What do you think so far?

[Treebore]

Not enough info yet. As it is i am not optimistic.

 

[Agamon]

I like what I see. Not exactly equal to my own vision for the game, but I like it a lot more than I did after watching the Thursday night GenCon intro.

 

[The Human Target]

Looks good so far.

I think they're trying to fix fundamental problems/not fun things in the game.

Whether they come up with anything brilliant has so far yet to be seen, but I'm optimistic.

 

[Flobby]

So fa? I'm thrilled with what I'm seeing.

I love 3.5, but only fear is that the 4e team doesn't change enough.

I second that. Looks REALLY good and I'm really excited; a lot of talk about more flexiblity yet simplier rules-- just worried its not fexible enough. My problem with 3E was I don't feel that the classes are flexible enough..

 

[blargney the second]

Insufficient data.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Cautious optimism.

Ditto for me.

I like some of the things I am seeing, but what we have seen so far is pretty thin, really.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

I like what they say that they are trying to achieve. Now, if they actually achieve it, i´ll upgrade to "want".

 

[Zimri]

I ,for one, welcome our new alien overlords.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I don't welcome opening up my pocketbook.

Off-topic, but seriously? I bet you don't even own a pocketbook.

 

[Shades of Green]

I need more info on the following subjects to have a solid opinion on 4E:
1) Will 4E be 100% playable without subscribing to D&D Insider?
2) How different would 4E be from 3E? Would that difference be worth the investment in 3 new core books (circa 100$ in total?)?
3) How miniature/skirmish-heavy would 4E be?
4) How useful would be my 3E sourcebooks (such as Lord of Madness) with 4E? How easy would it be convert stuff between 3E and 4E?
5) How focused would the game be on combat as opposed to other challenges (traps, exploration, stealth, diplomacy)?
6) And, most importantly, how would the overall 'feel' change?