Has 4e caused a great rift between gamers?

[Roland55]

I think there is a split, and a much bigger one then from 2e; when 3e came around, 2e was very much dead. Everyone was sick of it, save for a relatively small bunch. 3e was the "rebirth of D&D," if you want. When 4e came around, however, 3e was still very much alive and kicking. Pathfinder doesn't cause the split, or cause the split to grow bigger - they're just going to be the D&D for one side of said split, while 4e will be the D&D for the other side.

This. Well said.

I only know about 50 D&D players. The rift I see is about 50/50 ... which is far more than I expected. I hope it's much less serious elsewhere. I think the disruption is likely to heal somewhat with time.

It wasn't this difficult in my area the last time around, but I didn't 'experience' it on the Internet then. I actually had some difficulty finding people to try 4E with.

 

[DaveMage]

I think there is a rift.

The biggest loser?

This community.

 

[Mark]

Most people I know play multiple systems, including 4E and 3.5E, though they may favor one system over others.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I think we're going to end up seeing a lot more homebrewing and house ruling put into play now.

3e, along with the OGL, in some ways, spoiled us. For future reference, whenever in here I refer to "players," I also refer to DMs. The leveling, feat , and skill systems had their flaws, there's no doubt about that, but I think in many ways it opened players to the ideas of having a lot more freedom. DMs saw a rise in more codified rules for the things they were tired of always having to make up on the spot, and while many of the side and splat books had it's definitive bad sides, many others - like stormwrack - had it's very large ups with giving a bigger picture on how to do terrain that wasn't made of plains or forests. That leveling system I mentioned earlier gave players HUGE amounts of freedom to craft their characters.

I think this ideal of freedom is going to come out from this split, as people make their own ramshackle house-made systems, tying together fluff and mechanics from both Pathfinder, 4e, and perhaps other third party things that come along, tying it all together with duck tape and sending their own new system out amongst their players. It's going to be an odd couple of months, and it's going to get even odder once Pathfinder leaves beta and comes out in full force, but I think the END result will be the more experienced groups trying, in their own way, to repair the split by borrowing heavily from both groups; already we're seeing people who play 4e introduce their own takes on the new races, be it the dragonborn turning into lizard kin or what have you.

I can't say that I can predict how the hobby or community will end at, but I think it's far too negative to just shrug and say the split will be there together. Yes, there's a split, a wide one, but I don't think it will kill the community. Both loud mouthed hating on 4e AND unquestionable loyalty to 4e does make conversations very difficult for now, but it's still relatively new, and we're going to see the same problems with Pathfinder. It's my hope that we fellow geeks, nerds, dorks, and what have you, will eventually manage to stop shouting our hate, go back to smirking at whatever we find inferior - as we've ALWAYS done - and start collaborating to make new and awesome ideas.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Let me ask the inverse. Has Pathfinder caused a rift between gamers?

The reason I ask is that Pathfinder has been the first time a company has been legally able to continue on with a discontinued rules set even as D&D has moved on to a new edition.

Really, I'd say it's just a natural evolution. Pathfinder is a strong competitor for 4e, and both camps are putting out some good product. I think this will help force the companies to produce better and better material. As for gamers, there will be support for gamers of various different stripes.

Yes, maybe there's a split somewhere. I equate it to the split between Coke and Pepsi. They're both great tastes. Some prefer one, some prefer another.

 

[Obryn]

My group's doing just great.

I won't speak for gamers at large.

For the first time, I think, unless you count 3.0-3.5, you have two groups of frequent posters who are playing different editions. I think that's what you're seeing - a 3.x edifice (with occasional OGL stuff) is now split between 3e, 4e, Pathfinder, and OGL.

I don't think that's a bad thing, though.

-O

 

[Particle_Man]

No rift for me. I am playing 4e with one group that is testing the rules out of the system. I am ok with it. A few players grumble, but still are playing it. I think that other options coming out in future phbs and completes (or their equivalents) will mitigate some of the grumbling, and the other grumbler is an "equal opportunity grumbler" and finds faults with 3e *and* 4e.

My other group doesn't want to switch campaigns, so are sticking with 3e. That said, they like the idea that there are (or will be) cheaper 3e books soon. So they don't object to 4e as such, it is just that they are in a 3.5 game and don't want to end it, much less buy new players handbooks *and* learn a new system.

Myself, I am happy with both, though I also would love to play Castles and Crusades, B/X, 1st ed., etc. Or other systems, like Savage Worlds, or other d20s like Iron Heroes.

But man it would be hard to play the Rifts system again. I had better get Jesus as my DM and his Apostles as my fellow players for that one.

 

[Treebore]

I voted "no", but not because of 4E. We players create the divisions. The games don't.

So we need to get past the "My game is better then your game" mentality and just accept we all like and prefer different things.

I like C&C. I think 3E is waaaaayy too complicated and unfun to run, especially at higher levels. I have found 4E to be very "ho hum" and actually think GURPS 4E is a better system. So what? That is my opinion. IT doesn't change the fact others love 3E and 4E, and love GURPS, ROlemaster, etc...

We all game to have fun. The system only matters if you don't like it. Even though I find 4E to be "Ho hum" I am still having fun playing it with the people I am playing it with. In our last session the DM offered to end the 4E try out. We all agreed to keep going because even though none of us are falling in love with it we are having fun and may as well finish the module.

So I am glad people love 3E and 4E, and all the others. I am just glad I have my own system to love, and others who love it enough to play it with me.

I sure am not going to let it keep me from liking gamers who love 3E or 4E, we are all gamers. Thats all that really matters to me.

 

[aboyd]

I was going to say, "Nope, no rift at all, my group is happily playing 3.5." However, I get the feeling that your idea of a rift is "not everyone gets on board with 4th edition." So, I answered yes, there is a rift. We're over here, others over there; we're happy to be here, they're happy to be there.

I guess the answer is yeah, there's a rift and we like it.

Oddly, though, while everyone is saying that the rift is 4th edition vs. Pathfinder, we're just pure 3.5/OGL/SRD. I think d20srd.org is all you need to play a good game.

 

[frankthedm]

Yes, my group has a rift. Our host hates the level of dumbing down the system got. But the best friend of our host really likes the direction 4E went. The rest of us are on the fence, finding it fun enough to play, but still disliking of the dumbing down. I'd be against 4E more, but I love monsters and I am really bloodthirsty so the high critter body count pleases me. Our host says he is willing to play, but we all know he is just trying to be a gracious host.