D&D 4E Why I'm "Meh" About 4E

[The Ubbergeek]

Honest question - Does the fact that playtester reports say that they feel it is a better version of D&D have any impact on those folks who say the game doesn't look like D&D to them?

No, they would say indirectly at least 'corporate shillism'.

 

[maggot]

Honest question - Does the fact that playtester reports say that they feel it is a better version of D&D have any impact on those folks who say the game doesn't look like D&D to them?

By the comments on this board, it is clear that D&D means something different to different people. So how do we know how the playtesters define D&D?

The rules might be better, but I think it is the flavor that is off. And flavor is highly subjective.

That, and the corporate-shill thing.

 

[maggot]

What I'm most interested in is why you only want to play in one campaign setting with a specific set of rules and no other. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but I'm a big fan of changing things up fairly regularly and I'd love to understand what the fundamental difference between us really is.

I'm not the original poster, but why can't that be the fundamental difference. One guy likes one thing, one guy likes many different things.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

By the comments on this board, it is clear that D&D means something different to different people. So how do we know how the playtesters define D&D?

The rules might be better, but I think it is the flavor that is off. And flavor is highly subjective.

That, and the corporate-shill thing.

But that don't make it not D&D if you'd say not.

And vice versa.

 

[maggot]

But that don't make it not D&D if you'd say not.

I wasn't answering whether or not it is D&D, but whether or not is it "better D&D" or more specifically how one could think it isn't "better D&D" in light of playtester comments to the contrary.

Basically, "better D&D" is an individual response, and thus highly subjective.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Honest question - Does the fact that playtester reports say that they feel it is a better version of D&D have any impact on those folks who say the game doesn't look like D&D to them?

Nope. Why, should it?

 

[bmcdaniel]

Greyhawk already has half-demons (hello Iuz) and plenty of draconic races, so tieflings and dragonborn don't seem like much of a stretch. PCs could play 'em too (ever read the 1st edition Rogues Gallery?). Even if your DM didn't allow it as a starting race, you could get there via the reincarnation tables. Heck, Greyhawk even includes starships, WW2 tanks, Murlynd's six-shooters, Bab Yaga's hut, ninjas and Cheshire cats. Greyhawk (especially old-school Greyhawk) has always been a grab-bag of disparate elements.

4e fluff may need some tweaking, but I don't think its going to be hard to use 4e in my Greyhawk game.

Your milegage may vary, but I don't think its inherant to Greyhawk.

 

[Khairn]

Honest question - Does the fact that playtester reports say that they feel it is a better version of D&D have any impact on those folks who say the game doesn't look like D&D to them?

Not in the least. And not because I feel they are corporate shill. We each have our own styles of play, our own perceptions of what is (or isn't) D&D. Just because the style of play that the rules support is what a playtester enjoys, doesn't mean that I will like it.

Playtesters aren't looking at the game with my gaming group in mind, and I wouldn't expect them to. Playtesters can share their opinion of how much they enjoyed the game or say that the mechanics worked well. But as a gamer who is interested in hearing what 4E has to offer me and my group, its really up to me to decide if the rules (as we understand them today) will work for us.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

WW2 tanks

The rest I remember but that one I don't, where was it? I'll have to go back and see if I can find it again.

 

[Dire Lemming]

Blah! No one cares about the Planescape camp! As a Planescape fan, what does 4E have to offer me besides the annihilation of everything I know I like?