Has the horse left the barn?

[bastrak]

For me I don't think the horse ever entered the barn to start with.

I was open to a 3.5 revision but what we wound up with was a different game. What was done to the fluff regarding the planes and monsters in general still makes me despair.

I can only hope that in due course 5e tries to fix the huge mistakes 4e made, until then I'm running 3.5 and playing in someone else's Pathfinder game.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

I notice several other people mentioning that they'd consider playing, but not DMing - but no elaboration. What is it, exactly, about DMing 4E that turns others off?

For me, it's not being "turned off" to 4e so much as not being motivated to get into. I'm happy with what I've got, and no one is pushing me into it.

Honestly, I just don't want to bother with another set of rules without some reason to do so. Flipping through the book, thinking about it in the abstract, or reading forums isn't enough to interest me. That's fine for rules-lite systems, but 4e is simply too "big" for that. OTOH, playing is the perfect way for me to get introduced into the system before deciding if I want to master it as a DM.

 

[hewligan]

No. Too late for me now. I tried 4e, bought the books, read the books, sold the books, bought Pathfinder .... never looked back. Sorry 4e, but you just are not for me!

 

[Turjan]

For me, the horse has definitely left the barn. I would still play it if a good friend absolutely wanted to, but that's a social aspect and has not much to do with the game itself.

I actually like many of the changes 4e brought to D&D, changes that tackled problems I saw myself. As soon as I read through SWSE, I got really excited about what this could mean for the new edition. Unfortunately, that excitement was pretty much gone when I finally saw the 4e product.

I didn't really like the language that was used for describing game aspects, but I could have looked past that. The breaking point was how abstract the game felt. Marking? As I never use minis, this completely abstract mechanic was further enforced by the need for a battlemat.

I also didn't like that there was no simple fighter anymore for the players that don't want to think much during a game. On the other hand, I had loved the wizard with its bag full of quirkiness before, but now it looked incredibly stale.

Well, anyway, in the end I decided that this game wasn't for me. Not a big thing, because there are enough other choices available. It looks as if, in April, I will buy my last WotC book (for SWSE). I should probably be thankful for 4e, as I have had much more money left each month since its release .

 

[Remathilis]

I notice several other people mentioning that they'd consider playing, but not DMing - but no elaboration. What is it, exactly, about DMing 4E that turns others off?

(Note: I'm in the same boat; I'd be more open to play than DM, but I'm curious what others opinions on this are)

Actually, I rather enjoyed DMing 4e for the short time I did. It was a breeze to set up, and monsters were easy to run (sometimes too easy). I would not DM it again though due to the sheer amount of work required to GM anything; with few exceptions GMing is a labor of love and if its for a system I'm lukewarm (at best) about; I'm not willing to devote the time and energy needed. And given there is no "must run" modules for 4e yet (most of them being long combat-slogs with little in the way of exploration or plot) I don't even think I'd be a good AP DM.

There are other systems I feel the same way about (Star Wars Saga and Vampire to name a few); so 4e doesn't get called out alone. Still, 4e ranks with 1e as the only editions of D&D I would not DM in a heartbeat (the latter because if I was going to do that I'd simply run 2e, which I am much more familiar and comfortable with).

 

[Votan]

I suspect that the Hybrid rules actually reduce the chances of my playing 4th edition dungeons and dragons.

I have spent > $300 on 4E D&D books and I have seriously considered DMing it. However, the scale of the system is actually becoming daunting. I have the niggling feeling that, as the game gets larger and more complex, it will be harder to actually keep track of things and more likely to have unfun corners (where classes or races stop being fun for all and sundry).

Less complexity is actually what I want and not more complexity.

 

[Ariosto]

And given there is no "must run" modules for 4e yet ...

Yes, the lack of a "killer application" is a bit of a handicap. Have the designers actually put their best foot forward, rolled out the showpiece -- is that really all there is?

However one might assess them in the present context, Gygax's G and D modules were in their day attention-getting demonstrations of where the D&D game was headed with the AD&D line. (Judges Guild's Dark Tower was another, drawing material from the PHB).

 

[Votan]

Yes, the lack of a "killer application" is a bit of a handicap. Have the designers actually put their best foot forward, rolled out the showpiece -- is that really all there is?

However one might assess them in the present context, Gygax's G and D modules were in their day attention-getting demonstrations of where the D&D game was headed with the AD&D line. (Judges Guild's Dark Tower was another, drawing material from the PHB).

This is a good point. No matter what you think of these adventures in hindsight, all of my peers played them and enjoyed them. They were cool, interesting and really pointed out the neat aspects of AD&D. Not to mention the memberable ideas that showed up in them (Lloth, Underdark, Drow, Mind Flayers) that went on to inspire many other cool setting and adventures.

I just can't see an equivalent 4E adventure (although I'd be delighted to be corrected in this presumption)

 

[CasvalRemDeikun]

Before 2010, I must say that I was a pretty hardcore 4e supporter. I really liked all of the business decisions for the most part. I collected a good portion of the books (really only one book out right now that I want but don't have, and that is Primal Power). I was really pumped for this edition, even though I have never had a chance to play it yet (ran ONE game, and it was ONE session long).

BUT,

2010 appears to be a cesspool of releases. Outside of Martial Power 2, the PHB Races books, and the Dungeon Tile Master Sets, the rest is just utter crap. Here is a breakdown:

PHB3: Psionics-they have been crap in EVERY edition of the game they have appeared in and that doesn't seem to be changing, Hybrid Rules-Worthless. The only saving grace is the Minotaur race, which I can get from the Character Builder and Compendium.
MM: Yawn. This book hasn't drawn me in at all.
Dark Sun: Overpriced garbage setting(same price, half the content=BS) that is basically anti-D&D. Glorifies psionics, my least favorite aspect of D&D. Utter waste of time and money.
Gamma World: Neat concept, but it combines D&D and CCG and that is bad. It just doesn't seem to be for me (a shiny spot on the turd sandwich WotC is trying to feed us).
Board Games: I am neutral on these, I will have to see them.
Essentials Line: Yawn. It is a good idea in the long run, but it dominates the second half of the year and that irritates me. I might take a look at them though.

So overall, out of ~35 books and tiles coming out this year, I will be getting like seven items. That is less than any year for 4th Edition by a large margin. I guess I will have to wait for the 2011 setting to be announced(hopefully something more traditional fantasy like Dragonlance or Greyhawk), otherwise I will probably all but give up on 4e.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

I suspect that the Hybrid rules actually reduce the chances of my playing 4th edition dungeons and dragons.

What does "the Hybrid rules" refer to? Is there a 4e revamp coming, or does this refer to the new Red Box/Essentials stuff, or something else?

[EDIT: Ah, just read the following post! It appears it means "Rules for Hybrid creatures" or something like that.]