Half Sold

[DonTadow]

I'm a supporter of 4e, but I don't think I"ll be dM'n it anytime soon (other than at Gencon). The feel doesn't fit my campaign and I'd have to play and house rule too much stuff. It probably isn't even as much as 4e as much as it is that its new and not supported. Like 1st generation software the bugs have not been worked out of it and 3rd party publishers havn't gotten their hands on it to make supplements i could use. There's also a lot of spreadsheets and software I use to make game management easier, and I jut don't think that wotc's product will be anywhere near the caliber of DMgenie from launch. There also probably won't be an easy npc designer or quick mapping tools (3d is great, but from the looks of it it looked like everything had to be designed in game).

All in all 4e looks to green and rigidt for use out of the box.

 

[maggot]

Not that I'm trying to change your mind or derail your thread, but I'm just curious as to why you don't think you could DM a game with 4E? What about your "style" does 4E contradict?

Yeah, I definitely think an answer to that will derail the thread. But I'll give it a try.

I run core-only games: PHB, DMG, MM and no supplements. (I have my reasoning, but it isn't germane to this thread.) The current 4E offering is missing too much of what I consider D&D for that to be interesting to me.

Also the current core has added stuff that I'm not interested in seeing in a world of my design: mainly the dragonguys and so a lesser extent the tieflings. I don't like limiting stuff out of the core (I'm limiting enough, I think you will agree), so I'd be stuck having to include stuff I don't like in my campaign.

So since it would be my campaign, and I would be the one putting the most effort into it, if I run another D&D game, it will not be in 4E.

 

[maggot]

I didn't derail my own thread, I apparently killed it.

Back to the tiefling char concept, I was thinking of the character as being more ironic: She thinks she needs to be evil, but she really isn't, so she is quite vocal about her desire to do evil and the internal struggle generated by that. Of course, there is no intent or struggle, but she feels it is important to keep up appearances. So a tiefling poser if you will.

 

[Connorsrpg]

I am in the other camp completely.
I loved 3.5, but now find it a strain to DM (too many rules etc).
I am looking forward to 4e and looking forward to converting. I love creating and converting, so good times ahead....all I need is time.
C

 

[howandwhy99]

Just advice, so I'll bite my tongue afterwards. I'd say not to play a character purposefully designed to make problems in regards to issues outside of play. I've said before to leave your problems at the door. If you've got a problem with the game (more often it's a player in these situtations), don't "play" your problem. Deal with it out of game.

Even if the concept is to mock lightly, my advice is you're better off playing something others can enjoy with you. Whether it's a different game or character concept.

 

[megamania]

I may play a 4e game but I won't DM / buy tons of it. I had little problem with 3.5 and will mainly stick to that.

 

[maggot]

Even if the concept is to mock lightly, my advice is you're better off playing something others can enjoy with you. Whether it's a different game or character concept.

That implies that the other players wouldn't enjoy the character. A heroic character that only complains about a desire to do evil would be a great addition to the games I've been in. Far more disruptive would be a dark character that constantly goes against a heroic party's desires. I've seen the latter, and it ain't good.

Perhaps it was my use of the word "constantly". The character might do it constantly, but as a player, I would only do it occasionally. As with any characterization, you cannot let it get in the way of the point of the game: heroic quests, killing things and taking there stuff, tactical battles, or whatever.

I suppose characterizations could be the point of some game, but not any D&D game I've ever played in.

 

[Lizard]

I agree with the OP. 4e looks like it might be fun to play, but it does nothing to inspire me as a DM. None of the mechanics revealed thus far intrigue me from a system mangler/world builder perspective, and that's really the only difference from one game to the next as a DM.

I guess WOTC is gambling that 5 players voting "4E!" means the DM giving in and buying it...as opposed to one DM saying "We're sticking with 3.5" and 5 players saying "Guess we'll put off buying 4e, then."

Does the DM need players more than players need a DM?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I agree with the OP. 4e looks like it might be fun to play, but it does nothing to inspire me as a DM. None of the mechanics revealed thus far intrigue me from a system mangler/world builder perspective, and that's really the only difference from one game to the next as a DM.

I guess WOTC is gambling that 5 players voting "4E!" means the DM giving in and buying it...as opposed to one DM saying "We're sticking with 3.5" and 5 players saying "Guess we'll put off buying 4e, then."

Does the DM need players more than players need a DM?

Hmm, we're all going by anecdotical evidence here, but I am definitely interested in running a 4E game, a lot more than I wanted to run 3rd edition or Arcana Evolved games.

Currently, I am running an Iron Heroes campaign, and I am using the IH villain classes (far easier to build and run then the regular PC classes based NPCs) for most of my NPC building, and try also to incorporate some 4E ideas into the monster design. So far, I am enjoying that a lot more than I ever did with the 3.x rules.

 

[Lord Sessadore]

I'm strongly considering switching to 4E when it comes out, or rather when my group starts playing again after the summer (we're all university students). It all depends on how the game actually turns out, but I like what I see so far.

I have to agree with some of the previous posters, generating your own stuff for 3.5 takes quite a bit of time. I don't mind doing it, I actually enjoy it, but it's a little depressing when you look at the clock after generating an NPC and see how much time has gone by. I have a life to live too (or so I tell myself, haha).

Edit: forgot to mention that I'm the DM for my group. The others are not as familiar with all the rules (and I admit there are a lot of those in 3.5). Not sure what they would think about switching to 4E though.

~LS