A reason why 4E is not as popular as it could have been

[Dannyalcatraz]

And I would bet there's SOMETHING about the game that--if changed--even you would think is too much of a deviation to be called D&D.

Example: Even though D&D is my favorite game, HERO is my favorite system. And using it, I can do an amazing approximation it 1Ed-3.5Ed D&D.

But I still wouldn't call it D&D- as the PCs gained XP, there would be no semblance of a class/level game, for instance. Alignments (and everything linked to them) would be a massive add-on...as would creature types, etc. And the magic system? Given the D.I.Y. nature of HERO system, items, spells, psionics, SLAs and the like would be a LOT more varied. In fact, you might not see anything resembling iconic spells at all.

It may start like a D&D game...but it won't finish like one.

 

[billd91]

But if they had decided to support 4E, once the resources were devoted to it there would have been no turning back. And they didn't really like the 3E rules much either, did they? Otherwise why bother "fixing" it with Pathfinder.

If I fix or upgrade my house, does it mean I don't like it much? That's silly. I just want to make it better. Clearly, they liked the 3e rules enough to make them better, but also liked them enough to leave most of the structure intact.

 

[Aeolius]

Clearly, they liked the 3e rules enough to make them better, but also liked them enough to leave most of the structure intact.

Though now if you want to enter the bathroom, you have to climb through the oven door. Also, changes in planar cosmology led to the deletion of hot water heaters - plenty of cold water though. In short, yes it's playable, but I like my house the way it was.

 

[billd91]

Though now if you want to enter the bathroom, you have to climb through the oven door. Also, changes in planar cosmology led to the deletion of hot water heaters - plenty of cold water though. In short, yes it's playable, but I like my house the way it was.

What significant changes in planar cosmology? Are you talking about the Golarian campaign setting's planar cosmology? Because that's not core Pathfinder RPG. The 3e (and earlier) planar cosmology works just fine with the PF RPG.
Of course, most of the 1e-3e planar cosmology not being OGL, it's not like Paizo could really touch it.

And if there's a change in PF that, when compared to a house renovation, is anything like getting into the bathroom by going through the oven door, I can't find it. If you're going to use an analogy, it helps to use one that makes sense.

 

[Aeolius]

What significant changes in planar cosmology?

My mistake. I misread the quoted text and thought we were comparing 3e to 4e. 3e to Pathfinder is a no-brainer, especially with the available conversion guide.

 

[pawsplay]

Example: Even though D&D is my favorite game, HERO is my favorite system. And using it, I can do an amazing approximation it 1Ed-3.5Ed D&D.

But I still wouldn't call it D&D- as the PCs gained XP, there would be no semblance of a class/level game, for instance. Alignments (and everything linked to them) would be a massive add-on...as would creature types, etc. And the magic system? Given the D.I.Y. nature of HERO system, items, spells, psionics, SLAs and the like would be a LOT more varied. In fact, you might not see anything resembling iconic spells at all.

It may start like a D&D game...but it won't finish like one.

The thing is, I think I could use HERO to play something more "D&D" than anything 4e can do for me. I can include character options, spells, and creatures pretty much as I remember and understand them. Converting the original spells (there were, what, a hundred of them?) would be trivial, and the GM could certainly state you could not stray from the canonical spell list.

You can actually graft a level system onto HERO easily enough, similar to M&M's Power Levels; his approach has been used by systems converters for years.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The thing is, I think I could use HERO to play something more "D&D" than anything 4e can do for me. I can include character options, spells, and creatures pretty much as I remember and understand them. Converting the original spells (there were, what, a hundred of them?) would be trivial, and the GM could certainly state you could not stray from the canonical spell list.

You can actually graft a level system onto HERO easily enough, similar to M&M's Power Levels; his approach has been used by systems converters for years.

I'm with you...actually I'm a bit ahead: I've done much if what the two of us are talking about. However, I never went to the point of setting up the game to do a levels system- I always let the players spend their XP at their own pace.

I also didn't convert all the spells. After doing a few- and relying on HERO's own write-ups- I let players do their own. If they so chose. I helped others with conversions.

Ditto classes.

And, like you said, it had the right feel...until the players exercised the freedom HERO granted.

 

[billd91]

My mistake. I misread the quoted text and thought we were comparing 3e to 4e. 3e to Pathfinder is a no-brainer, especially with the available conversion guide.

No sweat. I was wondering if that was what was going on.

 

[Dannager]

SO the next time you think to type / insinuate something as patently asinine as someone who says that 4E dosent feel like D&D to them is narrow minded or inflexable, you might want to consider that you yourself might be narrow-minded and inflexible as well in pitching out that response?

This really isn't tough, guys.

Imagine a man named Bob. Bob likes his pies. Pies are an important part of Bob's life. One day, Bob notices a new pie listed on his favorite pie restaurant's menu: Boston Cream Pie. Bob has never had this pie before, and his curiosity compels him to order one.

When Bob is served his Boston Cream Pie, he is outraged. "This isn't pie!" he bellows, "It's missing some of the things I like about pies! It's way too much like a cake to be a real pie! It just doesn't feel like pie to me."

Bob's view of pies, as a concept, is very narrow. He has created a personal definition of what a pie is, and anything that falls outside that definition is not a pie as far as he is concerned. His definition of pie-hood is not open to revision; no matter how many thoroughly enjoyable desert pastries he samples, he will not expand his personal conception of the essential nature of a pie.

I appreciate your passionate defense of your own mindset, but let's not overextend ourselves, hmm? The creation of a rigid personal definition for what D&D is and isn't does not strike me as flexible.

It would be nice if we could put this particular flavor of gripe to bed. It's a silly one to begin with, and very nearly pointless when it comes to any sort of discussion ("I don't like 4e, it doesn't feel like D&D to me," doesn't explain your position any better than simply saying, "I don't like 4e," and tends to confuse things, because you're the only person who knows what your own personal definition of D&D looks like).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It would be nice if we could put this particular flavor of gripe to bed. It's a silly one to begin with, and very nearly pointless when it comes to any sort of discussion ("I don't like 4e, it doesn't feel like D&D to me," doesn't explain your position any better than simply saying, "I don't like 4e," and tends to confuse things, because you're the only person who knows what your own personal definition of D&D looks like).

We're perfectly capable of expressing every little thing we don't like about 4Ed. Indeed, we've done so many times.

"It's not D&D to me" is usually just the last one in the litany. A summation of how our dislikes make us feel about the game in general.

To examine your analogy, you claim that Bob's claim that Boston Creme Pie "isn't pie" to him means he has a narrow definition of "pie."

The problem is- to use a phrase from my profession- your conclusion assumes facts not in evidence. You have no idea if Bob's tasted pies from 189 different cultures of the world or just the 5 previous pies from his favorite eatery.

Likewise, dismissing someone's complaint of 4Ed "not being D&D" to them as "narrow minded" or "inflexible" (not to mention "silly" or "pointless") is similarly flawed- you have ZERO concept of their experiences in gaming. Someone with my aforementioned experience - 100+ different systems, remember- might even take that as an insult or as a sign of ignorance, neither of which does your POV any favors.