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

[Merlion]

Unfortunately, we won't hear from them what's wrong with 4e until 5e. I'd prefer to hear it from them sooner, frankly.

I disagree. We heard some things that were wrong with 3.0 before 3.5 and the same for 3.5 pre 4e.

 

[Piratecat]

The interesting thing here is that while 3e does have some problems, they're minor issues compared to earlier editions. 3e and 3.5 are damn good game systems. Don't think that WotC isn't intimately aware of this fact. That means that for something to make the 4e cut, it's got to feel more fun to the designers and developers than what we have now.

Will they get every one right? Certainly not for everyone, as different people like different campaign styles.

But my expectation is that they'll have a better game when they're done. It's possible they won't, but if that happens then everyone will keep playing 3.5. With a huge vested interest in making this the best game possible, they're certainly targeting the few weaknesses in 3e.

 

[Vigilance]

The specific point of the teaser was to establish the message that previous editions were painful to play--now here's something that won't be!

I've seen grappling grind adventures to a halt as players and GM flip through rules and scratch their heads.

That *IS* painful when it happens.

And contrary to what some folks are saying in this thread, EVERYONE KNEW IT WITHOUT WOTC TELLING US IT WAS SO.

So there was no conspiracy of silence. We knew some parts of the game were a confusing mess, and so did they, despite the fact that, taken as a whole, 3.0 and 3.5 were terrific games.

What exactly is the problem here?

That they are trying to improve the game? Or that they are saying they want to improve it?

I don't see how either is a bad thing.

 

[DaveMage]

The interesting thing here is that while 3e does have some problems, they're minor issues compared to earlier editions. 3e and 3.5 are damn good game systems. Don't think that WotC isn't intimately aware of this fact. That means that for something to make the 4e cut, it's got to feel more fun to the designers and developers than what we have now.

Will they get every one right? Certainly not for everyone, as different people like different campaign styles.

But my expectation is that they'll have a better game when they're done. It's possible they won't, but if that happens then everyone will keep playing 3.5. With a huge vested interest in making this the best game possible, they're certainly targeting the few weaknesses in 3e.

The frustrating thing for me is twofold:

1) We don't really know anything yet. It's hard to appreciate the enthusiasm of the designers when we don't have all the pieces. They love the new game. I think in some ways it's even *worse* when they post their enthusiasm because it's almost like they're saying "Ha! I've got this great toy! Pity YOU can't play with it yet, but WOW is it cool!"

2) I don't *want* a fully revised version. As you say, 3.5 is a damn good game! I wish they would have just tweaked it a bit. 4.0 may be a great game, but I don't want to stop playing the one I'm playing right now - too many options still left to try and too many adventures still left to run. I want all of the things they are promising on the D&D Insider for 4.0 to have worked for my 3.5 game. I'm guessing that some of the rules changes are being made so that WotC can have an online toolset that's not as complex to create as a 3.5 one would be. (Not that I blame them - 3.5 is an options beast that grows exponentially with every new supplement.)

Or maybe they're just tired of John Cooper knowing the rules better than they do.

 

[Maggan]

Strange how when new and improved products come out, the existing ones invariably become worse.

It's like when a new computer from Apple or operating system version from Microsoft hits the streets.

I think XP used some images where Windows 98 was a headache, and XP was a tube of pills to cure headache! Hilarious!

/M

 

[Maggan]

Unfortunately, we won't hear from them what's wrong with 4e until 5e. I'd prefer to hear it from them sooner, frankly.

The Design and Development on the WotC site articles have good info for that. For example, the Monster Redevlopment articles from Mike Mearls pointed out things that he thought didn't work, and stirred up quite a lot of discussion.

/M

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Just to contrast it with ad blurbs for 3E like this one here...

Why is this new D&D such terrific fun? The new system smooths out all the old rules' quirks and bumps, creating gameplay that is easy to understand and quick moving, yet with more depth than ever. Combat is much easier to conduct, but it's more exact, always making it clear exactly what's happening. The full-fledged skill system allows characters to do many tasks that fall outside their stereotypical roles. This means that characters in the same class aren't all clones. A fighter can be a slow brute with an axe or a lithe, rapier-wielding acrobat. All this customizability leads to more engaging characters and more opportunities for roleplaying.

....which for some reason sounds, in a lot of things, like the stuff being touted for 4E now. Faster, smoother gameplay, quick but exact combat (heh), characters in one class that are very different from each other, fighters for whom weapon choices can make a difference (sound familiar, anyone?), more engaging characters and more opportunities for roleplaying.

Which is why I'm sure we'll get to hear the same sermon replayed in 7-8 years time (IF that long), when they get ready to hit us with 5E. And just because every other brand is doing it that way doesn't mean it's not twice as annoying when it comes from the producer of my most favorite passtime, because every time they try to make me feel like the game I play, and how I play it, suffers and is inferior for all the "errors" it contains. Which is what's getting on my nerves a bit, and probably not just mine. It simply would be nice if the PR specialists found some other way to advertise their new game edition without trying to blackpaint the older ones. And yes, that video WAS insulting to every gamer who did a tiny bit of his own creative thinking to get around any potholes in the rules quickly while having fun playing. Doubly so since there will be enough potholes in 4E to require the same creativity and improvisation to get around for certain. No rule system is perfect, much less for every player, which is something 3.X proved in abundance.

 

[FireLance]

Just to contrast it with ad blurbs for 3E like this one here...

Why is this new D&D such terrific fun? The new system smooths out all the old rules' quirks and bumps, creating gameplay that is easy to understand and quick moving, yet with more depth than ever. Combat is much easier to conduct, but it's more exact, always making it clear exactly what's happening. The full-fledged skill system allows characters to do many tasks that fall outside their stereotypical roles. This means that characters in the same class aren't all clones. A fighter can be a slow brute with an axe or a lithe, rapier-wielding acrobat. All this customizability leads to more engaging characters and more opportunities for roleplaying.

....which for some reason sounds, in a lot of things, like the stuff being touted for 4E now. Faster, smoother gameplay, quick but exact combat (heh), characters in one class that are very different from each other, fighters for whom weapon choices can make a difference (sound familiar, anyone?), more engaging characters and more opportunities for roleplaying.

Well, I think WotC mostly delivered on what it promised for 3e (I'll take iterative attacks over 3/2 attacks, and even the grappling rules were an improvement over what we had in 2e), and from what I've seen so far, I've no reason to think that it won't deliver on its 4e promises, either.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Well, I think WotC mostly delivered on what it promised for 3e (I'll take iterative attacks over 3/2 attacks, and even the grappling rules were an improvement over what we had in 2e), and from what I've seen so far, I've no reason to think that it won't deliver on its 4e promises, either.

I'd contest that on a few points, but that's not the topic of this thread, and also victim to too much individual game experience to be of any discussion value except between us two, I guess.

But yeah, 3E brought many a good idea into D&D, along with a lot of WTF moments. And I'm sure 4E will do so as well. Wouldn't be D&D if it didn't.

 

[Maggan]

And yes, that video WAS insulting to every gamer who did a tiny bit of his own creative thinking to get around any potholes in the rules quickly while having fun playing.

I have to ask, why was it insulting to those players? It's not as if the video portrayed them, the ones who could think creatively and have fun, as ignorant. If a DM don't have a problem with the Grapple rules, why on earth, would he be insulted by a video stating that other people have had, and continue having, problems with the grapple rules?

/M