Chief Technical Officer
|
This weekend, the public is getting their first real glimpse of 4th Edition at Wizards of the Coast's D&D Experience 2008.
Among other things, they've posted a sort of primer for their 4E demos, entitled "What You Need to Know About Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition at D&D Experience 2008.".
My question to you is this: Has anything you've learned as a direct result of the D&D Experience changed your mind about 4th Edition?
(You can change your vote whenever you like.)
Please refrain from debating the relative merits of systems in this thread.
I had been favorably inclined towards 4e previously, but now I'm pretty much sold on it.
I've been looking to run a Rise of the Runelords game with some friends with no gaming experience whatsoever, and I've been waiting for more info about 4e because I was wondering if it would be easier to learn. The answer, apparently, is a catagorical "yes". I'm already compiling a mental list of all the things I don't have to explain anymore, and I like it.
~shrugs~ My mind has not been changed. I will still eventually buy the 3 core rulebooks, but not any time soon. I will keep on buying Paizo products no matter what.
You guys left no space for my answer.
I plan on playing both.
When all else fails, we can whip the Dead Horse
I voted that I haven't yet decided. But the news thus far is pushing me more into the against camp.
I was finally getting myself accustomed with the 3.5 rules and WotC is shooting 4E at us… Yuck!
Seriously, I've not checked any blog, forum or website about the new D&D (I honestly don't really care that much about a company that seems interested only in profit and not about the players’ fun, but that’s just my opinion!) except the PDF linked in this thread and, for what I’ve read so far, D&D Fourth Edition seems to be more complicated than 3.5 (which is, IMHO, more complex instead, which is a big difference than being complicated).
Character Roles. Four Defense Values depending on attacks. Healing Surges. Action Points.
As for I, I’ll stick to 3.5. Just hope that Paizo will stick with it too… or, better, that Paizo launches a 3.75 Edition!
Oh! How I miss the good ol’ days when being an Elf was considered as a Character Class! :)
|
I voted that I’ll be sticking with 3.5 ed. I plan on buying the Keep on the Shadowfell module to try the system out, but I like 3.5 too much to convert all the way. However, if/when Paizo converts Pathfinder I may spring for the core books, but that is the only good reason I can think of to spend the money on those new rules.
Still undecided though some of the things in the primer have made me look at 4th edition in a more positive way. Truth be told I'll probably go with whatever paizo does. That way I'll be guaranteed high quality gaming products.
I voted No, especially on the strength of #1. I want more flexible and inclusive class system, not a more restrictive one...
Really, nothing so far makes me want to jump up and buy $90 worth of new books and start playing a new edition.
I had been favorably inclined towards 4e previously, but now I'm pretty much sold on it.
Same here, that's exactly where I stand on the matter. Smurf.
|
|
I'll get the books and read them. But I think I'll probably be sticking with 3.5. I have SO MUCH 3.5 material and there's so much more I want to get (Tome of Horrors III, Eldritch Sorcery, Hamunaptra, Finish my Eberron Collection, Secrets of Pact Magic, etc.) that a new edition just really doesn't excite me all that much. It seems at this point that they've changed enough to kill backwards compatibility, but not enough to improve it much. Given the choice between those two options, I'd much rather use my titanic library of 3.0/3.5 material than reboot with just 3 core books again. If 4e is awesome, though, I'll convert. But as of right now, there isn't much in the industry press or official reports that makes me think I'll feel the need to. I came to D&D with 3.0, and I'll be happy to leave with 3.5 if it comes to that; I can pick up a 3.5-compatible book a month for a LONG time before I run out of stuff I want to purchase...
I've read the primer. I also read the 1st report. So far, D&D Experience hasn't changed my mind. I will buy the PH, read it, and then decide. Based on the primer, though, the odds of conversion to 4E are still low.
What I have read today gives me the impression that 4E is a minis game that has roleplaying built around it. True or not, that is the impression I gained. Discount it for what you wish, but I did not have that impression before this morning.
I'm sticking with 3.5.
Voted. I've been planning to stick with 3.5. I haven't seen anything so far to encourage me to switch. I do feel compelled to point out that I will follow Paizo, so if you guys switch, I would probably switch too (or at least find some way to make use of Pathfinder and the Gamemastery Modules--raiding them for plot ideas if nothing else).
I was actually starting to move towards the 4e camp, but the news from the D&D Experience is making me think of cancelling my pre-orders. The power levels seem way too high; and we're talking 1st level here and it's way too high. I'd hate to see higher level play. I need to know if it's possible to power it down. I know some might say I should play a different game, but I've been playing about the same power level since the Red Box; so if I can't still play me game then it's not my D&D anymore.
edit: I also agree with DMcCoy, this whole edition seems to be geared towards selling the minis than in being a game in itself.
Actually, I have to go with "No—I was planning on staying with 3.5, and I still expect to (although even 3.5 may go away in favor of True20...)"
|
You guys left no space for my answer.I plan on playing both.
Ditto. I'm looking forward to having two versions of DnD available to use as appropriate for the group and campaign involved. I'm not sure why it's either/or.
[Edit]
Also, it seems premature to have this sort of poll based a 2 page set of tournament "learn fast" rules. Anyone that claims "NEVER!" right now is risking having to eat their words later, IMHO. Ask us in July after the real rules have been out for a month. I wouldn't want to bet my business decisions on this sort of poll.
hasnt changed my mind at all sticking with 3.5 infact it seems the game im fixing to start would be harder and almost undoable with what i have saw of 4th ed.
My question to you is this: Has anything you've learned as a direct result of the D&D Experience changed your mind about 4th Edition?
I know this is going to come off more inflamatory than I mean...
But yes. It has convinced me that it is even less interesting to me than I originally expected.
nope, what I have seen so far hasn't changed my thoughts about whether 4e will be of interest to me or not, it has infact more reinforced them that it will not be my style of game (and that's okay... to each his own and all that).
I'll just stick to playing 3.x (and 1e and 2e and BECMI and Call of Cthulhu 5th or 6th e, and the occasional Marvel Superheroes game).
It hasn't changed my mind, I am still probably going to convert to 4th edition. I haven't seen enough to know I that I will convert or play it, but I'm still at my default answer of "I'll probably will convert."
I haven't read the primer from the WotC site yet (it's on this computer somewhere), but I've been reading the Liveblog (?) thread over on Enworld and I'm acutally more inclined to purchase 4E than I ever was before. I'm not all the way there yet, but at this point I'm ... intrigued (a far cry from my ambivilent/cranky start position).
Anyone that claims "NEVER!" right now is risking having to eat their words later, IMHO. Ask us in July after the real rules have been out for a month. I wouldn't want to bet my business decisions on this sort of poll.
Yup.
But yes. It has convinced me that it is even less interesting to me than I originally expected.
I was cautiously optimistic, now I'm just cautious and less certain that I will even buy a copy. Wait and see, wait and see.
More than ever I look at it as a completely different game and something I might try out as an occasional alternative.
read the first page
felt sick
closed the window.
I voted no.
I voted No- I still haven't decided either way. Which is true. I remain favorable to 4e in general. I will probably end up playing both for while.
I haven't even read the rules preview yet. IMO, there's still so much to work with in 3.5 that there's little need for 4e. Now, I will grant you that some clarification and tidying-up is needed, thanks to the avalanche of Races Of X and Complete Y books, but not enough for a whole new system. IMO. So, that said - I can't vote in this poll! I plan on sticking with 3.5 for a mighty long time to come. I know some of my gaming group have declared themselves to be looking forward to it and will be buying the core books as soon as they are available. And, more than likely, they will be wanting me to run it. But, in the end, I doubt I will be spending my own money on it.
I've looked over much of the previews, and there is much of the concept and setting that I have liked. But when it gets to the mechanics,...I'm reminded of the direction R. Talsorian's Cyberpunk game took; I'm left with the impression that it caters to a videogame and MMO demographic and player choices are 'dumbed down' to match a belief that the consumer has to be spoon-fed concepts.
I've seen much of the concepts I find exciting, with a reimagining of the of game with intriguing new cosmologies, races, character concepts,...but the execution I find lacking. Certainly 3.5 is not perfect and I freely admit I tweak it to suit my needs. But I think that's what has made 3.5 (and variations) so good is that they can be tweaked. I can see the core concepts and mechanics and can tweak them to meet my needs in most any setting. 4th Edition, while having a very bright and appealing look to it, just seems very restrictive in the end.
While I plan to eventually pick up the material as it comes out, right now it seems more likely I'll look it over to draw ideas and concepts from and then convert over to 3.5 mechanics.
I voted for #5, but that doesn't quite cover my position. I was really looking forward to 4e, but the leaks of the past few days have really soured me. Not enough that I'll say no for sure, but more than enough to kill my earlier enthusiasm.
|
I stay with paizo. what answer should I put?
The last one. As Paizo hasn't decided yet, we haven't (and cannot) either.
Much of what as said about 4E in the last few weeks has changed my mind regarding the new system from cautious pessimism to cautious optimism. But as a matter of fact I'm still planning to go the Paizo route and as long as they stay 3.5 I haven't much reason to change systems.
|
What I have read today gives me the impression that 4E is a minis game that has roleplaying built around it. True or not, that is the impression I gained. Discount it for what you wish, but I did not have that impression before this morning.
I'm sticking with 3.5.
Yup.
To me 4E will be Diablo II, while 3.X will stay Morrowind. Which does not mean that 4E won't be fun or good to play, but that it won't be a RPG system I'm interested in spending a lot of time (and money) with.I'll stay 3.5, house rules and all.
After everything release up to this point, I wasn't planning on converting. The stuff out of D&D Experience is just reinforcing that decision.
|
|
I had a lot of initial misgivings about 4e. Too much change, too soon; a Hasbro-ordered money grab; an abandonment of much of the general fabric of the game that had been more or less consistent since the 1e DMG. Then I started to see more and more about the mechanical changes, and some of it I really liked, at first glance. Some of it made me think "Well, maybe I can just toss aside the idiotic planar changes like I did for FR 3e." I'm running into the real problems of 3.Xe in my tabletop game now every week. High-level and Epic level gaming is almost unworkable. (Almost, but you can only, it seems to me, make a good game out of it if you put in enough work and have the right players.)
4e sounded like it was going to at least attempt to fix all of that. Fixing a half-dragon dual-wielder having 9 or 10 attacks a round with a speed weapon and their bite. Fixing skill math so that it didn't require an Excel spreadsheet, even for someone who's had Differential Equations. Hours and hours of prep work for a monster that might only live three rounds. 4e claimed at least that it would fix all of that.
It very well might fix some of those, but it's broken even more things than it's fixed, if you ask me. I just plain do not like the way it models the chaos of combat and the gradual development of fantastic power, from inexperienced squire that can barely hold a sword the right way to a knight that will live in song for centuries.
It's fairly obvious now why there's no 4e bard - they're entirely redundant in a game where just about every race and/or class has some at will ability, even at 1st level, that provides a minor buff effect to some other character. That, or you have some ability to move things around the battlefield like a giant playing with halflings.
I've just given up hope for 4e. I don't even think there's enough there to be worth buying the core books to strip mine. The few ideas that sounded good for high level play, I can just write up as house rules. The rest of it, though? Call me when 5e is released. Which, if 4e fails, will probably be before 2013.
|
I still remain in the 3.5-only camp. The rules and previews alone are just not winning me over. Sadly, this is WotC's game to lose and it seems like they are doing just that. I really have to see the core books and the pricing plan before I decide how much longer after 2009 I will remain with 3.5e.
Note that I remain faithful to Paizo should you go 4e, but I will remain with 3.5 at my table through 2009 at the very least. Your 4e APs (should you make them) will stack up on my shelf while I determine if I am going to move forward at all.
I approve of this poll. :)
I was worried that the game was going to become something I couldn't stomach.
Really, I was concerned that the game would...
1. Encourage "superheroes" as characters rather than "heroes".
2. Give players too much powers at low level.
3. Emphasize numbers and "builds" at the expense of story and character development
4. Become more influenced by anime and final fantasy than by the pulp literature that influenced the original design of the game.
5. Give players an elevated sense of entitlement while binding the DM's hands creatively
But then I realized that 3rd edition already did all these things and then some. If I could live with it in 3rd edition, there's really no reason I can't deal with it in the next edition.
The new rules of 4.0 (healing surges, at will spells, etc..) don't strain my suspension of disbelief any more than the old rules of 3.5 ( half dragon half minotaur spellstitched swordsages etc...)
I don't know if 4th will be any better 3rd. But I doubt It'll be significantly worse than third now that I've read the stuff from DDE and I understand the rules a little better.
Besides the majority of my players want to try out 4E. One of my players is so hyped for 4E that he's offered to DM the game when it comes out. As a DM who hasn't had a chance to just be a player since 2000, that's just too good of an offer to turn down.
|
|
No changes here. WOTC just keeps reinforcing why 3.5 is a perfect system. The only way they had a chance to reinvent the wheel was to first break the old one (negative PR). And even that has failed as far as I am concerned. As others have said, this reads like a minitures wargame; not the D&D I grew up and loved most of my life. My 3.5 books are still golden!
