D&D 4E Is my friend's unwillingness to try 4e irrational?

[Mercule]

We're talking about a hobby, here. The motivating factor in a hobby is to have some fun and relax. If 3.5 does this for him at an acceptable level, then it would be silly for him to commit to changing, at this point. He might take a look at it, later, and decide that it'd meet his needs even better, or he might not.

I don't think your friend is irrational at all.

On the other hand, there are people like me (and, from the sound of it, you) whose hobby needs are not satisfactorily met by 3.5. It would be irrational for us to stick with it. For myself, it's never been about 3.5 vs 4e. It's been Hero vs. Savage Worlds vs. 4e (or even nWoD).

It's all in taste and interest.

 

[danzig138]

Anyone who passes judgment on 4e (be it for or against) before they have seen the book is foolish.We have been given bits and pieces about 4e and nothing else. It is too soon to decide if you will or won't be switching your games to 4e.

Bull. Sure, all we've gotten so far are bits and pieces, but quite a few bits and pieces. If everything they've revealed so far is something I don't like, something that just doesn't jive with how I think games should be (at least the ones I play), then it's not foolish for me to figure I won't be adopting the game. Why? Because they aren't designing the game I need or want. And that's okay. If the bits and pieces were 50/50 or something, then sure, judgment should probably be withheld, but so far, that isn't the case. There are quite a few things in life I know I won't like without ever trying them (like skydiving), and it's not foolishness - it's a result of knowing myself.


For the OP: Sure, it might be irrational? So what? Leave it be, and when the time comes, things will work themselves out one way or the other, and there's no point in even bothering with it before then. Burn that bridge when it gets here. Until, good gaming with all your friends.

 

[Raduin711]

Eeeeyeeesh. They're friends for crying out loud. It's only natural to respect what your friend likes to do, even if it's different from what you enjoy doing... you almost make it sound like a sin for someone not to be excited about 4e and not wanting to be included in the game...

For the record, I would agree that it is no sin for Bob to not want to play 4e, and continue playing 3.5.

 

[PoeticJustice]

Never Mind.

 

[rogueattorney]

Let me be "Bob" for a second...

"I'm looking at my game shelf right now, and I see at least 4 different versions of D&D and another 9 rpgs, all of which I'd be perfectly happy to play with you guys. I have an rpg wishlist with another half-dozen rpgs I'd be happy to pick up and play with you guys. I also have a few thousand dollars worth of board, war, and card games that I'd love to play with you guys.

I have no interest whatsoever in buying into another fantasy rpg when I already have four perfectly good ones (not counting multiple versions of D&D). I have no interest in learning a new game, when I haven't already explored all the ins and outs of the games I have.

I can see you guys are excited about 4e, and if you guys really want to buy another edition of the game I've already bought 4 times, knock yourselves out. I'm going to sit this one out and maybe join a softball league or something."

While I don't know "Bob," I'd guess his reasoning is something like that.

At least that's why I won't be buying any 4e stuff. If that makes me irrational... oh well.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I can't help feeling sorry for 'Bob'. If I were in that position, I would be similarly outta luck, in the same kinda way. But at least there would still be the other group. . .

It seems he hasn't been very articulate in expressing why he's not keen on 4e, true enough. But it's pretty clear that he's just not (keen.)

Would he be willing to DM 3e for you guys (and would you be willing to play it) - thus keeping some 3e happening in that group, but without the DMs opposed to running it having to do so - and try out playing 4e, just for the hell of it, even if it's a bit distasteful. . . as an experiment?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Anyone who passes judgment on 4e (be it for or against) before they have seen the book is foolish.

I would point you to this poll (yeah yeah self selecting and so forth, but almost 56%), in which case you seem to be saying a whole lot of people on these boards are foolish in their decisions.

Even though we don't know what the rules will be like, exactly, we have a pretty good idea of what it will be like to play 4e. We know the design philosophy, we know what they're aiming for, and we know that they're good designers. Now, what their aiming for isn't to everyone's taste, so not everyone is going to love it, but speaking for myself, I'm switching to 4e when it comes out, and I find it very unlikely that I'm not going to love this game.

People point out quite often that we aren't getting hit by marketers selling the game to us, and this is true. One of the things this means is that we aren't seeing a blockbuster trailer of 4e with all the best parts made even better. We aren't getting "Next time on Lost" where the marketers lie to us to get us to tune in next week (though this seasons has been awesome!). We're getting the creators honest feelings on their work. They're trying to sell it, sure, but we're getting some sneak peeks under the hood and not just a flashy shot of 4e driving on a winding mountain road.

We can't be sure how much of these new aspects are emphasized in the game until we see it. We don't know how similar to 3e it is. When they show us a new mechanic, we can't be sure if it will show up every session, every encounter, or every round, not positively. But, anyone who has loved all but one or two things they've seen will almost certainly love the game and anyone who has disliked all but one or two things will probably dislike the game.

 

[Dragonblade]

Would he be willing to DM 3e for you guys (and would you be willing to play it) - thus keeping some 3e happening in that group, but without the DMs opposed to running it having to do so - and try out playing 4e, just for the hell of it, even if it's a bit distasteful. . . as an experiment?

Thats not a bad idea. I would certainly love to play in a game that Bob ran. I no longer like DMing 3.5, but I can still play it. And though I have never played in a game he has run, I think he would be a fantastic DM.

 

[Grimstaff]

I would point you to this poll (yeah yeah self selecting and so forth, but almost 56%), in which case you seem to be saying a whole lot of people on these boards are foolish in their decisions.

Another interesting trope touched on in that poll is that folks who are switching to 4E, sight unseen, have a very specific reason why: they are tired of 3.5 and its number crunching. On the other hand, like Bob, folks who have already decided not to try 4E, again sight unseen, have much more ephemeral and varied reasons for not wanting to. I suspect the root cause for most of them is simply "I didn't need a change, I was fine the way things were, so all this fuss annoys the hell out of me!"

I also suspect that Bob, as well as many other 4E pooh-poohers, will eventually come around on their own. Despite the very vocal minority, I don't believe there will be any more gamers playing 3.5 in June of '09 than there are playing 2E or any other older edition of the game.

 

[JahellTheBard]

I don't believe there will be any more gamers playing 3.5 in June of '09 than there are playing 2E or any other older edition of the game.

I just hope you are wrong ... but only time will tell us .... maybe some kink of 3.75 will go on on his path ...

I think there will be freedom for everyone to chose ... and besides ... after all, we do not know what 4 ed. will really be when June comes ...