When I found out enchantement was taken away from the wizard, Necromancy and illusion are either nerfed, gone or belong somewhere else, a handful of iconic spells are being butchered, schools in general are toast, Gnomes won't be core (DAMMIT), Bards (my second favorite class) are now sitting in the back of the bus and got mugged by somebody called warlord to boot... I still held some solid hope that when I saw the whole picture come together I would probably cave in and switch.
When I saw the Pit Fiend my heart sunk.
When I saw the Rogue I was uplifted a bit.
When I saw the new spell-save mechanic I felt like strangling a baby Panda, and then doing something obcene with the body afterward.
I think that did it for me. I will still give them a shot in the gamestore if my buddy doesn't mind us comming in and using them for a day, but buying them and giving them a true run-through looks out for me.
I don't need to waste the money for something I'm almost certain I don't want to play.
Having read some of the reviews that are available, I can say that I'm firmly not switching editions. It does sound like a fun game, but there's too much that is 'boardgamey' or 'computer-gamey' from what i've read. There are some mechanic changes that don't sound to bad. But overall there's just not enough to compel me to switch. (Especially given the limited compatibility of my 3rd edition and 3.5 material).
Have I mentioned I love this poll? :)
I'm still undecided, but I think I'm leaning toward staying with 3.5. That could change, of course.
Still undecided. I want to read and digest the complete rules before making up my mind.
Now that I think of it, another big difference were the HP totals--ie MUCH HIGHER than in 3.5. 1st level Player characters all had between 20 and 33 HP. The goblin mooks had at least 20 each, and the skeletons had about 70 each. Kind of had a Hackmaster feel to it.I'd like to hear more from you about it, Allen, because I frankly value your opinion more than a playtester with instructions.
Heathy, it was a pretty fun afternoon. I think you have to take my observations from the perspective of the fact that I didn't have a 4.0 Players Handbook, and can't judge the game as observed from what all else 4.0 edition will entail.
I was not crazy about the HP increase for everybody, but it was done across the board, so I think no one was unduly penalized in the end. I also did not particularly like how 4.0 handles Saving Throws, as there really AREN'T any. There is instead a Fortitude Defense, Reflex Defense, and a Will defense; all of which are very similar to your standard AC. You cast a spell/power at an opponent, the spell you choose gives you a fixed bonus, which you add to your d20 roll, and if you equal or exceed your opponents's Save Defense roll, then you affect him normally.I'll write a bit more soon, I've got to take care of my daughter for a few...
A bit more... The 4.0 game made use of the "Bloodied" condition, which connotates that when you are hurt/damaged to a certain extent, you have additional options available to you (presumably both positive and negative).
To give you an example of play, I played a1st level Eladrin Ranger in several of the delves. For my attack each round I would fire my composite longbow, I would declare the closest target my "Hunters' Quarry", and I would then make use of my At-Will Power: "Careful Attack" which gave me a +10 bonus to hit (I don't know exactly how the bonus was calculated but I assume that it included my 18 Dex score), and if I hit, then I did 1d10+4 damage (I only had a 14 Strength so I don't know how I got the damage I did; and ADD to that an additional 1d8 from the "Hunter's Quarry" and I did 1d10+4+1d8 PER HIT at 1st level with a measly non-magical/non-masterwork longbow. It appears that with the greater HP per character, comes an increase in damage done during all sorts of attacks.
When I played a 1st level Cleric, I would often used a ranged attack (good up to 25 feet distance) called "Sacred Flame" that required a "Reflex save" by my target (which translated to me rolling a d20+4 which was the bonus that the spell gives, and if I equalled or exceeded the target's Reflex Defense, then I did 1d6+4 HP damage, AND gave one of my allies 2 Temporary Hit Points.
Characters recovered from wounds suffered through "Healing Surges", and a "Second Wind".
As far as SKILLS are concerned, I didn't entirely grasp how the 4.0 skills system works, but it appeared overall to be better than the 3.5 skills system (which blows chunks unless you're a Rogue or a Ranger). My cleric PC could actually do a few things other than fight, cure, and turn undead. A definite plus.
The FEATS, like the skills, I didn't quite get. The feats that my PC's had were unlike most of what 3.5 has to offer. The feats seem to coincide with the At-Will & 1-time-per-encounter-Powers that I got to use (were on my pre-printed character sheet.)
All things considered, I'll give 4.0 a serious look. I am okay with continuing with 3.5 for the time being, but eventually I hope to make the transition. I may even continue to play both editions. The 3.5 system is hopeless convoluded with endless rule/splat books, and I'll end up prohibiting many of them when I GM 3.5 in the future. 3.5 does however more strongly resemble the "traditional d&d game" that we are all aquainted with.
4th edition gives me an easy chance to have my game "start fresh" and from scratch. It's different from 3.5, but I think that it's really not better, nor worse, just different. The game seemed to run noticably more smoothly; but we'll see how long that holds up after a year or two of 4.0 Splatbooks and rule expansions. It is my ultimate suspicion that 4.0 will go the way of 3.5 and thus the "Edition-Merry-go-Round" will continue on and on, as our friends at WoTC/Hasbro continue to try to reinvent the wheel in an effort to squeeze every dime out of us.
The controlled leaking of information on the system has not swayed me in the least. I admit I am bitter about the 4e change. A lot of that is the nixing of Living Greyhawk. Seems Wizards has lost a customer and Paizo (thanks for having the name at the top of the page) has gained one.
Rustle
I have changed my vote.
As of the moment, the plan is to buy the 4e core books at some point but I don't really expect it to be our main system. So I switched to sticking with 3.5
Same as Wicht. I'd ramble on like I usually do, but he said it fairly succiently. Changed my vote.
Right now 4e sounds like a large version of DDM with a storyboard add on. Sticking with 3.5-A wizard should not have to roll to hit with spells...
|
As DM I will stay with 3.5 for "serious" campaign gaming.
I will use the various D20 OGL offshoots (Black Company Campaign Setting, Thieves' World) for adventures from time to time.
And for some Fun Dungeon Crawls I will certainly give 4th a try.
Of course I will milk this system for all good ideas and create my 3.75 system.
|
Maybe I'm not reading things correctly but it just seems that 4.0 is being dumbed down and for me (an old man by all accounts) that is just not the direction I want to go. Combat was already fairly unrealistic and it just sounds worse now.
I'm definitely keeping my eyes and mind open as this comes to fruition but so far, I'm just not impressed.
Wayne
|
My poll vote hasn't changed (I marked "staying with 3.5" previously) but I am now changing an important piece of fluff. If Paizo goes to 4e, I doubt I will remain a subscriber and I will move to a "buy it only if I like it, part time customer". The DDXP reviews have confirmed my worst fears concerning 4e and where I used to think I would take my group along if Paizo converted, I no longer think that I will be able to do so; they would lynch me. At this point, only a miracle in the new PHB would cause me to change my opinion.
Guess I am going to have to put on my design hat and get back to writing if the good folks at Paizo go 4e.
they would lynch me.
Would that make you Lynched-Lich-Loved? :-P
I am still undecided. It was nice to finally get a lil tangible info for once. Though a lot of things are still open for me (read "most"). Some things I liked, some I didn't, some I don't quite get and want to see them all in context.
Barring incident, as it stands I will still buy the books and read them. I will decide after that. I do think though if 4 doesn't work for me I might pick up true20 and see how that works for me.
Odd, I can't seem to vote
do you see it to the left? I missed it at first.
|
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've voted "Yes, I'm going to 4th", but it isn't entirely true: the info I could read through the internet showed me that 4th-Ed isn't as bad as some guys want to paint it, but I still think it doesn't convince me enough.
I'll take some of 4th-Ed ideas for my own 3.75, but I don't think I'll convert. I'll decide it after playing a 4th-Edition adventure with core rules.I'll keep buying your products if 4th-Edition-Paizo is easy convertible to Aritz's-3.75, or if you include a 3.5 conversion (not necessarily in the print edition).
If you don't include 3.5 support, or 4th-edition makes your adventures really hard to convert to anything else, I'll try to play in standard 4th-Ed. If I like it, I'll keep being your customer. If I don't like the 4th-Ed-Pathfinder at all, then... Well, pretty obvious.
Really not a great black-or-white post, but it's what I think about it...
Aritz Cirbián
Barcelona, Spain
|
After reading all the DDE reviews & posts I'm definitely going to pick up the core 3 books and have a good read and playtest. If they can be used to tell the stories I want to tell (and my players approve) then I'll go with them. If the revised mechanics and play style are meh then I'll probably save my money.
However!
I would be lying if I didn't say that some of my decision making process will depend entirely on which way Paizo swings on this, I love the Pathfinder setting and stuff (ala Superscriber) and Paizo staying 3.5 could very well change my mind on moving to a new edition, and vice versa of course.
I was planning on checking out 4E and I still plan to. Despite all the complaints on these boards, I think it will be a better game than the currnent version. I look forward to trying it out.
I'm planning on buying the 4.0 core books, beyond that....well, not so sure. The D&D Ex "reviews" left me a bit cold (too much rah-rah?).
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
You guys left no space for my answer.
I plan on playing both.
That pretty much sums up my thought.
I plan on running 3.5 for the duration of my RotRL and my follow up CotCT. I might try running a 4e homebrew mini series when it come out but until I've told all the 3.5 stories I want to tell I'll stick to 3.5.
The guy who runs alternate me wants to run 4e. So I'll get to be a player in a 4e game at least.
It seems to me that the editions are different enough that I could happily keep both editions on my shelves.
I just switched my vote back to undecided.
I'm with Krueliad. I might try it, just to try it.
I was somewhat heartened by the Tome's recent podcast on Rituals.
It made it sound less like a combat game.
I didn't plan to switch (I still play 2E, but we use 3.5 stuff converted), but from what i've seen from D&DX 4E is even worse than I was expecting. Everything I've read has shown me weak watered down crap. My wife and I have read some of the new reviews to our players, and their reactions have been "We're not playing that, are we?"
Well, if those who are undecided split 50-50, then 2/3 of those who have responded are staying 3.5.
Well, if those who are undecided split 50-50, then 2/3 of those who have responded are staying 3.5.
Aye, but I think we can both agree the sample size of our poll here is quite small (451 total responses as of this post).
Cheers! :)
And you never know how people might change as better sources of information come out.
I started out neutral. Turned for it. Turned against it. Went back to neutral.
You can argue I'm flighty.. (Owl, yeah, heh)... but as new sources of information come out, I change my mind.
I don't know if this is the best choice for Pathfinder, but yeah.. it looks pretty interesting on a lot of levels.
If I was them I would have focused on a few other aspects of the game besides combat at the Show.. but as stuff comes out, it sounds more interesting again.
Statistically, this is the most important thing about this poll. I haven't hung out on enworld and when I stopped reading the WotC boards about a month ago they were relatively split, but it's pretty clear that the Paizo boards have a STRONG anti-4e skew. That tends to invalidate the poll as a predictive measure of the large-scale success of 4th edition, although it's something that Paizo might want to take under advisement.Well, if those who are undecided split 50-50, then 2/3 of those who have responded are staying 3.5.In an admittedly unscientific poll with a sample bias. :)
Hmm, lost my post there. Are the boards being flaky for anyone else today (that is, flakier than most days?)
You're assuming that the skew of this board is indicitive of the skew of Paizo's customer base as a whole, which, IMO, is an assumption that is generally false. (Everyone on this board would still be a small sample of all of Paizo's customers, I think!)
Cheers! :)
True. I've been online for a long time and a significant portion of the content on freeform internet forums (Usenet, messageboards, blogs and comments) has been complaints. Why should D&D messageboards be any different?
For some reason your post brings to mind a quote {contact} used as a sig over on ENWorld that always brought a chuckle:
"The Internet - because none of us is as stupid as all of us"
Cheers! :)
|
|
You're assuming that the skew of this board is indicitive of the skew of Paizo's customer base as a whole, which, IMO, is an assumption that is generally false. (Everyone on this board would still be a small sample of all of Paizo's customers, I think!)
I agree. Though the continued strength of Paizo's sales in the face of the 4e announcement and preview material might lend some veracity to the idea their customer base is resistant to the change. Of course, that is a big "MIGHT" and it could just mean the product is so good they customers it whether or not they intend to switch. I know even if I was more decisive about where my game was going I would still buy Paizo material.
|
|
Aye, but I think we can both agree the sample size of our poll here is quite small (451 total responses as of this post).
Cheers! :)
Actually, as far as sample size goes, 451 is not that bad. Examine the sample size for a lot of political polls sometime. The real problem, IMO, is that it is not a random sample and is therefore in no way indicative of the entire hobby (though it might be partially indicative of Paizo's base.)
I agree. Though the continued strength of Paizo's sales in the face of the 4e announcement and preview material might lend some veracity to the idea their customer base is resistant to the change. Of course, that is a big "MIGHT" and it could just mean the product is so good they customers it whether or not they intend to switch. I know even if I was more decisive about where my game was going I would still buy Paizo material.
When the gut check thread was still new I asked if anyone had read through the whole thing and taken a tally. At the time there was roughly 3 responses. 1/3rd to 4E. 1/3rd to 3.5. And 1/3rd to wherever Paizo goes. So you may be onto something re: Paizo's superb quality buffering them to sales loss.
Cheers! :)
but it's pretty clear that the Paizo boards have a STRONG anti-4e skew. That tends to invalidate the poll as a predictive measure of the large-scale success of 4th edition
Normally, I'd agree, but in this case, I do not. You're not looking at the picture as a whole. After 4E's announcement, we know that 3.5 sales dropped. Now, sales have picked up since then, but they are still down. Goodman Games and Necromancer have been ramping down their production of 3.5 content. Hell, goodman stopped 3.5 completely a few months ago. Customers that have no plans on going 4E have to go somewhere for their products. Paizo was ramping up production around that time, trying to launch product lines around that time. In short, they got the continued 3.5 customers that Necro and Goodman stopped producing for. By design or by coincidence, Paizo has a largely 3.5 customer base.
How many that planned on going 4E stopped buying 3.5 products altogether several months ago? How many are ignoring companies that have not announce 4E products because they "are not making products for my game"? Those numbers are not insignificiant.
Add both those parts up and you get what looks like the makings of a "Neonard" company.
(Neonard = New Grognard -> New Game even if it uses older rules.)
When the gut check thread was still new I asked if anyone had read through the whole thing and taken a tally. At the time there was roughly 3 responses. 1/3rd to 4E. 1/3rd to 3.5. And 1/3rd to wherever Paizo goes. So you may be onto something re: Paizo's superb quality buffering them to sales loss.
When I did my read through, I noticed similar, but I also took note of how many were subscribers. The 3.5 vastly outweighted the 4E crowd in subscriptions.
|
|
When the gut check thread was still new I asked if anyone had read through the whole thing and taken a tally. At the time there was roughly 3 responses. 1/3rd to 4E. 1/3rd to 3.5. And 1/3rd to wherever Paizo goes. So you may be onto something re: Paizo's superb quality buffering them to sales loss.When I did my read through, I noticed similar, but I also took note of how many were subscribers. The 3.5 vastly outweighted the 4E crowd in subscriptions.
While that might be true, and it does show a certain amount of brand loyalty, it is difficult to use that as indicator for any kind of evaluation. There might be many reasons why a person does not subscribe that has nothing to do with a desire to be Paizo customers. For instance, with all of my expenses I have had a hard time maintaining a subscription to anything. I buy material at my FLGS when I can.
I understand what you are getting at and I generally agree, I just think there are some caveats that need to be considered when making that comparison.
Well, if those who are undecided split 50-50, then 2/3 of those who have responded are staying 3.5.Aye, but I think we can both agree the sample size of our poll here is quite small (451 total responses as of this post).
Cheers! :)
Sample size? I'm just interested in those who responded.
The sample is 100% for my comment. ;)
When the gut check thread was still new I asked if anyone had read through the whole thing and taken a tally. At the time there was roughly 3 responses. 1/3rd to 4E. 1/3rd to 3.5. And 1/3rd to wherever Paizo goes. So you may be onto something re: Paizo's superb quality buffering them to sales loss.When I did my read through, I noticed similar, but I also took note of how many were subscribers. The 3.5 vastly outweighted the 4E crowd in subscriptions.While that might be true, and it does show a certain amount of brand loyalty, it is difficult to use that as indicator for any kind of evaluation. There might be many reasons why a person does not subscribe that has nothing to do with a desire to be Paizo customers. For instance, with all of my expenses I have had a hard time maintaining a subscription to anything. I buy material at my FLGS when I can.
I understand what you are getting at and I generally agree, I just think there are some caveats that need to be considered when making that comparison.
Plus, if you are pretty certain you'll be switching to 4E, there isn't much appeal in an ongoing subscription to 3E material. I dropped my Pathfinder Charter Subscription when 4E was announced for precisely that reason. I have enough 3E stuff as is, with a large preponderance likely to go unused. I may not be doing too badly regarding money, but I certainly can't afford to throw it away.
If Paizo doesn't go 4E and it looks like its easy to convert from 3E to 4E (and if someone does the work! :P) maybe I'll pick up the ones I've missed and run them sometime (they seem to have been awesome, based on reactions here!) And if they do go 4E I'll certainly pick up a sub again. I kinda miss not getting a special little present every month.
Cheers! :)
Here's another interesting poll: EN World: 4E or 3.5 or something else?
I like the accusations of cheating...
Here's another interesting poll: EN World: 4E or 3.5 or something else?
I like the accusations of cheating...
I like those poll results too. :)
|
|
What is interesting is how well the two polls mirror each other at this point. It would tend to make one think that this could well be the actual breakdown of the hobby at the moment and not just the attitude of Paizo regulars. Approximately 50% are committed to sticking with the older edition. 20% are gung ho for the new and the rest are caught in between.