Thumbs Down
Things I don't like about 4e:
Everyone has k3w1 p0w3rz.
Paladins hit a foew to give an ally an armor class bonus. (This is an example of the kind of thing I don't like; this one, particular, thing is not a dealbreaker in and of itself, but it's emblematic of the new design ethos, which seems to be "Everyone should make an attack roll every round -- attack to heal, attack to buff, attack to make your teeth clean...")
System is more tightly locked to fantasy, and to one particular style of fantasy; much harder to stretch it.
No apparent concern for the effects of raising the power bar on the world (at will heals, low-level teleports).
MMORPG-style "roles".
Combat functionality as the overwhelming factor in class design; all else is secondary.
"Exception based" monsters -- back to 2e we go!
Everyone is good at everything -- the SWSE skill system.
Impossibility of converting an existing campaign due to massive changes in "core" classes/races.
Way too much fluff in the core rules, and fluff is more integrated with the rules.
"Assumed setting" instead of encouraging DMs to be worldbuilders.
Removal of non-combat skills like profession, craft, and perform.
Regimented character development (Pick a path at 10 and again at 20) instead of freeform multiclassing.
Per-encounter and at-will powers remove challenge, or require every fight scene to be a massive, epic, knock-down, drag-out, SFX showpiece to challenge the players. No sense of building towards a climax.
Oversimplification.
"Reimagining" of things for no good reason -- who wanted river-nomad halflings or above-ground dwarves? Did the lack of these ever bother anybody?
General overall shift to the game design being about a long string of encounters, each of which happens in a seeming bubble, instead of being about heroes exploring a living world. That, more than anything, is the change in tone and style which is turning me off to 4e.
Things I don't like about 4e:
Everyone has k3w1 p0w3rz.
Paladins hit a foew to give an ally an armor class bonus. (This is an example of the kind of thing I don't like; this one, particular, thing is not a dealbreaker in and of itself, but it's emblematic of the new design ethos, which seems to be "Everyone should make an attack roll every round -- attack to heal, attack to buff, attack to make your teeth clean...")
System is more tightly locked to fantasy, and to one particular style of fantasy; much harder to stretch it.
No apparent concern for the effects of raising the power bar on the world (at will heals, low-level teleports).
MMORPG-style "roles".
Combat functionality as the overwhelming factor in class design; all else is secondary.
"Exception based" monsters -- back to 2e we go!
Everyone is good at everything -- the SWSE skill system.
Impossibility of converting an existing campaign due to massive changes in "core" classes/races.
Way too much fluff in the core rules, and fluff is more integrated with the rules.
"Assumed setting" instead of encouraging DMs to be worldbuilders.
Removal of non-combat skills like profession, craft, and perform.
Regimented character development (Pick a path at 10 and again at 20) instead of freeform multiclassing.
Per-encounter and at-will powers remove challenge, or require every fight scene to be a massive, epic, knock-down, drag-out, SFX showpiece to challenge the players. No sense of building towards a climax.
Oversimplification.
"Reimagining" of things for no good reason -- who wanted river-nomad halflings or above-ground dwarves? Did the lack of these ever bother anybody?
General overall shift to the game design being about a long string of encounters, each of which happens in a seeming bubble, instead of being about heroes exploring a living world. That, more than anything, is the change in tone and style which is turning me off to 4e.