What do you think so far?

[Just Another User]

Need more input, with a tendency to "meh."
Everything I see until now don't thrill me at all.

New skill system? I don't like it.
balance by encounter? I don't like it.
the basic setting "point of lights"? I don't like it.
change to demons/devils? Meh!

the only thing that even partially interested me until now was the article about martial ability as a power source and that is certainly not enough.

My general impression until now? It will not be D&D. It could evn be a good game, maybe even a good RPG game but I don't think it should be called D&D, as for me by this moment until something show me wrong I'll start calling it "4dventure!" (or 4d! in short).

 

[delericho]

as for me by this moment until something show me wrong I'll start calling it "4dventure!" (or 4d! in short).

I don't think I like that. Years ago, before there was a d20 system as such, White Wolf produced a very excellent game called "Adventure!". Don't you think your proposed name is a bit close to that one?

 

[Minicol]

Now that we have fair bit of info, what do you guys think about the new edition?

Not enough info, but definitely not thrilled.

 

[Just Another User]

I don't think I like that. Years ago, before there was a d20 system as such, White Wolf produced a very excellent game called "Adventure!". Don't you think your proposed name is a bit close to that one?

It is not my proposed name, it is WotC's (I don't know if you remember but it appeared in the "Big Hype" webpage the day before the big announcement.)

 

[PatheticWretch]

I almost couldn't be more excited by the changes I've heard of so far. I'm a big fan of Star Wars Saga if that's a preview of things to come.

I love the fact that you can keep chasing the bad guys even if you're "out" of spells, rather than stopping and resting for eight hours. "Oh, look, there's the bad guy, we're hot on his heels, but we've got to stop and rest...overnight."

I love how every class is getting special powers to use per day/encounter/at will, and how all classes will have resource management. I love fighting more opponents, rather than a single powerful creature. I love the class "roles" that several different classes can fill equally.

Just go down the list of announced changes, and I'm absolutely thrilled with it. I've become quite the fanboi.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

When it comes down to it, they've told us almost nothing of substance. The blog post "teasers" have so far focused on either describing play while avoiding actual mechanics discussion, or talking about intentions without talking about specifically how those intentions are going to come about.

Also, everything comes with the disclaimer, "we might change this before release!"

How can I make a judgement without good information?

 

[Ahnehnois]

I see some good changes (mostly in the simplification of rules and giving casters at-will abilities), but more bad changes. It seems like a lot of things are change for the sake of change. The demon/devil changes I dislike. 30 levels? Why? And I am vehemently against Bo9S style "spells for fighters". Overall, I don't like the changes I've heard, but it's still preliminary.

 

[Michael_R_Proteau]

I put need more input. I like the stated goals of the redesign, and really like the Saga rules, so when I heard it was a significant preview of 4E I was happy. That said, the glimpses of 4E we have had so far do not seem reminiscent of Saga and to me do not execute the stated goals in a manner I lie, so I am hesitant.

-M

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm pretty concerned with the "bigger, badder, better" syndrome.

So far, we have what appears to be full round attacks during a surprise round (it actually looks like full round attacks can be done as standard actions in 4E).

We have multiple non-movement actions by players every round.

We have an ability that grants +2 to saves and also grants an additional save when activated (unless the entangle itself did that, but unlikely).

And winning a fight without breaking a sweat.

One attacker both attacking and giving an ally a bonus to attack with the same maneuver.


All of this sounds a bit "bigger, badder, broken" to me. Not that it is broken, but it has the sound of making the DMs job real difficult.

The more options the PCs have every round, the more options the DM has to remember and account for. Plus, it is likely that the NPCs will have more options each round as well. That could be a lot of bookkeeping.

I'm not judging this yet, but I am observing that it's sounding a lot like Bo9S on steroids.

I used to have several players who forgot to add +1 to their AC for the Dodge feat and we even made up 3x5 cards to remind them. I currently have a player in my group who forgets to flank. All of the options available in a round of 4E combat might just swamp him, regardless of class. Just because playtesters at WotC who live and breathe this stuff every single day can easily handle 3 or more actions per PC and NPC per round and buffs to fellow allies every round does not mean that every player out there will be able to easily handle it.

The introduction of swift actions and immediate actions added a level of additional "worthwhile" actions per round into 3.5. However, they were somewhat few and far between for most classes. For 4E, it sounds like their equivalent will become commonplace every round for most likely, every class.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

How can I make a judgement without good information?

The rest of humanity seems to manage...