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

[Vegepygmy]

But that's the fault of the Realms storyline, not the 4e mechanics.

This makes it sound as if you think the Realms storyline was developed without 4E's upcoming release in mind. But that would be absurdly naive, so I'm sure it's not what you meant.

To the OP, nope. I wouldn't have griped at all. I approved of most (if not all) changes 3.5 made to 3.0, and didn't mind buying new core books, etc. (My wife spends a lot more on scrapbooking junk than I will ever spend on my hobby. Heck, I'm glad to give money to the companies that make D&D stuff I enjoy. I want them to stay in business and produce more cool stuff!) The only thing I ever griped about when 3.5 was announced was when I heard Wizards had planned on doing a "3.5" before 3.0 was even released. To the extent that they may have known there were things that needed to be "fixed" in 3.0 and instead "saved" those errors to be fixed later so they could justify a 3.5 release, I think that's major BS. But aside from that, I didn't gripe about 3.5 at all.

 

[ferratus]

This makes it sound as if you think the Realms storyline was developed without 4E's upcoming release in mind. But that would be absurdly naive, so I'm sure it's not what you meant.

I agree that one of the goals for 4e Forgotten Realms was that it be compatible with some 4e flavour assumptions. However, most of the blowing up of the realms was because the story team genuinely felt that FR needed to be "fixed" in various ways, such as getting rid of xerox-earth cultures such as Maztica and Mulhorand, reducing the number of gods, clearing out the famous high-level NPC's, and making it seem "new" again.

But if one was to pick up the old gray box, you could easily convert it using 4e mechanics without changing the flavour text of the gray box. It will play mechanically differently at the game table, but I can't see any need to change the story.

 

[Zustiur]

Is there a purpose to threads like this, other than to perpetuate the echo-chamber mentality that sows community division in the first place? It's not something we haven't seen here dozens of times before.

It's a bit like alcoholic's anonymous. The more we talk about our issues, the easier they are to overcome. It's therapy.
On the other hand I cannot see any benefit to posts like this one of yours, which seem to turn up in every otherwise calm and mature discussion. You don't like these threads so why read them? And more, why post?

 

[The Little Raven]

The more we talk about our issues, the easier they are to overcome.

I'm curious as to why we needed a forked thread about 4e gripes when the thread it forked from is essentially a thread about 4e gripes with the additional qualifier of being constructive and adding an opinion on how you would have done things differently. This thread is just a watered down, pointless version of the thread it was forked from.

 

[Desert Hare]

I'm curious as to why we needed a forked thread about 4e gripes when the thread it forked from is essentially a thread about 4e gripes with the additional qualifier of being constructive and adding an opinion on how you would have done things differently. This thread is just a watered down, pointless version of the thread it was forked from.

I forked the post into this new thread to gauge if people would have griped if WotC fixed up all the problems with 3E and called it 4E rather than completely making a new system.

Actually, I thought I made that pretty clear in my original post.

 

[Obryn]

I do think the New Coke thing is an appropriate analogy. That seems to be how many 3E fans are reacting.

Tell me about it. Some 3e fans even make alts to troll web boards and start/perpetuate arguments.

-O

 

[Campbell]

I forked the post into this new thread to gauge if people would have griped if WotC fixed up all the problems with 3E and called it 4E rather than completely making a new system.

Actually, I thought I made that pretty clear in my original post.

I think there's value in a thread that asks that question. I also think that value is lessened when the question is only poised to those who are most likely to give an affirmative answer. I think this subject is something we can all talk about in a reasonable manner.

Personally, I doubt I would have griped per say. I don't think I would have purchased it. I'd probably be off playing Mutants and Masterminds 2e, New World of Darkness, Shadowrun 4e, the occasional 3.5 game, and delving into a number of indie RPGs.

 

[Loonook]

Honestly, most of the gripes and issues which occur at high level play come from a lack of restraint in magic... but wizards and clerics SHOULD be the big guys in the world. Now, denying any magic from warriors in a setting seems silly, and buffs are a part of fantasy (wearing various talismans, mojo bags, general gris gris sorts of items)...

But why must there be 20 different effects presented on every character, mass effects, etc. in easily accessible forms? It was a foolhardy thing, and it always seemed forced. Rituals and auras which gave bull's strength sort of effects? Yeah, I can support that.

I think that basic Int-based stacked effects would be fine to stop the issue... along with rituals which would allow for the casting of Mass (X) effects. A Barbarian able to call upon his totemic idols to grant his allies the grace of the lynx and the strength of the auroch by expending Rage and the use of some sort of focus/time?

Nah... that would just be flavorful and silly .

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[Cadfan]

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.

If we can stipulate this, then great. I'm a big fan of 4e as is, and I'd have been happy.

But I'm not sure you can just stipulate that. One of the big reasons that people are split about the edition is because they disagree about what counts as "everything that was causing problems" and what counts as "fixing" said problems.

 

[Dannager]

It's a bit like alcoholic's anonymous.

Alcoholic's Anonymous doesn't advise blaming your issues on the beer.