What is your top question/concern about 4th edition?

[Korgoth]

*raises hand*

Don't get me wrong, it can be taken too far. But the simple truth is, the axiom "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" leads to stagnation if followed too slavishly. If the designers have a good idea--and so far, I've found the majority of what I know of 4E to qualify--I don't want to see those good ideas rejected just because "That's not the way it's been done."

I think all that is beside the point. It seems to me more like we've got a crew of designers who really, really wish that Feng Shui would have been a successful role playing game, and have decided to re-release it under the title "Dungeons and Dragons".

And yes, there are some people floating around who would like that. But I imagine that they are a very small slice of the market, compared to the number of people who will be 'urinated off' at having their game urinated upon.

@Masquerade:
You are totally entitled to your opinion and to your aesthetic tastes. But, and I mean no offense here, the fact that you have an anime avatar suggests to me that we probably won't be able to have much of a meaningful aesthetic discussion.

On aesthetic tastes in general: not too long ago there was a thread here where someone invoked their vision of D&D (at least at certain levels). It involved a hero leaping from Sri Lanka to Delhi (or maybe the Himalayas) in a single bound, a guy shooting a million arrows in no time, etc. That aesthetic is so far removed from my own (and the governing aesthetic of traditional D&D) that the two cannot coexist. There's simply no meeting ground. To try to incorporate both would be like the old vehicle design rules from MegaTraveller, where a self-propelled planetoid (i.e. Death Star) and a bicycle were supposedly able to be designed under the same system, with the same sort of stat block. I find that a fool's errand. Likewise, the traditional D&D aesthetic and the wuxia aesthetic are simply too far removed from one another. So if there were two people, one holding to the former and the other to the latter, at least one of them would inevitably be disappointed. What more can be said? At that point, it is simply 'war': each doing his best to make sure he is not the one disappointed.

I find it sad that what D&D is to me, and has been for quite literally most of my life, and what it has been as a locus of common discourse and enjoyment between me and my friends for years (over two decades) is being discarded for something I find (in my personal estimation) to be aesthetically bankrupt. For or better or for worse, D&D is something important to me, and I see it getting trashed over what I consider to be a juvenile fad.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I think all that is beside the point. It seems to me more like we've got a crew of designers who really, really wish that Feng Shui would have been a successful role playing game, and have decided to re-release it under the title "Dungeons and Dragons".

And yes, there are some people floating around who would like that. But I imagine that they are a very small slice of the market, compared to the number of people who will be 'urinated off' at having their game urinated upon.

I have no interest in Feng Shui. In fact, while I understand the appeal to others, I have no real liking for the aesthetics of fantasy anime, or most Far Eastern-themed fantasy in general.

And honestly, I see little if any of it in what I've heard of 4E. While I don't especially care for some of the wizard tradition names, I don't automatically associate most of them with an Asian feel--and nothing else even comes close--and they seem pretty easily swapped out in any case.

Truth be told, you won't find a bigger fan of traditional Western fantasy than me. (It's not all I like--I enjoy Eberron, for instance--but it's what I tend to default to.) I loved the Lord of the Rings movies, and any distaste I have for the novels is purely one of writing style. I still occasionally reread Raymond Feist's Riftwar series, Simon Green's Hawk & Fisher series, Eddings' Belgariad, the Thieves World anthology, Elric, and Conan. I don't watch anime. I don't play Final Fantasy.

And I like most of what I've heard. The notion that they're turning 4E into Fen Shui is so alien to my interpretation that, with the exception of one or two names, I can't even comprehend where you're getting the idea.

 

[Masquerade]

@Masquerade:
You are totally entitled to your opinion and to your aesthetic tastes. But, and I mean no offense here, the fact that you have an anime avatar suggests to me that we probably won't be able to have much of a meaningful aesthetic discussion.

On aesthetic tastes in general: not too long ago there was a thread here where someone invoked their vision of D&D (at least at certain levels). It involved a hero leaping from Sri Lanka to Delhi (or maybe the Himalayas) in a single bound, a guy shooting a million arrows in no time, etc. That aesthetic is so far removed from my own (and the governing aesthetic of traditional D&D) that the two cannot coexist. There's simply no meeting ground. To try to incorporate both would be like the old vehicle design rules from MegaTraveller, where a self-propelled planetoid (i.e. Death Star) and a bicycle were supposedly able to be designed under the same system, with the same sort of stat block. I find that a fool's errand. Likewise, the traditional D&D aesthetic and the wuxia aesthetic are simply too far removed from one another. So if there were two people, one holding to the former and the other to the latter, at least one of them would inevitably be disappointed. What more can be said? At that point, it is simply 'war': each doing his best to make sure he is not the one disappointed.

I find it sad that what D&D is to me, and has been for quite literally most of my life, and what it has been as a locus of common discourse and enjoyment between me and my friends for years (over two decades) is being discarded for something I find (in my personal estimation) to be aesthetically bankrupt. For or better or for worse, D&D is something important to me, and I see it getting trashed over what I consider to be a juvenile fad.

Point taken. I entirely respect your opinion as well, and I can see where you are coming from. However, I disagree that D&D cannot be all of these things.

Realistically, of course, age does play a major part here. What might be foreign to your perception of D&D (call it anime or wuxia or whatever) does, indeed, tend to be more popular among younger gamers, and it's inevitable that a new edition of the game would attempt to capture that segment of the audience. It is very likely that, an edition or two down the line, I will have to come to terms with my idea of D&D being pushed aside in order to cater to what I see as "juvenile." (In fact, I rather hope that the game we love survives that long and continues to evolve.) Will I adapt and play the way the kids are playing? Maybe, but probably not.

The point is, right now, you're playing your game and I'm playing mine, but they're both D&D, and I just don't see 4e coming along and wrecking that. I don't think that one of us has to be disappointed when that shiny new book appears next summer, but, if you are, I apologize in advance for my generation urinating on your hobby.

(Actually, the decision to use an anime avatar on these boards was a conscious one, and you have just proven to me that it sends exactly the message I had guessed it would. Also, for the record, there's no leaping from Sri Lanka to Delhi in any of my games. ^_^)

 

[WayneLigon]

I'll be the first to confess. Now, who are my four accomplices?

That would be me.

 

[MaxKaladin]

Realistically, of course, age does play a major part here. What might be foreign to your perception of D&D (call it anime or wuxia or whatever) does, indeed, tend to be more popular among younger gamers, and it's inevitable that a new edition of the game would attempt to capture that segment of the audience. It is very likely that, an edition or two down the line, I will have to come to terms with my idea of D&D being pushed aside in order to cater to what I see as "juvenile." (In fact, I rather hope that the game we love survives that long and continues to evolve.) Will I adapt and play the way the kids are playing? Maybe, but probably not.

That's pretty much where I am on this. I don't like much of what I've heard about 4e but I recognize that they're not designing 4e for me. They're designing the game to appeal to young people who have grown up with different influences than I did. I accept that. It's the way things work. I'll wait until next summer and buy the three core books before making my final judgement, but I don't think I'll be adapting or playing the way the kids are playing. I suspect I will (figuratively) put D&D out to pasture and move on to the ranks of the grognards. I've got plenty of other games, it's about time I played them.

To answer the original subject of the thread: I'm most concerned about power creep. It seems to have been happening with every edition and it sounds like 4e is going to have more of the same. I consider it a step in the wrong direction but, well, I know I'm outnumbered.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I don't like the whole Dragonball Z scene and while I can appreciate Exalted, I don't think we'll see much of this in 4e either. I can't understand what the big hang up is on a bunch of generic names though. If you don't like the names, change them! That's why they're generic to begin with. There is so much that can be done with fluff by simply changing names and backgrounds. A little writing goes a long way in adding flavor and mood.

Truth be told, you won't find a bigger fan of traditional Western fantasy than me. (It's not all I like--I enjoy Eberron, for instance--but it's what I tend to default to.) I loved the Lord of the Rings movies, and any distaste I have for the novels is purely one of writing style.

Interesting. As a big fan of the books (and I wasn't crazy about the style either) I wasn't crazy about the movies. I can watch them and they look amazing and everything, but what they did to some of those characters was unforgivable. Taking Frodo from being a pure character and a hero and changing him into a coward grates on me to this day. Of course he decided to keep the ring at the end of Return of the King! Who watching the movies would have actually been surprised by that?

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I have an 8-year-old (going on 9) nephew and a son who I have gotten to play some of the new Basic D&D. Both are super eager to play some more, I've let them look through my books but seriously, the Core rules are some dense material to grasp. The Basic game has been a great tool for getting young kids interested.

I sent James Wyatt a personal message through the WotC boards asking if they would ever do a Basic 4e. He replied that WotC does intend to do a Basic 4e set, but that for now the focus is on convincing the current fans that 4e is great stuff and that a Basic 4e will be coming someday.

So my questions is: How soon until a Basic 4e is put out.

 

[Reynard]

I don't like the whole Dragonball Z scene and while I can appreciate Exalted, I don't think we'll see much of this in 4e either.

I think someone needs to go back and read the Design and Development article that includes the dragon fight. I mean, wow...

Anyway, on subject: My biggest concerns with 4e are a) it will not be easily adapted "back" to what D&D actually is (at least for me and those that started the game in the "olden days") and b) it will continue the trend of removing right and responsibility from the DM in favor of giving those things to the players. Throughout the life of the game we have seen the rule books -- it starts with "late edition" suuplements and creeps into the core books of the next edition -- regularly and continuously reduce the importance and power of the DM to make the game less "unfun" for the players. We have yet to see anything for 4e that suggests this trend will be reversed. DMs do 90% of the work and are responsible for 90% of the fun had at the table, and as they say, with great responsbility comes great power...

Give the DM back his ability to craft a good game without fantaical adherence to rules as written. Remind the players -- right there in the PHB, preferably on the first page -- that the DM isn't just "always right" but that the DM needs to have the freedom and power to change things and choose things to make a better game. So long as the game continues to be more and more about player empowerment and character badassitude, though, we'll continue to see the DM harried and emasculated by the rule books.

If 4e gives the DM his "viking hat" (someone was going to snark about it, so why not me?) back, I might look into the game. Otherwise, the game's gone out of print, AFAIC.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Taking Frodo from being a pure character and a hero and changing him into a coward grates on me to this day. Of course he decided to keep the ring at the end of Return of the King! Who watching the movies would have actually been surprised by that?

Wow. I never interpreted anything in the movies to suggest that he was a coward. He's scared, yes, but he never fails to do what needs doing. He volunteers to go to Mordor. He leaves the rest of the Fellowship, prepared to go off on his own. While he sometimes verges on giving up, he never actually allows fear to drive him back.

Not to hijack the thread further (too late ), but I'd love to discuss this with you further, since it seems we got something completely different out of the trilogy.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I think someone needs to go back and read the Design and Development article that includes the dragon fight. I mean, wow...

And again, people are seeing "Dragonball" where I'm not. It was a fight against a dragon; no less D&D than any other party-vs.-dragon battle I've heard described.