Why do I complain about 4E?

[Fifth Element]

Now they're devils, and Erinyes are gone, because some players apparently didn't have the smarts to be able to tell the two apart.

That's not why.

Change to 4E, because it's so much better, and 3.5 was inherently flawed?

That's a misrepresentation.

Mmmm....hongy.

 

[Jasperak]

4e fixes the problems of D&D like you would fix a broken leg on a horse.

I have enjoyed 4e up to this point, but that comment sums up my feelings of it at this point.

 

[Banshee16]

That's a misrepresentation.

I don't believe so. It was pretty clear to me, and I'm not the only person who's brought it up.

However, I'm not sure I care enough about it to go searching through a year's worth of preview articles to find the comments. But things along those lines were mentioned several times.....as far back as 8 months ago.

It's not a knock on you. They're the ones who put the marketing together. I suspect that they were portraying their excitement for the new game, and possibly some comments were released that gave the wrong impression. It happens.

But regardless of the marketing, the game has zero appeal to me. Too many of the things I liked were gotten rid of, and too many things I disagree with, and have protested about, were integrated into the game. We've just moved in separate directions.

Banshee

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

They did an elf book?

Yep. It's due out in October:

Elves have always been among the most popular player character races. Pathfinder Companion: Elves of Golarion provides a comprehensive overview of elven societies in the Pathfinder Chronicles campaign setting. From the seat of elven power in Kyonin, to the mysterious boatmen of the Mordant Spire, to the secrets of the Sovyrian Stone, this Pathfinder Companion installment provides players and Game Masters the tools to breathe elven life into their campaigns.

The Gnomish Revolutionary Army demands equal time!

 

[Cthulhudrew]

The Gnomish Revolutionary Army demands equal time!

GRA?

 

[Spatula]

Firstly, if you are going to spend a whole lot of money on printing new rulebooks, why not spend some time fixing the acknowledged errors, flaws and bugs in the 3.5 Ruleset. The most glaring example would be something like the Grapple rules. Would it be wise for a small company like Paizo to put all that cash in and not fix some of those errors?

Sure, fix the grapple rules, as long as you do it in such a way that you don't need to convert existing monster stats. The part where it becomes problematic is when it's not trivally backwards compatible with existing material. And people survived for 8 years with confusing grapple rules. Groups have either adopted their own fixes, or not found it to be a problem.

Secondly, Paizo are still doing 3.5. All their supplements, adventures etc are using the 3.5 Rules. They will only start using their Pathfinder rules in 2009, after Gencon

Ah, I was not aware. Good to hear!

 

[Mister Doug]

The marketing was pretty miserable as well. Change to 4E, because it's so much better, and 3.5 was inherently flawed? OK.....so you've been selling me a product you knew was flawed for the last 8 years, and you expect me to give you more money now? Uh....no.

Banshee

I'm trying to understand how they were supposed to have marketed the game. "3rd edition was a great game, with a few minor flaws. None of major consequence. But we want you to buy this new thing that really isn't much better" is both a poor way to ell something and not something that likely reflected the views of the design team.

What I read and heard was, "after 8 years, we've seen that some elements of design that we though were good got tired over time, and we think that the third edition had run its course and is showing its weaknesses, ones that we say after much experience, and we've worked at trying to rebuild the game from the ground up to achieve what we think are the strengths of D&D, and we think we've increased the fun and decreased the tedium."

Doug

 

[SSquirrel]

And people survived for 8 years with confusing grapple rules. Groups have either adopted their own fixes, or not found it to be a problem.

Or avoided it like the plague it is if at all possible.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Or avoided it like the plague it is if at all possible.

Tried to use the rules as written was always our attempt. There was still a lot of stuff left unexplained, and even the Rules Compendium didn't clear the matter. But it mostly worked. (Working means: The monster grappled the PC in question and we used dimension door, teleport or used Freedom of Movement to get out. Our Raise Dead, a day later... The only time Grappling was good and interesting for the PC was with our Arcana Evolved campaign and the Giant PC. And maybe my 3.0 FR Druid/Shifter...)

 

[pemerton]

If a 12-year-old picks up 4E today , he or she will know the game and its RPG tradition as a complicated, rules-heavy miniature wargame which his/her PC can run without all the finicky sheets of paper and number-crunching.

Given the content of chapters 1, 2, 8 and 10 of the PHB, plus much of the DMG and bits of the MM (like those that set out the cosmology and the historical interrelationships of various creatures) I find this comment bizarre.

Are you saying what you're saying despite having read those things I've referred to, or have you not read those parts of the books? If the former, can you say more to explain your interpretation of what you read? If the latter, can you explain how (not having read the books) you've formed your view of what they say?