D&D 4E Mouseferatu weighs in on 4e

[Just Another User]

So the idea is that the system will somehow prevent people from taking three things you don't like about it, from three different books, and combining them into one thing you really don't like? That doesn't strike me as being terribly likely.

No, I think that what he means is that there some races, classes and mmmh, "tricks" that he really don't like but that judging from the preview WotC think are really cool, and he just hope that in 4e there is no overadbundace of them.

FWIW I agree with him, I never liked the "freakshow factor" of 3.X with a lot of weird races going around and (apparently) nobody caring, and 4e seems to make it worse (I really can't see how a creature like a 4e tiefling can go around in a PoL setting without a costant risk to be burned at a stake at every isolated, superstitios and suspicious of strangers village and with the premises of PoL I don't see how a village can be different from that. I hope they really cover that in the books), at least in 3.X the weirder races and classes and "tricks" are optionals. But it is harder for a GM to say "no, you can play a tiefling warlock, they don't exist in my homebrew" when they are in the core book of your game and the existence of such races can "color" quite heavily a world.

 

[BryonD]

I started in 1978, and I like the fluff, the lairs, the idea farms that appear in the W&M book, the implied setting, and presumably in the 4e MM. I liked MMIV and MMV.

I have a demanding full-time job, a new home, and a baby on the way (and therefore a pregnant wife -- it has its own implications). I NEED the fluff to help me with stuff. If I take a published module (I am running AoW now) and I can outfit it with some stuff from my own campaign ideas, generated from fluff in other books like MMIV, then the game has served me well. I really don't have time to wolrd-build at the level that someone like Lizard likes to, even though I WANT to.

If 4e gives me the tools, the help, the pseudo-setting stuff like lairs and a town or two, then I am gonna be STOKED.

I can't wait to read about the new village/town in the DMG.

There have been polls that overwhelmingly established that these ideas are "the winner" on the ENWorld 4E board. I'm not disputing that.
But I still stand by my predictions for the long term results.
Much of this stuff will be like fresh donuts. They are wonderful when they are hot out of the oven, but they don't take long to become stale and hard.

 

[rkanodia]

Yes, I know. I was amused by the fact that someone mentioned Have Gun, Will Travel in a D&D discussion -- the protagonist's name was Paladin. The attached file was his calling card.

I think you are spot on with the analogy. The new PoL conceit lends itself to that type of episodic story-telling. The heroes move from point to point, being hired at each one to help the towns folk. It's a easy and fun way for new DM's to get started without having to worry about building a big world. Even better, as you gain experience, you find that a world emerges from various bits and pieces.

Ah. I didn't see where you were going with that. The name is indeed a funny coincidence

Have Gun - Will Travel also shows that such a game doesn't have to be one dungeon crawl after another. Gunfighting was only one of Paladin's tools; investigation and diplomacy probably solved as many of his problems as violence did.

 

[Gargoyle]

According to some posters on the Paizo boards, WoTC sent out an email to the playtesters today that allowed playtesters to share their positive experiences, but not the negatives.

Yes, and WotC is secretly controlled by Vecna's evil robots.

http://www.vecnarobotics.com/robotics/product-services/bear-robot/index.shtml

 

[scruffygrognard]

Based on Ari's and Jon's actions it seems that WotC's NDA is a bit more specific than that, and has separate language regarding (1) the rules, and (2) their opinion of the rules. Professionally I would be curious to see how it's drafted (I draft NDA's for big banks and hedge funds at my day job).

Based on a few posters at Paizo, I am under the impression that WotC sent e-mails to playtesters saying:

"You are allowed to say positive things about your experiences with 4th edition -- example, example, example" but "are not allowed to talk about your negative impressions of 4th edition -- example, example, example".

If this is so, then the objectivity of playtester reviews in the whole (though I'm sure that the two reviews I've read here are legitimately positive) is questionable.

Can anyone confirm or refute that WotC sent out such an e-mail and, if so, how can playtester results be relied upon to give an accurate picture of the game's merits?

 

[Just Another User]

According to some posters on the Paizo boards, WoTC sent out an email to the playtesters today that allowed playtesters to share their positive experiences, but not the negatives.

well, if that is true then the questions are, how many playtester there were in total? and how many of them shared their positive experiences?

I counted two, until now, both in this thread. Someone know/heard of others?

 

[Shroomy]

I haven't heard any others either. The "negative" impressions mentioned on the Paizo board were sketchy at best. I was actually surprised that I hadn't heard anything about this here or at the RPG.net boards.

 

[Dausuul]

I don't think it's a good idea to have a tiered supplement series in which "you must be this tall to play" using the later-published books and new players are kept in the kiddie pool represented by the core. All supplements should be extremely accessible, because that will encourage new players to buy lots of them, which will benefit us all.

Oh, I think we can have "advanced" supplements... that's what third-party publishers are for.

 

[Just Another User]

Even if that "only positive impressions" isn't true (or even if it is) it is weird that nobody else said their opinion by now. I mean, playtesters are gamers, they probably are bursting from the wish to say something about the game. I know I would at their place.

 

[Dragonblade]

According to some posters on the Paizo boards, WoTC sent out an email to the playtesters today that allowed playtesters to share their positive experiences, but not the negatives.

Any actual evidence of this? Or is this just all hearsay?