How has the 4e/3e schism affected you?

[Hussar]

You would be incorrect. It didn't last long, but VTM did, in fact, outsell D&D briefly.

Citation please.

 

[Razuur]

1.) As D&D combat always has?

2.) Way more options than any previous edition.

1. If you played it that way. You could opt to not use the tactical rules and still have a satisfying experience in 3.0, and arguably 3.5 (though it was more challenging but not too bad). We played without minatures, battlemaps, AoO, simplified grappling, etc. How do I play the new system without miniatures and a battlemap and keep it a satisfying experience? Too many people have admitted that it could by done, BUT WHY WOULD YOU? That says everything.

2. I compeltely disagree here. In the old system a fighter could be one of any kinds of warrior. In the new system it means X or Y. In the old system I had players choosing to be Experts and even Commoners to play particular roles that the core classes didn't cover. How do I create a wizened Sage in the new system? How do I create a crippled prince? How do I create a young boy adventuring out into the world for the first time? Or a priest with no powers? I could do all of that using the 3.0 core books. And it meant something. And don't say that "those are RP elements that don't require rules". To me that is the lamest excuse ever and shoddy game design. I want a system that handles RPing, not just a combat resolution system.

Don't get me wrong, 3.x was not perfect and had its flaws. Everybody seemed to have their own set of house rules to tweek it to fit their desired experience. But that was its strength. it was a toolkit that gave us a structure for everything, and all of the myriad d20 and OGL stuff was the ultimate frosting.

But I didn't want to go here. we were all stating out opinions and I just stated mind. I don't understand why people get so upset that people disagree about this. I can totally see why some DnDers love the new DnD!

Razuur

 

[timbannock]

Do you have 3.x/4e arguments around your own gaming table? Are you currently experiencing adoption pains as your group decides what to play? Do the arguments get kind of nasty?

Haven't quite got the playtest up and running, but I've got 1 player who's excited, 2 who are pretty much interested in anything, and 1 who'll look for the downside in just about anything, and 4E is no different. But he's always willing to give something a new shot, so no issues there.

Any stories of actual gaming groups being split apart because of this?

None I know of. I could see it happening if I was saying "No more 3.5E ever again, no matter what," considering how much they've all spent on those books, but I'm not saying that, so I don't foresee this.

Do you think that the schism you see online is reflected among the total gaming demographic? If not, why not?

I'm guessing 4E's selling well (I read that there's already a new print run...?), so it can't be too bad. I'm gonna guess the new GSL will create more issues though. Not enough to bury 4E (or come even close), but enough to be an issue.

Do you think the community will eventually heal itself? How long do you think it will take? What will be the result/general concensus?

Considering how many people still play older editions (like OD&D and 2e and such), I'm gonna say that the community will just keep evolving in different ways.

How does this current schism compare to past D&D base-splitting from earlier editions? The same? Worse? Better?

I'd say this is roughly the same as 2E -> 3E. At least initially. Now with the GSL out and issues with that, I think 4E will hit a big speed bump for a time, but depending on how DDI does, that could be a HUGE boon for 4E...if it gets up and running well. If DDI sucks and the GSL pushes out big players like Necromancer and the rest, then 4E will take a real hard hit. But will that kill it? I doubt it.


All my personal opinion and experience.

 

[timbannock]

2. I compeltely disagree here. In the old system a fighter could be one of any kinds of warrior. In the new system it means X or Y. In the old system I had players choosing to be Experts and even Commoners to play particular roles that the core classes didn't cover. How do I create a Sage in the new system? How do I create a crippled prince? How do I create a young boys adventuring out into the world for the first time? Or a priest with no powers? I could do all of that using the 3.0 core books. And it meant something. And don't say that "those are RP elements that don't require rules". To me that is the lamest excuse ever and shoddy game design. I want a system that handles RPing, not just a combat resolution system.

I see ways to do all of that using the 4E core books.

I don't think any edition of D&D has been better at facilitating roleplaying than 4E's skill challenge system. I'd say it works better than most other systems for codifying roleplaying interactions, rewarding good roleplaying, and generally giving the RPing parts of a session the possibility of being a valid climactic sequence that brings all the player characters into it, just like any battle can.

IMHO

 

[Fobok]

I personally don't care that people aren't switching. However, the online hostility drove me even from here for a while, and I'm only back as it is to see if there's any calming yet.

Even Necromancer Games' forums, where the userbase is for the most part anti-4e, isn't as hostile to those that disagree as some of the threads around here.

And I'm not just talking about those that disagree with me here. A lot of people seem to think the other side isn't valid because they disagree. (I even admit to getting caught up in that a few times myself.)

Even when moderators called for a stop to the edition wars, nobody paid attention.

It's even worse in other forums, too.

Really, in the end, I want to be able to discuss the game I want to play without people coming along arguing over whether it's a good game. There seems to be nowhere but my own gaming group to do this.

 

[Wormwood]

Yep, back in late 2000, it was wah wah, 3rd Ed is Diablo, now we have wah wah, 4th Ed is WoW…thrilling…

Meet the new nerd, same as the old nerd.

 

[Hussar]

How do I create a wizened Sage in the new system? How do I create a crippled prince? How do I create a young boy adventuring out into the world for the first time? Or a priest with no powers?

Crippled prince? How did you do that using 3.5 RAW? Young boy? Again, how did the rules of 3e D&D help you there?

Priest with no powers? That's easy - he's not a cleric, but, he preaches. That can be done in pretty much any edition.

But, be that as it may, do you honestly think that the system is set such that you could play commoners without massively rewriting just about every element? The entire CR system breaks down instantly there. Which knocks on XP, and a number of other elements.

Never mind that 3e combat is incredibly lethal to standard classes, let alone NPC classes. How did you avoid killing PC's constantly?

But, besides all that, would you say that choosing an NPC class should be an assumed option in the game? Or should it be a not really supported fringe option?

 

[sckeener]

• I bought the 4e books core books.
  
  Do I plan on buying more 4e books? No. I am not going to bother until I see a overwhelming need. I am not currently playing in a 4e game nor do I plan on running one, so why should I? My wife who is a gamer does not even have her own copy of the 4e books.
  
• My group is split. Mostly the 3.5 side is winning. I have no clue when/if we'll switch.
  
• The sites I frequent have become less frequent because of the schism. I avoid several forums. Some sites I've now turned to such as http://www.circvsmaximvs.com/ amazing that a site where there are few limits I find the least venom.
  
• My wife and I are having a minor schism because she is actively hostile to 4e. She prefers stories to tactics. So do I, but I'm willing to at least look/play the system.
  
• I'm buying/subscribing to paizo. I like what they are producing. Love it is a better description. I highly recommend Paizo to everyone I meet.

 

[Wormwood]

• My wife and I are having a minor schism because she is actively hostile to 4e. She prefers stories to tactics.

So do my wife and I.

My advice would be to heed the RP/story advice in the DMG, and approach the game without any accumulated 3.5 baggage. Because that's working *awesomely* for our very story-oriented game.

 

[Verdande]

[*]My wife and I are having a minor schism because she is actively hostile to 4e. She prefers stories to tactics. So do I, but I'm willing to at least look/play the system.[/list]

Then play games where stories take precedence over tactics? If anything, 4e is more cinematic than 3e, and should have a pretty good ability to carry a storyline.


Anyways, for my contribution, nobody I know cares in the least that some people hate 4e. We all like it, it's great fun. We look back at 3e and laugh and laugh and laugh that we ever liked such a wierd game that restricted us so much, and enjoy our newfound freedom of gaming.