D&D 4E Paizo and 4e.

[tenkar]

Wow! In one post we get:

1) "make it up yourself" (despite the fact that no one knows how the new rules will work, especially for things like the new magic system)

The original poster suggested that he would have to make up classes / races himself. I indicated that many would be in the same boat.

2) "use internet posted material" (knowing full well that when PHBII/III/IV comes out with an official version, you have to retcon the character, perhaps drasticly)

What about Favored Souls (a perennial ENWorld favorite)? Scouts? Numerous other classes that WotC has added to the mix? None of these will be in the 1st 4e PH. Many will be looking to play their old classes in the new edition.

3) "if that's too hard, don't play 4th ed" (you aren't their target audience)

I believe WotC is hoping that the vast majority of 3.5 campaigns will wrap up and new campaigns will be started with 4e. Look at the FR reboot. Kinda like going from XP to Vista and finding some of your favorite programs no longer work or don't work as well with the upgrade. As an aside I have stuck with XP

4) "druids aren't really 'core'" (despite the fact they were core in 1st ed, 2nd ed and 3rd ed)

I mourn the loss of Bards... I have played such since the old Bard Variant in Dragon #56. I never said Druids or Bards aren't "core", just that there are many classes being actively played that are official that aren't going to be in the initial 4e release.

and the coop d' grass:
5) "no one is forcing you to play 4th ed!!1!!"

No one IS being forced to play with the new rules. I'm interested in seeing what WotC puts out and I am hopeful that it will be for me, but if it isn't I've got more then enough 3.5 books to last me a lifetime.

The only thing missing is "I, for one, welcome our new Fruit Roll-Up masters!"

Nice... Like the way you read into my post stuff that wasn't there

The issue of converting 3.5 druids to 4th ed (assuming druids aren't in the PHB I) is a valid concern for some people, I daresay a lot of people. Handwaving away those concerns like this is not a real answer to a valid concern. It's borderline rudely dismissive.

Well, I was not being rude or dismissive. As I stated earlier, I been playing a version of the Bard since 1e. I'll be playing one in 4e even though there won't be one officially at release (assuming I play 4e at all).

Again, my feeling is that WotC is hoping there will be very few conversions and more reboots when 4e hits. I'm not hopeful that converting 3.5 to 4e will be easy, let alone accurate and complete.

 

[carmachu]

Uh, that's a serious logical fallacy - you can have different views that are valid or invalid, especially here on the forums. You're applying the fallacy of the excluded middle; it's not either/or, it's a spectrum.

Except...we're using number type information to back up views, not jsut eth views themselves.

There's no difference in these statements:

"More than a few people had their desire to DM killed by 3e"

"More than a few people are not switching to 4e"


No difference there in the statements, when used to back up your opinion on the matters. We've seen folks use the second statement to back up the view that there is major dissent, and that there would be a strong following for 3.5/3.75 hybrid....which some folks have ruled out as teh internet doesnt speak for the whole.

It stands to reason that a bunch of folks posting on enworld that they no longer DM becuase of 3e'S complications doesnt represent the whole either. As with teh above paragraph, the more vocal voices are just teh ones heard.

 

[RigaMortus2]

WotC has been up front stated that it is going to be difficult to convert 3x characters to 4E and they won't be putting out a conversion guide for that reason. Sorry to say, but either (a) start a new campaign when 4E comes out (b) make all new characters when 4E comes out within the same setting/world (c) try your best to convert using the new rules (if you have a 3.x Fighter, there will be a Fighter in 4E, even if they are completely different mechanics-wise) or (d) don't convert, continue to play 3E.

These are all valid options. Just because you don't want to pick one of them doesn't mean they aren't valid. I fear, you will have to choose the lesser evil here, and only you and your group can decide what that is and what works best for you. There is nothing WotC (or any company really) can do to appease all the people all the time.

 

[tenkar]

3.75 was dead before it was born.

Those that would have been needed to be the driving forces behind it have indicated it is not a viable alternative.

As they are successful in the RPG business I expect they have a better idea of what makes good business sense then the internet masses.

(I would have bought a Necro/Paizo 3.75 release in a heartbeat)

 

[Umbran]

Cant have it both ways folks. Pick one. Either the forum views are valid or their not. Cant cherry pick here.

Do not try to "call out" one person for behavior of nameless others, please. It isn't in the least bit fair.

In general, I think this thread needs, as MM puts it, the tension dialed down about three notches. Step back, and take a breather, folks.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Wow. Catsclaw227 may I suggest you humbly report to WotC as head of marketing to replace whatever nutmunch they have now? If something like this was said at GenCon instead of "dewd, man, new game! Itz great! Yur current game, sucks, dewd! Um, grapple broken, man...um...uuhhh" I might have actually sat and patiently awaited 4E with an objective viewpoint than coming to the independent idea that 4E was pushed on WotC by the big "H" and that the designers are scrambling to do "what dad says" or they'll get in trouble. Oh well, hindsight and all that.

-DM Jeff

I agree that the GenCon 4E annoucement was handled kinda poorly. It looked to me like it was a last minute decission to make the announcement. But over the past couple of months, I have really been liking what I have been seeing about 4E. I am sure there will be some things I dislike, but I hope the majority of the changes I will like

 

[carmachu]

Do not try to "call out" one person for behavior of nameless others, please. It isn't in the least bit fair.

In general, I think this thread needs, as MM puts it, the tension dialed down about three notches. Step back, and take a breather, folks.

Excuse me. I am not calling one person out. This goes across many people, of both sides of teh issue.

Its something I've seen as a WHOLE in teh forum. Folks need to pick which they wish as valid. Because I get tired of seeing it valid in one particular case, but not in another.

 

[tenkar]

Excuse me. I am not calling one person out. This goes across many people, of both sides of teh issue.

Its something I've seen as a WHOLE in teh forum. Folks need to pick which they wish as valid. Because I get tired of seeing it valid in one particular case, but not in another.

It the nature of the beast called "opinion".

When your opinion is backed by other posters then their opinion is valid... when opinions don't match up their opinions are invalid.

Opinions are not facts. Personal bias will always be a part of which polls / opinions / "facts" one will consider valid.

 

[Twowolves]

I didn't mean to come off as hostile or rude (at least. not this time ), so I apologize for that. I wasn't also really calling out tenkar on his post. It just seemed a prime example of some of the things I've seen said (or paraphrased, I suppose) in this subforum. Seemed a nice post to reply too.

But again, I am not angry or heated, didn't mean to make anyone else feel that way either. My bad!

 

[Jim Hague]

Except...we're using number type information to back up views, not jsut eth views themselves.

Except...that there are no numbers to back up your statements.

There's no difference in these statements:

"More than a few people had their desire to DM killed by 3e"

"More than a few people are not switching to 4e"


No difference there in the statements, when used to back up your opinion on the matters. We've seen folks use the second statement to back up the view that there is major dissent, and that there would be a strong following for 3.5/3.75 hybrid....which some folks have ruled out as teh internet doesnt speak for the whole.

It stands to reason that a bunch of folks posting on enworld that they no longer DM becuase of 3e'S complications doesnt represent the whole either. As with teh above paragraph, the more vocal voices are just teh ones heard.

No, that's an assumption based on anecdotal evidence at best. What are you trying to get at here, exactly? You keep making broad statements with nothing more than anecdotes (and not even specific ones) to support them.