D&D 4E What would make you decide against 4e?

[BryonD]

If the ability to customize is reduced, then I am out.

You can have simple default methods for quickly building monsters and npcs without forcing cookie cutters on PCs and NPCs that the DM wants to develop. But it is also possible to just short cut into simplification with dumbing down. So far it isn't clear which way they are going.

Most everything else I've heard I really like. So I'm still clinging to optimism.

 

[Mallus]

If the playtest with my group next summer doesn't pan out.

 

[Imaro]

This would be my biggest turn-off...

...if Wotc fails to deliver on their goal of "faster, better, more refined", and instead replace all the old complexities with new ones.

...with this as a caveat...

If the ability to customize is reduced, then I am out.

You can have simple default methods for quickly building monsters and npcs without forcing cookie cutters on PCs and NPCs that the DM wants to develop. But it is also possible to just short cut into simplification with dumbing down. So far it isn't clear which way they are going...

So far I'm not terribly impressed with their method of simplifying monsters (holding off judgement till I understand "roles" better. It just seems like they're removing alot of abilities and claiming that's simplifying the system...I can do that (or just forget about the one's that don't stand out) when I run 3.x. In fact this doesn't even seem to warrant a further edition, just create a book of simplified monster stats...basically a "condensed" version of the monster manuals. If the demand for this is there it should sell just fine.

 

[TerraDave]

If the rules are not better than 3.5e, I will not use them.

I'm kinda frustrated with 3.5e though, so I probably will move to 4e. The designers are saying all the right things so far regarding what they see as needing to be fixed.

Cheers, -- N

Good summary. (though not in your sig. that is just wrong).

To add, details we are seeing tend to be flavour stuff, that is really a mixed bag.
Add for all those developer promises, we have seen almost nothing to back them up.

I'd really like to see, say, a 5th level fighter, including feats/manuevers/powers. That would tell me a lot about how much they have succedeed in either making it fun, fun, fun, or just sort of a mess.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Things that would turn me off of playing :

Saga style skill system.

No (non MAD) two weapon fighter build that's as effective in combat (all things considered) as a two handed fighter.

Inability to build a character sufficiently similar to those I used the bard class for formerly.


Things that would turn me off of even reading it :

No OGL.

Insufficient SRD support.

 

[Desdichado]

Actually, there's very little about 4e that I've heard so far that I don't think sounds at least marginally better than 3.5. Oddly enough, the attributes of 4e itself will probably have very little impact on whether or not I buy it. Rather, the factors that will make my decision include:

1) I'd rather be playing something other than D&D anyway. I'm not interested in a major investment of yet another D&D system when D&D is my "compromise solution" rather than my actual preference.

2) My huge investment in d20 and D&D products. With what I currently own, I can run any game in any genre and any style to my satisfaction. Because there's a high degree of cross-compatability between all my 3e, 3.5, d20 Modern, d20 Star Wars, d20 Call of Cthulhu, Arcana Unearthed, Midnight, Iron Kingdoms, OGL Conan, etc. products any switch to 4e even if the system is tons better means an immediate drop in the quality of my game due to lack of resources relative to using a pre-4e system.

3) Group inertia. At the moment, my rather indifferent attitude towards 4e is the best of anyone in my group. Everybody else has made a firm statement that they have no interest in updating.

4) Budget. I've got other things to spend my money on. During the heady days of the early 2000s, and even fairly recently I had plenty of available cash for picking up D&D books, but now my wife and I have reallocated some of that "petty cash" to other interests.

5) Interest. Honestly speaking, I'm just not that excited in general about the hobby these days. I still enjoy both playing and running, but the fires of excitement have burned down to some nice solid coals. They'll be warm for a good while yet, but I certainly don't feel that excitement to be up to date with all the latest and greatest material anymore.

All of that adds up to a 4e that I think will be markedly better than 3.5, but which I probably won't buy anyway. In any case, I won't be an early adopter, and I won't buy it until I've had a chance to read through the SRD or the books themselves in some detail. And I certainly don't see my adopting 4e "whole hog" even then. I'm simply not going to get into the supplement "arms race" all over again.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm a little surprised at all the comments about the OGL and SRD. I mean, seriously... how does that affect anyone's game at their table? If it's open or not, I mean? I use open content in my games. I use closed content. I pretty much don't distinguish, care, or sometimes even know which is which.

 

[BryonD]

It seems to me that the biggest threat to 4E is not any one thing.
The bigger problem seems to be that they have already offered up enough different big changes that (it seems) 50%+ are significantly put off by something.

 

[Aeolius]

I'm a little surprised at all the comments about the OGL and SRD. I mean, seriously... how does that affect anyone's game at their table?

Some of us only game online, these days. The OGL and SRD allow outside publishers to publish some pretty nifty D&D supplements. Hopefully an outside party can also use the OGL to devise an online alternative to the D&D Insider applications, since the ones presented by WotC not only look like a clunky 20-year old video game but also won't run on my Mac.

If the D&DI Virtual Tabletop was cross-platform, looked more like klooge.werks, and allowed for characters of non-standard races, then I'd take a look.

 

[tsadkiel]

I'm a little surprised at all the comments about the OGL and SRD. I mean, seriously... how does that affect anyone's game at their table? If it's open or not, I mean? I use open content in my games. I use closed content. I pretty much don't distinguish, care, or sometimes even know which is which.

Because the OGL and SRD make it possible for us to get quirky, fun, and generally neat stuff from third party publishers who don't have to worry about selling in WotC numbers.