Was there a defining moment for you?....

I hate to be a downer, but I suspect many of the people who decide they are in love with 4e, unseen, will be some of the first to have their hearts broken. It's a fact... we can always imagine something better than what we have.

. . .And we can often imagine that what we have now is better than everything else. That could apply to 3.5, or to those who pick up 4e down the road.

People often prove what they want to believe to themselves either way, by overlooking the bad parts, and focusing on the good parts. Depends on what good parts we're all looking for, I suppose.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

For me, there were two moments.

I lost any remaining interest in 3.x the moment I first read Star Wars Saga Edition. My first thought was, 'Why can't D&D be like this?' Then, hearing that this was a major preview of 4e, that's what's gotten me looking forward to 4e.

Then, watching the announcement video where they revealed D&D Insider, and specifically the virtual game table, sold me.
 

pawsplay said:
I hate to be a downer, but I suspect many of the people who decide they are in love with 4e, unseen, will be some of the first to have their hearts broken. It's a fact... we can always imagine something better than what we have.
Sure, but simply after reading all these D&D (as in Design & Development) columns, I've got more creative ideas for D&D (the game) than in the last one or two years. Even IF 4E blows, I've got enough inspiration to houserule my personal 4E!

And that was the defining "moment": When all these design tidbits showed up during GenCon, especially in the James Wyatt and Mike Mearls interviews, they basically sold me on the solid design direction of 4E.

Everything else, including that *funny* D&D Sizzle-trailer, was just icing on the cake, though I liked the French guy!

Cheers, LT.
 

I'm still in the cautiously optimistic camp.

Nothing I've seen so far has really turned me off the game, and I love that it'll take from SWSE and such...but I'm quite happy with 3.5e.

I can see myself doing what I've done with Star Wars, though. Continuing my Revised d20 game while working out a separate Saga game. This will probably be the approach I take to 4e. Not abandoning 3.5e for it at all but just adding it to my collection of games as a whole.
 

JoeGKushner said:
I don't know if people think that high level combat in every other game system is automatically speed up, but in games like Hero, or even in the 'low' powered Warhammer, as you advance and gain more options, it takes long to implement those options in combat so things take longer.

Right now our group is playing warhammer 2e. We've had 17 advances so far. I really don't think combat has slowed down that significantly. I'm not buying the line from WotC that high level 4e is just as fast as low level 4e. However a game can be designed where the gap between high level and low level is lessened if not insignificant just like Warhammer combat.
 

Gundark said:
Right now our group is playing warhammer 2e. We've had 17 advances so far. I really don't think combat has slowed down that significantly. I'm not buying the line from WotC that high level 4e is just as fast as low level 4e. However a game can be designed where the gap between high level and low level is lessened if not insignificant just like Warhammer combat.


Interesting.

Are the characters in third or fourth careers? Any slayers in the group?

When I played, elves tended to be... pretty tough and dwarf slayers tended to be near indestrutible. The lack of damage they took tended to make combat longer. The elves with spells tended to make their options more open.

The fact that Warhammer does have numerous combat options, should the players take them, also added to the time taken factor.
 

I was taken with being rid of the '8 hour rest, 15 minutes of madness' daily routine.

But I have concerns that they are rushing the whole thing and that the errata will be as large as the PHB...
 



Remove ads

Top