In my personal opinion, I kept this email dumbed down and streamlined to the point of idiocy <snip>
You think this is an 'E-Mail', and yet feel you need to 'dumb down' your brilliant observations?
Nice.
Get in line with the others that like 4e... the little bus should be here any minute.
|
Good advice. You should consider following it.
In my personal opinion, I kept this email dumbed down and streamlined to the point of idiocy in case people playing WoW had trouble reading it. Frankly, you have a right to disagree with this post, that's your perrogative, but I have complete disdain for anyone that would find it insulting.
Really, the "let's take what somebody else wrote and turn it into a personal attack is getting very old. Sebastian, I've seen you in every negative 4E thread there is. I think we all get it, you love 4E, you can't imagine why anybody wouldn't love 4E. I have no problem that you, or any other person love 4E, what I have a problem with is that you can't seem to get over yourself.
In my personal opinion, I have formed myself by reading the manuals and playing the game, 4E is a pile of crap. If you disagree with me, that's fine, I think its great that people can have different opinions and enjoy different things, but turning each and every response you write into a hate-filled insult-ridden diatribe on how we're idiots for having a differing opinion than yours is tired and frankly isn't doing much to enamor me to the Paizo community. Just because you thinly veil your "you're an idiot" response into a snappy repeat of what has just been said doesn't make it any less hurtful to others.
What I don't get is how this kind of continued attitude keeps anybody new coming to these boards and the damage you're doing to the community.
|
Accidental? Hardly. It's that these corporations decided that no one was going to sue them for breaking the agreement.
I work in the book business. There's no "sue" involved. You pay a fine to the publisher if you violate a Strict-On-Sale date or they stop dealing with you. You can also face weights & measures legal issues. That said, once someone violates the S.O.S., the publisher often lifts it so everybody else can benefit from the sale of the hot product. Don't be surprised if you see 4e stuff on the shelves of all manner of stores before Friday.
|
|
Please keep it cool in here, folks.
Guys, at this point, one thing at least seems clear: for those who aren't interested in 4E at all (and based on these messageboards, we know that there are a lot of us out there), we have a viable alternative with the Pathfinder RPG. Is there much reason to re-hash what we don't like about 4E or WOTC's policies, or what have you? Let's move on to a fluffier, fuzzier place. . .pick the camp you like, revel in its neatness and appropriateness, and leave the other camp to its own devices. Is there really a need to keep on squabbling about these things?
Guys, at this point, one thing at least seems clear: for those who aren't interested in 4E at all (and based on these messageboards, we know that there are a lot of us out there), we have a viable alternative with the Pathfinder RPG. Is there much reason to re-hash what we don't like about 4E or WOTC's policies, or what have you? Let's move on to a fluffier, fuzzier place. . .pick the camp you like, revel in its neatness and appropriateness, and leave the other camp to its own devices. Is there really a need to keep on squabbling about these things?Please keep it cool in here, folks.
QFT
Amen brother. Amen.
Guys, at this point, one thing at least seems clear: for those who aren't interested in 4E at all (and based on these messageboards, we know that there are a lot of us out there), we have a viable alternative with the Pathfinder RPG. Is there much reason to re-hash what we don't like about 4E or WOTC's policies, or what have you? Let's move on to a fluffier, fuzzier place. . .pick the camp you like, revel in its neatness and appropriateness, and leave the other camp to its own devices. Is there really a need to keep on squabbling about these things?Please keep it cool in here, folks.
Neither should people be forbidden from posting their first impressions of 4E, though. Just don´t fall into the trap of equating the people who like 4E to the game.
Appologise for the rambling.
I have spent a day now reading the rules and this message board. I list what I wanted out of D&D4e.
1) Better skill system - Spent 4 years playing in a 3e>3.5e Night Below Campaign, and my 20th Paladin's d20+3 spot vs the Rogues d20 + 25 always seemed silly.
2) Grapple rules for Hand to Hand combat. I want my character to grab our 'feared' Archmage as she runs off from the Dragon after rolling a 1 (Her Mindblank having been dispelled).
3) Getting away from all the buffing. Prior to entering Dungeon buff with Holy Sword, Barkskin, Hero's Feast, Deathward etc etc etc.
4) Changes in Spells: Teleport, Polymorph, 6th Planeshift vs 9th Astral Spell etc etc.
So what did I feel I got: 1 & 3.
I also got:
i) A completely new game. Its Fight Club - everybody fights. Everybody can heal themselevs and keep on fighting.
I was reading a clean/beautifully illustrated computer game manual. There is still comparable roleplaying game support info for 3.0/3.5, but it is a new game. As with all new games there will be issues that come up that will need improvement, so I feel the game is at a similar stage as 3e was, it will need a 4.5e.
ii) Better skills system and better (but far simpler) combat system.
You wield two-weapons pretty much for show now, you only get one attack (Some feats give you off-hand attacks later).
iii) No grapple rules as far as I can tell.
iv) Far less variation in spells, they just do damage or skill enhancement. Hardly any buffing spells, rituals are a good idea, but the variation of spells is limited. No teleport or Find the Path of old.
v) A game that is incomplete and tailored to allow for add on books. The Monster Manual should have just focussed on monsters 1st to 10th maybe?
4e is a new game. It has started again. It is also intended to move into the computer game arena. It is a good, clean (new) game with probably all the attendent issues that go with new games.
My only critism is the (deliberate) Magic the gathering marketing slant where the system is incomplete. Forcing you to buy this book for Barbarians and that book for Frost Giants. Better that they produces 3 books that allowed you to play 1st to 10th Level, then MM2 for 11th to 20th monsters etc etc - that would have been far more reasonable.
I have bought these 3 books, but will try not to buy anymore splat books, the 80 odd 3.0/3.5 splats are enough. For old gamers out there, I think I will try to change 4e for use in a Runequest Sartar Campaign, somehow using Siz and Pow, and also using spirit/battle/rune/divine magic. This would make it RQ 6th edition...
Cheers
My biggest gripe with 4e is simply that it looks and feels like an MMORPG that has been adapted to a pen and paper medium.
I think there's some of truth to this.
I know many don't, but online gaming is the major competition now. You could argue that WotC would be foolish if they didn't include successful elements of such games into a redesign.
Then again, one doesn't make tennis balls look like baseballs to compete with a more popular, but different, recreation.
Please keep it cool in here, folks.
I'm already cool... just call me Fonzie :)
Well...I gave up reading the thread on the beginning of page 3 when it was clear it had turned into a 4E bashing circle jerk.
Despite my disappointment with Paizo's direction, I wanted to give Pathfinder a fair shake. Unforutnately, some of the PFRG's advocates are so hostile and irrational that I just can't continue to hang out on these boards (talk about loving something to death). So I think I'm taking the advice I got right here on the boards a few weeks ago:
I'm going to ENWorld.
Best of luck and sorry to see you go. However, I'm sure you'll find them to share your opinions on 4e in far, far greater numbers. As a favor, though, see if you notice any "hostile and irrational" behavior over there. Granted, it'll be coming from your side of the fence but don't kid yourself with the rose-colored glasses.
Let's move on to a fluffier, fuzzier place. . .pick the camp you like, revel in its neatness and appropriateness, and leave the other camp to its own devices.
I suggest clicking on the little triangle that closes the opposing section of the messageboards.
Hopefully, we can still meet and converse civilly on the neutral ground of the Pathfinder AP board and the Smurf thread.
Accidental? Hardly. It's that these corporations decided that no one was going to sue them for breaking the agreement.I work in the book business. There's no "sue" involved. You pay a fine to the publisher if you violate a Strict-On-Sale date or they stop dealing with you. You can also face weights & measures legal issues. That said, once someone violates the S.O.S., the publisher often lifts it so everybody else can benefit from the sale of the hot product. Don't be surprised if you see 4e stuff on the shelves of all manner of stores before Friday.
On that "stop dealing with you" not only does the early distributor risk losing WoTC's business, but there is a small (but very real) possibility that they could lose Hasbro's business. (I used to work with SOE, and yes SONY did protect us this way in one instance.)
So, I really doubt that the pre-release was deliberate.
...but it's pretty obvious WotC has a leak. Those documents are absolutely not scanned images.
Agreed. But I doubt WotC did this deliberately -- there's no credible benefit to them.
My biggest gripe with 4e is simply that it looks and feels like an MMORPG that has been adapted to a pen and paper medium.I think there's some of truth to this.
I know many don't, but online gaming is the major competition now. You could argue that WotC would be foolish if they didn't include successful elements of such games into a redesign.
If they though they could take on WoW, then I think they've been quite wrong. D&D might be the big RPG, but compared to WoW, it's nothing.
Another problem is that a WoW-like game concept just doesn't work that well as P&P. It was done with PCs in mind. No matter how fast you can play those rules now, WoW is still way faster.
And the things that make RPGs unique and "better" than WoW (for some people or people's desires) were branded as sacred cows and butchered.
I doubt that they'll get that many new players with this: Roleplayers will miss the variety, MMORPG players the quick and easy fun. Each will probably stick to the games he has now.
pick the camp you like, revel in its neatness and appropriateness, and leave the other camp to its own devices. Is there really a need to keep on squabbling about these things?
I think that this thread was necessary. The difference between this thread and previous ones is that now we have the rules lying before us. Previous threads always had the uncertainty. People would still defend their choice by saying "we don't know that yet". Well, now we do. Several 4e proponents kept saying "I bet a lot of those who rant about it will convert in the end." and by what I read here, many can now give them a definite denial.
And it's interesting to see that many have cancelled their pre-orders after seeing the stuff.
On that "stop dealing with you" not only does the early distributor risk losing WoTC's business, but there is a small (but very real) possibility that they could lose Hasbro's business. (I used to work with SOE, and yes SONY did protect us this way in one instance.)
Depending on who we're talking about, it's probably likely that hasbro needs those companies' business far more than the other way around.
Friendly advice to the paizonians.
Dont feed the trolls, they will leave on their own. Its a public forum so people will agree/disagree. Lets not get dragged into any further messes. I really wouldnt want to see this place end up like "another site". :)
Color me Paizo.
|
|
I've also seen the less legal copy that's floating around the internet.
Not only do they have to deal with places like buy.com that sent out their sales early, but it's pretty obvious WotC has a leak. Those documents are absolutely not scanned images.
I haven't seen the files, but it might not be WotC that has the leak. The printer, for instance, may have the leak. Since they're doing DDI, they might have a leak in the company contracted to do that. Leaks can come from all over the place, which is the frustrating thing. Regardless of who leaked the files though, it seems good for Paizo, so I'm happy. :)
One of the things that infuriates me about the 4.0 marketing campaign, and something that's really put a sour taste in my mouth about the whole deal, is the patronizing way they act like old ideas are somehow new and groundbreaking. When I read that rather insipid bit by Ms. Astrid about her character creation and how amazing and new Point Buy is (when I've been using it since 3.5 launched), I was practically yelling at my computer screen. When the most recent preview on their site about alignment came up, and they claimed that the new "Unaligned" default alignment was somehow *not* the same as Neutral, and then went on with an almost word for word description that matches how I've explained Neutral to players for years, it just drives me crazy.
If you've got something new to show, show it. If you're just using something from ages ago, don't pretend it's new and hope we're stupid enough to buy into it.
I'm reserving final judgment of the rules until this Saturday's demo game, but I've gotten a look at the leaked galleys, and I'm not particularly impressed.
iii) No grapple rules as far as I can tell.
Perhaps in the upcoming Martial handbook
It's interesting to me how often in 4E threads that even those who love the game have already decided that they are "houseruling" a bunch of stuff.
I found with 3.x that I could play the core rules completely as written.
I like that much better. :)
(Especially since 2E was a houserule-fest for my group.)
And, when you consider that the advice in the 1st Edition DMG literally consisted of "Hit them with random lightning bolts, and set blatantly obvious grudge monsters on them", then it is an evolution...Not to be a terrible thread-snarker (okay, maybe I am), but can you dig up your literal quote of that? Because I never read that in my 1st edition DMG.
I'm also a little picky about using "literally" when it isn't appropriate :)
1st Ed DMG Revised ed 1979 p110 second column 5 th paragraph
Contributor
|
It's interesting to me how often in 4E threads that even those who love the game have already decided that they are "houseruling" a bunch of stuff.
I found with 3.x that I could play the core rules completely as written.
I like that much better. :)
(Especially since 2E was a houserule-fest for my group.)
Actually, with 3E, I immediately wanted to houserule a whole bunch of stuff. After playing for a while, I ditched most of my houserules, and then after a few more years, created some new better ones. My initial houserules turned out to not improve the game.
For 4E, I plan to play the RAW for a while before houseruling, even though there are changes I'm "sure" I want to make (like bringing back confirm rolls on crits). I just want to be extra sure.
I'm willing to bet that a lot of people will make 4E houserules and then ditch them after a while.
Also, the number one appeal to me about 4E is the underlying math. I don't think it's possible to houserule that into 3E without rewriting the whole system anyways, but I do think it will be possible to add back in my favorite bits from 3E.
Mind you, I am FAR from committed to playing 4E in any kind of long term.
Why is this thread in the Pathfinder forum again?I believe the initial intent was to ask if seeing 4E made anyone change their mind about Pathfinder.
Oh, right.
Um...No. Still buying Pathfinder, still not buying 4e.
I like it, and my gaming group will be playing it once our current Ptolus based 3.5 campaign is complete.
Its different, and I think needs a bit of a mindset shift to really get into. Our group is generally for it, although people will obviously make comparisons to 3.5 (I cant do this anymore etc etc etc) but in the main ive always found that you can roleplay with any system, and the rules set you use is just a way of adjudicating the in character actions.
We went on a road trip once and played a 6 hour roleplay game in the car thats entire mechanic was based on flipping a coin and how many cigerette butts you had. And it was a damn good game.
At the end of the day D&D and roleplay are an excuse to get togther with my friends every thursday and have a good time. We have been together now for 13 years and the group has only had one face changed in all that time.
Sorry im rambling. I had a point, but ive forgotten what it was.
oh yes.
Roleplay (to me) is about having fun with my friends. A ruleset isnt going to change that REGARDLESS of what those rules are.
|
At the end of the day D&D and roleplay are an excuse to get togther with my friends every thursday and have a good time. We have been together now for 13 years and the group has only had one face changed in all that time.
Sorry im rambling. I had a point, but ive forgotten what it was.
oh yes.
Roleplay (to me) is about having fun with my friends. A ruleset isnt going to change that REGARDLESS of what those rules are.
Great point. This is also true of our goup. We started with Dragonwarriors, moved to Warhammer rolplay, went to Earthdawn (greatest roleplay books to read ever...terrible mechanincs though), now we play 3.5 D&D.
The only thing that's changed has been the systems we played, every time we meet, we have fun. Go figure.
We're not changing over (too much money invested in 3.5 at this stage) but I'm sure one day we'll try another game (a mate has the new Warhammer roleplay, and I've got Dark Heresy) and I'm betting we'll still have fun.
Cheers
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
1st Ed DMG Revised ed 1979 p110 second column 5 th paragraph
Not to be a terrible thread-snarker (okay, maybe I am), but can you dig up your literal quote of that? Because I never read that in my 1st edition DMG.I'm also a little picky about using "literally" when it isn't appropriate :)
So, the point pretty much stands. The advice is literally (as in really, actually), in order:
* ask them to leave* do not invite them again
* exercise peer pressure
* obviously roll an extra chance of a random encounter (not actually the same thing as a "grudge monster", as this is more of a strong hint to settle down)
* points of damage from bolts from the blue
* charisma penalties (which actually makes a fair bit of sense)
A lot more than saying throw grudge monsters or lightning bolts. The advice is somewhat on the tough side, but frankly being soft on obnoxious players isn't that good an idea.
I was pretty sure that 1st ed's last word on troublesome players wasn't to off them, and I'm pleased that's correct.
It's interesting to me how often in 4E threads that even those who love the game have already decided that they are "houseruling" a bunch of stuff.
I found with 3.x that I could play the core rules completely as written.
Which brings back up that we know - directly from WoTC - that 4th Edition as written will be an INCOMPLETE game. They have deliberately left races/classes and rule information off, to force the purchase of the PH2 and DMG2 next year.
|
Ahh...the roller-coaster keeps rolling.
Initial 4E announcement: "What? I am feel like I just 'mastered' 3rd ed." Not happy.
Wizards Presents: "Ok, it's not so bad. Maybe there is some hope that it's actually going to be ok. Borrowing from Star Wars Saga is a good thing."
Developer Blogs, playtest peeks, etc.: "Holy crap. This isn't D&D. This is something new entirely. Not sure I am liking it" Glad Paizo Announced Pathfinder RPG
Frequent Excerpts: "Ok, I see now. A lot of this looks pretty decent. I think Pathfinder RPG is going to have trouble."
Recent "early" release: "WTF? That's it? Yeah...it looks like an interesting game. But I have only so much time and I like the game I'm playing." Biggest let down: Its pretty barren. It's like watching previews of a movie and getting excited only to discover the preview WAS the movie, and the best parts to boot. There's nothing in the PHB, DMG, MM that will change your mind about 4E that you haven't seen in the excerpts.
I feel Pathfinder RPG will be a good venue for those who aren't interested in 4E. I Imagine it will be diminishing returns though. As 4E begins to fill in a lot of the stuff that's missing it will begin to look more attractive.
See how bad 4e is? People would rather play Palladium
Say what you like about Rifts, but I need to stick up for TMNT and Other Strangeness!
;P
Peace,
tfad
Perhaps in the upcoming Martial handbook
iii) No grapple rules as far as I can tell.
4th Edition Player's Handbook, page 290:
Grab (standard action)
You make a Strength vs. Reflex attack to grab an enemy.
A grabbed creature is immobilized (Speed 0).
You can sustain a grab as a minor action each turn automatically (meaning that creatures can only escape using their own actions).
If you are hit by a condition that stops you from making opportunity attacks, the grab ends.
If you are forcibly moved by an effect (push, pull, slide), the grab ends.
Moving a Grabbed Creature (standard action)
Strength vs. Fortitude check; you can move the creature with you up to half your Speed.
Escape (move action)
Either Acrobatics or Athletics vs. Fortitude; if you succeed then you escape the grab and can shift as part of the move action.
This means that a grabbed creature can make two escape attempts on their turn.
|
Why is this thread in the Pathfinder forum again?I believe the initial intent was to ask if seeing 4E made anyone change their mind about Pathfinder.
Exactly. Or the opposite. Or to provide additional thought for those who were still looking for information.
Sadly, like any attempt at meaningful dialogue on the latest incarnation of DnD, it just gave both camps excuses to bring out flamethrowers.
I have saw it and boy am I ever glad There is PFRPG for me to buy.4E is so not for me.To the ones it is for enjoy.
|
|
For those who received the 4E core books early (*cough* BUY.com *cough*), has a readthru of the books affected your decision in continuing to play 3.x or the future Pathfinder RPG?
OK, I've read through most of the thread and haven't seen my personal gripe mentioned...so I figure I may be able to contribute to the conversation.
To quickly answer the original question, I have seen the 4th ed "preview" and that sneak peek caused me to cancel my preorder. Why do you ask? Just one word:
Synergy.
That's right...I could have dealt with much about 4th that I didn't like (such as pre-rolled iterations of the same monster, predetermined powers and many of those powers being just weird) but when corporate ideals begin to shape the product to the degree that I observed..I can't handle it.
The entire premise of 4th edition seemed an extension of their DDM product, coupled with MTG ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming online offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.
To be clear now, I'm not against ppl or corporations making money-I'm all for it. The more money they make, the more books they publish the more the game expands! But the manner in which that company makes money does colour my perception of them, thus when the re-packaging of a bunch of money making ideas forms the basic framework of my favorite hobby-I tend to walk away from the company; I wish them well, but I do walk away.
Anyhow, that is my gripe-keep in mind it's only my perception and though you may disagree, it's going to keep me from subscribing to WOTC and their products. I don't agree with how (I think) they formed their "corporate design direction" and I think that the overall IP of D&D has suffered for it in this latest edition.
Be well
Speech
|
|
The entire premise of 4th edition seemed an extension of their DDM product, coupled with MTG ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming online offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.
I am going to pull a club from Sebastian's golf bag:
The entire premise of Dungeons& Dragons seemed an extension of their Chainmail product, coupled with Avalon Hill Squad Leader ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming AD&D offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.
This hobby has always followed this model. Create > expand > diversify > redefine the core > repeat.
|
|
CWM - who the hell are you to take the actual history of our game and pervert it to support your viewpoints? You start a thread like this, and then say you're going to pull out a club when someone disagrees with you. Cool it down, man!
I did not start the thread.
I have been a D&D player and GM since 1976 so this is not "history" to me.
And you should familiarize your self with golf to truly understand the analogy I was using.
So, would you care to address the substance of my post rather than its form?
|
|
The entire premise of 4th edition seemed an extension of their DDM product, coupled with MTG ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming online offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.I am going to pull a club from Sebastian's golf bag:
The entire premise of Dungeons& Dragons seemed an extension of their Chainmail product, coupled with Avalon Hill Squad Leader ideals of constantly buying upgrades to keep competitive/current tacked on with the afterthought of their upcoming AD&D offering. It appears to me that they took all the things that seemed to already be working and rolled it all together to make a juggernaut product that will make them even more money.
This hobby has always followed this model. Create > expand > diversify > redefine the core > repeat.
Just a bit of a point to add.....D&D was always to be a roleplaying game. People playing Chainmail wanted to alter the game to be able to inject the roleplay into the game. This started with 'hero' type forces in the original Chainmail game and evolved so that people could play as the character instead of just moving the piece around the board.
It was always meant to be roleplaying but the system it stemmed from is tactical, which isn't bad, but may be some of what you see from time to time in the game.DISCLAIMER: My previous statement was in no way meant to allude to any game system either being more RP oriented or Tactically oriented. I merely made a statement based on some stuff I read in the past to help clearify another statement. Any offense that anyone takes to this statement may cause me to lose sleep at night (yeah, right) and may effect my sexual performance (doubt it).
Nope! My books will be shipping soon and I couldn't be happier. I have to admit that the books didn't have quite as much as I had hoped, but then again, they are quite big so I can see why now.
I'm not going to subscribe to DDI as I am sure I can probably get most of that content for free from my buddy, who did subscribe, or off the net somewhere. Hopefully that fills in some of the blanks.
I believe that it is well known that the PDF's that got circulated are confirmed to be an earlier draft as well, and have errors in them and missing content, so I just want to remind everyone of that again.