admit, I am a 4E hater. I have not been subtle about it, nor have I left many in doubt. But why do I hate 4E so much. Sure it came out to early, sure races gnomes and half orcs are an intigral part that are getting tossed asside like a cheap hooker, but those are not the reasons why I do. Yes they dumped the easy, entry level class of fighter for something more anime and organized the game to such every last cent out of the fan base, but that is not the source of my real problem.
My true detest of this game is that it is no longer a toolkit for a general fantasy game. It is now just as much a general toolkit as Exalted is. Exalted has a very specific setting that is intigral with the mechanics, OD&D-3E have no firm setting. Setting elements are hinted at but none are fixed. 4E assumes a setting where infernals interact often enough with humans that tieflings and warlocks are commonplace. That is a very specific world.
Yes, there is nothing there that I can't homebrew away. Well the same is true with Exaled. And at what point am I no longer homebrew and I am designing from scratch and using elements of another game as inspiration. For the worlds I want to play in, I'd have to almost strip the entire PHB away save the mechanics chapters and design a new game from the ground up. So if I am putting in that much work, I ask myself, why would I buying this book in the first place?
Excelent reasons, but that's not a reason to hate. At the end of the day, I feel betrayed. There's something about old childhood memories of great games and knowing that another generation just like you will be having similar experiences has a comforting feeling. Knowing that a great adventure that you loved as a kid will be the same adventure that your kids will be experiencing has a kind of "passing the torch" feel to it. WotC has invalidated old adventures with their new integral setting. As such, the torch no longer feels like it will be passed.
D&D needs better Stewards of the Brand.
My true detest of this game is that it is no longer a toolkit for a general fantasy game.
First things first, you haven't seen the game so you can't say that with any authority.
OD&D-3E have no firm setting. Setting elements are hinted at but none are fixed. 4E assumes a setting where infernals interact often enough with humans that tieflings and warlocks are commonplace. That is a very specific world.
Untrue. D&D has a world where wizards memorize/prepare spells ahead of time and maintain expensive spellbooks, while clerics pray and get spells from their deity for free, there's an alignment system that associates every living thing with a specific place in a specific cosmic wheel of cosmology--to name just a few of many examples of setting-specific mechanics like what you mention.
WotC has invalidated old adventures with their new integral setting. As such, the torch no longer feels like it will be passed.
Balderdash. That there are warlocks in the world doesn't somehow invalidate happy experiences that happened decades ago, nor does it prevent someone from enjoying an adventure for the first time next year.
sorry im with dmccory on they way 4e has been presnted . just seems like to much wow . and dont get me wrong i like wow just not in my dnd . i was with em for faster prep time and maybe some triming of the rules, but what we have been shown so for just isnt for me so call me a 4e hater if ya want i want weak 1st level chars,i want schools of magic ,i want my elves to be elves and not a planer races where now calling elves ,i want gods to be gods and not something to kill at high level as a matter of advancement.theres more i dont like but thats whats on my mind,and yes i misspelled a lot on here im tired it'll be ok. also there was a few posts on here that seem to have vanished.
gnomes and half orcs are an intigral part that are getting tossed asside like a cheap hookerGnome and Half-orc hookers generally have to be cheap. Otherwise they won't get any business.
Hey, once you go Gnome, you'll never roam alone.
While my priorities are somehwat different from yours, DMcCoy, I wholeheartedly agree with you: The D&D I know can easily be adapted to many different worlds, and not only can - there are many different worlds that use D&D rules, and work well.
But for 4e, you have to adapt the worlds to work for 4e. Just look what they're doing to the Forgotten Realms. They're not making 4e fit the Realms, they butcher the Realms to fit 4e's design guidelines.
And whenever I compare 4e to WoW now, WoW strangely comes out ahead: At least you only have to pay twice, and it has gnomes.
Well DMcCoy, I just can't understand what you are talking about... What you are saying make absolutly no sense to me.
I am not a 4E hater but I am not necessrly a Pro-4E.. But a least I try to be objective in my comments and opinions...
I can understand that having to wait for a future supplement to play half-orc or gnome could be frustratring but what the hell are you talking about 4E having a firm setting where 3E as none...? In case you didn't not realize, for those of us who dont't play in Greyhawk having Pelor, Wee Jas and Heirononeous as core Deity is setting specific... having sorceror appearing in 3E where they didn't not exist in 2nd is setting specific... Gnome with natural spell-like abilities, hafling who look now like kender (where is my hobbit from the 2nd)... you want more...? The choice to add tieflings and warlocks was done cause they are popular characters to play... that's all... and probably cause they are part of the core in the last Neverwinter Night PC game... But they have been in the DnD environment for a few years now and could be consider Core... Are they better than elf, dwarf or human... don't think so but I really don't mind having them in my setting if my players want to try something new...
And then you are talking about old childhood memories and that WotC has invalidated old adventures with their new integral setting... Please stop, you will make me cry...
Unless you are very very young, are you trying to tell me that you can't see very fondamental difference between your game experience with 3.5 and, let say, 1st advanced edition? Where you on a desert island when they make all those changes between the 1st and 2nd and then from the 2nd to the 3rd? The only edition change without major impact was the 3 to the 3.5E cause, guess what, 3.5 is a revised version of the third, tweaking some minor bugs and not a new edition (thus the name 3 and a half)... Are the new changes with the 4E will really have more impacts than the previous edition change? Don't think so...
I agree, they are doing majors modifications with the 4E trying to appeal to a more modern gameplay style (most peoples don't have time to play on a regular basic and can't wait for 2-3 months of gameplay before gaining a +1 to attack and 1d10 hit points... they want quick result and character progression... we now live in an entertainment era of instant gratification). Most older gamers have a job, a wife, childrens and can't have has much time to their RPG hobby as they would like... and new players have WoW for game experience reference! So I guess it's not really complicated to understand the changes they want to make to the new edition... This new edition may not appeal to your style of gaming but may appeal to most of the gamers.. WoC can't please everyone... and if you like the 3.5E rules why not keep playing it? But please don't tell me that the new 4E is not DnD...
People get nostalgic about the adventures that they first experience when they come to the game. I have seen many who tried 3E for the first time not enjoy old 1E modules. I've gone back and looked at many old 1E modules. Guess what. Most don't hold the test of time. (A few do.) They just aren't as detailed or as good as today's.
I think it's not well advised to judge the system without seeing it. There are parts of 4E that look really intriguing. (Others, like the whole virtual tabletop/DDI thing don't.) Best to wait until stuff comes out and try it for yourself.
And to KaeYoss... Please, don't come here to tell us that they've been no major change of the Forgotten Realms setting with every new edition of the core.. The Avatar War doesn't ring any bell in your memories? What about the introduction of planars, tiefling and Aasimar in the core FG setting of the 3rd edition? Why have they done that? What about the Shadow magic? What about Regional Feats? They have re-written the backgound of most NPCs of the realms with each edition change... If you didn't notice major changes in the FG from 1st to 2nd to 3rd.. I just don't known what to think.... But does those changes where so bad? Why those of the 4e should be any differents??? Cause they've been done only for a marketing purpose? To sell you a new Edition? I'm probably naive but I've alway think that new editions were published in great part for this reason (beside trying to improve the gaming experience)...
|
I have to say that I disagree with DMcCoy on 4E no longer being a toolkit for DMs and players to adapt to any fantasy setting they want. In that aspect, at least, it does still resemble D&D. However, I too hate 4E (even without seeing it in its full glory). Most everything that has been released by WotC has shown me that they have taken the basic concept of D&D - a fantasy game with funky dice - and completely reinvented it. And not to my liking. Despite their claims otherwise, it is apparent that the designers are creating a hybrid of tabletop gaming and MMO gaming. No, I don't think they'll go completely digital (for awhile, at any rate), but the tabletop rules seem to have a lot of MMO elements in it. What it boils down to for me is this: WotC is making a new game, and calling it D&D, which it isn't, and that is why I hate 4E.
D&D needs better Stewards of the Brand.
Not much I can add to this...
I agree 100% with your points. Whatever game WotC is making, it will never be D&D to me. They've got it all wrong.
PS: And no, I'm not going to buy multiple supplements in order to acquire what should have been core content.
|
@DM McCoy – I agree with you. Our heritage and tradition is at risk, many millions of us would like to see this torch passed. I have always admired Erik Mona for his sensitivity to this. On October 23rd, in his post 4.0 PAIZO IS STILL UNDECIDED, Erik wrote, “Are there enough players willing to make a break from Wizards of the Coast and the Dungeons & Dragons brand to sustain a healthy 3.5-based Pathfinder business?” This has raised my awareness of the ugliness about to occur so I’ve flipped through XPUD's newly released garbage yesterday at my favorite game store. I was disgusted. (I can't even bring myself to spell out that company's name any more...) I agree that this new “edition” is an illegitimate heir to the legacy of our game. I agree we need new stewards of our game, and it is up to the millions of us to make this decision, and break this monopolistic stranglehold upon our culture and traditions.
4E IS NOT DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS It is a new game and it breaks the public's faith in that company's stewardship of the game's intellectual history and traditions. THE MUNCHKINS HAVE TAKEN OVER. Thanks to the trusted stewardship of Monte Cook, Erik Mona, the folks at PAIZO, and others, one can play 3.5 and still be playing Arneson & Gygax's game! However, one look at the new 4E material propaganda, and you can see just how badly the fundamentals have been corrupted. I vote no confidence in 4E.
It sounds like we agree that there should be a split, a meaningful departure from the wizards who even now are twisting their ringfingers and grinning because soon they will have monopolized the whole genre, catered to the very youngest of consumers, and leaving the rest behind, abandoned, without support, without the OGL, crushing any possible chance to have such a voice in the future.
There must be a break from this monopolizing company that would abandon 30+ years of proud tradition so wantonly.
|
At least you only have to pay twice, and it has gnomes.Unless you want the expansion and the extra content it brings. Then you have to pay thrice. At least until the next expansion. ;D
I don't play MMORGs, and I've never played WOW, but I have friends who do. Still, isn't it true that as long as you pay your subscription you can keep playing the WOW you purchased? If they have an expansion, you can't play that expansion without buying it, but that doesn't stop you from playing the game you already own... Right?
This is a little like D&D. If I don't buy the MMV I can't use it in my game (unless I steal it). I personally didn't buy that expansion, so I'm not able to access that 'area of the world'.
Certainly with D&D there is a choice about whether or not to use a particular expansion. I think that a lot of people see that D&D isn't trying to offer a 'stand-alone' product. They seem to be trying to 'cross-tie' a lot of their products together so you HAVE to buy many to get full use out of it. They've implied that they've left 'crucial' information out to be released later. I don't know what the form of that will take, but I won't find out, either.
@DangerDwarf, I'm glad you're still enjoying 2nd edition. I was really excited about 3rd edition and 3.5 when they came out. I think they had a number of improvements that made them worthwhile. Particularly of interest to me was getting the tools to build anything. Rather than creating creatures from DM fiat, I have base guidelines that help me make the monster and help me balance it against other monsters. That's huge. And there are so many other advantages that I've found. So, when I'll be playing 3.x many years from now, I'll know that I'm in company with other players who never 'upgraded'. And if that is true seven or eight years after the 'end' of 2nd edition, I think I can look forward to far mor people still playing 3rd edition due, in large part, to the open nature of the system and the support it has had from 3rd party publishers. But, nothing about 4th edition I've seen appeals to me.
