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 hate. Yes they dumped the easy, entry level class of fighter for something more anime and organized the game to suck 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.
agreed, but I kind of expected this eventually from the company that brings us Magic The Gathering or whatever its called. Im surprised it didnt happen sooner.
Alot of the designers that draw heavily on other sources like WoW also doesnt help the situation.
I play WoW probably too much myself(4 70s and a 67 so far), but I look forward to D&D being just D&D. 4E isnt D&D, thats been my opinion all along. For the record, im 38 (an old school D&D fan), have a life, job, girlfriend of 9 years, etc. and I dont consider myself a grognard. Im all for new rules that make the game easier, but the apparently "munchkinized" 4E isnt for me.
Do I feel betrayed...... No.
Do I feel WotC betrayed D&D...... Yes!
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
I am a seething, rampant, unabashedly, raging Hater of 4E.
For an example of my level of distaste and disgust please feel free to listen the Tool song titled Aenima. That's my feelings. I want a frozen rock from space to fall into the WotC headquarters.
Irrational and insane, maybe. Emminantly satifying and theraputic, definitely!
I can't say that I hate 4th edition. That would be like saying I hate baseball bats. No matter how much it sucks when someone implants screws into a baseball bat, jams it up my rectum, and procedes to do a prison style jig all accross my soul with it, I don't hate the bat...
What I hate is the greedy corporate whores who hold the reins over in washington, all armed with said bats...
Oh yeah, looks like we got two votes for a giant frozen chunk of space rock to come rocketting down right on the money grubbing head quarters of my least favorite gaming compony.
I want a frozen rock from space to fall into the WotC headquarters.
Umm, guys, I realize you're not really advocating someone hitting WotC HQ with a kinetic bombardment from space, but I personally still feel that this statement is inappropriate. Any statement that you'd like to see a building (with people in it) destroyed is really over-the-top and, well, disturbing.
I hereby request that you discuss your anger/hatred without using statments that you'd like to see people harmed/killed.
And now I return you to your regularly-scheduled hate-fest...
I want a frozen rock from space to fall into the WotC headquarters.Umm, guys, I realize you're not really advocating someone hitting WotC HQ with a kinetic bombardment from space, but I personally still feel that this statement is inappropriate. Any statement that you'd like to see a building (with people in it) destroyed is really over-the-top and, well, disturbing.
I hereby request that you discuss your anger/hatred without using statments that you'd like to see people harmed/killed.
Perhaps add ",at night"?
My true detest of this game is that it is no longer a toolkit for a general fantasy game.
If you want a toolkit, try Hero.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
My true detest of this game is that it is no longer a toolkit for a general fantasy game.If you want a toolkit, try Hero.
Can't you go to Fox news and try and rally up voters for Hilary? Or maybe just post a single smug thread about non-D&D games and just cross reference it each time instead of trying to come up with new barbs about how much D&D (any edition) sucks?
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
I want a frozen rock from space to fall into the WotC headquarters.Umm, guys, I realize you're not really advocating someone hitting WotC HQ with a kinetic bombardment from space, but I personally still feel that this statement is inappropriate. Any statement that you'd like to see a building (with people in it) destroyed is really over-the-top and, well, disturbing.
I hereby request that you discuss your anger/hatred without using statments that you'd like to see people harmed/killed.
Consider yourself disturbed then... I'm venting, get over it.
|
|
I think that the Warlock Class and the Tiefling Race rather fill a specific niche than being a generic Archetype.
Lets compare the Warlock with the Wizard. Both work magic. But we do not need an explanation why the Wizard is able to do this and how he does it for the mchanics to work. Does he use ley lines or his inner strength? It is for the DM to decide.
The Warlock on the other hand uses a special, pre-defined dorm of magic. To make the mechanics work, we have to have certain entities with a certain mindset that allow the rules to work.
Now you can say the Cleric also needs certain entities for his magic to work. That is true, but the DM is still free to create the mindset of the gods and how they distribute the magic. They can be evil or god, caring or uncaring, actively involved with mortals or distant. They can channel their power or the Cleric simply uses the power his faith gives him. The degree of freedom for the DM is much much greater than compared to the Warlock.
Now lets look at the Tiefling and compare him to the Halfling. The latter comes without the baggage of heritage. Just look at how different halflings are portraid in Midnight, Dragonlance and Ebberron.
But the Tiefling race has to have a demon or devil or some other corruption. You can play a Halfling in a campaign setting without demons or devils but it is hard to play a tiefling in this setting.
Just my 2 cents (Euro-Cents btw.)
I see it this way, the current designers are a bunch of power munchkins whom had many characters die at the hands of Dm's either based on a bad saving throw,bad attack rolls etc. They got tired of the Dm having all the power and wanted to be able to save said characters from these so called "Pointless Deaths". This is why you saw such power levels rise from 1st,2nd to 3rd edition in the character creation. There are other signs as well such as the spell True Resurrection.;)
Exactly how this game(4e) is gonna turn out, I don't know. They lost me on the new flavor/image which apppeals more to the younger kids of today. I grew up in the 70's so my level of fanasty is defined for me based on Star Wars, Tolkien,comicbooks of my day etc.
So a younger version of me grew up in the 90's to Dargonballz,Jurassic Park, Teenage mutant Ninja Turtles etc so they have fanasty defined for them. So Ninjas riding dinosaurs, with Dragon headed men is alright with them.
Or maybe just post a single smug thread...
Point taken. Although, coming from you…
|
|
Or maybe just post a single smug thread...Point taken. Although, coming from you…
He does have a point, though. Practically every one of your posts says, "Play Hero" along with a statement or implication that D&D, regardless of the edition, sucks. I'm not trying to be mean, but what is the purpose of posting on the 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons forum when you neither like nor play Dungeons & Dragons? I don't like Pokemon, but I don't go on the Pokemon forums, and say "Pokemon bites! You guys should play D&D instead of that silly card game."
I've been resisting this since I first saw the thread title, but alas, I can resist no longer...
When All Is Said and Done...
...more is said than done.
You may now return to your regularly scheduled thread of 4E hate (though I really wish you wouldn't - there's enough negativity flying around the boards as of late).
Aghhhh! These threads are like kobolds. Everytime you turn around you are stepping on another one.
I'm done with 4e threads as of right now....I'd should have listen to that werewoof...
Hi, I've only just registered, mostly to reply to this topic.
For me, 4E doesn't exist. What they are making for me just is not DnD. Drow are Fey? No Gnomes? Butchered Planes? Sorry no deal.
Should have been a new system, new multiverse. That I could have got behind, but not butchering the entire lore.
Hi, I've only just registered, mostly to reply to this topic.
Wow. Cool beans. Welcome to the boards. Hope you enjoy many a good discussions here.
(And guys, I have to agree, I do not condone any talk of harm against anyone at WotC. Hoping a product they make flops and they beg for their old customers back, sure. But I want them all to enjoy long healthy lives. Preferably in the presence of loved ones.)
Perhaps add ",at night"?
I hereby request that you discuss your anger/hatred without using statments that you'd like to see people harmed/killed.
Now THAT'S funny!
No I don't want actual real people to suffer actual real harm just because of 4th edition. I'm honestly sorry if what I said bothered anyone here. Also, from where I come from, we have this thing called venting. You get upset, you say a bunch of over the top, highly emitional, generaly highly offensive crap that has little to no meaning, and generaly you feel better afterward. Apparently this isn't too common. *shrugs* Don't know what to say to that, other than if you don't understand where I'm coming from, I hope you die...(please for the love of god understand that that was a joke, laugh at it, and have a good day)
Drow are fey in fourth? Where is this talked about???
Practically every one of your posts says, "Play Hero" along with a statement or implication that D&D, regardless of the edition, sucks.
You have never posted in a thread which had a title you disagreed with?
Call me a troll if you will. It is my opinion and I am just as entitled to it as you are to yours. Why would I wish to walk amongst the unwashed masses? To show you all the light of course. (sly grin)
I will concede I have been overzealous as of late and for that I apologize. As far as I know, this is an open forum and as long as I abide by the rules I have just as much right to post here as anyone else. Please feel free to ignore me if you disagree with my views.
|
|
Well, I have posted on threads I don't agree with. But they about a game I like, play, and have a vested interest in the development of its future. You just seem to want people to play HERO instead of D&D, so you just randomly jump into thread to criticze D&D and all class based RPG's. There are a lot of games I don't like, know much about, or care to know much about, but I don't go trolling on their messageboards telling people to ditch a certain game for D&D. Maybe I came off sounding a bit harsh, but I don't understand why you keep posting on D&D forums when you don't like or play D&D. If you want to start a thread aksing if some people disillusioned with D&D would like to try HERO, that would seem like a much better way to go about it. It would even be better if it was on the Other RPG's forum. Anyway, back to thread.
Hating something takes too much energy better spent thinking up interesting encounters and plots for my D&D game.
Do I love 3.5? Yes.
Why? Because it has served me well and continues to serve me well.
Do I hate 4e. No.
Why? Because I don't know all the facts. I'll make that decision after I've run 3-4 game sessions with the new system, and compare to my 3.5 group.
People keep saying that 3.5 is D&D. No it's not. The Basic Red Box set is King!
What I hate is the greedy corporate whores who hold the reins over in washington...
With all respect, Ha$borg is a public company, and there is only one goal for every public company. It's not like they're different than anyone else - it's just that we're impassioned with the game. Plus, WotC may run the show here in Washington, but they've been given a mandate ~from the real 'greedy corporate whores'~ and if they don't meet it they don't put food on the table. That's life.
and if they don't meet it they don't put food on the table. That's life.
Nobody begrudges them making money or a profit. Hell, all of us want 4E to succeed, but we want a game we can recognize as D&D. Some of us can't see what WotC is passing of as D&D as being the game some of us have been playing for three decades.
|
and if they don't meet it they don't put food on the table. That's life.Nobody begrudges them making money or a profit. Hell, all of us want 4E to succeed, but we want a game we can recognize as D&D. Some of us can't see what WotC is passing of as D&D as being the game some of us have been playing for three decades.
I can truly appreciate that. I can understand why the change seems drastic. I can't say for sure if it is that big a change since the play test reports and the feedback on the designer blogs seems to point to a general acceptance of the new tone as not too far off the mark and even on target by some accounts.
I think the crappy marketing campaign is actually a bigger problem then the game will be.
I think the crappy marketing campaign is actually a bigger problem then the game will be.
Probably.
I think the problems all started when they made Elves a race instead of a character class.
Honestly, where's the fun in that?
|
|
Hopefully, that will turn out to be true. If they hadn't cancelled the magazines, and were more respectful of the traditions and lore of previous editions, I would be far more likely to be on board for 4th edition. It would also help immensely if the designers weren't so condescending to their fans. Making statements like, "If you use profession skills, your games probably aren't that fun.", and "We didn't know what to do with fairies and unicorns, because they aren't just evil monsters to kill and loot from." were absolutely insulting and moronic things to say. These things should have gone through some kind of PR filter.
On the subject of what DMcCoy originally wrote, about the 3.X rules being a tool kit, this is something I was never personally comfortable with. I wanted to like them after I'd eventually moved on from 2.0 AD&D, but I found I could just never click with them. I played with the 3.5 rules throughout their entire run, which has been roughly five years now I think? This is one of the primary reasons I am looking forward to 4th edition, it seems to me to be a bit more akin, mechanically at least, to the 2nd edition I was comfortable with. For me at least, 3.X edition was very much a player's edition - anything the DM did on his side of the screen you knew was replicable on yours. There were rules for it, it's simply the players didn't often take advantage of them. In every published scenario I've read through there are rules for how to design the traps the group encounters, the class-levels of all the monsters are detailed and all their powers/abilities are carefully annotated.
I always felt kind of limited by this - I have no doubts this stems from coming from a 2nd edition mind set, but I liked having most of the world inaccessible to my players. Monsters could have abilities they never could, because they were monsters.
So if I might ask, are the big changes they're making which upset you the ones to the rules and taking away that tool kit aspect of the game or instead the forced and assumed world? Would you personally feel more relieved if you got ahold of the books and found they were split between mechanics and world?
Obviously from what we've seen so far, the race entries will include some details about this assumed setting, but if the rest was simply relegated to the back of the book in its own separate section, do you think you'd feel less up in arms about it?
Also, you mentioned they are "dumping the easy, entry level class of fighter for something more anime..." and I was wondering what you'd meant by that. Was this in reference to the artwork, the information in Races and Classes or the Book of Nine Swords?
|
|
Obvioulsy, he means that the 4E fighter is supposed to get Book of Nine Swords type of maneuvers. Since the maneuvers work like spells, they make for a much more complex character to manage in play. Complex characters can be itimidating and frustrating for new players to play, which is why the relatively simple 3.5 fighter and barbarian were excellent classes for new players to play. There doesn't seem to be any "simple" classes because every class seems to be getting 25 or more levels of powers.
|
|
Obviously from what we've seen so far, the race entries will include some details about this assumed setting, but if the rest was simply relegated to the back of the book in its own separate section, do you think you'd feel less up in arms about it?
3.x was set in the Greyhawk campaign world. Of course, if all you have are the 3 core books, you'll know very little about the setting. No maps, no details about various locales, just some of the gods and some other fluff here and there.
Why do I hate 4e? Honestly, some of the changes seem pretty good (for a functional preview of 4e, go to the bookstore and check out the newest edition of Star Wars RPG rules). I hate 4e because of the mightier-than-thou, condescending tone that WotC takes with us. They try to tell us that we've been playing the game all wrong, and it almost seems like they are purposely trying to push out anyone with a time-investment of over a decade.
WotC has said that this is a money thing. They don't make money off the books anymore, now they only make money off of TCGs and the minis line. So they're restructuring D&D to force players to purchase minis. Personally, I like using minis for combat. It shows everyone exactly where they are in a room, thereby cutting down on players saying, "he can't hit me, he didn't have line of sight" or "I'm totally outside of that fireball's area of effect." That's my choice, though, and it should forever remain a choice. If I want to play a minis-based game, I'll play D&D Minis, or Battletech, or Warhammer or such.
Then, some more personal issues I have. Half-orcs dumped because of their implied history. Gnomes dumped because, um...dunno (gnomes at least are steeped in real-world history, whereas halflings originally came from J.R.R. Tolkien). No druids or bards (bard being my favored class). Now no brass or bronze dragons?
I've got enough material and plans for 3.5 that I won't be needing 4.0 until WotC releases 5.5!
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I beleive he means the Maneuvers will complicate the fighter class. (maybe not obivious, Corey, let's try to keep the tone from degrading.)
As an aside, that's why I prodded our newbie along the Battle Sorcerer path. More HP, fewer spells to confuse, and a bit more forgiving than the regular sorcerer.
Now no brass or bronze dragons?
Just wanted to let you know that both dragons will appear in a future supplement as I understand.
|
|
I beleive he means the Maneuvers will complicate the fighter class. (maybe not obivious, Corey, let's try to keep the tone from degrading.)
As an aside, that's why I prodded our newbie along the Battle Sorcerer path. More HP, fewer spells to confuse, and a bit more forgiving than the regular sorcerer.
I didn't mean to sound condescending. I guess it just came out that way.
|
|
Hopefully, that will turn out to be true. If they hadn't cancelled the magazines, and were more respectful of the traditions and lore of previous editions, I would be far more likely to be on board for 4th edition. It would also help immensely if the designers weren't so condescending to their fans. Making statements like, "If you use profession skills, your games probably aren't that fun.", and "We didn't know what to do with fairies and unicorns, because they aren't just evil monsters to kill and loot from." were absolutely insulting and moronic things to say. These things should have gone through some kind of PR filter.
That is why i am reserving judgement until the game is actually released. If the game works then I will play it no matter how crappy the PR. If the game sucks then I won't play it. But in the end the game is not the PR and when the two get all conflated then emotions run too high.
Obvioulsy, he means that the 4E fighter is supposed to get Book of Nine Swords type of maneuvers. Since the maneuvers work like spells, they make for a much more complex character to manage in play. Complex characters can be itimidating and frustrating for new players to play, which is why the relatively simple 3.5 fighter and barbarian were excellent classes for new players to play. There doesn't seem to be any "simple" classes because every class seems to be getting 25 or more levels of powers.
I beleive he means the Maneuvers will complicate the fighter class.
Bingo on both counts. Say you have a complete RPG noob in your group and you're starting him out at level 1. What are you going to set him up with? Bard, no ("I want to use countersong." "But no one else is singing."). Cleric, no ("How many spells do I get to choose from again?"). Druid, no ("How long do I have to wait until I can turn into a bear?"). Short of the long, a Fighter is easy. Dwarf fighter with Power Attack and Improved Init is very easy for a beginner. The only thing they have to decide is if they're going to lower their BAB from 1 to 0 and get an extra point of damage. Gives them few options to not overwelm them and while still making them very useful at early levels (thus making them feel good). All the while they're learning how to role play and learning how the rules work.
Now replace that with Bo9S. The "fighter" now has spells. Lets not kid ourselves; the only difference between a spell and a maneuver is the fluff. If they assume a "stance" this might change their speed, give them extra abilities, allow you to do extra damage, all depending on the stance. You can use maneuvers that give bonuses that stack with the stance for extra damage, extra hitting bonus, etc. If you thought remembering a flanking bonus or a bards inspire confidence bonus was hard, wait until EVERY SINGLE PLAYER IN THE GAME gives bonuses, has class bonuses that stack, has racial bonuses that stack, heals when you hit, and so on.
Monsters could have abilities they never could, because they were monsters.
Weapons of Legacy rules: You can make a Monster of Legacy with powers that players can't have. Says so right in the rules.
So if I might ask, are the big changes they're making which upset you the ones to the rules and taking away that tool kit aspect of the game or instead the forced and assumed world? Would you personally feel more relieved if you got ahold of the books and found they were split between mechanics and world?
Obviously from what we've seen so far, the race entries will include some details about this assumed setting, but if the rest was simply relegated to the back of the book in its own separate section, do you think you'd feel less up in arms about it?
Here's what I mean by an assumed world. Infernal interaction is so common with the world that Tieflings and Warlocks are common. I don't have a problem being in a monster manual and a class supplement, respectively. A DM can easily say, "We're not using at supplement and no races from the monster manual." But when you make a race and/or class in the PHB illegal, that's a whole different story. Imagine walking into a game where the DM says, "You can't play a human, dwarf, or a wizard. Oh the swashbuckler from Complete Warrior replaces the standard fighter." I don't know about anybody else, but I'd be like, "What kind of freaking weird homebrew are you running to remove PHB races and classes?"
Back to Tieflings/Warlocks, what if I want to keep demons/devils so rare that they show up twice in a 20 level game? That doesn't make sense when there are those that made an infernal pact and hellspawn running around. So now I have to have a world where they are all over the place just to stay consistant with WotC's homebrew.
In reference to Cory: While it is indeed obvious that the maneuvers come from Book of 9 Swords, what isn't yet obvious as far as I'm aware is whether the Flavour will remain the same. The Book of 9 Swords definitely had an anime/Wuxia vibe, but does that mean the types of maneuvers we see in 4th edition will as well? I haven't heard anything of the type yet, so your Sword and Shield moves might simply be things like "Take Cover" and "Shield Bash" as opposed to "Swirling Butterfly Defense" and "Unexpected Tortoise Strike."
In response to Mac: I couldn't agree more, and that has really been my biggest sticking point with the new edition. I hate it when anyone tries to talk down to me, particularly about how wrong I've been previously. Mechanically I actually enjoy a good deal of the stuff I've seen, but the flavor and particularly the marketing for 4th edition has really left a sour taste in my mouth.
As for the minis, I have very mixed feelings on them. I feel it's very difficult to play 3rd edition without miniatures, and it sounds like in 4th they will be essential. I began using them in 2nd edition when they were very much optional, and so I have a long history with them (as well as having a lot of miniatures by this point) so I don't feel too big of a push to buy into more miniatures, save perhaps some of the common lots on EBay of whatever their pushing out in plastic.
To DMcCoy: Thank you for the Weapons of Legacy quote, I'd never gotten a chance to read the book before. I always liked the concept but what I saw in it seemed too expensive for the price you had to pay so it never saw use.
I definitely see what you mean about the Assumed World. Do you think it'll be possible to put some kind of home-brewed explanation over it that you'd be satisfied with? Also, I have in fact been in games where certain PC races or classes were outlawed for various reasons (from practical constraints on a DM's world to simply not liking something). It was a rather strange experience.
On the subject of fighters, while they are very simple, don't you feel they fall to the wayside after awhile? I've rarely seen someone play a fighter for very far through the level advancement in 3rd, and I recall friends who played fighters enjoying it a great deal back in 2nd edition until about 5th or 6th level, at which point it began to feel routine.
What I would expect, and this is sadly not grounded in facts, is that the fighter will remain relatively simple. Likely at first level once they make their choice between Sword and Shield or Two-Handed Weapon, they'll be able to pick up one Power. I don't know if they'll be getting a new power each level or not, but what I wouldn't be surprised by is if some of the Powers were upgrades for previous powers. So if your Two-Handed Weapon fighter gets the Power Attack Power at level 1, at level 5 or 6 he might pick up the Improved Power Attack power. Something akin to that.
I definitely see what you mean about the Assumed World. Do you think it'll be possible to put some kind of home-brewed explanation over it that you'd be satisfied with?
Frankly, no. While I can homebrew anything .... how about I just run through some examples:
I am a descendent of Tieflings Requires tieflings to not be insignificant in number => requires setting adjusted to fit WotC's homebrew.I partisipated in a rutual that drew on infernal powers that made me a Tiefling Why are you good aligned? Someone who's going to sell their soul to a devil for power is generally convinced of what they are doing. Also how many people have to do this to make the race common enough to be in the PHB? How messed up is your world that people willingly choose to be sell their soul in large numbers?
Its an affliction, like being a vampire That's not how devils operate. They operate on "the choice." Making it possible to be afflicted with being a Tiefling removes "the choice" from "going to hell."
Short of the long: I have yet to see any explaination for Tieflings that don't require a major setting adjustment (like Forgotten Realms) or a major change in how they operate.
EDIT: Also, at what point are you no longer homebrewing to "keep the level of consistency of a setting the same" and are you homebrewing to remove the whole "humans having sex with demons" thing because you personally don't like it. I don't like bringing out the fluffy bunnies because they're nice. I have no problem with orcs raping humans to produce 1/2-orcs. Orcs are savages, they do that.
On the subject of fighters, while they are very simple, don't you feel they fall to the wayside after awhile?
I can't speak from experience. I've never played a straight figher in 3.5. But yes, I do feel similar. For a more experienced player, the fighter is lacking. But I feel that's why there are other options: CW, Bo9S, ToB, and so on. They are for more experienced players, not the basic starting out player.
The vast majority of RPGers first game is D&D; D&D needs to have an easy, entry-level option.