Do we have a news version of 4E already? Forked Thread: Edition War Across the Net...

[Aus_Snow]

The 'news version of 4e' is EN World, in a manner of speaking.

Oh, a new version. . . no. It's 4e, pure and simple. Well, simple anyway.

 

[Jools]

I see what the OP is saying, but I think there's a difference between a new edition and a living game where the design team actively improves upon the system as a continuous process.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

And when the community has to make such a distinction, then imo it means that we have a new version of the game.

Emphasis mine.

Great to have you on board, I'm glad you've finally realized just how D&D 4e is and become part of its community, as opposed to being a bitter outsider who makes hyperbolic complaints about a game you don't need to play in order to create strife.

 

[mach1.9pants]

 

[Mallus]

No.

(also, the OP's sig is a false conclusion)

 

[Storminator]

Emphasis mine.

Great to have you on board, I'm glad you've finally realized just how D&D 4e is and become part of its community, as opposed to being a bitter outsider who makes hyperbolic complaints about a game you don't need to play in order to create strife.

Lighten up CG. This is what the Ignore feature is for.

PS

 

[Jack99]

The 'news version of 4e' is EN World, in a manner of speaking.

Oh, a new version. . . no. It's 4e, pure and simple. Well, simple anyway.

I see what you did there. Actually pretty funny!


As for Derren. I would like to know if you think that we should have had a new edition (3.6; 3.7 etc) when the MM3, MM4 and MM5 came out? I mean, they changed monster of all levels a lot, as opposed to the solo rules which only affects 7-8% of all monsters.

 

[Bumbles]

There's a new version every time somebody says..."I'll do things this way" .

While in some cases by pure chance, two individuals may make identical changes, according to the by-laws, we still have to count them twice.

 

[Derren]

As for Derren. I would like to know if you think that we should have had a new edition (3.6; 3.7 etc) when the MM3, MM4 and MM5 came out? I mean, they changed monster of all levels a lot, as opposed to the solo rules which only affects 7-8% of all monsters.

I havent followed the higher 3E MMs (MM3++) so I don't know what WotC has done in them.
But the thing is, The 4E MM2 did not simply add new monsters, they changed the way monsters (slos and minions) are build.
In the past year WOtC changed quite a few things. The whole Out of Combat mechanics (Skill challenges), the entire stealth system, The way they build monsters. And in addition they published several rules which, as far as we know, are intended to fix weaknesses in the system like Masterwork Heavy Armour, Expertise and NADs.

Just imagine some rather common scenes in D&D. A rouge sniping in combat, a party fighting against a solo monster or a party doing a skill challenge. Wouldn't you say that this scenes would play out very differently depending on if the party uses the unerrataed Core#1 rules or when they use the errata, Core#2 Monster rules and have access to the bugfix feats (but no other "splat" material)?

I don't remember very well, but how many rules did actually change between 3.0 and 3.5? How compareable are the 3.5 changes to the ones introduced to 4E by now?

 

[Piratecat]

I personally think folks would have more fun if they'd stop trying to create purposefully negative threads creating controversy where none actually exists, and just headed off to play whichever game they love the most.

I'm going to swing this shut, because I honestly can't see much purpose to keeping it open other than laying down a fertile field for an argument. If you feel strongly about it either way, feel free to email me.