D&D 4E Not going to 4e

[Wolfspider]

I will probably scan the SRD for ways of improving a couple weak-points in 3.5 (like grappling), but I'm sticking with 3.5.

EDIT: Not only am I not going to 4E, I suspect that everyone in the thread about going to 4E is also not going to 4E.

 

[Wormwood]

There was booing? Ouch. :\

I was saying, "Boo-urns."

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I'm quite sure I won't be making a decision to switch until I have the books in hand to make a proper, final judgement. However, I will say that I am presently fascinated with the idea of a 1E campaign as much as the possibilities of a new edition.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Truth be told, I'm not thrilled about 4e. Some is ok, some, not so much. But even if I wanted to give it a try, I'd have to do alot of convincing. No one in either of my gaming groups wants to have anything to do with it. (And both of my gaming groups are comprised of completely different people, save me.)

 

[Turanil]

Just wanting to see who else besides myself really has no interest in 4e .

Except for an occasional eyeballing in this forum, I have no intent to waste my time with 4e. Already I have abandoned 3.5 and prefer to keep on with True20, C&C, and Savage Worlds. In reading a few threads here and there, I understand that D&D has become a genre in itself, not the generic fantasy game it was meant to be many years ago. Also, 4e seems to be intended for a younger generation with whom I certainly don't share the interests (anime, WoW, etc.). Being the old nostalgic player I am, with traditional fantasy preferences, 4e is definitely not for me. Besides, I am tired of what I perceive as a money-grab scheme to draw ever more from my wallet (when the last Savage World rulebook is but 10$ all in all!). There is so many things I could do with my money...

 

[DM_Blake]

Not switchiing to 4E -- if I ever run anything again, I'd like it to be B/X.
The breaking point for me was several things that they described as "problems" that would be "fixed."
1) "Wizard should never have to fall back on a dagger, staff, or crossbow"
2) "No more 'dead levels'"
3) "Paladins don't have to be LG"
4) "Playing a support character isn't fun"
5) "1st-level PCs should be 'heroes'", 'heroes' meaning super-tough

Any one of these changes would be enough for me to be not interested in running 4E. Taken together, they make me not even want to play it. It's clear from their design principles that the hobby has moved on.

This has to be a troll, right?

I mean, of all the 4e changes to gripe about, and I'm still firmly on the go/no go fence myself, I see 1, 2, 3, and 4 on your list as very good things to fix. I'm thrilled to death that they're fixing each of those things.

Wizards relying on crossbows half the day is silly, and no fun for the player. Dead levels shouldn't exist and I cannot fathom why you would be upset at removing them - why would anyone desire a 'dead level'?. LG paladins are fine, but why don't any other gods get cool holy warriors to compete? And apparently from your post you want players in support roles to not have fun.

I cannot justify any of those 4 points as being appropriate or desirable for any game.

Now, I agree with you on number 5. I don't think 1st level characters should be heroes.

So, was this just a troll, or do you truly believe those "problems" should not be fixed?

As for me, my biggest reason for avoiding 4e is the apparent restrictions being applied to classes. I hate forcing people into a narrow role and making it harder to break out of that role. Fine for WOW, fine for other video games. Not fine for PnP in my book.

 

[Evilusion]

Well I was on the wait and see list myself. The last three or four news updates has put me in to the Not going to 4e list.

Evilusion

 

[moriarty777]

I don't plan on running it... I have no idea if I'll ever even play it. At this point, I don't run 3.x either since I grew tired of various aspects of the rule set from a DM's point of view. I have no problem playing in certain 3.x games though.

That being said, I may still buy the 4th Ed. PHB (I'd say a 50% chance). I'd be more interested in porting a couple of concepts over to 'fix' issues I have with 3.x

M

 

[Arnwyn]

So, was this just a troll, or do you truly believe those "problems" should not be fixed?

Kinda goofy what certain ENWorlders are calling "trolls", these days. I can see you're really new here, though, so maybe you're just learning.

In any case, FWIW, I don't think 1, 3, and 4 need to be "fixed", either. (Based on personal experience only, of course - I don't give two craps about how strangers play, nor should I.) However, with that said, I'm not against them being improved.

 

[Dristram]

I had gotten fed up with 3.5, so I switched to C&C. With 4e, I thought maybe it could bring me back. But they're making too many changes that take away the classic D&D feel. To me, the only reason 4e will be D&D is because of the name. So at this point in time, I'm not switching. I'm happy CKing C&C.

That said, if when it's released, buddies of mine want to run a 4e game and invite me, I'll play just as if they invited me to play any rpg. With the right group of players, any rpg can be fun. But I won't be DMing 4e.