D&D 4E I'm really concerned about 4E
- Thread starter Odhanan
- Start date
Simia Saturnalia
First Post
I'm certainly wallet-voting virtual minis.
Hell, I've been wallet-voting all their minis for years.
I want the top-of-the-scale dragons as display pieces, but other than that minis are for painting.
Hell, I've been wallet-voting all their minis for years.
I want the top-of-the-scale dragons as display pieces, but other than that minis are for painting.
WayneLigon
Adventurer
A'koss said:
As fas as I know it was a throw-away line in a blog post where they said they considered it for about five seconds but like so much else, it'll now be repeated as gospel against the evil 4E.
Desdichado
Hero
I don't understand that core complaint. Does anyone actually view "core" materials differently than other materials? Especially if it's a top-down mandated approach?
To me, "core" is what the DM says is applicable to the game. In our group's case, it's usually pretty much anything by WotC. Non-core would be third party d20 stuff.
To me, "core" is what the DM says is applicable to the game. In our group's case, it's usually pretty much anything by WotC. Non-core would be third party d20 stuff.
I have a few players who feel the same way. They saw 3.5, and they see 4E, as a money-grab to some degree, but also as a way to change D&D into something "else." Perhaps make it more its own milieu, perhaps something else.
Anyway, they say "4E? Already? Great, they are going to nerf [insert favorite spell or feat here], change how [insert ability here] works, dumb down [insert book-keeping element here]"
From a DM's perspective, 3.5 did a lot right. It did a lot wrong, too, but the change from 3.0 to 3.5 had a big impact on DM's and how the game ran from their side of the table.
I personally think that 4E is taking that and running hail mary with it. They are blowing all the chaff from the wheat, killing a lot of sacred cows. The idea is to make the game easier to run, faster to run, but keep the whole sense of options options options.
The problem, I think, is that such a sweeping change, all at once, is what's going to hurt things. They are essentially drilling down the most basic idea of what D&D is and rebuilding it from the ground up. Being that it's 30+ years later, and you have different people designing this new edition than those that created the very first edition, it's essentially going to look and feel like a new game.
The question then: is this new game better?
Well, that's all just opinion, I'm afraid.
I like a lot of what I've seen, but I'm concerned by a little bit of it too. Luckily, you can ALWAYS house-rule stuff.
Oh, and how is going with the "1st Core Three of 4E" any different than saying "Core Rulebooks only in 3E?" Buy what you want, deny what you don't. If players complain, kick 'em out, here them out, or whatever you do in your current game.
Or stick to 3.5. Despite my liking 4E's news so far, I know my players are 3.5E fans, so we'll be sticking with that edition for at least the next year and change (gotta finish Rappan Athuk Reloaded AND World's Largest Dungeon....so maybe the next 2 1/2 to 3 years...)
I'll game with 4E players on a different night ;-P
Anyway, they say "4E? Already? Great, they are going to nerf [insert favorite spell or feat here], change how [insert ability here] works, dumb down [insert book-keeping element here]"
From a DM's perspective, 3.5 did a lot right. It did a lot wrong, too, but the change from 3.0 to 3.5 had a big impact on DM's and how the game ran from their side of the table.
I personally think that 4E is taking that and running hail mary with it. They are blowing all the chaff from the wheat, killing a lot of sacred cows. The idea is to make the game easier to run, faster to run, but keep the whole sense of options options options.
The problem, I think, is that such a sweeping change, all at once, is what's going to hurt things. They are essentially drilling down the most basic idea of what D&D is and rebuilding it from the ground up. Being that it's 30+ years later, and you have different people designing this new edition than those that created the very first edition, it's essentially going to look and feel like a new game.
The question then: is this new game better?
Well, that's all just opinion, I'm afraid.
I like a lot of what I've seen, but I'm concerned by a little bit of it too. Luckily, you can ALWAYS house-rule stuff.
Oh, and how is going with the "1st Core Three of 4E" any different than saying "Core Rulebooks only in 3E?" Buy what you want, deny what you don't. If players complain, kick 'em out, here them out, or whatever you do in your current game.
Or stick to 3.5. Despite my liking 4E's news so far, I know my players are 3.5E fans, so we'll be sticking with that edition for at least the next year and change (gotta finish Rappan Athuk Reloaded AND World's Largest Dungeon....so maybe the next 2 1/2 to 3 years...)
I'll game with 4E players on a different night ;-P
DonTadow
First Post
JVisgaitis said:Then don't buy them. Just because they are saying that they want to release a lot more books as core doesn't obligate you to buy them. That goes doubly so for the digital miniatures and everything else. I don't understand why people get so uptight about stuff like this. WotC is a business. They are trying to make money. If you don't like their practices or the Digital Initiative, don't subscribe to them! Buy the initial 3 core rulebooks and move on and be happy with life.
Seconded. I'll also say wait a few months. We're eight months out folks. Vista didn't have a solid preview for journalists until month 4 (outside of beta crap). I personally have stopped reading a majority of the 4e threads. lot of them are rumors, hearsay misinterpreting one sentence ofa blog to mean its the end of the world.
If anything magic is more of a reassurance. Magic has an online game that is completely separate from the ccg. I like that. D and D will be the same. I seriously doubt I'll be using the online tabletop no matter how spectacular the graphics are if I am regulated to buying lines of code to play with it. Consider it a good thing that there are already other established tabeltop software out here that have vowed to go on even with 4e looming.
From an Iron DM's perspective
, 3.5 did little to help out the DM. It is a DM's prep nightmare. It's the reason there are more players than DMs and definitely the reason there are more mediocre DM's than good ones. I don't know a good DM who hasn't had to house rule something or another (myself included). it's the main reason why the marketshare for Dungeons and DRagons is not growing. Why its not easy to pick up and play. I don't think they're dumbing down anything as much as they seem to be equating more stuff to common sense.
I chuckle when I hear comments like (they're throwing out the rule book, they are killing all the sacred cows, they are making it into something else). What by chance are they making into? Don't say mmorpgs, because an mmorpg can never be a tabletop.
I think they're just trying to make the game accessible. If that means stopping the idiotic rolling of 25d6 or rolling saves into defense I am all for it. If that means making wizards a little more useful than the occasional bomb Cheers, because the end result is the game's growth and popularity.
When I first got 3e, I sat at that table. A bunch of 30+ year olds all griping about how money hungry this new wotc company is. How they're "changing everything". How they're throwing away the rulebook. And you know what? I ignored it. Because dungeons and dragons has never been a set of rules. EVER. It is what it is because it was one of the first games to blend a dynamic game and acting out the character. That is not going to change. The only thing that changes is how well the two interact. 3.5, though less gamey than advanced and 1st edition is still quite technical. The more dice roll the less Dungeons and Dragons, it actually is and the more war tactile game it actually is.
Thornir Alekeg
Albatross!
I think I see what you are trying to say; you want 4e to be so good that you can't help yourself but buy just about everything they offer up. Unfortunately, what you have been seeing so far is not making you quiver with anticipation at getting your hands on all that D&D goodness. You will buy the 3 main 4e books, but you fear that you will feel a lot of buyers remorse if you keep purchasing WotC products because it won't be material that really appeals to you. Is that right?Odhanan said:
If so, I can tell you I understand just where you are coming from - it happened to me with 3e. I bought the core books, I have enjoyed playing 3e, but whenever I bought another book from WotC, I felt...underwhelmed; look, more PrCs that don't make sense, more feats, more "power-ups." The new materials just didn't make me want to rush out and try all the new stuff right away. It hit the point where I stopped buying more materials. I felt a little lost for a while as others kept buying books and discussing them. After a while I grew used to the idea that I was not playing D&D on the "cutting edge."
I'm looking forward to seeing the 4e rules, and I hope they will be great, but I already know that I will probably not go back to buying lots of materials beyond the three core rulebooks, and I'm OK with that.
Mercule
Adventurer
I really don't get the whole DI heartburn. I was rabid collector in 1E and (early) 2E. I had my complete set of 1E books, but I didn't bother with a subscription to Dragon and only bought one or two issues of Dungeon. They're an add-on.
Same with the DI. You don't have to get them. You aren't missing much if you don't.
Then again, I don't really understand the die-hard collector mentality. In 1E, I found a lot of use in every book (except Dungeoneer Survival Guide). In 3E, there are some books I just won't touch (Book of Madness -- I hate beholders, aboleths, and mind flayers; Magic of Incarnum; wouldn't have gotten Tome of Battle, except it was half-price or less). Some books, for any RPG, just aren't applicable to every game.
On the other hand, if you're really a completist, then you can rejoice with 4E. Your collection of 3.5 books will be done. Just stick with them.
Same with the DI. You don't have to get them. You aren't missing much if you don't.
Then again, I don't really understand the die-hard collector mentality. In 1E, I found a lot of use in every book (except Dungeoneer Survival Guide). In 3E, there are some books I just won't touch (Book of Madness -- I hate beholders, aboleths, and mind flayers; Magic of Incarnum; wouldn't have gotten Tome of Battle, except it was half-price or less). Some books, for any RPG, just aren't applicable to every game.
On the other hand, if you're really a completist, then you can rejoice with 4E. Your collection of 3.5 books will be done. Just stick with them.
GoodKingJayIII
First Post
I personally have zero interest in the digital initiative. So I'm right there with you. Unfortunately there's just a lot we don't know right now, and there's no way of knowing until this stuff goes live. The best thing for me has been to not get caught up in the hype, positive or negative, and just wait and see. That's not to say I haven't been excited or unhappy with certain revelations, but it's difficult for me to understand how the whole game is going to mesh until I have the actual copy in my hands.
I will say that if Star Wars Saga is any indication of their design philosophy, then I'm very hopeful for the new edition. But the real question on my mind is the digital initiative and how (not) participating will affect my game.
I will say that if Star Wars Saga is any indication of their design philosophy, then I'm very hopeful for the new edition. But the real question on my mind is the digital initiative and how (not) participating will affect my game.
