D&D 4E the 4e debate: a typology of players

I suppose I'm some form of mutated, bastardized love-child of 3, 4, 5 and 10. (Least common multiple: 60. Apropos of nothing.)

I never intended to DM 4E, simply due to the staggering investment I have in 3.5, despite being very well aware of 3.5's weaknesses. (I mentioned I DM, right?) But I was looking forward to the new edition, and figured I'd almost certainly enjoy it as a player. Then I saw two major rules sub-systems that are so mind-bogglingly contemptuous of gamers that I'll not be able to even play 4E. (One of those rules-systems I actually play-tested, in the form of the miniatures game, for several hours. And it was so horrible it drove me from that game.)

So I find myself really liking certain aspects of 4E -- most of it, really -- but so loathing these other aspects that every time I think about the possibility of playing I throw up a little in my mouth. It's kinda like finding out that Scarlett Johansson is a guy ... after spending a lot of time fantasizing about getting her into bed.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad





Solid number 8 here, with a little bit of 11 grumbling at me in the back of my head. 3rd was great fun. 4th also looks like great fun of a slightly different flavor, although I miss bards, familiars, and some of the other wonky goodness 3rd had.
 


Jeff Wilder said:
I never intended to DM 4E, simply due to the staggering investment I have in 3.5, despite being very well aware of 3.5's weaknesses. (I mentioned I DM, right?) But I was looking forward to the new edition, and figured I'd almost certainly enjoy it as a player. Then I saw two major rules sub-systems that are so mind-bogglingly contemptuous of gamers that I'll not be able to even play 4E. (One of those rules-systems I actually play-tested, in the form of the miniatures game, for several hours. And it was so horrible it drove me from that game.)
Number 8 and 9.

Also, what's the egregious sub-system? The suspense is killing me!
 



Remove ads

Top