Does DDN do it better?

[n00bdragon]

P.S. I'm somehow not surprised that you turned this into attacks on 4e. At a certain point, it's probably safe to drop the hate and move on. It's been 8 years and a whole edition.

It wasn't an attack on 4e, if anything I'd call it a defense of 4e. D&D is whatever game has the D&D label on the front. I concur with Ahnehnois that if all the good pieces of game design have to be discarded because they "aren't D&D enough" you may will end up with people who might have otherwise played and enjoyed the game taking a pass on it. Simply writing those people off by saying they should go play a different game is pretty... what's the word? Someone help me out here.

 

[Ratskinner]

Nope. Uh-uh. Simply not true.

There is nothing in 4E that hadn't been tried before in other editions of D&D, either as core or options. The application of these things may obviously be different than in other editions, as of course they would have to be when mixed together in a new edition; but 4E is not a whole-cloth different game than past editions of D&D - 4E is 100% derived from and in the same family as any other D&D edition. It is not a completely new or different game with just the D&D name slapped on it.

I agree with both of you.

I think it depends on how you look at 4e. If you look from the "bottom up", that is individual pieces and mechanics, then I agree with you. The pieces that make up 4e all have origins or precursors in previous editions. Looking from the "top down", I think 4e did a lot of unique and original things (for D&D, anyway) to give structure and inform the details of those pieces. I know folks who object directly to those larger design goals. As a wise man once said, many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

Also....Its only page 2 and already we're off-topic? Criminy.

 

[Ahnehnois]

It wasn't an attack on 4e, if anything I'd call it a defense of 4e.

In a sense it is. I've got a wide range of criticisms rendered on these boards, but in the grand scheme of things, I consider myself a pro-4e voice. I'm not a grognard or a traditionalist or close-minded. I think there need to be new editions, and I think there needs to be real change. I've made plenty of suggestions here and in the playtest surveys.

So I agree with the rest of your post as well.

 

[GX.Sigma]

the assumption that the DM will be tailoring encounters and treasure to the PCs rather than building a sandbox environment with "objective" encounters/treasure

I have not found this to be the case. I'm running my D&DN campaign as a sandbox, and the rules are not getting in my way.

outsourcing the character sheet in the form of a contest rather than considering it an important game element that they should probably design themselves

Companies do this sort of thing every once in a while for some publicity. It's not like they gave up on designing a proper character sheet. Most likely, they're not focused on that right now (they probably want to wait until the rules are solid), so they may as well encourage the community to do it themselves for the time being.

Besides, I trust the community more than I trust the designers to come up with something that's actually useable.

(The rest of your post I totally agree with.)

 

[keterys]

Eh, I apologize if I misinterpreted your remarks then. Removed the comment

 

[Evenglare]

5th edition does nothing that I couldnt get from my other D&D editions. Of course I'm going to buy it because I can't get any new material for campaign settings. They seem to want to keep refeeding us the rules so we can rebuy campaign settings. I dont CARE which edition I play, I just wish they would keep with one and start producing adventures and fluff. I mean when 4th edition came along I was fine with it, they promised to balance everything and get rid of the awful rules like grapple in 3rd edition. Fine just.... give me the worlds and produce new content for them. Well it took them several years to get all the campaign settings out, and really didnt give anything new, I didn't even recieve any Dragonlance content until what.. a month ago? So then essentials comes out and they promise it's going to be the evergreen edition of D&D. GREAT, STICK WITH IT. But no.. of course that didn't pan out. Now 5th edition is coming out. GREAT STICK WITH IT. PRODUCE ADVENTURES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD. This is why pathfinder is doing so well. They produce quality adventures. I dare say that pathfinder doesn't even CARE about the rules, they just wanted to stick with something so they can produce stories, which is what D&D should always be about. 5th edition just PLEASE stick with whatever ruleset you are going to give us.

I seems to me like Mearls and the team are always thinking of something new, and abandon what they are working on and are like " LOOK LOOK AT THIS NEW THING" . Which is fine, but when you start producing new editions every half a decade and not really completing the ones you have, it's annoying. REALLY annoying from a consumer view. I understand that I can take their new campaign stuff and hack it so it will work with whatever rule set I am using, but I am a busy guy. I don't have the time I used to. I buy this stuff so I DONT have to spend time converting material to a new ruleset AND make stories my party likes. It kind of pisses me off that 4th edition didnt have a dungeon master guide that fleshed out the epic level campaigns. It seems to me that wizards just lost interest, which makes me lose confidence in a company that doesnt see a product through to the end. Again I love all editions of D&D, but there really ISNT any reason to change the entirety of a ruleset every 5 or 6 years. Start producing quality fluff and content for the game you have out NOW.

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[GX.Sigma]

Simple, skill-based Psionics? LOL! In D&D...Never.

Didn't psionics use the proficiency system in 2e?

(yes, "simple," I know...)

Deeper Rules for describing and exploring the world...? Nope...at least not until 5E.

Can you elaborate on this? I'm not sure if you're being serious with this comment, but what to you makes 5e's exploration rules any deeper than the classic exploration rules?

 

[SirAntoine]

There will always be new editions coming out. Every DM should feel free to continue using the rules and setting they favor, and they can stick with it forever. I intend to start a new D&D campaign soon, and I hope my players will give me the same attendance regardless which edition I choose. There will never be a substitute for the way I play the game personally, using all the rules and styles I came up with myself over the years. D&D is mostly what the DM's bring to it, and that's what makes it endure.

 

[Ahnehnois]

Non-WotC OGL products are not D&D.

My copy of the Psychic's Handbook (a skill-based psionics system published by a third party under the OGL) clearly states "requires the use of the Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook, Third Edition, Published by Wizards of the Coast" on the cover. So yes, it's D&D.

That being said, that and the first one are the only ones that I got from a non-WotC source. I suggest you research a little more carefully before making such far-reaching claims. Also, check your 4e books to ensure that everything in them had previously been introduced in some form in an "official" D&D source. I know I enjoyed my 2e games whenever my shardmind avengers had to decide whether to use a healing surge or an encounter power before they headed off to Feywild.

Then again, this all goes back to my point that it's okay to introduce things that weren't in D&D previously, and that it doesn't necessarily undermine the game. Now that that's over with, there was a topic to this thread I think. I want a D&D that can do everything 3e can, and more. Otherwise, there's no reason for me to dump 3e.