Prophet2b
First Post
Retreater said:Good for you. Let me know if you enjoy it. I hope you do.
I doubt I'll remember this thread in May, but if I do, I'll let you know.

![Devious :] :]](http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png)
Retreater said:Good for you. Let me know if you enjoy it. I hope you do.
Imaro said:I'm confused, how can you like something that doesn't exsist yet? I thought this forum was for the discussion of WotC's impending release of 4e.
Doug McCrae said:Have you ever looked forward to something? Christmas? The next episode of a TV show? The next book in a series?
I believe there's even a word for "liking something that doesn't exist yet". Anticipation.
Retreater said:In my opinion, it's unheard of in any industry. I'm not even sure if Microsoft is as nasty to their customers.
Doug McCrae said:Have you ever looked forward to something? Christmas? The next episode of a TV show? The next book in a series?
I believe there's even a word for "liking something that doesn't exist yet". Anticipation.
Gundark said:I have seen a few people on this and other boards declaring their hate for the new edition and their intentions to not buy the 4e books.
Honestly, isn't it a little too soon to be declaring this? It's been barely over a week since 4e was announced. We do have Star Wars SAGA as a preview, but really there is SO much we don't know.
You might look a little silly declaring your hate now and your love a year from now![]()
Mouseferatu said:Really? Most mainstream RPGs go through editions faster than D&D does. Vampire: The Masquerade had three editions before Vampire: The Requiem came out. Call of Cthulhu is on edition six or seven. And so on.
If someone comes to ENWorld and says "D&D sucks" that's trolling. If someone posts to a thread about topic X saying "X sucks" that's threadcrapping. I believe overwhelmingly negative posts about 4e in the 4e sub-forum should be regarded in the same light.ShinHakkaider said:If the OP is going to ask for objectivity he needs to ask from BOTH sides of the fence, not just the naysayers.
Retreater said:1. I've spent too much money on 3.5. I still have plenty of material to use. So unless WotC makes it 100% compatible with the previous edition (which will be impossible), they lose on this point.
2. I won't support the DI. Really, it's too much to spend every month for what we used to get for free. But then I'd hate to be considered "not a real D&D player." So unless WotC decides to allow free downloads of the important stuff to those who spend their money to purchase their books, they lose on this point.
3. They cancelled Dragon and Dungeon, and for that, the wound is still fresh. (How soon the ENWorlders forget! I, for one, won't let Paizo's death be in vain!)
4. For all the small guys, Necromancer, Goodman, and the other 3rd party publishers and the freelance authors who are getting jerked around by this scheme, just like they were with the release of 3.0, I won't support 4.0. (And guess what, I'm one of those freelance authors.)
5. Also, I've been unhappy with WotC's content as of late and the direction they've been taking. The Mike Mearls monster previews border on sacrilege in my mind. Seeing this as a preview window into the design philosophy of 4.0, I can see it's one I don't share.
These I think are all good reasons to refuse to spend the $240 that will be required to start up a D&D 4.0 campaign ($40 per rulebook, and $120 per annum subscription to play).
So, no thank you, WotC. If enough of our fellow enthusiasts would stand up against this scheme, we wouldn't keep getting jerked around by frequent rules changes, poor quality editing in books, etc. Vote with your wallets, ladies and gentlemen.
And no, I don't hate D&D.