D&D 4E Who else is going to be a deserter when 4e comes out?

[Darrin Drader]

UNDEAD TSR!

Ooh hey, does that mean we get an undead Lorraine Williams to go with it?

*Jumps up and down with excitement!*

 

[Razz]

Depends on whose perspective you're looking at. WotC has a great reason...to make money and keep in business. Every other reason is secondary.



It can't? Really? I beg to differ.

If fourth edition gave me third edition, but with better handling of Epic levels; I'd buy it in seconds. If fourth edition gave me a better Monster creation system; I'd have it on preorder. If fourth edition gave me MADE THE GAME EASIER TO RUN AT HIGH LEVELS AND STREAMLINED PLAY THEREIN, I'd be camped out at the game store door on release day. There are other things that could be improved or added.

I consider 3.5 to be the best D&D that has ever been...but it has plenty of room for growth. It isn't, to me, about better options, but about iterative improvment. Just because I haven't foreseen all the possible improvements doesn't mean any couldn't be made. 3.0s strength was in throwing out many old design assumptions, IMHO, while maintaining core concepts. I would expect a hypothetical fourth edition to do the same.

Better handling of epic levels can be presented in a 3.5 supplement (hence the call for "Complete Epic" book that a lot of people have been wishing for, that'd be some help).

Better monster creation system? They ran one in a Dragon article a long time ago, have guidelines in Monster Manual 3.5, and have more guidelines in Savage Species. What more guidance do you need? That's what making monsters is mainly about. Not a hardcore system that can perfectly and mathematically make the best creature, more like a "do-it-yourself, but here's some guidelines".

Better guidelines for running high level campaigns, I agree. But that also can be accomplished with my above response, they just need to release another epic-level product to supplement the ELH. Luckily, they are releasing Power of Faerun for running high level games in FR, maybe a generic product isn't too far down the line.

Improvements to the game can be made through the following: more products, more house rules, good use of Unearthed Arcana, and a possible Unearthed Arcana II. I really don't see what else needs to be improved, mechanically speaking. The game will never be perfect, that's impossible. 4E wouldn't be an improvement. It would just be a repeat of all the other editions, with people crying out "error here, this is broken here, you didn't give us enough of this here".

 

[WizarDru]

Improvements to the game can be made through the following: more products, more house rules, good use of Unearthed Arcana, and a possible Unearthed Arcana II. I really don't see what else needs to be improved, mechanically speaking. The game will never be perfect, that's impossible. 4E wouldn't be an improvement. It would just be a repeat of all the other editions, with people crying out "error here, this is broken here, you didn't give us enough of this here".

That's a valid opinion...I just happen to disagree. We've already seen what happens when you spread core rules over a few dozen supplements...you get a mess. I don't use House Rules, and I limit the number of supplements I use, regardless of which I buy.

The idea that MORE equals better is one I don't necessarily accept. I think D&D can handle higher levels better than they currently do: piling MORE rules and material on top of the existing framework does not suggest easing the DM's burden to me. 3e's core creators admitted that they didn't test 11th-20th level play with nearly the same rigor as lower level play, iirc, and it shows. Cobbling together suggestions for a 5 year-old issue of Dragon, a 3.0 supplement (that was near-3.5, but not quite there) and some rough guidelines from the MM don't take the place of an actual article or section similar to creating Epic Level spells from seeds, IMHO. It's a set of patches written by a host of authors, not a single guiding hand. It's inelegant, at best, and can be self-conflicting at worst (such as the changing monster categories).

While I'm not eagerly awaiting a 4e, I can see lots of room where things could be improved. Yes, no system is perfect...but your argument could just as easily be applied to AD&D as 3e. Some folks, however, don't want to have to use eight books to play the game, with post-its over whole sections of the rules that they've modified, ignored or changed. With enough modification, one can turn D&D in to True20, Grim Tales, Mutants and Masterminds...or Castles and Crusaders....or they could purchase those systems that, in and of themselves, are whole.

I personally don't believe that D&D can't be improved upon, any more than I did when I first cracked open the red book. I appreciate that some folks wouldn't want to drop coin on it, but I would want to judge it on it's own merits, rather than turn it down outright. WHich is exactly what I did with 3e, when I picked up the 3.0 PHB with no intention of actually playing...5 years ago.

 

[Kanegrundar]

The easiest way for WotC to get me to switch to 4E would be to make it a 3E to 3.5E switch. Tweaks brought on by the last few years of playing and listening to comments, questions, and concerns of the gamers, but still keeps everything well within the realm of being able ot easily convert from 3/3.5 to 4E. If 4E makes it too hard for my to convert material over, or isn't really an improvement, then I'll gladly stick with the current edition. I may buy a 4E PHB just to keep as a collector's item, but not to use.

Kane

 

[Ranger REG]

The easiest way for WotC to get me to switch to 4E would be to...

Don't give them ideas, at least not now.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Don't give them ideas, at least not now.

Seeing as how I doubt they're going to be listening to little ol' me specifically, I'm not too worried about it. I don't really see 4E comign out any time before 2008. That's an alright timeframe, IMO. I don't know if I'll switch over even then, but I may be slightly more open to the idea by that time.

Kane

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Despite that I'm a Realms fan, I'm prepared for the end of a pretty good run. In fact, I have to accept that WotC may not do a Kara-Tur book for 3.5e before 4e come out and no FR products will be published by then from them.

You're right, REG, crack cocaine is a hell of a drug.

 

[Ranger REG]

You're right, REG, crack cocaine is a hell of a drug.

I woudn't know. My only drugs are food and D&D.

 

[tetsujin28]

Depends.

If it's better than 3.5, no.

Pretty much. If it's a better game, darn skippy I'll change over.

 

[TheGM]

I'll buy it. Like so many have said, I will go through the core, decide if I like it, and go from there. I played 3.0 like five times, all my other games going to other systems. 3.5 I've played a lot more. The quality of the game will determine my level of commitment to it.

But my view of "quality" is likely a minority here. I thought 3.0 did too much at once, and would gleefully see some backward movement in an intelligent manner - along the lines of C&C but not so stripped down (multiclassing of some kind is a must IMHO for example, but feats aren't).