D&D 4E Why does everyone feel threatened by 4E?

[Bluewyrm]

So, in the spirit of full disclosure:

I officially prefer 4e. Actually, I prefer non-D&D systems altogether, but I definitely prefer 4e to 3.5. I've been reading the forums here pretty regularly for about 6 months now, basically long enough to follow the release of 4e, though this is my first post. I have been playing D&D since I was 7, and have played every edition (including basic). I have also been writing my own RPGs for about 13 years now, though none of them have ever been released. I stopped GMing awhile ago, which is I why I rolled back to D&D. I currently play in two D&D campaigns, one is 3.5 and the other is 4e.

However, this isn't being posted to discuss the differences between 3.5 and 4e (you all have been doing a wonderful job of that, thank you). What I am curious about is why so many people seem to feel threatened by 4e?

I can understand why many people wouldn't like 4e, and until I played it, I didn't care much for it either. But that's not the source of my confusion... what I am constantly hearing however is that so many people believe that this is the end for D&D, how 4e will ruin D&D, so forth. I know my 3.5 GM thinks it's the worst thing ever (of course he's never even cracked the spine of a 4e book), and there's seems to be this general "worry" from the 3.5 crowd that their hobby will be ruined. I can't understand why...

I could understand these concerns in regards to there being no more source material released for 3.5... only there are so many splat books in existence I can't imagine anyone has fully used all of them. Plus there are tons of non-WOTC source-books out there as well once the WOTC well runs dry. So I can't believe that is the reason for all the concern.

So what is it? Is there a concern that their player-base will go away? Is it just a knee-jerk reaction to all the 4e-fanboy-ism?

What do you guys think?

 

[Giryan]

I think it's mostly what you always find of the internet, there's no milage in being quietly contented so you only hear people moaning or the fanbois

 

[Donatello]

Honestly the same thing happened when 3.0 came out. It was the end of the D&D then too.

And to a point, they're right. 2e was dead, long live 3.x. Now 3.x is dying, and 4e is the new king in town. Every edition has its fans and their reasons for liking their version best. It could be anything from fear of change to preference for a particular style of gameplay that one version favors over another.

In the end, people will play what's the most fun for them. Unfortunately those same people will often jump on a soapbox and cry to the heavens why their opinion is "right". I personally could not go back to 3.x after playing 4e for a few sessions, and I had my share of trepidation before the system came out too.

 

[Wormwood]

Is it just a knee-jerk reaction to all the 4e-fanboy-ism?

Just doin' my part.

 

[Caliban]

Why is this posted in the rules forum?

 

[Celtavian]

re

I'm mixed on 4E. Love what they did with the melees, hate what they did to the wizard and priest and the spell system in general.

But since I'm playing a 4E paladin, and it seems like 4E Paladins are finally the brutal holy warriors they always should have been, I'm kind of happy playing a 4E Paladin. I'm more happy with a 4E paladin than I was with a 3E paladin.

The 4E paladin is a force to be reckoned with. He is perhaps the most versatie of the classes in the game. He gets ranged encounter and daily powers. He gets healing. He gets fairly strong melee. He gets Heavy armor and shields. He gets to use strong melee weapons. He gets good saves. The Holy Avenger is a bad to the bone weapon.

I'm a little disappionted I'm not immune to fear and disease anymore, but heck fear and disease aren't what they used to be. I'm also a dwarf paladin, which means I'm pretty good against poison to.

I'm pretty happy with the 4E Paladin. I feel like a real bad dude. I hammer and I can take a beating like no other class in the game. Can I really complain about the 4E paladin? I don't think so.

 

[JaeKin]

I think alot of folks haven't picked up a book or ran a game, and they make an assumption it's not better than what they have. I find that an interesting comparison as most roleplayers get flak for being roleplayers by people who don't understand the game and never read a book or played in a game.

Personally, I dislike the generalization that because I support 4E, it must be vehemently so, and to be honest, I read alot of the posts defending it and find alot of the "WotC says it's great, so it is" style posts to be close-minded.

Simply put, I enjoy playing D&D, I like 4E, more than 3.5. End of story. If you don't enjoy it, super, but I would encourage you to at least pick up a book and run a game if you haven't. No one convinced me the game was better, I tried it, and enjoy it.

Of course, there's the obvious answer of people crave attention, and you get alot of attention if you stand on either side of the fence right now and shout really loud how much one is better than the other.

 

[Nadaka]

For me? Part of it is how everything revolves around combat and how every class uses the exact same approach to things. I realize that this actually more closely resembles early D&D, but I never liked early D&D. But mostly it is the GSL. WotC basically has the right to say "All your Intellectual Property are belong to us." or "We don't like you anymore" and totally screw over 3rd party content producers who try to support the game.

 

[Jack99]

Why is this posted in the rules forum?

Why is it posted at all? Post like these are just asking to end in an "edition war". Seriously, let people play whatever edition they want. Be it OD&D, 1e, 2e, 3.0, 3.5 or 4e. Hell, if they want to play a non-D&D game such as Shadowrun, Pathfinder, GURPS or whatnot, let them do that, without constantly debating the finer points of which system has the most merit. It only leads to arguments and insults, and never ever brings anything positive to the table.

I mean, I get that this is the internet, and we are supposed to discuss things that are a waste of time to discuss, but maybe we should stick to those that don't result in flames and insults, like the merits of ninja(e)s vs pirates in RPG's, or how paladins should act, or other interesting and fascinating debates..

Cheers

 

[Lareth]

4e is complicated, unrealistic and inflexible. Those aren't just side-effects of the core rules. They're design goals.

I don't mean "elves and magic" unrealistic. I mean "square fireballs and normal crossbows on full auto" unrealistic. The rules explicitly state that, given the choice between game balance and internal logic, screw logic.

This means that, to adhere to the spirit of the game, all adjudications require hours of rules-checking, cross-referencing, spreadsheet design, discussion, playtesting and a trip to customer service. You can no longer use common sense to resolve problems because the rules actively discourage the use of common sense.

It's like trying to create an immersive, interactive environment with exciting battles, fantastic locations, intricate storylines, political intrigue and fast-paced action using chess as your core mechanic. It's just not set up to handle it.

And, five years from now, this is the edition that 95% of all players will be using. Most college students will only know other editions from rumor and stories.

For the next ten years nearly all new games (and new editions of old ones) are going to follow this trend.

Gaming is a social activity. Gamers form communities. And it's sad to watch my community wither and die. Again.

These things happen. I just wish it didn't have to happen like this.