D&D 4E Poll about your interest in 4e

Scrivener of Doom · Sep 22, 2012

Own it, play it, love it.

So, why am I here?

I really like Paizo's stuff even though I prefer the 4E rules (but I am definitely open to 3.5E or Pathfinder in the future) simply because it's easier for me as a DM and it suits the playstyle of my players.

But I love reading Paizo's stuff.

The adventures and adventure paths are great for plot ideas, encounter ideas, new monsters, NPCs, maps, MAPs and art. The ancillary products like the flip mats and map packs (see the map theme at work?) are just great at the table and easier to use - even if less customisable - than dungeon tiles. I also like a lot about Golarion but I am a died-in-the-wool Realms DM since the Old Grey Box (but who actually prefers the 4E version - except for the maps).

I am no edition warrior: I pick and choose from all the editions and take what I like even if I use the 4E rules. My latest campaign involves a 4E world and rules inspired by 1E, 2E, 3.xE and 4E adventures (and three adventure paths) using 2E NPCs and monsters whose levels reflect their 1E hit dice.

It's all D&D to me.

dd.stevenson · Sep 25, 2012

Scrivener of Doom said:
It's all D&D to me.

I wish I could say I feel the same--I really do.

I think the 4E well was (for me) poisoned early on by this creative vision:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aLXuMb6WWw&list=UUhyvbrH8yS1K1GFEDBYrTlA&index=95&feature=plcp]Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition Presentation: Part 3 - YouTube[/ame]

That was back in early 2008, and at the time I was between groups and so I figured that looking forward I was going to be better off playing WoW. So that's what I did for awhile, and left off D&D entirely. Later, I did make the effort to check out one of the 4E handbook in borders and wasn't impressed... it just didn't feel the way I thought d&d should feel...

A few months later, I got my hands on a Pathfinder book and joined a PBP game.

So, long story short, I suppose it's most accurate to say I rejected 4E based on distaste for the early marketing and on a ten-minute flip through the PHB.

Scrivener of Doom · Sep 27, 2012

dd.stevenson said:
(snip) So, long story short, I suppose it's most accurate to say I rejected 4E based on distaste for the early marketing and on a ten-minute flip through the PHB.

So did I.

It wasn't until I thread Piratecat's thread about the ease of prepping for his 4E games that made me want to take a proper look.

I was in the middle of a 3.5E campaign and was generating a 16th-level blackguard. Despite all my 3.xE experience, it took me about 3 hours to get it just right - ie, so that it would last more than one round in a level-appropriate combat - and then I built the same NPC using 4E rules while teaching myself the same rules at the same time in 45 minutes.

I was sold.

So it's still all D&D to me.

Psion · Sep 28, 2012

Never bought any books, never played (did watch a few games, that's about it).

Very early on, I could tell they were actively scuttling things about the game that I find to be essential for D&D.

dagger · Sep 28, 2012

I owned the PHB and had a subscription to use the Character Generator. Our group played for about 16 months then dropped 4e. We now play PF and 1e. Basically back to what we did before trying 4e except it was 3.5 instead of PF.

Stouthart · Oct 2, 2012

I own the 4ED PHB, DMG, and MM and played it (as well as the later Essentials edition) a few times. I even bought my players copies of the 4ED PHB. It never really grabbed us. My old 3.5 group split into two and now I play in a Pathfinder campaign (Middle Earth, 4th age) and DM a 3.5 Forgotten Realms campaign.

Stouthart

DragonStryk72 · Oct 4, 2012

To my mind, the core problem was that they took all the Dungeons & Dragons parts out of D&D. Characters lost a lot of depth in 4e, which was exactly the opposite of the way it needed to go. There was almost no real chance of death for PCs unless you're just feeling vindictive as a GM, which removed all real tension to the combat.

Meanwhile, Pathfinder changed things almost completely. They made base classes like Fighter really interesting to take again, with archtypes that allowed for variant builds in every class, bringing back old creatures, and even some new ones. The Adventure Paths themselves were a marvel, a complete campaign in a box. The APs even came with Player Guides that gave the PCs reasons to be involved with the group and the campaign.

Paizo does exactly what a game company should do, they support their product with quality and care, while Wizards churns out books that are pretty blatantly there to try and separate you from your money with little real value.

Bellona · Oct 6, 2012

I bought the PHB and FRCS for 4e, despite having misgivings about the system. Shortly thereafter, the differences between 4e and previous editions annoyed me too much and I dropped the idea of running any 4e games. I do participate in a sporadic 4e campaign run by someone else, but it's not because of any joy in the system.

On the other hand, I'm currently - and happily - running two Pathfinder (with some dashes of 3.5, particularly FR) campaigns, and have three other 3.5/PF on the backburner. I'm also playing in two other sporadic 3.5/PF campaigns.