Was there a real need for a fourth ed.? Or would tweaking 3.5 have done it for you?

[Wisdom Penalty]

I loved 3E. Still do. If they could have fixed the reliance on magic and the high-level play, that is what I would have preferred. Not sure if that's a "tweak" or not. And that's where house rules and revisions and what-not fail for me; I don't think bandages can save 3E. It had a great life, but it was time to take the next step. You can't keep the backwards compatibility *and* fix what needs fixing.

That said...4E is certainly different from whatever it is I thought the next edition would look like.

I guess I don't get the reason why we needed to add eladrin, for example, and drop half-orcs. That's minor, I know - but it seems there were so many changes, why change those core tenets of D&D that have been around since bellbottoms?

But hey - I didn't like U2's Achtung Baby when it came out. It was "too far" ahead of where I was at. Now I realize it was genius. YMMV. Perhaps 4E is the same.

In the end, we're having more fun with 4E than we did in the waning days of 3E. And I guess that's what matters the most.

WP

 

[Thasmodious]

I'm not convinced that 4E really is a total rebuild of 3.5, to be honest.

It's not. It's the next edition of D&D. 3.5 is not the basis for 4e. D&D in general is.

And yeah, we needed a new edition (reworking is bad phrasing here). 3e had run its course.

 

[IanArgent]

I was about done with 3.5; despite *finally* having hit the sweet spot in play int he campaign I was a player in. I wasnt' running it any more because it was just too damn much work.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Need, no.

But I would have been onboard if they had sold it better. I had (and still have and will continue to have for years to come) a major problem with them selling it as, "Everything we write up until right now sucked and the past 30 years of gaming was just plain aweful for you poor poor players." Getting worked up that as much as I did made me leave behind anything with a d20 for quite some time.

If only it was sold as a celebration of 3.x. If only Wizards had been upfront about cancelling the mags and said, "We're extending the magazine license to allow Paizo finish out their adventure path before we start up our own online venture with the mags," instead of letting Paizo tell us that they lost the license. If only Wizards had worked to bring the 3PPs onboard sooner by letting them see the GSL early, allowing more companies to have products ready to go on day 1. If only they had kept the mags around for a little longer and showed us how things in 4E worked instead of giving us articles that insulted 3.x.

If only ... if only ... if only ... the words of missed opportunity.

 

[malraux]

I guess I don't get the reason why we needed to add eladrin, for example, and drop half-orcs. That's minor, I know - but it seems there were so many changes, why change those core tenets of D&D that have been around since bellbottoms?

To me, this was one thing I think 4e went just far enough. I got started in DnD in 03, and so much of the game felt like I was coming into a TV series 3 or 4 seasons in. For example, 3e core was based in Grayhawk, but there was basically no current info on it. The reboot of things like what the world is like or what the basic races are to me was a good thing, because knowing what eladrin are doesn't require having followed the game from the beginning.

 

[Victim]

If there's not significant changes, then I don't think there should be a new rules release. I wouldn't have wanted another 3.5 style change.

 

[Delta]

Voted for for the first option, although that's not really right either. For me, 3.5 was a bridge too far (I'd need a step back to 3.0 sensibilities to be happy.)

And that being said, this poll is going to go the same as all things 4E on ENWorld. 60% like it, 40% don't.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I kept trying to find a version of 3E that actually worked well for the campaigns I wanted to run, but I never could quite manage it... Products like d20 Modern and Iron Heroes, which made many interesting tweaks to the game, seemed like they might work, but they never quite did. D&D really needed something much more than minor alterations to suit my needs, and it took the 4E overhaul to accomplish it.

4E isn't perfect, but many of the core changes it made were needed for the game.

 

[Gothmog]

A complete reworking of the system was badly needed. 3.x D&D was being crushed under its own weight and system assumptions. In theory, its a good system- in practice, its just too fussy and hard to work with to be worthwhile. We gave up on 3.5 years ago, realizing it couldn't handle the kind of game we wanted.

While 4e isn't perfect, it corrects a LOT of the problems of 3.x D&D, and makes playing and DMing more fun. I haven't had this much fun with D&D since 1e, so they did something VERY right.

 

[Drowbane]

I still run and play D&D 3e ("3.75e").

I have absolutely no interest in 4e, not that its a bad game. It just doesn't feel "D&D" to me. I have played it, and it is fun. But for D&D, I'll stick to 3e.

If 4e had been a major cleaning up (fixing minor flaws, tweaking classes, etc) of 3e, I would've been on board.