4th ed -- yeah, but are you actually ready to leave behind the 3rd?

[Drowbane]

Let's see.... do I still have oodles of character concepts I wanna try out, using the current ed.?

Hmmm.... yup.

Am I interested in spending hundreds of dollars on books that will essentially do what the stuff I already spent hundreds of dollars on does?

Hmmm... nope.

Sorry, I'm not buyin 4e. Not now, not in a year, and (so far) not ever.

what he said.

4e would have to amazingly good for me to even thumb through the pages.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I didn't vote, because there's no option for those who abandoned D&D between 3.0 and 3.5, and have no intention of ever coming back.
[/IMG]

Ditto.

 

[megamania]

The point has already been made but- there is so much yet discovered / played in 3.5 why switch?

I just can't imagine what could make 4.0 any better.

 

[wingsandsword]

I just can't imagine what could make 4.0 any better.

This is the key part.

When 3e was announced, there was trepidation because I know myself and my gaming friends (IRL) feared it could get worse. However, we knew the system could get better. We already were playing a heavily houseruled version of AD&D (with some houserules that closely resembled what would become standard rules in 3e like ability score improvements with level).

When 3.5 was announced, many felt it was way too early for a new edition, but people did see that there were some big holes in the system that needed to be plugged (some domain abilities, heal/harm) and some core classes needed some significant reworking to be less front-loaded, and the game could use some tweaking.

However, I just now don't see the call for a 4th edition. The D&D games I play now are quite close to the RAW (albeit with a selective use of non-core materials), so it's not like I want or need a complete overhaul of the rules. I don't look at the 3.5 rules like I did with 3.0 and think that there are just certain character creation options that are so overwhelmingly powerful that you just have to take them, or spells or other rules elements that are so out of balance that they need another tweaking.

Simply put, just churning out another edition is not the guaranteed goldmine some people here think it will be. Remember that when 3e was announced, there was a lot of skepticism, especially at first, and WotC insiders have told us that they were afraid it might not take off. Remember how many gamers left AD&D at 2nd Edition, or never upgraded? A whole new edition of a game with as passionate and finicky a fanbase as D&D is a big deal, and it's easier than you might think to make a game that won't sell.

Just putting the "D&D" name on any fantasy-themed game won't make it sell big. It will sell some, yes, but the long-term sustained sales by dedicated customers that fuels something like D&D require a quality product.

 

[Driddle]

I'm one of the 'non-responsive types' for this poll, 'cause I didn't see what i feel.

Hate to tell ya this, but option No. 5 was the humane goofball trap. You always had the choice of not picking anything at all.

Now you'll be tagged with an electronic tracker and released back into the wild to frolick with other goofballs.

 

[Edgewood]

I personally could care less about 4th edition at this stage of the "game". I have no intention of attempting to reinvest into a system I have already sunk a good portion of my hard earned dollars. On the flip side of the coin, I won't hold anything against WotC for bringing out a new edition. It's their business. If they bring it out in 2007 or 2008, then 'meh'. Good luck with all that.

I'll remain with 3.5 in the meantime.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

This is the way I look at it - a new edition is just another RPG.

I play a different system for my primary game system. I play other RPGs as secondary systems. Since about a years after 3.0 hit the shelves that secondary system was D&D. I didn't care for 2nd edition, so before that point it was 1st ed D&D, or Rolemaster or Mythus or ....... So when 4th comes out, I'll read the rules (I love the bookstores with chairs that let you just sit and read, that was how I finally read Exalted). If the game system strikes me as a good one, and better than what I am currently using, I'll consider switching.
But, I have a huge library of 3.x books. More ideas/classes/settings ect than I could use in a decade. And I still get the new stuff that interests me. In my evaluation of 4th ed, not only does the system have to do the kind of things I want it to do better than what I use now, it will have to compete with the "potential roleplaying ideas" (if you will) inherent in all the extra stuff I already have for 3.x . That would almost have to be a system as good or better than what I play as my primary RPG now (which fits my approach and playstyle perfectly).

So all in all I'm interested in 4th, and follow the discussions, but I truly doubt that I will switch to playing it, unless it is a minor gaming miracle.
But then I felt that way about 3rd, but the multiclassing system combined with feats and prestige classes sold me. And it would take something that is that much of an evolution/change that would make me strongly consider 4th.

 

[librarius_arcana]

I will buy 4th ed, just to check it out if nothing else, if it's good I'll play it, if not (ie, more mini based) I'll just stick with 3.5,

But I have hopes

 

[Ranger REG]

Isn't the current SRD pretty much "core only"? Really, the more you stray from core, the less valuable the SRD becomes. So I think pogre is saying he'd only get the core rules for 4E and would be dissapointed if there was no SRD for it.

For me, "core only" is the material from the first three D&D rulebooks (PHB, DMG, and MM1).

The SRD also provide expanded material including those from Expanded Psionics Handbook, Deities & Demigods, and Epic-Level Handbook

Even the MSRD went beyond "core," providing material extracted from Urban Arcana, Menace Manual, and d20 Future.

 

[Heathansson]

I'll buy a PHB 4e IF I can't find a group of surly 3.5 holdouts to game with.
There's other stuff I need to think about buying.