Pros and Cons

[Asmor]

Just play it.

I've heard many stories of stubborn 3e players being swayed by actually playing the game.

There's a full adventure available for free that takes characters from levels 1 to 3, and quick start rules, available here on Wizards' website.

You can download the character builder and make characters of up to 3rd level for free.

And there's your reason to play. Because you can. Because it's free. And love it or hate it, you at least owe it to yourself to try it.

 

[Rechan]

I'd suggest using the character builder to make some diverse pregens, present them to your players, and play.

I suggest this because it gives you an idea of the system, AND, I think that players should play the game before they pick their powers.

 

[Bumbles]

Buy the Starter box. If you enjoy it, great, if not, well, it's less than 20 bucks and an evening.

For four players, that's less than one movie.

 

[MercuryCrash]

p n c

For me a group of us played through a module (Keep) and learned 4e together. It seemed after a couple of sessions everyone was in the flow and it was an easy transition. 4e is definitely easier especially for the DM. If you have played the D&D minis new edition, 4e combat seems a bit like team minis to me. There's a huge heroic factor early on that I notice the most in the change for new players. I think the individualism for characters is hindered slightly. I suggest jumping in and committing to a module it worked for us and it allowed everyone there to decide for themselves.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It is probably well-nigh impossible to get an unbiased opinion on the thing. I'd take everything everyone is telling you here with at least a fistfull of salt, both positive and negative.

Best way to see if you'll like it?

Run your group through WotC's free intro adventure:

Keep on the Shadowfell + Quick Play Rules Totally Gratis

If they're on board, and you're on board, keep going.

If they're objecting, or you're objecting, maybe jump to Pathfinder instead.

I've found this to be a fairly decent predictor of whether or not a group is into 4e:

If your group is thinking 3e is getting a little old and crusty around the edges, 4e will likely be what they're looking for: a breath of fresh air, a drink of water in the desert, and a gem amongst glass.

If your group likes playing 3e and thinks that it's totally fine, 4e will likely be like expecting to bite into a cake and instead biting into a cake filled with scorpions and maggots and maybe severed fingers.

I'm being hyperbolic, of course, but if your group is happy where you are, there's no need to change and it'll be a tough pill to swallow, and if you're not happy where you are, it'll be probably exactly the kind of change you're looking for, different enough while being similar enough.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Pros:
1) Better class balance.
2) Classes balanced at every level, so you no longer have to play from level 1 to X to maintain balance.
3) All classes have the same amount of 'once per X' time-limited resources so the fighters are no longer boosted by keeping going while the wizards need to rest.
4) Low level wizards can do something magic every round, no more crossbow wizards.
5) Monsters easier to build.
6) Combat more interesting and varied. Both PCs and monsters have lots of flavourful powers.
7) Game simplified, faster. Fewer rules.
8) Easier to houserule, expected numbers at each level clearly spelled out, magic items easier to remove for example.
9) Dedicated healer no longer necessary.
10) No longer possible for players to win at the char gen stage, through system mastery.

Cons:
1) Game simplified, dumbed down.
2) Battlegrid necessary.
3) No longer possible for players to win at the char gen stage, through system mastery.

 

[Nimble Goodbarrel]

Wow. Everyone thank you so much for all of the input.

Great idea about the free mod. Love it and going to try and run it soon.

I do feel that 3e is getting old and crusty. Not very excited about playing. Mostly because everything takes so long to get through.

Doug> Long live the Glasgow Rangers.

Does anybody hate it and feels that 3e is better? and.... why are mini's necessary?

 

[Rechan]

Also, I will tell you this, and you should tell your players this: 4e does not read good. The books are like textbooks; they have formula and lots of rules, and very little fluff/story to the core books. Reading the core books can really make you feel BORED, and the game looks boring (a common complaint).

Playing it is a much different experience than reading it.

why are mini's necessary?

Because of the majority of abilities are measured in squares (on a grid), and deal with movement. The system revolves around the notion of tactical combat, placement, movement, etc. For instance, if a player uses an area affect, how do you determine how many are in the effect if you DON'T use minis?

If you're going to run KotS, I could make some (serious) suggestions. KotS is not a great adventure (it has the bare bones of a Good adventure), but it's very bogged down. It's best if you retool it to suit your tastes, than to play it right out of the box. At least, that's IMO.

 

[ppaladin123]

Once again I need help. I am trying to convince my other players that we should switch from 3e to 4e. But since I don't know too much about it, and my group doesn't know anything at all. I was wondering if I get some quick pros and cons. What are you favourite things about 4e? What was changed that you didn't like.

As always your help is very appreciated.

Thank you so much.

Nimble
Toronto, ON

I really like 4e but I think you are putting the cart before the horse here. If you don't know much about 4e then it is too early to be trying to convince anyone to switch to it. Play KotS (free as mentioned) and see if you guys like the general feel. Discuss it with the other players/DMs. Be prepared for disagreements. Decide what you want to do from there.

 

[Bumbles]

and.... why are mini's necessary?

They aren't strictly necessary. There are many substitutes you can use instead.