-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
D&D 4E What would make you decide against 4e?
- Thread starter JoeGKushner
- Start date
WayneLigon
Adventurer
I can't really say until I've seen more. So far, I haven't seen any real deal-breakers for me though I'd go further with most of the changes I have heard about - of course I realize that they must make only so many major changes in order to keep as many customers as possible.
I could see myself not changing or devising my own hybrid 3.5/4 system (such as adding static saves or racial abilities) if 4E doesn't deliver on it's promise to simplify things in a significant manner for the GM and players.
Edit: One thing that would make me back off would be if they backed off on the hints that Vancian casting is mostly gone.
I could see myself not changing or devising my own hybrid 3.5/4 system (such as adding static saves or racial abilities) if 4E doesn't deliver on it's promise to simplify things in a significant manner for the GM and players.
Edit: One thing that would make me back off would be if they backed off on the hints that Vancian casting is mostly gone.
Last edited:
Wednesday Boy
The Nerd WhoFell to Earth
As pawsplay said, I too dislike the idea of warrior classes getting super powers or chi-like abilities. That just doesn't fit my tastes. And while I think streamlining some complex mechanics is a good thing, if it goes to far and oversimplifies the game I won't like it.
But it really depends on whether it will spark my imagination when I read it. If I read the 4th Edition PHB and it doesn't make me more excited to play than 3.5, I'll stick with 3.5.
But it really depends on whether it will spark my imagination when I read it. If I read the 4th Edition PHB and it doesn't make me more excited to play than 3.5, I'll stick with 3.5.
Simple. If, when I run Keep on the Shadowfell for my group, we don't enjoy it, or at the very least enjoy the game if the adventure design itself is ropy, I don't buy it.
If we do enjoy it, I run out and get the three core books and start trying to put together something fun.
If we do enjoy it, I run out and get the three core books and start trying to put together something fun.
WyzardWhately
First Post
I'm going to look over the spell list. If there's still weird stuff like Glassteel and long-duration Rope Tricks in there, I'm pretty much in. If it's all strictly combat-oriented, I'm out. I'm totally with the guy above who said 'symmetry.' That would completely turn me off, although with this whole 'roles' thing I don't see it happening as much as it could.
If 4e isn't as good as 3e, I won't switch.
But WOTC is saying the right things so far. So switching is pretty certain at this point.
I do, however, look forwards to the day when all the people who can't tell the difference between "Fighters may select chi or supernatural powers" and "Fighters MUST select chi or supernatural powers" quit the game. Or at least quit the forum. They make my head hurt.
But WOTC is saying the right things so far. So switching is pretty certain at this point.
I do, however, look forwards to the day when all the people who can't tell the difference between "Fighters may select chi or supernatural powers" and "Fighters MUST select chi or supernatural powers" quit the game. Or at least quit the forum. They make my head hurt.
MoogleEmpMog
First Post
If 4e underwent a major reversal and wasn't OGL, it probably wouldn't be worth my time to learn it.
If 4e is not superior to SWSE + existing d20 supplements, it probably wouldn't be worth my time to run it.
I imagine I'll play 4e now and then regardless of how it turns out, especially at first; nothing I've seen so far indicates it will be awful or anything.
If 4e is not superior to SWSE + existing d20 supplements, it probably wouldn't be worth my time to run it.
I imagine I'll play 4e now and then regardless of how it turns out, especially at first; nothing I've seen so far indicates it will be awful or anything.
Doc_Klueless
Doors and Corners
Seeing as how I'm not playing 3.x at the moment, the only criteria I can think of that 4e needs is for it to be easier than 3.x for me to DM.
If they fail to make it run faster/smoother with less prep time on my end, I'll just stick to using Savage Worlds whenever I can get the time to play (which isn't right now as I'm working on my Masters, started a new job, dealing with other family related issues).
Oh, and if they keep the same Vancian spellcasting as before. It might not be a deal breaker, per se, but I would be very disappointed.
Now, those are the criteria for getting me not to play it. As for not buying it, there isn't anything they could do as I'll buy a copy of all three books to read at the very least.
If they fail to make it run faster/smoother with less prep time on my end, I'll just stick to using Savage Worlds whenever I can get the time to play (which isn't right now as I'm working on my Masters, started a new job, dealing with other family related issues).
Oh, and if they keep the same Vancian spellcasting as before. It might not be a deal breaker, per se, but I would be very disappointed.
Now, those are the criteria for getting me not to play it. As for not buying it, there isn't anything they could do as I'll buy a copy of all three books to read at the very least.
