3E to 4E Gripes (Was: What Did You Want Fourth Edition to be Like?)

[Desert Hare]

Forked from: What Did You Want Fourth Edition to be Like?

If WotC had fixed the half dozen things that people often site as being seriously wrong with 3.5 and put it out as 4th edition, then people would be griping that it really is just 3.75 and not a truly "new edition." We'd have twice the griping that we had when 3.5 came out regarding Wizards just wanting to take money from people, etc.

When talk of a Fourth edition came out, most people around here said they thought it was too soon, but those who thought they had been ripped off to a large extent with 3.5 said they would be cool with it if it the new edition was truly different. That's what it is. It's the same core principles, only it's different and in many ways more modern. What's wrong with that? That's what people said they wanted.

Actually I'd have been one person that wouldn't have griped. What about the rest of you that have since stayed with 3E? Would you be griping about money woes or that it wasn't 'new enough'?

I personally know for a fact that I would have been happier with a 4E that would have stayed as true to 3E as possible, but while fixing everything that was causing problems and the bog down of higher level play.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

My biggest gripe is the loss of fluff.

I can (and have) go (gone) back to 2nd edition and convert virtually everything over. Want to run a drow adventure? Convert Menzoberranzan. Want more Forgotten Realms stuff? Just convert the old adventures.

I can't do that with 4e. It is a great fantasy game, but it's not an extension of the mythos and story that has been D&D. I don't believe it "isn't D&D", as it is a fantasy RPG with most of the elements. However, it's not "the same but different". It is different. Some embrace that, with the slaying of the sacred cows. Others, such as myself, see it as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I miss those old concepts, fluff elements, and so on. I miss them enough not to convert so that I won't have to miss them.

If I play 4e, it's like playing a different game (for me). I don't bother trying to blend the old fluff and the new game, as they've intentionally changed SO much. I play it as a fun "in-between" cross of older D&D and Warhammer. It's more of a "board game" to me than a RPG, because I cling to the old roleplaying history, themes, stories, cultures, etc that are in existence, and use them in my 3rd ed gaming. When I play 4e it is about kicking butt while using my powers tactically. That's fun, but it's missing what I've stated above.

 

[ProfessorPain]

I think 3E created a lot of divisions between gamers, since it placed so much weight on rules mastery. But in my opinion, they made a mistake by releasing an edition that catered to 3Es critics; and neglected its champions. Just from a marketing stand point. I believe they fragmented their own market. Because 3E is supported by so much 3rd party material and open license, it wasn't like older editions. They couldn't just switch like they did from 2E to 3E; because 3E has a whole industry behind it, and there is nothing to stop companies like Paizo from repackaging it and making it their flag ship. What they did was create a game that 3E critics love, but 3E fans hate. Neither is worse. They just cater to different tastes. But by cutting it down that line so clearly, they made certain many of the 3E fans will go back to a game that is mechanics heavy (which is their preference) and has a flexible multi-classing system. Not saying 4E won't be succesful; but this does feel more like the days of 1E and 2E when you had real alternatives to the current edition. In 3Es heyday there really wasn't much serious competition, since everyone was riding the d20 gravy train.

 

[MrGrenadine]

I personally know for a fact that I would have been happier with a 4E that would have stayed as true to 3E as possible, but while fixing everything that was causing problems and the bog down of higher level play.

Yeah, me too.

 

[doctorhook]

How did I want 4E to be? Pretty much the way it is.

There's no denying it, I'm a fan.

 

[Wik]

Well... get ready for flames. I'm sure they're gonna happen on this thread. Just a matter of time.

My biggest gripe was the shift entirely to combat, the feel that non-combat has been ignored - except for a shrunken skill system. In essence, the classes all feel more or less the same outside of a fight.

That, by the way, is obviously an "in my opinion", so 4e fans, don't burn me at the stake.

I also dislike how it seems like the spellthief will never make an appearance in 4e. *sigh*

 

[Charwoman Gene]

My biggest gripe is people failing to read the op and using inappropriate threads to whine about the same-old same-old complaints that are also applicable to 2e-3e.

I would NOT have whined about a cleanup. It's what i was expecting. I was expecting no major rules changes though.

 

[xechnao]

I personally know for a fact that I would have been happier with a 4E that would have stayed as true to 3E as possible, but while fixing everything that was causing problems and the bog down of higher level play.

How would they have fixed 3e? Do somathing like Pathfinder? If not what? Try to rebalance the thousands of feats and spells on a basis of multi-class builds and across all levels?

I do not believe Wotc could have fixed the balance problems of 3e if it wanted to provide something more than a handbook with a very limited number of multi-class builds.

Paizo on the other hand focuses on adventures. So if you like 3e I would think that the Paizo model is a better one to handle with it than the Wotc model.

 

[Desert Hare]

Paizo on the other hand focuses on adventures. So if you like 3e I would think that the Paizo model is a better one to handle with it than the Wotc model.

I'm not liking how Pathfinder is shaping up. The Beta is practically a new system (like the classes, I see much of the changes as uneccessary). I'm liking what Kerrick is doing with his Project Phoenix redo.

 

[ferratus]

My biggest gripe is the loss of fluff.

I can (and have) go (gone) back to 2nd edition and convert virtually everything over. Want to run a drow adventure? Convert Menzoberranzan. Want more Forgotten Realms stuff? Just convert the old adventures.

I can't do that with 4e. It is a great fantasy game, but it's not an extension of the mythos and story that has been D&D.

I don't understand this at all. My entire campaign converts old 1e and 2e materials, with all the fluff of the adventures intact. I'm finding it a lot less work to convert than it was for 3e, simply because NPC and monster creation is so much simpler. I'm not converting any of the text, just the monster stats, and there have been nothing that doesn't make perfect sense in 4e yet. Could you explain why you can't convert Menzoberranzan to 4e, or Hellgate Keep, or the Ruins of Zhentil Keep or any of the other 2e FR modules?