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

[A'koss]

A solid 8 for me.

4e is including most of the things I was hoping would make it into a new edition: more power derived from the PC himself, less reliance on magic items, class-based defense bonuses, epic rules designed alongside the core rules, pruning down the "stat abomination" monsters, higher starting HPs at 1st level, removing save or die powers and spell resistance, encounter-based powers... yeah, lots there that me likey.

A potential stumbling block for me will be in how the game handles money. If magic items can be bought for gold, then that is all gold will be ever used for in the game. I like more options for where money can be spent in the campaign, but we'll see how 4e handles it. Multiple, potentially overlapping aura effects in combat could also be a drag as could be tracking multiple imposed conditions on a large group of combatants... so, there's still some nagging issues that we'll have to see how it sorts out in play.

 

[Aloïsius]

So far, more than 70% rate it above 7. I think it means 4e will be a success, because, well, 7 means that you are probably curious enough to buy it.... Less than 20% rate it below 5. I don't know if this will be enough for pathfinder to find its niche, however.

 

[lutecius]

I was actually hoping for a new edition before it was announced. But then I realized the design philosophy wasn’t quite what I expected. I did like a lot of the fluff changes though.

Now except for a few goodies, my doubts about the crunch have been confirmed and the actual fluff is not so great when you go into details.

Also, wotc’s attitude and marketing just rubs me the wrong way, DDI looks like a a joke and many artistic choices are not to my taste (not that I really take that into account)

So 3, for effort.

So far, more than 70% rate it above 7. I think it means 4e will be a success, because, well, 7 means that you are probably curious enough to buy it.... Less than 20% rate it below 5. I don't know if this will be enough for pathfinder to find its niche, however.

To be fair, that's 70% of people who still read and post on the 4e forum i.e. who are more likely to be interested in 4e in the first place.

This poll should have been public, too.

 

[muffin_of_chaos]

The cohesiveness of the methodology that determines dynamic character interaction (generally combat) is what I look for in a system. Rules for roleplaying or otherwise seem irrelevant to me, maybe because I generally play in low-combat games and the emphasis on such concepts is strong enough that constricting them in any way with 'suggestions' seems to undermine the DM's creativity.

 

[Imp]

I'm a 5. There are things I've heard I really like. There's also some really broad changes in emphasis that I want to see how they shake out in play. And I want to see how the game looks with some of the supplemental rulebooks when they come out. The things I don't like I suspect I could work around, but I don't know how much work that'll be. Also some of the 4e advocacy really puts me off... but, those guys'll be my beta testers I suppose.

 

[GnomeWorks]

So far, more than 70% rate it above 7. I think it means 4e will be a success, because, well, 7 means that you are probably curious enough to buy it.... Less than 20% rate it below 5. I don't know if this will be enough for pathfinder to find its niche, however.

Yeah... because it's really surprising that a poll like this shows that those who regularly visit the 4e sub-forum are mostly pro-4e.

I imagine that the majority of those who would have voted 4 or lower are elsewhere on the boards, and aren't concerned with checking this forum often. But that's just a guess.

 

[Geez3r]

8.

I really like almost everything I've heard about the game, but for some reason I'm not real ecstatic about it. I really have no reason to not be really excited about the change of editions, and yet I'm not really over the top about it.

 

[jeffh]

7. I am very interested, and consider most of the changes I've seen to have useful streamlining aspects; those I don't wholeheartedly agree with I can still at least admit there's something to be said for (yes, even the 1-1-1-1 movement system I hate so much). But I also see a fair number of things I'd miss or that feel like change for the sake of change. And, I have had some problems with aspects of WotC's handling of the changeover, external to the game itself, since August - and the list has grown more than it's shrunk, especially those surrounding the GSL. I remain cautiously optimistic but my overall enthusiasm is down somewhat from its D&DXP-period heights.

 

[Tewligan]

I voted a 1. I hate to trot out this already-old saying, but it doesn't look/feel at all like D&D to me. Hell, 3.x doesn't look like D&D to me. My 1e campaign, though? Awww, yeah, that's D&D to me! I'm sure that it'll be a perfectly awesome game for some people, but it's not my thing.

 

[danbuter1]

I went with 5. There are some really cool ideas I've seen, but all in all, it's not something I'm going to rush out and buy the day it's released.