Changeover Poll

[bouncyhead]

I think the "bought the books, did read them, did not like what I read, did not start playing" people chose option seven.

"Tried" implies actual, more than one session play, IMHO.

Of course, good point.

Any suggestions for a 'why have you not switched?' poll?

Off the top of my head:

1 GSL/Lack of 3rd party support.
2 Tried it. Too radical a change from 3.x.
3 Tried it. No problem with radical change per se but I just don't like the new rules
4 Tried it. Don't know why, but it doesn't feel like D&D.
5 Tried it - looks OK to me but not better so why switch?
6 Tried it - looks good to me but I have too much invested in 3.x.
7 Haven't tried it. Happy with 3.x, didn't buy the books.
8 It took me four years to switch from 2 to 3. Give me some time.
9 Doesn't matter how good it is, I just hate WotC/Hasbro/giving my money to the man, man.
10 There's a 4E? Sorry, I've been living in a cave.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

951 votes, and a slight change:

Changeover: 32%
No Changeover: 59%
Partial Changeover: 9%

Option 6: 31%

 

[Wicht]

Of course, good point.

Any suggestions for a 'why have you not switched?' poll?

Off the top of my head:

1 GSL/Lack of 3rd party support.
2 Tried it. Too radical a change from 3.x.
3 Tried it. No problem with radical change per se but I just don't like the new rules
4 Tried it. Don't know why, but it doesn't feel like D&D.
5 Tried it - looks OK to me but not better so why switch?
6 Tried it - looks good to me but I have too much invested in 3.x.
7 Haven't tried it. Happy with 3.x, didn't buy the books.
8 It took me four years to switch from 2 to 3. Give me some time.
9 Doesn't matter how good it is, I just hate WotC/Hasbro/giving my money to the man, man.
10 There's a 4E? Sorry, I've been living in a cave.

I would be interested in this poll myself.
But some Suggestions...

Tried/haven't tried - felt insulted by the pre-release marketing
Haven't tried it - too many sacred cows slaughtered (I would probably choose this one myself)

 

[bouncyhead]

I would be interested in this poll myself.
But some Suggestions...

Tried/haven't tried - felt insulted by the pre-release marketing
Haven't tried it - too many sacred cows slaughtered (I would probably choose this one myself)

The danger is that it would become a 'let's kick 4E around the block' thread and that gets nobody anywhere. If it could stay bicker-free though it would make very interesting reading.

 

[Wicht]

The danger is that it would become a 'let's kick 4E around the block' thread and that gets nobody anywhere. If it could stay bicker-free though it would make very interesting reading.

It's hard to for a soul to say why they are not playing a system without criticizing that system. The real danger is in the pro-4e crowd trying to argue against the reasoning of the anti-4e crowd. As soon as that happens, there probably would be bickering. (Though to be fair, if there was a pro-4e thread and an anti-4e person entered to argue about why they did not like the system it would be just as bad.) If the thread stated at the beginning though that the thread is not open to disputation regarding anyone's opinion then it might avoid the problem.

 

[Garnfellow]

Of course, good point.

Any suggestions for a 'why have you not switched?' poll?

Off the top of my head:

1 GSL/Lack of 3rd party support.
2 Tried it. Too radical a change from 3.x.
3 Tried it. No problem with radical change per se but I just don't like the new rules
4 Tried it. Don't know why, but it doesn't feel like D&D.
5 Tried it - looks OK to me but not better so why switch?
6 Tried it - looks good to me but I have too much invested in 3.x.
7 Haven't tried it. Happy with 3.x, didn't buy the books.
8 It took me four years to switch from 2 to 3. Give me some time.
9 Doesn't matter how good it is, I just hate WotC/Hasbro/giving my money to the man, man.
10 There's a 4E? Sorry, I've been living in a cave.

If you make a poll, make sure you allow for multiple responses, because no 1 reason really fits for me. It's the cumulative effect of a bunch of things -- inlcuing 1, 2, and 5.

 

[sword3274]

It's hard to for a soul to say why they are not playing a system without criticizing that system. The real danger is in the pro-4e crowd trying to argue against the reasoning of the anti-4e crowd. As soon as that happens, there probably would be bickering. (Though to be fair, if there was a pro-4e thread and an anti-4e person entered to argue about why they did not like the system it would be just as bad.) If the thread stated at the beginning though that the thread is not open to disputation regarding anyone's opinion then it might avoid the problem.

I totally agree with this. Until the one side can truly accept the other sides complaints - whether they agree with them or not - there will be no civilized discussion on the merits and flaws of 4e and 3e. At least not among both parties simultaneously. No one wants to be told that the reasons they don't like a particular system are "stupid" or they don't know what they are talking about. no one wants their input in a discussion to be piled on, or even to be edited or deleted just becuase a moderator doesn't share the posters opinion.

Sadly, I fear many people can't get past their own feelings and opinions to not only see but also respect how others honestly feel about this. That isn't meant to be a knock against anyone specifically (or not) or anything to incite a riot - it's just human nature. I'll be the first to admit that I have a hard time accepting other viewpoints when I think mine is "right" (just ask my wife). If we do not perceive our own thoughts and feelings on a particular topic to be the most valid, we (at the very least) deem others opinions as less valid. And after this much time, I certain that gap cannot be bridged. It would be wonderful if it were possible, but human nature dictates it cannot, at least not in an internet forum...more's the pity. I have yet to be able to enter a civilied discussion on the merits and flaws of 4e (and 3e) before degrades into a mire of insults.

Changeover: 32%
No Changeover: 59%
Partial Changeover: 9%

I think, after all this time, these numbers are rather fascinating.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Such a poll will be next to useless.

Slightly less useless if you make the votes public.

 

[bouncyhead]

I have yet to be able to enter a civilied discussion on the merits and flaws of 4e (and 3e) before degrades into a mire of insults.

It's a shame. There are several interesting concepts in 4E - for me anyway. The measures to prevent the 15 minute adventuring day for one, + a host of specific rules ( e.g. simpler crits, 'bloodied', easy-to-run monsters with interesting attacks, passive perception ). Some of them we've HR'd into our Pathfinder Beta game. If nothing else, 4E shows that the developers correctly identified some mechanical/gameplay issues with 3.x that were worthy of attention, even if they addressed them with solutions that don't suit my personal taste.

 

[sword3274]

It's a shame. There are several interesting concepts in 4E - for me anyway. The measures to prevent the 15 minute adventuring day for one, + a host of specific rules ( e.g. simpler crits, 'bloodied', easy-to-run monsters with interesting attacks, passive perception ). Some of them we've HR'd into our Pathfinder Beta game. If nothing else, 4E shows that the developers correctly identified some mechanical/gameplay issues with 3.x that were worthy of attention, even if they addressed them with solutions that don't suit my personal taste.

Agreed, it is a shame. One thing I've taken, for example, is the 1 hp "minion" concept. I'm also intrigued by the way the cosmology is laid out. I have to disagree with you if you are implying that 3.x had a "15 minute workday problem" - that, in my most humble opinion, has never been a game problem but rather a player issue.

But your post is a good example, with its sturcture and tone, of a non-inflammatory post that would be a welcome contribution to a peaceful pro/con edition discussion.