So that's it for 4th edition I guess?

[Evenglare]

Well, the roleplaying opportunity comes from the DM not the game. I can attest to this because I ran the original dragonlance modules using both pathinder and 4th edition using 2 different groups .You know how much of the game changed? None. Both groups went through the game at more or less the same pace, both groups could make the same decisions, and both groups had a blast.

So don't come bringing in your edition wars bs into this thread. My self and MANY others think 4th edition D&D IS D&D so it negates your whole menu argument, as well as my experiment between editions negates your roleplaying argument. Take it somewhere else please. This topic is about what the next step is for 4th edition, not whether pathfinder is better than 4th edition.

 

[Obryn]

I wouldn't stress it much. It happens to every game system after a while.

4e is a very complete, polished system right now. I don't feel the need for much more support.

I'd recommend the offline character builder, Fully "Loaded", in case WotC burns its bridges. Masterplan can easily do the duties of Adventure Tools.

-O

 

[NewJeffCT]

agreed on the role-playing - I think that's mostly up to the DM and players.

 

[Li Shenron]

An edition is dead only if you don't play it.

I know this is hard to believe but... honestly, I think the publishing end of my favourite edition (3.0) was the best thing that could happen to it (beside its start, obviously ). Once they stop publishing, they stop screwing it up. From that point, there is only the love of its fans, and your own creativity.

 

[Evenglare]

I hope this is the case. I'm just wondering if there is some sort of 4th edition wiki for fan stuff or something... some centralized place for those still wanting to contribute.

 

[NewJeffCT]

An edition is dead only if you don't play it.

I know this is hard to believe but... honestly, I think the publishing end of my favourite edition (3.0) was the best thing that could happen to it (beside its start, obviously ). Once they stop publishing, they stop screwing it up. From that point, there is only the love of its fans, and your own creativity.

good point, but with 4E, I relied on DDI - the monster builder & character builder. I don't think I'd pay for a "dead" edition's online support tool.

I'm sure the online tool will be almost required for every edition going forward as well, so I don't say that just about 4E.

What I will say is that in looking for a new group, people who prefer 4E will say they'll play any edition of D&D, including Pathfinder. However, people who don't like 4E will be firm about not wanting to play 4E at all. Of course, that's just my experience.

 

[billd91]

It's really sad to see people say "it's a good game but didnt feel like D&D". Which (to me) means if this game were named anything else it would be doing amazing, but it didnt live up to my image of this game for nostalgia purposes so it should die because of that . I completely don't understand this line of thinking at all.

To echo Grimmjow, it doesn't have to be a question of nostalgia, but of expectations. Names (and trademarks) have meaning - deviate from that meaning too much and you set up friction between the expectation of the audience and the product.

 

[Balesir]

4e is a very complete, polished system right now. I don't feel the need for much more support.

I would really have appreciated it if they had produced a few more elements for 4E before ditching it:

1) More Epic tier support

2) A good, solid system for social interaction along similar lines to the (excellent) combat system they made

3) A similar extension to the systems for exploration - including hazards and traps in better "tactical" format

4) Realm rulership and mass battle rules (the latter was kinda part-way there with swarms/mobs already).

A good DMG3 might have done it.

good point, but with 4E, I relied on DDI - the monster builder & character builder. I don't think I'd pay for a "dead" edition's online support tool.

Agreed, they are very valuable, but I have offline versions of both, so I've no worries.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I have played and enjoyed 4th Ed, but it has a bit of a New Coke deal about it.

And as others have said, there's enough 4th Ed material out there for lifetimes of gaming.

 

[Obryn]

Moving past the same dull, tired edition warring....

I would really have appreciated it if they had produced a few more elements for 4E before ditching it:

1) More Epic tier support

2) A good, solid system for social interaction along similar lines to the (excellent) combat system they made

3) A similar extension to the systems for exploration - including hazards and traps in better "tactical" format

4) Realm rulership and mass battle rules (the latter was kinda part-way there with swarms/mobs already).

A good DMG3 might have done it.

I agree on Epic Tier support. I think Sly Flourish's Epic Tier handbook is the next best thing there, though. (Heck, the new MM3 math dramatically improved the Epic situation already.)

As for the social/exploration... Eh. We're doing it okay right now. I can't stand using skill challenges for social interaction; I use them for more dramatic task resolution and leave social interaction to roleplay and a few dice rolls without the structure.

I still need to post my own mass battle rules... doh.

-O