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

[Henry]

I can't think of ANYTHING that will stop me from LOOKING at it; However, if it's no fun, it'll stop me from PLAYING it long-term. Hopefully, that won't happen.

 

[Doug McCrae]

I don't have any preconceived ideas. Even if it's slower than 3.5 that won't necessarily be a deal breaker.

I'll buy it and try it out. If I like it I'll keep playing. If not, I'll go back to 3.5.

 

[olshanski]

I will not switch until I've seen releases from Goodman, Paizo, and Necromancer; all supporting 4E.

 

[Desdichado]

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.

So? Let's assume the worst (which we already know not to be true, so that's another reason why this whole line of thought suprises me.) 4e isn't open content.

You're not going to continue to get quirky, fun or generally neat stuff for 3.5 when the market has mostly moved on. So why does moving to 4e have anything to do with it being open or not?

 

[tsadkiel]

So? Let's assume the worst (which we already know not to be true, so that's another reason why this whole line of thought suprises me.) 4e isn't open content.

Oh, I know. It's not a concern that I actually share, but it's one that I understand.

You're not going to continue to get quirky, fun or generally neat stuff for 3.5 when the market has mostly moved on. So why does moving to 4e have anything to do with it being open or not?

Well, I haven't played 3.5 for years, so that's pretty much moot. But I'm more likely to play an edition which has both streamlined rules and a potential feed of quirky, fun, and generally neat stuff.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

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.

1. I'm only going to bother investing a lot of time and effort in a rulesset I can write content for. So far, the e-Dragon and e-Dungeon have been no more prompt or reliable in dealing with my submissions than Paizo was in the last few years, so I have no reason to believe there will be a major 'official' content outlet.
Absent an OGL, there's not sufficient reason for me to master 4e's system.

2. I use Star Wars Saga Edition and d20 Modern extensively, and a few bits from D&D's core books, Completes and campaign setting books. Past that, I use almost exclusively third-party materials. WotC does not generally offer more than token service the steampunk, JRPG and sword and sorcery fanbases, so their in-house books are of limited utility.
Absent an OGL, there wouldn't be sufficient material for me to draw upon, so I might as well stick with my current system; if I had to make it all up myself, I'd use Mutants and Masterminds or HERO as the game engine, since I only don't due to workload issues.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

1. I'm only going to bother investing a lot of time and effort in a rulesset I can write content for. So far, the e-Dragon and e-Dungeon have been no more prompt or reliable in dealing with my submissions than Paizo was in the last few years, so I have no reason to believe there will be a major 'official' content outlet.
Absent an OGL, there's not sufficient reason for me to master 4e's system.

yup, pretty much. I may never actually get things written due to a variety of factors, but the potential invests me in a system and considering its possibilities to an extent that a non OGL system cannot.

 

[Desdichado]

Let me make sure I understand; and I'm not trying to pick apart the reasoning, just make sure I'm grokking it. Having an OGL is important on the off chance that you decide to write something for the game and want to publish it via internet, vanity press, etc.? Without that remote possibility, you won't even consider the new edition?

And again, we've already been told that the OGL will continue to be supported through 4e?

 

[Flynn]

For me, I am already committed to buying the first three core books. I'm sure someone around me will be running a 4E game at some point, and in order to play, I want to be prepared. Besides, whether or not I decide to use it, I'm sure I can mine it for ideas.

Now, as to whether I use it myself or not, that depends on my impressions once I get the material and can review it. Before then, I don't have enough information. I like what I see, in general, and the things I don't like, I can change. (I'm good like that.) But I'm not making a decision on the matter for my own games until I see how the system works and how well I think it will play at the table.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Mistwell]

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.

More like about 10% or less, really.

Most people who are satisfied with something don't bother to say they are satisfied. It's those who are upset that are most vocal. And given you have a number of people in this thread voicing opinions against 4e that are not even playing 3.5e to begin with, I am not even sure many of the complainers represent lost customers.