D&D 4E Rate your interest in 4e.

[Gallo22]

I voted 1. I'm a teeny weeny bit interested to see what they are going to do with it, but mostly I'm happy with my current game of 3.25 with bits of Pathfinder and Monte's BoEM thrown in. I'll probably thumb through the book but don't have any plans to purchase anytime soon, and only if I see some ideas worth stealing to use in my 3.25 game.

I must be a little dumb, because I'm just not seeing what all the excitment is about. I haven't since day one. So many gamers who have play tested say the new rules make it easier to run, yet I've never had a problem with 3.0/3.5. I think some gamers for get that the books are "guides" and no set in stone.

I'm very interested to see what the comments about 4th Ed will be after 6 months to a year after the release and see what rules gamers are complaining about then?

 

[Dragonblade]

I would vote 11 if it were an option. 4e is shaping up to be the best edition of D&D I have ever seen. And I have seen and played them them all except OD&D.

In fact, this may be the first edition of D&D where I need no houserules at all. I am far more excited now than I was when 3e was released. In fact, I haven't been this excited about a game, any game, since I was ten years old and cracked open my first D&D rulebook.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Ah. I have misused an already terrible analogy. I thought that "jumping the shark" was a way of saying that something is over-the-top, Hollywood-style awesome-to-the-point-of-absurdity. Like jumping over a shark in waterskis. Not "old guy trying to remain relevant by acting ridiculious."

The two are related...FYI

I'm a six. With some of the recent news I'm leaning toward it. I do like a lot of aspects of the game, my criticisms probably lay more with the insane things things that some of the more ardent supporters can be inclined to say than with the game itself.

I do think some of 4e's worst enemies are, in fact, its biggest fans.

And it does have to overcome the fact that for most of it, 3e is "good enough" for me. It's like they're adding drops of water to the ocean -- the fact that you're adding drops isn't enough to get me to say that you've changed the ocean. Continued 3e support from Pathfinder and, perhaps, from companies disillusioned with any kind of theoretical GSL poison pill clause becoming reality, is just another feather in the cap.

What might make or break this deal is twofold. #1 will be the GSL. If there is a poison pill, I'll be slightly against picking up 4e. #2 is DDI. If it sucks, the idea of playing pick-up games and getting the rules for $10/month instead of buying books, might be out. Either thing would put me more against it, both together would probably make 4e basically worthless to me.

 

[Zil]

This is probably why I am more interested in Pathfinder right now. Paizo has released much more information than WotC has, and they've released it in a much more useful format. Paizo is also soliciting playtesting from a much wider base of players...anyone who wants to playtest it can do so. In short: I've seen more of Pathfinder than I have of 4E, and I've played more Pathfinder than I have 4E. This doesn't make it a better game, necessarily...but it does make me more interested.

Ditto on the Pathfinder interest. I'm thinking of starting a new campaign up in the next couple of weeks using the Pathfinder Alpha rules. The open play test of the alpha rules was a good move on Paizo's part.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

I never understand the people who care about the OGL for 3.x or a possible "poison pill" in the GSL. I guess these people like to feel important and "enlightened" by "standing up against" the "evil, greedy corporations" when all they're really doing is hurting themselves.

WotC is in business to make money. Period. The license will reflect whatever beliefs they have about what will generate the most money for them in the short and long term. To an outsider who hasn't seen sales and marketing data, its pretty pompous to assume that you know more than WotC about what approach to take, simply basing it on the preferences you you and your circle of friends.

Anyway. . . back on topic. . .

I voted a 7. I'm pretty burnt on 3.x. I'm counting on 4E to revive my interest in D&D. If it doesn't I'm just going to stick to miniatures gaming and drop RPing altogether. 3.x has become a chore to me, not a pleasure.

 

[Shado]

My vote goes to 11!

One of my groups DM's has placed his campaign on hold as soon as 4e was announced. One of the others has put us on a path of world cataclysm so he can incorporate the changes in 4e immediately. I've ran short side games of SAGA to help introduce some of the changes and have a working hybrid rule set for Modern that sits somewhere between 4e and SAGA.

Homebrew character sheets, power cards and new game supplies ordered to bring in 4th Edition right.

It's like anticipation for X-mas from my childhood.

 

[AZRogue]

I voted 8. I suppose I could have gone to a 9 but I had a notch of excitement killed with the possible GSL "poison pill" thing. This is important to me because I believe the OGL helps the industry itself and, while it is their right to do so, any move that negatively effects it will be considered a jerk-off thing to do. Limiting the new license to better shape the products designed is more than fair, but the (rumored) move to force companies to choose between the GSL and the OGL, instead of allowing a product-by-product choice, seems petty.

But enough of that. I'm just glad 4E decided to slant itself towards gamism as the tedious simulation slant of 3E made that system, and some of the great innovations it had, into something slightly less appealing than contracting the ebola virus.

 

[Xethreau]

I want it to be out really bad, but I am not sure that I would kill for it to be out right now...

But it would be tempting. 8

 

[I'm A Banana]

I never understand the people who care about the OGL for 3.x or a possible "poison pill" in the GSL. I guess these people like to feel important and "enlightened" by "standing up against" the "evil, greedy corporations" when all they're really doing is hurting themselves.

WotC is in business to make money. Period. The license will reflect whatever beliefs they have about what will generate the most money for them in the short and long term. To an outsider who hasn't seen sales and marketing data, its pretty pompous to assume that you know more than WotC about what approach to take, simply basing it on the preferences you you and your circle of friends.

Y'know when I say that some of 4e's biggest fans are their worst enemies, this is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. You felt some need to be a jerk and assume motives and post a wildly inaccurate defense of something that isn't even confirmed yet.

Without getting into it too bad, and staying on topic, there are many, many, many things in this world more important to me than D&D. If 4e doesn't suit me for whatever reason, I won't be hurt in the slightest. I'll be spending my hard-earned money and too-short time on things that do better to fill my needs, which just won't be D&D anymore. I won't be losing any sleep about it -- I'd be pretty sure WotC would be loosing more sleep about the $3,000+ I could've brought to 4e over the next 10 years, but maybe not much more -- it's still a drop in the bucket for them, I'd guess.

 

[Dice4Hire]

6

I am interested in 4E, will buy the core books, and will run a short adventure with the system.

But that might well be it. I like 3.5, and I have not explored all the details of he game yet, not by a lot, so I want to do more with 3.5. Last tie I switched I was so sick of 2E that anything would have been better, and it was, but this time, I'm sure 4E is not my D&D, though I admit it might be a different-but-just-as-good-D&D.