|
Here are the totals as of Paul Hedge's response:
Like it - 14
Not Sure - 10
Dislike it - 25
Played Shadowfell - 10
Read the Core Books - 27
Read the Previews - 12
This is what I had gotten a sense of, but it still amazes me. Nearly 4 times the number of people haven't even tried a short playtest of the game, compared to those who have. In regard to RPGs, I have always felt that a playtest was the best way of determining whether or not a game is for me. Reading the rules didn't always give the best sense of whether or not it would be enjoyable, and it was definitely the case here. My players and I were pretty anti-4.0 going in. I had no plans on anything to do with it, but for the sake of making sure, decided to spend one day trying a short playtest.
In the end, we had fun. It wasn't phenomenal, it wasn't horrible, but it was fun. Monsters in particular were a lot more fun to manage for me (DM).
One of my players put it best. "I had a taste of 4e, it wasn't bitter and I didn't want to spit it out, and so I wouldn't mind a second bite. But I still like the pizza with all the toppings that is 3.5."
To all who haven't tried it yet, I encourage you to spend one day with your players, just one day, and try out the preview. Borrow it from someone if you want. I'm not saying this in the hopes you'll change your mind, I'm still planning to go with PRPG myself. However, I do say it in the hopes that you try it just to say you have, to know, through and through, that it either is or is not the RPG for you.
Who knows, you might end up like me, and still have a little fun. Please keep the votes coming, this is very interesting.
|
To all who haven't tried it yet, I encourage you to spend one day with your players, just one day, and try out the preview. Borrow it from someone if you want.
Well-spoken. Your analysis reminds me of folks first reaction to the mystic theurge prestige class. Folks were near-flaming WotC of how horribly overpowering the class read by having access to both arcane and divine magics. Play, as the class's author and folks who actually used it in-game, proved otherwise (and which I can vouch for as well).
To all who haven't tried it yet, I encourage you to spend one day with your players, just one day, and try out the preview. Borrow it from someone if you want.
My players would never play it ever. would have to find a whole new group. and really my lack of interest in 4e isn't enuff to even read or try to learn all the new rules.
#4.
I really want someone to discuss how high level play goes compared to 3.5. After 12 or 13 levels I begin to loathe running 3.5 games because of the work involved... it's supposed to be fun, not work. I have hope for 4E in that respect. In fact, that was my tipping point between 4E and PFRPG... complexity at higher levels.
As a player, I love what I see in PFRPG, but there is no way I am going to DM that system, I'll let someone else do it... it's just too darn complex for me.
This is what I had gotten a sense of, but it still amazes me. Nearly 4 times the number of people haven't even tried a short playtest of the game, compared to those who have.
I wouldn't look too deeply into the nay-sayer posts. Message boards are notorious haunts of the vocal minority.
I really want someone to discuss how high level play goes compared to 3.5. After 12 or 13 levels I begin to loathe running 3.5 games because of the work involved... it's supposed to be fun, not work.No kidding! In my last 3.5 game one of my players was a 10th level swashbuckler that fought with 2 rapiers. Five attacks per round was just ridiculous and extremely time consuming.
|
I wouldn't look too deeply into the nay-sayer posts. Message boards are notorious haunts of the vocal minority.
So the pro-4E posts on Gleemax and Enworld are the voices of a vocal minority. There's a relief!
::rolls eyes::
Seriously, if you're going to question the validity of a board or a forum and dismiss the opinion of the majority who have posted there don't ask for your opinion to be counted. This poll was for Paizo customers, its been answered by Paizo customers. Is it indicative of the whole RPG community? No more than ENWorld represents everyone in the RPG world.
|
|
I really want someone to discuss how high level play goes compared to 3.5. After 12 or 13 levels I begin to loathe running 3.5 games because of the work involved... it's supposed to be fun, not work. I have hope for 4E in that respect. In fact, that was my tipping point between 4E and PFRPG... complexity at higher levels.
As a player, I love what I see in PFRPG, but there is no way I am going to DM that system, I'll let someone else do it... it's just too darn complex for me.
As someone who runs 30th+ level adventures on a regular basis I understand your complaint, even if I find the same "work" to be fun. Hopefully 4E solves that problem for you and you enjoy high level gameplay as a DM again.
Have fun
I really want someone to discuss how high level play goes compared to 3.5. After 12 or 13 levels I begin to loathe running 3.5 games because of the work involved... it's supposed to be fun, not work. I have hope for 4E in that respect. In fact, that was my tipping point between 4E and PFRPG... complexity at higher levels.
As a player, I love what I see in PFRPG, but there is no way I am going to DM that system, I'll let someone else do it... it's just too darn complex for me.
I'm essentially in the same boat. 3.5 at 1st through 3rd level is an awesomely fun experience. For me it dulls somewhat after that only to come roaring back from 9th-12th level, after that its really cool conceptually but it almost does not matter how cool the game is when combats are taking multiple sessions to play out.
Even the most exciting of battles between the Red Dragon and her Minions and the PCs just starts to fall apart when last week you started a battle with a Dragon, this week your going to continue the battle with the dragon. Then everyones on vacation for two weeks but in three weeks time its hoped that we can finish off the battle with the Dragon. What should be a truly epic experience just looses its shine under this circumstance.
My gaming comes in five hour weekly chunks and in that time my players need to be able to gab with each other and catch up and we need to stop for a meal (and more gabbing) break part way through. There really is only about 3 1/2 hours of actual play. I'm just feeling as if 3.5 is not well suited for my group and our lives.
I think I like 4E but I honestly won't truly know if its really done what I want it to do until my players get into the upper levels.
I'm a #6 I guess.
You seem to be saying that those of us who haven't played it yet, should mitigate our opinions, but you are asking us about a game that isn't out yet officially, so I'm not sure what you expected.
There are certain things, like the less openness (no OGL) and some of the more obvious ploys to milk us, that will stick in my craw for good, but I did find that once I accepted that the rule was when there was a dispute between the gamist and the simulationist, you don't just come down on the gamist's side, but you take the simulationist outside and shoot him, I could appreciate it better.
Also, the fact that Pathfinder is putting in some of the same rules that I disliked in 4e, like no save or die, makes me think that maybe I'm just wrong.
So I guess I'm not as much of a 6 as I was, but I'd be very surprised if I became a 1 when I play it.
#9 followed by a partial #6 (I browsed through them for quite a while, but didn't actually read indepth... from what I read I can say that 4e doesn't seem quite as bad as I feared it would be... but it still definatly not for me and my perfered playing style).
Definitive 3 and 6 and yes i read them for a week before my final jugement
Sitting on the fence between #8 and #9 initially before shifting to #6 after review never really cared for tactical mini games which is how 4E feels to me.
#7 (And have read and will run D&D Day module Into the Shadowhaunt)
|
|
I really want someone to discuss how high level play goes compared to 3.5. After 12 or 13 levels I begin to loathe running 3.5 games because of the work involved... it's supposed to be fun, not work. I have hope for 4E in that respect. In fact, that was my tipping point between 4E and PFRPG... complexity at higher levels.
As a player, I love what I see in PFRPG, but there is no way I am going to DM that system, I'll let someone else do it... it's just too darn complex for me.
Well judging from what ive read and what ive gatherd from other sources high lvl combat against elites and solos just turns into a mindless hackfest since hp and damage output dont seem to scale right. Against everything else it seems to work fine.
::rolls eyes::
Seriously, if you're going to question the validity of a board or a forum and dismiss the opinion of the majority who have posted there don't ask for your opinion to be counted. This poll was for Paizo customers, its been answered by Paizo customers. Is it indicative of the whole RPG community? No more than ENWorld represents everyone in the RPG world.
For the record, I didn't mean to discount anything anyone said. I was merely stating the fact that message boards are used by a very vocal minority.
|
|
For the record, I didn't mean to discount anything anyone said. I was merely stating the fact that message boards are used by a very vocal minority.
I'm not sure how saying this:
"I wouldn't look too deeply into the nay-sayer posts. Message boards are notorious haunts of the vocal minority."
isn't a discount of what the majority of people on this thread (at that time, not sure about currently) have said. You give advice about the opinions of people who have for one reason or another voted against 4E and then comment about a vocal minority. Given the statement, it really comes across as a shot at the "nay-sayers."
Maybe you mispoke, I know I do it all the time. If I had the post above to do over again I would rephrase it to be... gentler in my critique of your statement.
As for the message boards/minority observation, I'll repeat, applying that logic to message boards in general would allow us to dismiss a majority of Gleemax and ENWorld posters as a "vocal minority." If you can come up with a distinguishing characteristic instead of a laconic quip, then that's another story.
Maybe what you meant to say is that all messageboard users are a vocal minority and thus any online poll should not be used as basis of measurement to determine the success of 4E. In that case, all of the online polls conducted here, gleemax, and enworld could be false indicators. With that statement I'd agree wholwheartedly as by nature the population of an online poll is self selective.
Tell you what, let's start again.
Hi, I'm Forgottenprince, and though I'm 99% most likely sticking with 3.x/PRPG I hope you enjoy the D&D edition of your choice.
Have a nice day!
FP
#1 and #7. No question about it. My group and I have found the DnD we want to play for quite some time. One important point is that the game reads, for the DM, as more tactical than it is in play. When you play the game the DM is staring at a lot of nuts and bolts (mechanics) that are unfamiliar to him; The PCs are not. When the game is played it is decidedly familiar. The game really is much different at the table than it is while kicking back and reading the books.
Er, and no, I'm not incriminating myself in regards to any alleged ... books.
|
|
#3 and #4
Although I still consider 3.5 my favorite game.
I have only bought the 4th PHB and won't invest more cash in it.
As DM I will only DM 3.5 or PFRPG as the mechanics favor my gaming style more.
That said, as a player it is fun to play 4th even though it still has a lot of rough edges and problems.
But I am sure 4.5 or the "revised edition" will take care of these problems.
I wouldn't look too deeply into the nay-sayer posts. Message boards are notorious haunts of the vocal minority.
This is what I had gotten a sense of, but it still amazes me. Nearly 4 times the number of people haven't even tried a short playtest of the game, compared to those who have.
I'm a 6.
Love the way people dismiss others opinions just because they're on the internet. I'm not really that vocal about this subject, I may be in a minority, but I seriously doubt it's that small a minority.
Look bottom line, even 4venger fanatics sometimes let their guard down and admit 4e is basically a different game to any previous incarnation of the great game ... if that's true, as I honestly believe it is, then why assume many established fans are going to like the changes?
I suspect by moving so far from previous editions, followed by all their well publicised blunders of this year (GSL, D&DI, etc), WotC may be surprised how few people pick up next years core books.
#2.
I like what I'm reading in 4e, but Keep on the Shadowfell was really "meh" for me. I hope their adventures get better with time.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
#2.
I like what I'm reading in 4e, but Keep on the Shadowfell was really "meh" for me. I hope their adventures get better with time.
I think it would be interesting to run this poll again from the start, now that the game has been out for 3+ months and there have been more modules, etc. to play. I for one playtested the game for over nine months before June and didn't like it the whole way through. You left that out as an option.
4E is cool.Different, but I like it..reminds me of B/X D&D in many ways. As a DM I LOVE 4E.
KOTS was fairly lame. Then again, adventure design has NEVER been WOTCs strong suit, regardless of edition.
#5
But if they don't come up with more options soon I'll slide into a #6 simply because I got bored with what's available.
Oddly enough, 3rd ed. kept us *ridiculously* entertained for months when it came out, before we started drifting into the splatbooks.
|
I've been reading a lot of the threads about 4.0, and am interested what people have experienced before drawing their conclusions. So I'd like to do a simple poll. Checked out some online ones, didn't see any good ones, so I thought I'd do an unofficial one here. We can count up the results as we go.
For the sake of reading these quickly, please attempt to leave out the 'whys' and whatnots. Just include the number, or the line, that best fits your experience. Also, assume that the higher choices can include the lower ones. So if you've read the core books and some previews, you can pick from 4-6. If you've played the preview, regardless of whether you've read the books or not, go with 1-3.
Thanks! To start things off, I'm #2.
1. Played the Keep of Shadowfell preview, I like it.
2. Played the Keep of Shadowfell preview, I'm not sure.
3. Played the Keep of Shadowfell preview, I dislike it.4. Read the core books, I like it.
5. Read the core books, I'm not sure.
6. Read the core books, I dislike it.7. Read the online previews, I like it.
8. Read the online previews, I'm not sure.
9. Read the online previews, I dislike it.
Well for me it would be 3 and 6
thanks
#4
#4. Although I am playing it. I'm running The Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde with 4E. Just started, though, so really can not comment beyond the conversion which extraordinarily easy.
#6
4
#5
I am trying to stay open minded and i want to give a chance to D&D4, but i am not very enthusiastic, and i am actually at the border of #6.
(quoting myself, how psychologically interesting...)
Since then : #6.I read the books thouroughly, tried as a DM and a player, but that's not for me. Sorry...
#1 (though I was in the DM's seat) and #4.
#4... The rules are clearly better than 3,5.
Haven´t played KotS but with SOW we have a great time... Although it needs a lot of work.
5. Read the core books, I'm not sure.
I also played a preview adventure, but different one.
4
Still happy with 3.5, though, and the fun games I'm playing are all 3.5, so I'm in no hurry.
4. Same here, but won't be continuing with 3.5, Pathfinder or Monte Cooks Ultimate Might Books instead.
#1 and #4. Not going back to 3.x if I can help it. I think a poll like this on these boards is going to give a false reading since most of the 4e players have already left.
The reading ought to be more or less accurate for the current Paizo community. The gaming community at large, though? You're right. Not so much.
You need another category.
#10 - Haven't read it, Haven't tried it. Don't like it based on irrational hear-say!
(Yes, that is technically the same as #9 - but I am admitting that my prejudice is irrational and unfounded.)
#9 and #6
I dislike the new 4.0 rules so much I BORROWED the books rather then buy them. This is from someone who enjoyed Complete Champion mind you... ::sighs:: WotC thou haft forsaken thine fan-base...
I did that too...It's gone to the point where its a WOW board-game rather an actual rpg(even the artwork is similar).And to think I was expecting this to be even better than 3.5...I miss TSR I'll tell you that much
PS: Did anyone else think they would see "click for this ability on the specific menu" written somewhere in the books or is it just me? ;-p :-(