Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zustiur" data-source="post: 4457552" data-attributes="member: 1544">I've been resisting up until now, but I have to chime in here. Is it reasonable to expect that the designers will aim to keep the game similar enough that the existing fans will stay on?I speak as one who has seen the death of a game series due to the developers working to harness a new audience instead of starting with the intent of retaining their existing audience.I agree with every single point that Celtavian has made throughout this thread, and commend him for keeping his cool despite the verbal sticks and stones thrown his way.I take issue with the argument that 'this isn't the same game so get over it'. If it's labeled D&D it damned well should be the same game. I can walk into any edition from 0 to 3.5 or 3.p and expect to have a fair idea of what each character can do and how the system works. 4e has totally departed from that situation.Fighters went from damage dealing nuts to meat-shields and moveable walls.Wizards went from glass hammers to bizarre ... well recharging wands basically.Clerics went from dedicated support personnel to secondary fighters.Rogues went from sneaky opportunists to prime damage dealers.Critical hits went from something worth cheering about to something I yawn over.What on earth is going on here?Like Celtavian I can see the point of minions. I can see the point of lots of rules in 4E, but that doesn't mean that those rules are fun for me (us). Two nights ago I spent an hour and a half fighting a small bunch of kobolds. We blew all our dailies and encounter powers on one battle... why? Not because we were in a terrible amount of danger of dying, but simply because they were so damn tough that we needed the extra damage to take them down. Where are my low hit point opponents? To put this all another, simpler way. I want my 'sacred cows' back.All this round by round balance between classes makes me feel like I'm playing Hero Quest rather than D&D. My experience of D&D has always shown that lack of weight in combat was made up for out of combat. That doesn't seem to exist in my (currently limited) experience of 4E. All this fairness and equality in the short term has taken away from the flavour that each class used to have. There's a lack of divergence in what each class can do.As best as I can tell Celtavian started this thread as a way of contacting those who agree with him. The intent of this thread was most definitely not about arguing over which is the better system. Some people don't seem to be able to understand that. Indeed. I agree with you... now if only I could actually find enough steady players near where I live. I've never had any success in finding other gamers around here via the internet. Mind you, after talking with half the players from my current game... I get the distinct feeling that I'm NOT the only one who has problems with 4E in my group. Just a pity (for me) that the current DM is so pro-4E.Strangely as a DM myself, I find 4E even more problematic in terms of preparation than 3E. Virtually NONE of the example monsters in the MM are written in a form that would make me use them. This means every creature has to be customized, which is something I did not find in earlier editions. In 3E I only had to customize the special ones, not the mooks. Now we've got hundreds of example special ones... which may or may not be the appropriate level to work with their counterparts, and very few basic grunts that take hits and die in the traditional D&D manner.</blockquote>

Verification