D&D 4E Going/Not Going to 4E which edition did you start with?

[JediSoth]

I started with the red boxed set (about the time it was revised to be red with two books and no "Keep on the Borderlands") and gradually moved to AD&D. I switched to 2nd edition when it came out and to 3rd when it came out. Took me a year to fully switch to 3.5.

I'm not currently considering switching to 4E.

JediSoth

 

[Gundark]

Started with Basic (Blue Box). Not switching to 4E for the forseeable future. Not necessarily because of the direction of the game, however. Though ... honestly ... I don't think we know as much about the direction of the game as we think we do. We really haven't seen much substantial information, have we?

We really know next to nothing, all we have is opinion and design philosophy. I am looking forward to D&D xp though(I'm not going but look forward to heard from others), hopefully the playtests will bring a lot of opinion and game crunch.



As for the OP's question.. Played a game of 1e, got Red Box for Chirstmas, Mom was told that D&D was of the devil and I wasn't allowed to play D&D anymore. I was allowed to played other RPGs so went to TMNT, then to Heroes Unlimited, then to Rifts. Grew to hate Rifts and Palladium and quit RPGs for Warhammer 40k. Got into 3e, then 3.5.

I will pick up and most likely fully switch to 4e

 

[Howndawg]

Started with Holmes, went to AD&D as soon as I got all the books, went to 2e, 3e, and 3.5.
Most likely will move on to 4e.

 

[jaer]

Started with the Red box around '86. I was six at the time. Went to the blue box.

Started AD&D after finding the TSR gold box computer game Pool of Radiance. What a mind-job that was for little ol' me.

"Wait...I can be an elf AND a fighter? WHOA!!" And then there were these crazy ranger, paladin, and bard classes when I my bro got the AD&D books. Man, that DMG guide was sacred back then. I remember the awe I felt the first time my bro (who at that point was my DM) let me look in it.

My groups won't decide if we switch until 4e is out, but most of us are pretty excited about the changes. We are currently favoring it.

 

[JeffB]

Started with LBB's

Am looking forward to and buying 4E. Will hafta see whether its actually going to "work", but I'm liking what I hear for the most part.

 

[HeinorNY]

2e > 3e > 4e

 

[Darth Cyric]

Started with 2e, through the 90s played that but also got acquainted with groups that played 1e still. Actually preferred a lot of things about 1e over 2e.

Went on to 3e, which did a lot of things better but also a lot of things not so well. 3.5 fixed a lot of 3.0's problems but also added a lot of its own.

Moving on to 4e, definitely. Even if I didn't think it would be a good system that is fixing a lot of what annoyed me immensely about 3.x (which I do), I think that if I were going to be a grognard about it, I would've stopped at 1e. Being grognardish by harkening back to 3.5 really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

2e > 3e > 4e

When Ainatan posted this my mind immediately through up a mental picture of someone going from 2E to 4E using 4E-style diagonal movement to avoid 3E (even though that's not what he said). I think I probably need to stop reading that other thread!

 

[Lord Zack]

I guess you could say I started with 2nd edition, because the first D&D I ever owned was a 2d edition one. But the first edition I've actually played was 3rd. I own books from way back as well and I have to say as far as I can tell, each subsequent edition is over all superior to the last and 4e appears to be continuing that trend.

 

[Stormtower]

Started with Moldvay Basic and primarily played BECMI through the 1e years (dabbled in 1e and own the books).

Current mood towards 4E: Leaning quite positive (excited, actually) from an initial strong negative. I'm enchanted by the new artwork and the mechanical underpinnings aligned towards simplicity and consistency ("easy to learn, hard to master" the old adage).