What will happen to 4th edition?

[Imaro]

So if any expects that I will ever yield an inch after being the guy that had nothing to do with starting it, they're sadly mistaken. Put down your weapons and go home.

Uhm... ok.

Fine, but you aren't buying it now, presumably you aren't playing it now, and presumably it is of no interest to you, yet here you are in a thread about the future of a game you could care less about! Its certainly true that you are welcome to post here, and I'd say you might even have something interesting to say about the actual thread topic, but I'm mystified as to why anyone would spend their time dissing a dead game. If you want to start a thread with the topic "All who were dissatisfied with 4e vent here" I'm happy to just not even open that thread...

I care about the future of the game in a sit back and see what happens to it sort of way, and for me that's enough to post my own thoughts on it and see if what I think comes to pass... What I don't get is if the OP wanted only positive opinions on the fate of 4e why that wasn't stated? It was a general question open to all and I'm sorry but you don't get to decide who should and shouldn't post in it...

Well, I'm not directing negativity at any other games. I'll be frank and say I've pointed out the shortcomings of previous editions of D&D in threads, in an illustrative way, not to complain about them or WotC for writing them, etc but just to explain how 4e was different. And yes, if you said that the negativity directed at 4e wasn't 'over the top' I would just put a few appropriate emoticons next to that and roll my eyes. You and I both know it was drastically over the top.

All I'm doing is posting my dissatisfaction and criticisms of the game... why do you have a right to do that, but I don't??

I'm just saying, whatever you call it, 5e or whatever, that there was a game in there somewhere that was satisfying to both sides, IF they would stop being dorks. Some people just seem to be unable to let go. Thanks a whole lot for that!

Kettle...

I don't have to 'reconcile' anything. You have no interest in reconciliation so why is that my job? I don't see any reason why the default expected solution can't be the one I like and its still possible to bend it in a number of ways without breaking it. If you want to meet on that common ground, give an inch.

Pot...

I see, you just want to h4te, not actually make any good faith effort to have a community where there's some dialog and some agreement on a common game system that we all could enjoy together. I've never suggested that it should be up to YOU to sit down and make the game you like out of a game you didn't like. I only stated that everyone should have been willing to enter into that process in good faith. I don't think that happened. 5e isn't the result of a good faith effort to bring together the elements of different editions that we could all enjoy together, it was nothing but a purge of the heretics. So no point was missed, except by you IMHO. Just remember, I offered the olive branch, you didn't take it.

LMAO!! What olive branch... that I should play 4e (See the post above this one)... It had it's chance and for whatever reason it's time is over how about you practice what you preach... but then again it's always easier to blame others.... at least I'm honest about my dislike of 4e and don't pretend I'm actually looking for a game to accomodate everybody when in fact I really just want the game I enjoy...

 

[Imaro]

My issues are already locked into the system it seems. Honestly, modularity can only do so much to a system that is deliberately designed to be antithetical to the style of play that I want to see supported.

And this is how many feel about 4e... and I'll just leave it at that.

What's wrong with all kobolds being sneaky and able to set a trap, for example? This is exactly the sort of thing that kobolds DO, so why shouldn't the mechanics of the game support that? Its not likely you will re-purpose that away, and if you decide to use kobold stat blocks to represent something else, why then clearly you'd be wanting to replace or ignore SOMETHING. Having had a vast amount of experience doing this stuff in 4e I assure you that repurposing monsters in various ways is not a big deal. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill, and on top of that there are all sorts of 'theme' monsters around in all editions that have very specific mechanics. 4e just pushed that down to the level of the more mundane monsters so that you could make them all feel special, instead of the AD&D 'bags of hit points' kobold, goblin, orc, hobgoblin, gnoll, bugbear, ogre, (hill giants actually have a special ability). Actually it wasn't even a 4e innovation, 3e did it too. Heck, even in 1e there were rules for adding special stuff to humanoids.

In my world they may not... In my world they may act more like piranha, swarming over enemies and wearing them down by sheer numbers and small attacks, lacking the cleverness for traps. So no setting a trap or being sneaky is what some kobolds do.

Secondly I am not making a mountain out of anything, I just stated my preference and why I like it... so please cool it with the hyperbole. 3e actually let you customize monsters in a myriad of ways so while they may have had some minor abilities built in (and even then it was usually skills or feats) you could create a totally different type of kobold if you wanted to by RAW... in 5e I find it trvially easy to add an ability to a monster and it's customized for my setting... again just a preference...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Uhm... ok.

I care about the future of the game in a sit back and see what happens to it sort of way, and for me that's enough to post my own thoughts on it and see if what I think comes to pass... What I don't get is if the OP wanted only positive opinions on the fate of 4e why that wasn't stated? It was a general question open to all and I'm sorry but you don't get to decide who should and shouldn't post in it...

Ah, so what you mean is you are so worried that ANY ELEMENT of D&D heaven forbid should ever accommodate the play style you disliked that you will be forever vigilant and make sure that every thread on the subject of 4e as a game is indelibly marked with your opinion.

All I'm doing is posting my dissatisfaction and criticisms of the game... why do you have a right to do that, but I don't??

I wasn't posting any criticisms or dissatisfactions. Well, I might have posted some thoughts on 4e and its shortcomings, but I never did so in the terms you seem to have, which smacked of "boy its a good thing we're rid of THAT!" If you were posting constructive criticism and it was addressed at 'what is the future of 4e' (IE we were talking about things we'd like to see change if there were some sort of follow-on game, and there were some comments like "boy it would have been nice if that was how 5e had been"). We weren't criticising 5e itself that I recall, except again in contrast to how we wanted to see things go in 4e. Remember the context here, 4e is out of print and unsupported. 5e is a current living product that DOES WHAT YOU WANT ALREADY. You are SAFE dude. You don't need to be carrying this torch anymore and any torch I might carry is illuminating a graveyard. Why do you care? If you want to post about what you think could be done to make 4e a better game and what you'd like to see WRT that then great, otherwise you're just peeing in our bathwater AFAICT.

Kettle...

Pot...

LMAO!! What olive branch... that I should play 4e (See the post above this one)... It had it's chance and for whatever reason it's time is over how about you practice what you preach... but then again it's always easier to blame others.... at least I'm honest about my dislike of 4e and don't pretend I'm actually looking for a game to accomodate everybody when in fact I really just want the game I enjoy...

Again, I don't think you appreciate the difference in context between my posting and your posting. I'm talking about might-have-beens, the past, and MAYBE at most what some industrious hobbyist might do in some future. You're griping about some past insult you suffered at the hands of WotC when they put out a game you didn't like when you have already torn it down so far it isn't even in print and the replacement game bears NO TRACE of what you didn't like. There's no pot and kettle here buddy. There's just you pissing on my grave. What gives? I mean a few constructive comments about what could be fixed or at least should have been fixed is great, but you basically have decreed ALL OF 4E SUCKS COMPLETELY, there isn't even one single aspect of it you haven't dissed. So why bother? Its not meaningful criticism at this point. Its just venting your peen.

 

[Haffrung]

Or, conversely, if you think that 5e is really a response to market demands why would you think 4e would be any different? WotC may have become better at measuring their market (in part because 4e players funded 2 years of research and development via DDI!), but the basic goal didn't change. Does anyone really think that, with 4e, WotC deliberately set out to build a system that only a few "squeaky wheels" were interested in?

On several occasions, the 5E devs have commented that the D&D had been focusing on hardcore players for too long (IIRC, 'for the last 10 years or so'). They referenced people who post on forums or really get into char op. And then they said that their broad polling and market research for 5E uncovered the fact that most players are quite casual, and aren't especially hung up on rules, or dedicated to optimizing characters. That they really just want a game to let them generate stories and table and not worry too much about what is written on the character sheets.

If you take those comments at face value (and of course, some people won't), WotC had for a long time let design be driven by the hardcore fraction of players who engage in online analysis and optimization. Their market research for 5E showed them they were better off targeting the larger, more casual market. So yes, their basic goal did change: make the system lighter and sell fewer items each to a larger number of players to broaden the player-base, rather than selling lots of books to a small number of hardcore players.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

And this is how many feel about 4e... and I'll just leave it at that.

I think you are just projecting. You hated 4e and you just cannot understand how anyone else could actually compromise because its not in your nature to do so. I showed you the olive branch, the "we should have all compromised on a mutually pleasing game" and you threw it back in my face. You can't even understand the concept apparently.

In my world they may not... In my world they may act more like piranha, swarming over enemies and wearing them down by sheer numbers and small attacks, lacking the cleverness for traps. So no setting a trap or being sneaky is what some kobolds do.

Secondly I am not making a mountain out of anything, I just stated my preference and why I like it... so please cool it with the hyperbole. 3e actually let you customize monsters in a myriad of ways so while they may have had some minor abilities built in (and even then it was usually skills or feats) you could create a totally different type of kobold if you wanted to by RAW... in 5e I find it trvially easy to add an ability to a monster and it's customized for my setting... again just a preference...

So, what you're saying is monsters shouldn't have any nice things because you might want to make them into different monsters and the horror that would ensue as you cross out the existing power they have and put in a different one would engulf the world! Get real! Seriously, this is the silliest objection I've ever heard in my life. If you want 'piranha kobolds' then you're going to have to make them, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD NOW WITH THE GENERIC BLAH KOBOLDS!!! lol. You've gained nothing except made everyone do more work to get what they want and deprived the monster of any interest.

Would you also insist that the ghoul doesn't paralyze because maybe you might want to make a lacedon that rips people's throats out instead?

 

[Imaro]

Ah, so what you mean is you are so worried that ANY ELEMENT of D&D heaven forbid should ever accommodate the play style you disliked that you will be forever vigilant and make sure that every thread on the subject of 4e as a game is indelibly marked with your opinion.

No, I mean what I said... I'm curious as to just how popular or un-popular 4e ends up being now that it is no longer the current edition (I'm betting it ends up as a pretty unpopular edition of D&D with little support but I could be wrong). Not sure where you're getting the rest of that stuff from.

I wasn't posting any criticisms or dissatisfactions. Well, I might have posted some thoughts on 4e and its shortcomings, but I never did so in the terms you seem to have, which smacked of "boy its a good thing we're rid of THAT!" If you were posting constructive criticism and it was addressed at 'what is the future of 4e' (IE we were talking about things we'd like to see change if there were some sort of follow-on game, and there were some comments like "boy it would have been nice if that was how 5e had been"). We weren't criticising 5e itself that I recall, except again in contrast to how we wanted to see things go in 4e. Remember the context here, 4e is out of print and unsupported. 5e is a current living product that DOES WHAT YOU WANT ALREADY. You are SAFE dude. You don't need to be carrying this torch anymore and any torch I might carry is illuminating a graveyard. Why do you care? If you want to post about what you think could be done to make 4e a better game and what you'd like to see WRT that then great, otherwise you're just peeing in our bathwater AFAICT.

I could ask you the same question... why do you care what I think or say about 4e? Why are you carrying the defenders torch in that graveyard? If you or the OP wanted this to be a thread that was only positive commentary on what will happen to 4e then why wasn't that made clear? I've give reasons for not liking 4e but as far as solving those issues... that ship has sailed, like you said I have a game that works better for me why would I be interested in creating some kind of Frankenstein game that is still probbably ill-suited to what I want out of play. Now if you were to ask me I could tell you what I did like about 4e... but be forewarned for me the bad outweighed the good at a fundamental level for me.

Again, I don't think you appreciate the difference in context between my posting and your posting. I'm talking about might-have-beens, the past, and MAYBE at most what some industrious hobbyist might do in some future. You're griping about some past insult you suffered at the hands of WotC when they put out a game you didn't like when you have already torn it down so far it isn't even in print and the replacement game bears NO TRACE of what you didn't like. There's no pot and kettle here buddy. There's just you pissing on my grave. What gives? I mean a few constructive comments about what could be fixed or at least should have been fixed is great, but you basically have decreed ALL OF 4E SUCKS COMPLETELY, there isn't even one single aspect of it you haven't dissed. So why bother? Its not meaningful criticism at this point. Its just venting your peen.

Where am I griping about an insult... I'm stating my opinions about 4e... just like everyone else is in the thread the only difference is mine aren't positive... Nowhere have I decreed all of 4e sucks (unless your declaration that your own issues are fundamental to 5e is also declaring ALL OF 5E SUCKS COMPLETELY). If you wanted to know what I did like about 4e you could have asked me... but you didn't instead you made incorrect assumptions.

 

[Imaro]

I think you are just projecting. You hated 4e and you just cannot understand how anyone else could actually compromise because its not in your nature to do so. I showed you the olive branch, the "we should have all compromised on a mutually pleasing game" and you threw it back in my face. You can't even understand the concept apparently.

Oh, I understand the concept... the problem is you keep claiming 4e is that game and I disagree...

So, what you're saying is monsters shouldn't have any nice things because you might want to make them into different monsters and the horror that would ensue as you cross out the existing power they have and put in a different one would engulf the world! Get real! Seriously, this is the silliest objection I've ever heard in my life. If you want 'piranha kobolds' then you're going to have to make them, JUST LIKE YOU WOULD NOW WITH THE GENERIC BLAH KOBOLDS!!! lol. You've gained nothing except made everyone do more work to get what they want and deprived the monster of any interest.

Would you also insist that the ghoul doesn't paralyze because maybe you might want to make a lacedon that rips people's throats out instead?

Dude calm down... I didn't insist on anything... if there had been abilities I would have changed them (of course the more extensive, ingrained and complicated the form said abilities take the harder that is to do), the part I don't agree with is that it is necessarily "weak" design which were the exact words I responded to. I then stated my preference but nowhere did I admonish the preferences of anyone else (Or make up imaginary versions of what was said by a poster).

I'm sure there will be quite a few DM's who are interested in and fine using the 5e kobolds as written... especially since they die in like what one or 2 rounds... but yes continue telling us about all the extra work I apparently made everyone do...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think it is high time that this debate come to a close Imaro. I think maybe you're a bit tone deaf here myself, but talking past each other is pointless. Given that 4e seems to have what almost amounts to the official hate of WotC I don't give it a really high chance of ever being revisited or supported even to the degree they now seem willing to support 3.5 (which isn't a LOT, but some). Oh well. I guess we'll see how things go. Once the new shiny wears off 5e maybe there will be a place left at the table for the fans of 4e, but I'm at this point pretty convinced that much of the community will never let off about it. Too bad for them I guess....

 

[Lwaxy]

Closed for obvious reasons.