The big announcement: 4dventure

[Dirigible]

As others have noted, I think this'll have something to do with the re-edition of the 1e-like D&D that WotC is supposed to be bringing out. $D, time, time travel, back to auld schoole...

And they deliberately disguised it as 4e because they knew it'd give the public conniptions

 

[frankthedm]

I don't know what to think.

I'm kind of excited to see the new product...and yet thinking "ahhh-man, another set of rules to learn".

I doubt they will be hard to learn. Heck, I won't be surprised if there is a base class caster with no prep work / no hard choices at all that makes the warlock look complex.

 

[Xyxox]

I ma welcoming my selfto grognard status barring dnd 4e being absoltulely incredible im gonna sit dnd out from here on in. Hell evne wahammeri s less expensive that switching editions every 3 years. SO back to warhammer and historical minis for me. as wel las continuing 3.5 games i have going now.

At least with Warhammer, you're minis are still usable. Worst case scenario is costs change and you might have to break up a unit into smaller units or something.

 

[Cadfan]

I really like the idea of a rules revision. The creation of game rules for a roleplaying game like this really need redone every so often based on experience gained from actual players rather than playtesters.

That being said, I really like all the weird character types and feats out there. A rules revision which eliminates those makes the game a lot less fun for me. I don't feel like waiting ages for new versions of Tome of Battle, the Scout, the Hexblade, etc, etc, etc. Even though I'd like revised versions of these things, I won't like the period between the release of 4E and the release of the feats and classes needed to create certain character concepts.

While there are things that can be done better, and I welcome the chance to see that happen, part of the fun for me is coming up with an off the wall character type, then optimizing it as much as possible. That won't be as enjoyable with fewer choices.

 

[Agamon]

LOL, I have enough 3.5 stuff to last me to 5E. Not to mention M&M and WFRP. This isn't really a big announcement to me.

I was ready to drop D&D and not look back right when 3E was announced, which made me excited with all the changes I wanted to see to the game. WotC made too good of a game this time around, ironically.

I know Morrus was looking forward to this news to get some meaty chunks on the front page like Eric used to be able to do. So I'm happy for him, anyway.

 

[Rangoric]

At least with Warhammer, you're minis are still usable. Worst case scenario is costs change and you might have to break up a unit into smaller units or something.

If you say so, The Wood Elf Army I had when they where first published is useless under the new rules.

If you ran a Craftworld Eldar Army in 40k it got smushed rather well too. Not completely like my Wood Elf Army, but sometimes an army concept you have just gets nukedm which it did. I can still "Play" it but it doesn't play out at all like I had it worked out to.

Costs changing is the least of the issues, army compositions rules have changed from edition to edition.

 

[frankthedm]

At least with Warhammer, you're minis are still usable. Worst case scenario is costs change and you might have to break up a unit into smaller units or something.

Oh, you'd be surprised. Rules changes and whatnot can really much with one's model selections.

Edit: The above post points it out nicely.

 

[Jonathan Drain]

I wouldn't compare Warhammer to D&D when it comes to cost. A box of unpainted miniatures costs the same as or more than a D&D rulebook, but with D&D it's feasible for a group of five players to purchase one book between them every few weeks. You don't get the same economy with Warhammer.

Granted, Warhammer gives you a much more tangible product that won't become useless when a new rules edition is released.

 

[Agamon]

You and me both, buddy.

This has got me really pissed off. I want to rant, scream, and vent. Not so much about the edition change ... that was eventual ... but because we've been lied to about it. You lying WOTC bastards ... 'we're not working on it, it's several years off' my hairy dwarven arse! Just tell me this: why? Why do we need a 4E now? And frankly, if you give me any other answer than "It's all about money; sales were beginning to slump so we needed to kick out another edition to refresh our sales of core books and reprint everything from the beginning again to boost our profits" I'm going to call you all liars, turn my back, and never give you another dime.

Where's Morrus to confirm/deny this stuff? And I want the ex-WOTC'ers to give there assessment of the why now (OK, why a year from now, but why now) decision.

I need an appropriate smilie to convey my anger.

I refuse to be the angry grognard, myself. I think apathy will work a lot better for me. And I won't be a hypocrite; I can't stand posters that have to announce every other post that they dislike 3/3.5E because an older edition is so much superior. Well, diaglo notwithstanding, at least he does it in a way that makes me grin.

I will frequent these threads though, just in the hopes that Henry is down with the new rules. We need a return of "C'mon August!" Ah, memories...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Granted, Warhammer gives you a much more tangible product that won't become useless when a new rules edition is released.

Oh no?

3rd Edition Warhammer invalidated over 50% of the points value of my Eldar army, by removing all rules for lasgun Guardians, Harlequins, and a few other units covered in 2E. Afaik they've still not put rules for any of those back in.

So it's not always that simple, sadly.