I can't read 4e books like I could 3e books. You?

[(un)reason]

After reading White wolf books, I had the same experience when I went back to D&D (at least, WotC, books, some D20 stuff was better at this.) Even the really good 2nd ed setting books seemed slightly flat and functional by comparison. It's like watching those cartoons you loved as a kid again as an adult and seeing just how many things they're lacking now you have a better basis for comparison.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I get the new design philosophy, I think. 4e books seem to be for support around the table while, you know, gaming. Things are relatively easy to find, ordered, and organized.

There's a part of me, however, that dearly misses the extraneous prose to be found in the earlier editions. (I haven't got the FR stuff, so maybe that's different.)

I'm with ya every step of the way here. 4e books are very clinical. A clinic might be a good place to go for medicine, but it's not some where I would hang out.

3e books were like a library. Discovery was around every page!

2e books, for me, were kind of like those vintage books. They sound a little silly sometimes, but they're filled with some great stuff that you just can't get anymore.

Not a fan of gygaxian prose myself, but it was very DISTINCT.

 

[That One Guy]

Hmm... interesting topic.

D&D is not as readable as WoD, IMO. However, 3.5 and 4e are a different type of readable. 4e books are only fun if I think about how the rules I am reading transition into narratives and character interactions. AV, I drooled through. I think I got most of it, but I'm sure I missed something. The FRPG... I just read Dark Pact, skimmed Spellscarred, and Swordmage, and skimmed/read the paragons for interesting things - I mean, paths that would benefit anyone in a game I play in, or intend to run.

Although Heroes of Horror was one of my favorite books to read (and later aloud to my girlfriend). Oh, and Tome of Magic! The sweet delicious lore in that book was amazing. I was so bummed that it came so late in the 3.x life cycle.

 

[Snoweel]

While I hope future fluff books are just as fluffy as they have been in the past, I prefer the core rulebooks to remain concise and functional.

 

[Fifth Element]

There is a lot of good advice on how to conduct things at the gaming table, and more of that than any previous edition but its crammed between page upon page telling me what FUN is, what is not FUN, how to increase the FUN factor in the game because nobody could possibly have any FUN with another rules set.

It's really not "page after page", and it's really not them telling you what is fun, it's more "make sure the game is fun" and them offering suggestions as to what can make the game more fun. There's no "do this or you're not having fun", despite that poorly-written DMG paragraph discussed in the other thread.

 

[Shroomy]

Now there were a lot of good 3.5e books written by WoTC that were interesting reads, mainly the later supplements, adventures, and campaign setting books, but man, the core rules and the crunch heavy earlier books were pretty boring IMO. I never sat down and read either of the three core rulebooks all the way through like I did for the 4e versions. That said, I find that the experience of reading rule books for pure pleasure is less than a scintillating one; I read the books to learn the rules, build my character, and find cool stuff to put in my adventures.

 

[Imp]

Yeah, I've whined about this here before – I found the 4e PHB so violently uninspiring to read that it's keeping me from the game (which I'm still convinced has its virtues, I still want to try it sometime, and I'm sure plays better than it reads to me). I mean, I quite literally thought after 20 or so pages, "wow, have I actually finally outgrown this stuff?"

Well, maybe not.

I compare it to the 3.5e Spell Compendium, a handy reference book that's dry as a sand sundae – useful, but the last book I'd pick out to try and sell anyone on 3rd edition D&D.

I skipped 2nd edition, but I had fun reading some of the books when I got a chance.

 

[Rechan]

For the sake of argument, I have the feeling that Manual of the Planes will be on there. While there are stat blocks and rules, I just can't see the whole thing being rules; it has to be fluff, because it's about exploring the planes.

I'm actually looking forward to this book.

 

[Benimoto]

Actually, recently I've been leafing through the 4e Monster Manual a bit before bed. I wouldn't call it reading, but I've found myself looking at the encounters at the end of each monster block and imagining how I could work those encounters into my campaign. You know, thinking up reasons why the monsters would be working together, whether a certain encounter leads naturally to another encounter, etc.

It's nothing like the way I read the 2e Monstrous Compendium. Everything is so densely packed in there, but it's still fun to read about 20 variant beholders in 3 pages.

 

[Byronic]

Fourth edition is formulaic, far too clean and a very boring read. My text books make for more interesting reading. But I didn't buy DnD for pleasurable reading anyway.

Third edition wasn't near the amount of struggle 4.0 is, I can sometimes even lose myself in it. But it was not my first choice.

I still use WoD and other RPGs for pleasurable easy reading and inspiration. They even have much better parts about making good storylines.

Now that I think of it, WoD had a wonderful way of balancing parties. In character creation you should try and arrange it so that everyone has different skills. This way with a good story you stand a good chance that everyone has a good amunt of time in the limelight.

... now to find some way for that to work in DnD instead of the current way and we'll have DnD 5.0