Is this what you went through with 3rd Edition?

[Cadfan]

My reaction to 3e and to 4e were about the same.

When 3e came out, at first I thought, "What? Why?"

But then I read some of it. And I saw that it was the same game as 2e, except with all the different subsystems rolled into a cohesive whole. I saw that attack rolls were really just the same, except easier to remember. I saw that skills were basically the same, except standardized on a roll of a d20. I saw that character classes were the same, except that now you could mix and match classes and races pretty effectively without all sorts of rules wackiness. And I was excited.

When 4e came out, I first thought, "What? Why? Tome of Battle just came out! D&D has already been fixed! What's left to improve other than maybe a general rebalancing of classes and spells?"

But then I read a bit. And I learned that it was basically the same game as 3e, except with rules wackiness fixed. This time, instead of the broad, sweeping standardization that 3e brought to the game, it was more technical mathematical fixes. Like fixing the way that unequal attack bonus progressions result in certain characters eventually becoming very bad. Or fixing the way that limited skill points lead to characters that excel in certain areas, but utterly fail at standard issue skills like riding a horse or swimming. And now I'm excited.

 

[Psion]

The metasetting is irrelevant to a person's game because everything about it is optional.

There is nothing in 4e stopping you from having dryads as beautiful forest spirits, evil chromatic dragons, good metallic dragons, lawful good paladins, gnomes, bards, the planes using the Great Wheel cosmology or anything else that isn't hard-wired into the rules system.

Oh, please. Nothing stops me... except for the fact that the published rules won't support it, everything published for the game will contradict it, and the players whine if you don't let them play stuff in the book.

That's not nothing.

 

[hong]

Psion is basically saying that he's experiencing what I experienced with Exalted and its handling of the Immaculates, but with more beating around the bush.

I still kinda like Exalted, though.

 

[shadowguidex]

I started my DD career in 1st edition, and have played every edition since. My current 3.5 campaign has lasted a couple of years - my group has gamed continuously since the release of 3.0.

My group is very enthusiastic about the release of 4E - everyone is scouring all the boards as much as possible trying to find more information. We have generally always been excited about gaming nights, but now we seem to spend at least an hour every week discussing all the new information we have found out about 4E. We plan to scrap our current game and get right into a brand new level one adventure that I have already began writing.

I personally am very diligent about polishing my adventures perfectly, trying to envision all possible loopholes and exploits, and trying to really flesh out the setting and the encounters. I am very excited about the ease that 4E will introduce in the area of writing the adventure from a DM's perspective. I spend hours and days writing adventure, yet I frequently feel that 3.5E is too cumbersome. 4E seems to be streamlining the DM's job without dumbing down the process. I can now create the exact monster I want in much less time, yet the monster will feel unique and challenging, and capable of doing things that no other monsters can do.

I think this needs to be said - there is always a silent majority that doesn't feel compelled to complain and will take change in stride. I believe the ratio of 4E lovers to haters is screwed drastically by a vocal minority that either loves to complain, or fears change. Many people fit into both categories.

 

[Henry]

http://groups.google.com/group/rec....bca0c3ec1e7447d9?hl=en&tvc=1#bca0c3ec1e7447d9

Cruising around Google groups I found discussions like the above that were hauntingly similar to discussions going on right now. This is only one thread that I picked out of thousands. Doing an advanced search of rec.games.frp.dnd from, say, December 1999 to March of 2000 reveals more similarities than you could believe.

 

[Blue]

Let me sum it up like this.

The people who I play with who hated 3ed before it was out hate 4e before it is out.
The people who I play with who had an open mind about 3ed before it was out have an open mind about 4e before it was out.

Right now, everyone I play with, including the "3ed haters" plays 3ed. (Well, 3.5, but they were on-board for 3.0.)

Basically, I see the same fervor, same sort of hate/love going on, same resistance to change and same starry eyes from something new as there was before 3.0 made it's debut. But in the end everyone was playing 3.0 because it was just a better system then AD&D 2nd.

Cheers,
=Blue(23)

 

[Umbran]

If you are proudly anti-4E, what can you tell me to convince me that this time you really mean it?

You were good up until this point.

It is entirely possible and reasonable for people to really mean something at one time, and then change their mind when they have more information. People change. Needs change. Tastes change. Opinions change.

 

[shadowguidex]

It is entirely possible and reasonable for people to really mean something at one time, and then change their mind when they have more information. People change. Needs change. Tastes change. Opinions change.

Well much of this sort of psychology is just showing us that the person generally fears change. They do not necessarily really honestly object to certain rules or ideas presented in 4E, they merely criticize because their comfort zone is being challenged and they feel the need to lash out against the source of their discomfort, even when the upcoming change is fixing cumbersome or broken ideas.

If a player has an ingrained sense of what a Fighter's round consists of, and have been playing the same way for years, it can be a system shock (1E Con based - roll%) to have that idea radically changed. The same goes for the layout of the planes, the core classes, and whatever other things that are viewed as being a long time constant to the game. I personally love the new cosmology, but many people will hate it simply because it is different - without really evaluating how bad the old system was, or the rationale for making the changes.

 

[WayneLigon]

So, do you think that this furor over 4th Edition is going to turn out to be much the same sort of panic at change and then coming to like the new edition?

It seems very likely.

 

[Psion]

Well much of this sort of psychology is just showing us that the person generally fears change. They do not necessarily really honestly object to certain rules or ideas presented in 4E, they merely criticize because their comfort zone is being challenged and they feel the need to lash out against the source of their discomfort, even when the upcoming change is fixing cumbersome or broken ideas.

Sure. But assuming everyone fits such a stereotype isn't too open minded or conducive to getting a real feel for what is going on. It could be as simple as many people had bad experiences with 2e and good experiences with 3e.