D&D 4E The WotC designers will be bashing 4e once 5e is announced . . .

[Piratecat]

And it is amusing to note how many of the older edition things that 4e seems to be returning to (in terms of art, flat XP for monsters, etc.) that many of those posters disparaged when they came from earlier editions (but now seem perfectly fine, or even excited about!).

Funny how times change.

Not that much! If you were around in 1999 when Eric started this site, you'd have seen the exact same behavior. Only it applied to 2e instead of 3.5, and there were fewer members of the site.

Things will end up being okay. The game is still going to be fun, maybe even more fun in some areas, and lots of folks will be playing in both 4e and 3.5e campaigns for years to come. And we'll have lots of rules and house rules discussions about 4e as well, as inveterate tinkerers work on it. I'm pretty sure that'll be no more or less fun than what we have now.

We'll go through it again in eight years or so, when 5e gets announced.

 

[Raven Crowking]

We'll go through it again in eight years or so, when 5e gets announced.

Alarmist!

 

[delericho]

And now suddenly out comes this long list of things that "don't work".

Before 3.0e was released, I knew I didn't like Prestige Classes, favoured classes, or the Monk/Paladin multiclass restrictions. (My stance on PrCs has shifted somewhat, but I still don't like most of them.)

Almost as soon as 3.5e hit, I knew and stated that I didn't like Weapon Familiarity. I have grown to loathe the multiclass-spellcaster problem, and the various patches that have been inserted to 'fix' it (Mystic Theurge, I'm looking at you). Level Adjustment has never quite worked right.

Oh, and then there's the never-ending Polymorph errata. How many times has that been changed in the last eight years?

I dearly love 3rd Edition (and 3.5). In 1999, it was pretty much the only thing I was looking forward to that met or exceeded my hopes. But it has never been perfect. So, the news that the designers have identified flaws isn't exactly a shock.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Revisionist history is a beautiful thing.

Dazzle me with your GoogleFu. I couldn't find any threads where Pokemount bashers were being attacked.

These are more typical:

http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-60674.html
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=161453

I call. Let's see your cards.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

And it is amusing to note how many of the older edition things that 4e seems to be returning to (in terms of art, flat XP for monsters, etc.) that many of those posters disparaged when they came from earlier editions (but now seem perfectly fine, or even excited about!).

The art isn't changing as much as you think it is. That which we have seen so far has not nearly approached the level of total suck present in the really old stuff. Moreover, a lot of what we have seen is done by WAR, who is widely acclaimed as one of the best 3E-style artists.

I don't like flat XP for monsters. I like the CR / EL system. I think it works fine. The fact that I'm not going on a Razz-like rant regarding their demise doesn't mean it isn't a change I'm not 100% behind. Instead - and this will come as a shock, I know - I've decided to save the ranting until after I've seen the finished product, giving the designers the benefit of the doubt that they know what they're doing.

Funny how times change.

... and yet stay the same. Bitter, oldtimer attitudes included.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Dazzle me with your GoogleFu. I couldn't find any threads where Pokemount bashers were being attacked.

I recall quite a few people being attacked for calling it a pokemount, but not for their opinions on it, per se.

 

[Grog]

Notice that all the WOTC D&D people are rabidly enthusiastic about 4E and nary a nay sayer in sight? That doesn't usually happen like that in real life. Ergo - the party line.

Company employees talking up their upcoming products doesn't usually happen in real life? Really?

 

[Doug McCrae]

. . . and, for one, am already looking forward to the doublethink that will ensue.

It's not doublethink. There's no contradiction in the following statement:

5 > 4 > 3.5 > 3

 

[Raven Crowking]

Posting "I don't like the Pokemount" was one of the ways you could get nearly everyone to agree with you

Obviously, "Was Shadowfax a Pokemount?" has been forgotten, as well as several other threads (some of which still exist on this board). Lo! the many times I have been accused of being an elitist or of saying others are engaged in wrongbadfun merely for the use of the word "pokemount" in threads like this one (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=199774&page=1&pp=40) where, apparently, dependence on magic items, as well as the easy purchase and sale of them, have been more popular and persistent than they have been complaints.

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3631280&postcount=441

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3631280&postcount=361

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3631280&postcount=286

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3631280&postcount=192

Now, I don't have all of the threads that I've posted in bookmarked, and I no longer have the Search function, but I'd be mighty interested to see the thread where the world "pokemount" brought a chorus of agreement, because, frankly, I think its more mythical than unicorns and virgins.

RC

 

[Shortman McLeod]

Indeed.

And it is amusing to note how many of the older edition things that 4e seems to be returning to (in terms of art, flat XP for monsters, etc.) that many of those posters disparaged when they came from earlier editions (but now seem perfectly fine, or even excited about!).

Funny how times change.

RC

A huge one is monster design. I remember the early days of 3e how everyone was raving about the brilliance of "intuitive" monster stats in 3e and how "finally" monsters and PCs had the same rules governing their design.

Now they trumpet what is, essentially, a return to the monster design philosophy of AD&D 1e/2e. And everyone cheers!

"We have always been at war with Eurasia."