[4E +] Dear wizards of the coast,

[jephlewis]

Well, not much to say other than that I agree with a lot of what you are saying- as do 99% of the people on these boards.

Glad you like it, but, if anything, the polls here would suggest otherwise

No they don't. These are not the WOTC boards.

99% THats a funny number.

OK, 99% is just a bogus flamebait number.

Okay. You know, when dicebox said this, I kinda took it in the same vein as someone saying, "it's the best thing since sliced bread!", i.e., you know, a very positive, not to be taken literally statement. In fact, i'm 99% sure that's what he meant.
Nobody really thinks dicebox meant that number literally, do they?

Overall, I am not a fan, but here is what I do like:
<snip good points>
Things that I am glade were included, but not the implementation
- Action Points
- Healing Surges

I've noticed at least one thread about action points, so it would seem you're not the only one.
Is there anything you are hopeful for, regarding 4E?

Jeph, your accolades sound premature. Exhaustive reading and screeding is all well and good, but there's something to actually playing that is very telling.
I was all set up to be the gushing fanboy myself, but man playing it has just gotten me more and more sensitive to its shortcomings.

That is very true! Perhaps the whitespace in the books will begin to cause problems once I play it, eh?

But seriously, what do you like about 4E mechanically and/or the way it's laid out? For example, do like the way powers are in the appropriate class sections?

What are you hopeful for? For example, are you hopeful for any particular campaign settings?

WHOA!!! Saving throw versus melodrama!!!
HORRIFIED??? Did the evil sith in the book come out and scare you with their BAB. Were you horrified at their lack of powers which would make the jedi as powerful as a protocol droid? (After all the Jedi SHOULD be balanced to a protocol droid). Or was it.. yes the worst... this must have been horrifying... they say a square is equal to 5 feet instead of simplifying it to 1 square!!! You mean diagonal movement SHOULD cost more! Truly the Great Old one had his hand in creating Star Wars saga!

I *rolls dice* got a 6; made my save! [I took the "different strokes" feat multiple times, and we houseruled it so it stacks!]

Soooo Mournblade, what do you like about 4E? Do you, for example, like that every class has at will, encounter, and daily powers?

What are you hopeful for? For example, are you looking forward to a modern or post apocalyptic setting with 4E based rules?

I lurv you!

No need to blush good sir, I get that all the time [mostly from women, when they've been drinking a lot]!

Sometimes I feel bad for ya Scott, because it's like you're forced to play 'good cop-bad cop', except it's just you. So you end up praised and criticized, sometimes in the same thread. It's weird, man. *rolls natural 20 on diplomacy* The positive thing we can take home from these experiences is that roleplayers are passionate and give lots of feedback!

Keep up the good work, man, and don't let the suits or the interwebz bring you down.

 

[delericho]

Well, not much to say other than that I agree with a lot of what you are saying- as do 99% of the people on these boards.

Closer to 60% at best, if the polls here are to be believed.

Going back and looking at "the missing link" that is SWSE was both intriguing and horrifying. You can see the parallels and thought process that went into 4E, but at the same time, you realize what 4E could have been had they not gone the extra mile to streamline the ruleset- and it wouldnt have been anywhere as pretty as it is now.

It was like looking at Frankenstein, or some alien-human hybrid. I realized just how far the system had come and really, for the first time, just how akward and challenging the 3.X rules really were.

Now, was it really necessary to so vehemently attack the older edition? Especially when SWSE is such a great game?

Anyway, things I like about 4e (despite not being a fan):

- Explicit class roles. I think they're maybe a little too rigid, and maybe a little too much is made of them, but I think the concept is very solid.

- p. 42. Probably over-rated, but a good thing nonetheless.

- The encounter design methods, and the solo/elite/normal/minion split. This is probably the highlight of 4e for me. Fantastic!

- Differing levels of monsters in the MM (that is, Orcs at different levels). This was attacked when MM4 came out (for 3.5e), but turned out to be immensely useful. Good to see it has continued.

- Skill Challenges, or at least they would be if they ever fixed the math. The concept has already been lifted for my SWSE campaign, and will be incorporated into future 3.5e campaigns I run.

Unfortunately, these are counterbalanced by a number of things I don't like, and a handful of things I really dislike, but this isn't the thread for those.

 

[lutecius]

I disagree with most of the OP's points but it's really a matter of preference so there's not much more to say.

Overall, I am not a fan, but here is what I do like:

1. XP Costs gone
2. No level drain
3. Removing most non racial abilities from Race.
4. Unified Saving Throw progression with initial class bonus
5. Heroic Tier multiclassing (for the most part)
6. Passive Skill Checks
7. Rituals (for the most part)
8. Feywild and Shadowfell
9. Spellcasters are balanced.
10. Saves as Defense
11. class options (E.g, Brawny Rogue, Trickster Roguel )
12. More starting hit points and how con modifies hit points.

My list is pretty close to yours.
I may not agree on #5, though. I think tiers are an great improvement over prestige classes which were somewhat messy, but i hate how restrictive multiclassing has become.
As for #9, I like that spellcasters are more focused and balanced at low and high levels. I just whish spells hadn't been reduced to damage and movement effects.

Okay. You know, when dicebox said this, I kinda took it in the same vein as someone saying, "it's the best thing since sliced bread!", i.e., you know, a very positive, not to be taken literally statement. In fact, i'm 99% sure that's what he meant.
Nobody really thinks dicebox meant that number literally, do they?

No, it's really not the same thing as saying "I love it with every part of my body" or even "it's the best thing, evah", which could be interpreted as "for me, it's the best dnd/rpg yet".
Even if that number wasn't meant literally, it's implying that an overwhelming majority of posters here loves the game and ignoring the many posts critical of 4e. Or, like others said, just flamebait.

 

[avin]

So far I'm inclined to change all my games from 3.5 to 4E.

Things I dislike:

- Lack of out of combat magic for Wizards.
- Solid fluff explanation(s) for Healing Surges.
- Cartoon network art, anatomy is gone.

 

[Greg K]

I may not agree on #5, though. I think tiers are an great improvement over prestige classes which were somewhat messy, but i hate how restrictive multiclassing has become.

What I like is that you can no longer take a new class and automatically gain a bunch of new armor and weapon proficiencies, thus avoiding taking the appropriate feats. I also like how only your initial class gives your character a save bonus, thus avoiding the stacking of good saves and , again, the save feats.
This, imo, makes one's initial class more important and is better reflective of the time they spent to acquire their initial class skills and someone trying to learn a new class between adventuring and traveling.

Now, what I don't like about heroic tier multiclassing (remember, I said I like it for the most part), is that, iirc (I haven't looked at the books in months), certain class abilities are off limits.

As for the tiers, I am not a fan. I don't like Paragon Paths or Epic Destinies. (Then again, I wasn't a big fan of 3e prestige classes-I prefer class variants and hybrid classes).

As for #9, I like that spellcasters are more focused and balanced at low and high levels. I just whish spells hadn't been reduced to damage and movement effects.

I completely agree. However, I wrote that I liked that spellcasters were toned down not that liked what has become of spells. Maybe, I should edit my original post to be clear

 

[Greg K]

Closer to 60% at best, if the polls here are to be believed..

Actually, about 50% at best, if the polls here are to be believed (and only if we give a 7-8% margin of error in favor of 4e) . 58% (approximately) of the participants had either gone back to previous editions or did not switch.

 

[Mournblade94]

What are you hopeful for? For example, are you hopeful for any particular campaign settings?

I am hopeful for Dark Sun. the rules system might work for Dark Sun, and they wouldn't have to shoehorn the rules into the campaign setting like they tried to do with the Forgotten Realms.

I *rolls dice* got a 6; made my save! [I took the "different strokes" feat multiple times, and we houseruled it so it stacks!]

Soooo Mournblade, what do you like about 4E? Do you, for example, like that every class has at will, encounter, and daily powers?

Powers is generally one of the things that turns me off to 4th edition.

What are you hopeful for? For example, are you looking forward to a modern or post apocalyptic setting with 4E based rules?

I am hopeful for very little with 4th edition. there are plenty of rules systems out there. I am sure True20, or HERO can do modern or Post apocalyptic much better than 4th edition. Wraith Recon already covers the modern from what I hear. just replace guns with crossbows. The anachronistic setting is already published.

I do think 4th edition might be a good set of rules for Dark Sun, perhaps if they release Dark Sun I would be inclined to visit 4th edition again. At the very least, I would look at Dark Sun to convert to another system like HERO if 4th edition gets worse than it is.

I played 4th edition for 3 months. I could find very little other than skill challenges and action points that I liked.

 

[glass]

In your opinion, how could I communicate my thoughts and ideas in my OP without it coming across as a "rant"?

I think the key word was "long", not "rant". Brevity is the soul of wit, and it is also the soul of getting people to read your post.

And yes, I realise the irony of saying that at the beginning of this post.

Wall of text; would more spaces in between blocks of text help?

They wouldn't make the post any shorter (quite the opposite, in fact).

Or perhaps I should have added, "so, what are you just now liking about it"?

That might have helped too.

You know, I never got to play spelljammer, but I had two of the boxed sets, some adventures, and at least one of the old 'monstrous compendium' inserts for it.

I had some spelljammer stuff too, but never played it much. I'm torn between wanting WotC to release something, and not wanting to wait until 2010 at the earliest, and likely much longer.

Nobody really thinks dicebox meant that number literally, do they?

94.3% of statistics are made up on the spot.

Actually, about 50% at best, if the polls here are to be believed (and only if we give a 7-8% margin of error in favor of 4e) . 58% (approximately) of the participants had either gone back to previous editions or did not switch.

Deciding not to switch is not the same as thinking 4e is not a good game. And, polls like that are likely to be somewhat self-selecting.


glass.

 

[Alikar]

Things I dislike:

- Lack of out of combat magic for Wizards.

May I point you to PHB chapter 10: Rituals.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So far I'm inclined to change all my games from 3.5 to 4E.

Oddly enough, that is one of the things that I've found a lot of 4Ed non-adopters like myself say is a problem: We'd have tried to do so if the game were more easily convertible.

In point of fact, the ease of conversion from 1Ed to 2Ed, and from 2Ed to 3Ed was one of the reasons I and the players I game with so quickly adopted the newer editions (99% conversions within 3 months for each previous revision).

4Ed, OTOH, was different enough that- not only were there press releases saying we'd be better off not converting but instead starting anew- persons like myself who tried going through at least the mental exercise of attempting to do so were amazed that the press releases were dead on.

Simply put, a lot of us didn't want to start over- that was a burning hoop we weren't going to jump through. It wasn't that we were blissfully enamored of 3Ed's mechanics, per se, but rather that that we didn't want to ditch our campaigns or wait a year or more to get all of the books required to overhaul an old campaign to 4Ed. "Ditch or retcon" just wasn't an option for many of us.

I hope that when 5Ed rolls around that the designers keep this in mind, and make that edition's transition easy from either 4Ed, previous editions, or both. (IOW, either don't change the rules so radically OR come up with some kind of conversion manual.)