I think I have finally "put my finger on it"

[Doug McCrae]

As for my tastes for D&D, its much like yours, but i want it european in flavor. Book of 9 Swords indicates to me that we are going to have fighters, rangers, knights, rogues, etc... flying through the air, jumping 20 feet into the air to land on roof tops, and then leap 40 to 50 feet from roof top to roof top, or leaping from treee to tree on the tips of their toes, or call on their "chi" to perform other super human and magical feats.

That's exactly what I wanted to see in 4e but it's not to be. Bill Slaviscek has said that fighters and rogues will be merely incredibly highly skilled, not supernatural. I feel that moving into the realm of the impossible is the only way fighters can achieve parity with mages. Plus I just like it.

 

[Reynard]

So too has D&D evolved. We should let other elements of fantasy in, otherwise D&D will stagnate, and discourage new blood, hinder new stories from being told, not new possibilities to be allowable under the rules.

I don't think he is saying that D&D can't or shouldn't evolve -- I think he is suggesting that such evolution means that D&D is no longer D&D from his perspective, that earlier editions or even other games will do D&D better than 4E in that context, and that means that D&D loses a fan and consumer and he loses D&D. I happen to share that perspective. It doesn't matter if 4E is a "better" game; it doesn't matter if it is more balanced or provides for high octane, summer blockbuster action. Those things aren't D&D, so the game 4E isn't better -- it is worse, "bad" even, because it is no longer D&D.

People that decide to get all defensive and snarky about those of us willing to share our misgivings about 4E need to realize that not everyone started playing with 3E, and not everyone wants the things that the 4E designers believe will make a "better", and better selling, D&D. Moreover, it is important to realize that we have an emotional investment in D&D -- it has been part of our lives for a very long time. In some cases, the majority of our lives. Of course we are going to be put off and upset that a long loved hobby and form of entertainment is getting revised to the point of no longer being viable from our perspective.

Also, I think it is important for everyone to remember that EN World is not a 4E community, or a 3E community. It is a D&D community and telling people to "not post" about things they care about in relationship to D&D is disingenuous and hurts the community. We might argue about how per-encounter abilities are awesome/teh suxxorz, but we can still discuss what makes a good campaign or how to build a great adventure or why dragons make great enemies.

 

[Rechan]

I don't think he is saying that D&D can't or shouldn't evolve -- I think he is suggesting that such evolution means that D&D is no longer D&D from his perspective, that earlier editions or even other games will do D&D better than 4E in that context, and that means that D&D loses a fan and consumer and he loses D&D. I happen to share that perspective. It doesn't matter if 4E is a "better" game; it doesn't matter if it is more balanced or provides for high octane, summer blockbuster action. Those things aren't D&D, so the game 4E isn't better -- it is worse, "bad" even, because it is no longer D&D.

People that decide to get all defensive and snarky about those of us willing to share our misgivings about 4E need to realize that not everyone started playing with 3E, and not everyone wants the things that the 4E designers believe will make a "better", and better selling, D&D. Moreover, it is important to realize that we have an emotional investment in D&D -- it has been part of our lives for a very long time. In some cases, the majority of our lives. Of course we are going to be put off and upset that a long loved hobby and form of entertainment is getting revised to the point of no longer being viable from our perspective.

And of course you have to realize that such an attitude was held when 3E came out, and when 2E came out. I'm certain there are those out there that still play 1E. I know there are people out there who still play 2E. Inevitably you will have people who say "No, I am not converting" for whatever reason - be it "This isn't D&D" to "I spent too much money on this edition's books" - I was certainly irked over the conversion, because that $100 leather bound Spell Compendium set I received for my birthday was bunk. And I've invested considerably in 3e.

As it was said earlier, Everyone has an opinion as to what D&D is. Someone might have a very Gygaxian attitude of "You roll 3d6 6 times, each time you roll that is the stat you roll period, and your only options are Fighter Thief Wizard Cleric and we're into the dungeon with drow in one room, a beholder in another and that's that". Some might think that Eberron is the Quintessential D&D experience. And no one is wrong. As well, given the varying ages we're dealing with, some who started with 3e may have been playing for most of their lives, or at least their adult lives.

But what we're dealing with also is a question of D&D Mechanics versus D&D Fluff. Thus far, I have seen no Fluff that gets away from the heart of D&D. We still have classes, with the Fighter/Rogue/Wizard/Cleric, and they will be going into dungeons to kill stuff. Mechanics wise, we can argue whether downgrading Vanican magic do Will/Encounter/Day is "Less D&D" or not, but I have yet to see much Fluff that says "This is not the same game".

Ultimately WotC has to make a decision as to "What" 4e D&D is going to be, and go with that. Either way they're going to anger people. Just announcing 4e has angered people.

 

[Treebore]

And of course you have to realize that such an attitude was held when 3E came out, and when 2E came out. I'm certain there are those out there that still play 1E. I know there are people out there who still play 2E. Inevitably you will have people who say "No, I am not converting" for whatever reason - be it "This isn't D&D" to "I spent too much money on this edition's books" - I was certainly irked over the conversion, because that $100 leather bound Spell Compendium set I received for my birthday was bunk. And I've invested considerably in 3e.

As it was said earlier, Everyone has an opinion as to what D&D is. Someone might have a very Gygaxian attitude of "You roll 3d6 6 times, each time you roll that is the stat you roll period, and your only options are Fighter Thief Wizard Cleric and we're into the dungeon with drow in one room, a beholder in another and that's that". Some might think that Eberron is the Quintessential D&D experience. And no one is wrong. As well, given the varying ages we're dealing with, some who started with 3e may have been playing for most of their lives, or at least their adult lives.

But what we're dealing with also is a question of D&D Mechanics versus D&D Fluff. Thus far, I have seen no Fluff that gets away from the heart of D&D. We still have classes, with the Fighter/Rogue/Wizard/Cleric, and they will be going into dungeons to kill stuff. Mechanics wise, we can argue whether downgrading Vanican magic do Will/Encounter/Day is "Less D&D" or not, but I have yet to see much Fluff that says "This is not the same game".

Ultimately WotC has to make a decision as to "What" 4e D&D is going to be, and go with that. Either way they're going to anger people. Just announcing 4e has angered people.

I've played almost every version of D&D (not Chainmail), and I have converted to every edition of D&D. 3E is the first edition of D&D I quit. It took me nearly 5 years to decide to quit. I seriously invested in every edition, including 3E. I have several hundred 3E books and modules (from White Wolf, Kenzer, Paradigm, Green Ronin, XRP, Goodman, Necromancer, Troll Lord Games, Mongoose, FFE, Privateer, Paizo, pretty much everyone) and a large metal miniature collection, tiles, etc...

My biggest reason to quit 3E was prep time. Second biggest reason was AoO rules. Third biggest reason was the scale of power. 4th is complexity/length of combat.

So if 4E is done right for me, prep time will be seriously reduced, AoO's will be all but gone, combat will be considerably faster. From what I have read and heard these are happening to some degree. Even the scale of power may be lowered a bit with the de emphasis of magic items. So 4E may actually get me back "into" D&D. Meaning the current edition being supported. I'm still into D&D, just very different from what is the current version. So that possibility makes me even more apprehensive. It makes me hope even more that they do it right for me this time.

Just I am hearing a lot of things that make it sound very possible that they will not. So I am going to feel very "up in the air" for over 5 months. I hope the apprehension is worth it when 4E arrives.

 

[Rechan]

Just I am hearing a lot of things that make it sound very possible that they will not. So I am going to feel very "up in the air" for over 5 months. I hope the apprehension is worth it when 4E arrives.

The Races and Classes/Monsters and somethingorother Preview books are coming out in December. So that's only three months you have to be up in the air before you can have some solid material to sink your teeth into.

 

[SteveC]

I just wanted to talk for a moment about the whole "the game is becoming Exalted!" meme that seems to be going around.

The thing is, the game is changing to continue to be current and relevant to new and younger players. Back in the day<tm> Gary and Company didn't draw all of the quirky D&Dism from ancient tomes of high literature, they drew them from what was popular at the time. That's not to say that there aren't strong elements of great literature in the game (Paladins anyone?) but those odd things that make D&D, well, D&D come from what was popular fantasy in the 70s.

Back in the day, Elric, Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser, Edger Rice Burroughs were all parts of popular geek culture of people growing up and going to college. Ditto for Lord of the Rings.

Today, with the exception of Lord of the Rings (thanks to the movies), none of those books are still in the mainstream of the collective sci-fi, college nerd crowd. I seriously doubt that a sizable number of gamers under 25 have even heard of most of the source material for D&D (again, with the exception of LotR). What's more, as much as I love Conan, Leiber, De Camp et. al, they actually weren't very good literature: they were largely Pulp novels, that were fun to read (the Incomplete Enchanter is one of my favorite guilty pleasure from the time) but they weren't exactly Shakespeare. Is there anything wrong with that? Of course not! But let's not make the mistake of saying that we're talking high art.

And that's why things are changing: to keep them relevant. Writing a game based largely on source material that your market increasingly hasn't ever heard of is not good a good business practice. Now I know that there are ENners out there who will tell me how they're 16 and Fletcher Pratt is their favorite author ever, but that's no longer the norm.

So as much as I love all of the old books, and as much as I dislike much of the fantasy that's popular today, D&D needs to change with the times to keep fresh and relevant to todays market.

Now when I start to see classes entirely based around young women who are mystically bonded with an animal, and must use that connection to learn about their mysterious heritage and defeat the evil dark lord, well, I'll join the grognard club as well. Well maybe not if I play the class and get a pony.

Just my $.02.

--Steve

 

[Dalamar]

jumping 20 feet into the air to land on roof tops, and then leap 40 to 50 feet from roof top to roof top, or leaping from treee to tree on the tips of their toes, or call on their "chi" to perform other super human and magical feats.

Your average 20th level fighter without magic items can currently expect to jump up 9ft or long jump 35ft regularly without even having had to focus on jumping if he has a running start. A Fighter who is focused on jumping (Acrobatic and Skill Focus, throw in Run and 5 ranks in Tumble for a bit of extra) with good Strength (say... 18, reasonable for a 20th level melee fighter without magic items) and he's making 50ft long jumps regularly (total modifier +38 on running jumps). Make that a raging 20th level barbarian instead and he has a good chance of exceeding 60ft on a running long jump.

I just don't understand when people say they don't want DnD to become something like this when it already is like this.

 

[jimgoings]

MMORPG Influences

I think that more than *any* other single thing, modern MMORPGs are influencing the new edition of D&D. Much of what WotC has mentioned so far seems to be similar to concepts found in WoW, Everquest, LotRo, etc.

I think this is a good thing for the most part. Once concern, however, is that current MMORPG roles are very defined and and tend to feel the same to me, even when changing from WoW to LotRo. The tanks, nukers, healers, etc have established roles that work well in combination with each other and having the right balance means a great party. However, not all D&D games can be balanced this way. What if no one wants to play a certain role?

 

[Raven Crowking]

When a fighter can take a giant-hurled boulder in the chest without being knocked down and keep swinging like he was at full power, he's superhuman.

The hit point system is deliberately abstract. If you can show me where in the rules a fighter can "take a giant-hurled boulder in the chest without being knocked down and keep swinging like he was at full power" I'll concede that you are correct. However, the hit point system doesn't do this.

RC

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

What's more, as much as I love Conan, Leiber, De Camp et. al, they actually weren't very good literature: they were largely Pulp novels, that were fun to read but they weren't exactly Shakespeare. Is there anything wrong with that? Of course not! But let's not make the mistake of saying that we're talking high art.

Sure, writing like Howard or Leiber is so easy, so artless, pretty much anyone can do it. I'm sure it's just that nobody chooses to.

Let's not treat these guys as if they're the founding fathers of an entire literary genre.

Fencing, fighting, wenching, drinking, whoring, and sorcery-- pfah! You don't see that kind of stuff in Shakespeare.